Author Archives: Joseph Hagen

Review by Joseph Hagen & Jenny Memmott

As the lights went down and the opening strains of the film Les Misérables rumbled through the theater, my fiancée leaned over and whispered, “I have been waiting to see this movie my entire life.” She, as someone who has spent their life obsessively listening to the musical and attending every possible stage performance of the show, represents a good majority of rabid individuals who have waited years for a film version of the beloved musical to be released. However, creating a film version of a musical as hallowed as Les Misérables is tricky, as the expectations are incredibly high. Fortunately, Tom Hooper succeeds (for the most part) in translating this musical to the big screen and in the process, gives us a gritty, sweeping, challenging, emotional and fresh version of the musical that should leave all Les Misérables fans (and non-fans) satisfied.

Let’s start with the good. Firstly, Tom Hooper’s vision and conceptualization of the musical is incredible. The directing is absolutely inspired. The world Hooper creates in Les Misérables is all at once beautiful, gritty, and at times, challenging. The beautiful people in the film are certainly lovely, but Hooper does not shy away from showing the poor and downtrodden characters of the film as realistically as possible; they are dirty, diseased, emaciated and ugly. With frequent tight shots of the actors singing, it is impossible not to get sucked into the emotionalism of the film. Much has been made of Hooper’s decision to let the actors sing live in the film. I feel that this was a genius choice: the actors’ performances feel genuine and very much in the moment.

I cannot write this review without mentioning the performances of both Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway. Hugh Jackman IS Jean Valjean. Aside from singing the role capably, he absolutely embraces this role and makes Valjean’s journey in the film believable. You can see every emotion in Jackman’s tired eyes and vulnerable face. I have to admit that in his last scene, I was wiping away a tear. As for Anne Hathaway, there is no other word to describe her performance other than devastating. Believe all of the hype that you’ve heard about her performance. She is absolutely incredible and should be a lock for Best Supporting Actress. Although her time onscreen is short, it is absolutely heart breaking. Aside from Jackman and Hathaway, the other main actors in the film are exceptional and well-cast. Samantha Barks makes a terrific Eponine and both Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter provide much-needed comic relief as the Thénardiers. Although I have always thought that Amanda Seyfried’s vibrato sounds sort of like a goat caught in a propeller, she is (almost) tolerable in the less than substantial role of Cosette.

The biggest weakness in the film is Russell Crowe. It is an absolute shame that Crowe was cast as Javert. For those familiar with the story of Les Misérables, one could argue that the role of Javert is equal in importance to Jean Valjean. Javert is the yin to Valjean’s yang and much of the story’s plot is driven by the complex relationship between the two. Although Crowe is a powerful actor and could likely pull off this character in a non-singing role, alas, this is a musical. Crowe is vocally outmatched by virtually everyone in this film. He weakness as a singer is made even more evident in his one-on-one scenes with Jackman. Crowe sings as if he has a runny nose and despite his obvious eagerness to impress in this role, he falls flat. As much as I loved this film, I think about how much more spectacular this film could have been with someone else cast as Javert.

All in all, Les Misérables is a triumph. Fans of the stage show will be extremely pleased. As for those who come to the theater with no prior knowledge of the stage show, I believe they will come away from the film with a favorable opinion of the film and will likely have the song “Do You Hear the People Sing” stuck in their head for days after the film is over.

Review by Joe Hagen

Argo, the story of a CIA “exfiltration” agent tasked with getting American hostages out of the Iranian revolution, is a wonderfully paced, perfectly shot and fantastically acted film. An all-star cast spearheaded by actor/director Ben Affleck, Argo brings grit and honesty to a story that needed to be told.

With Academy Award caliber acting from talents such as Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, and a show-stealing Alan Arkin, each actor brings the perfect balance of intensity and humor. Most notable is the performance of Arkin, who plays an absolutely hysterical Hollywood producer recruited to provide an alibi for the CIA. With so many moments of tenseness, Arkin’s performance of Lester Siegel allows the audience a chance to breathe, reflect on the levity of the events unfolding, and possibly most importantly, laugh.

Showing directorial flashes of brilliance in The Town, Affleck brings a maturity and vision to Argo. Using the right combination of flecks on the screen, sepia tones, tight camera shots, props, and a spot-on soundtrack, Affleck shows that he appreciates the larger conceptual themes at play in his storytelling.

With a fantastic “don’t say more than needs to be said” screenplay by Chris Terrio, it allows Affleck the freedom to explore the visual richness of the Iranian culture and gives a subtlety to the depth of each character. By flipping your pre-conceived notions about the film, Terrio allows a wonderful story to be told in a simple, straight-forward way.

Argo is an intense, emotional, funny story told in a complete and satisfying way. Top-notch actors combined with spot-on technical film-making that ultimately delivers a compelling and important story that is worth watching.

Review by Joseph Hagen

John Carter, based on Edgar Rice Burroughs’ 11-volume Barsoom series is proof that great source material does not make a great movie. Riddled with plot holes, a terrible script, horrendous acting, spongy special effects, embarrassing 3D, generic music and pedestrian directing, John Carter is a mess of a film.

“A fish out of water” theme meshed with “learning to love again,” John Carter is 132 minutes of capture, escape, capture, escape, jump 30 times, capture, escape. Entire scenes of this film seem to be throw in so that the advertisers could have an “action packed” movie trailer… Meanwhile, the screenplay leaves characters feeling flat, with laughable dialogue and little motivation for the actions they are taking.

Carter, played by Taylor Kitsch, “jumps” from a monotone Southern accent, to a monotone John Wayne impression into a monotone James Franco after sucking on a bong. Kitsch seems to try to channel great action stars of the past, but does not have the presence, acting chops or charisma to pull it off effectively.

Dejah Thoris, played by actress Lynn Collins, is the princess of a Mars-town called Helium. Written to be the smart, strong, inventive and beautiful, Collins pulls off only the later. To be fair, a terrible screenplay positions her as an educated scientist one minute, a Mortal Combat style butt-kicker the next, and doe-eyed schoolgirl love interest the next with zero transition or motivation in between. I must have missed the part where they explained her split personality disorder… I also found it distracting that she was the only character that spoke with an accent on her planet.

Actor Mark Strong as Matai Shang, leader of the Therns, was a bright spot in the film. Mysterious and interesting, he is the character I found myself rooting for that the camera would dump John Carter and follow him around instead. One of the few actors in this film with REAL charisma, Strong seems to rise above the silliness happening around him and delivers an interesting and “deep” bad-guy character.

One other thing — I always find it funny that in a land where they have giant flying ships, hover bikes, guns, lasers and magic, but people still fight hand-to-hand with metal swords. Honestly, if this was a good idea don’t you think the U.S. Army would be placing billion dollar sword orders for our soldiers? I LOVE swords, but you need to add in some kind of plot device to explain it (George Lucas goes to great lengths in Star Wars to explain WHY the Jedi use lightsabers).

A disappointing mess, John Carter is proof that in some cases even a strong conceptual starting point is not enough to make a good movie. The three pillars of good movie making are wholly missing, being replaced with a terrible screenplay, bad acting and sloppy directing.