Les Misérables - Review

This review was supposed to be in fact be about John Q which I watched a couple of weeks ago, but I went to see Les Misérable’s yesterday evening and I couldn’t help but review it straight away! So here goes;

This new adaptation of the French novel and longest running musical on the west end has been highly rated by many critics and with a cast including awarding winning Anne Hathaway, Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe and Helena Bonham Carter it is not much of a surprise. After seeing this film for the first time yesterday the cast and a basic knowledge of the storyline was all I had to go on as I have not seen it performed on stage or read the highly acclaimed novel. However my little knowledge about the films background did not leave me disappointed, I found it to be a thriving film of emotion and brilliant performances from the cast.

Directed by British director Tom Hooper most famous for his 2010 film The Kings Speech, Les Misérable’s is set in 19^th century France and follows the life of ex convict Jean Valjean, caring for orphan Cosette, after a promise he made to her dying mother. The film focuses on the trials he faces trying to get back on his feet whilst looking after this young girl and avoiding capture again after breaking his parole. About the storyline, all I have to say was that there was a lot to take in throughout the film, not just due to its length but also because of the vast number of characters and the time scale it revolves around. Personally I did not mind too much about all of this as I feel that it gave the film a certain impact that would not have been put across as well had any of these things varied. It was an in depth story which involved thought to comprehend, which is never a bad thing when watching a film.

The large number of characters meant that the performances given by everyone can in some cases be seen as “short and sweet” for instance, Anne Hathaways character, Fantine, is only seen in the first half of the film, and yet she has won both the Bafta, Oscar and Acadamy Award for best supporting actress, which was 100% deserved. The only two characters which are in fact shown from beginning to end throughout the film are Jean Valjean (Jackman) and Javert (Crowe) each of the other characters only appear in a small number of scenes depending on the character. One actor within this film that I feel deserves much more credit for his performance was Eddie Redmayne, his character is one which requires power and emotion and in my opinion Redmaynes performance was no short of brilliance. (Watch out for him people, I predict he will be huge!! and Daniel Huttlestone!)

Emotionally, this film needs to be tackled with a box of tissues, I am not one who cries often in the cinema and so this new experience startled me a little. Every emotion I can pretty much think of is related to in one way or another throughout the film: pride, happiness, love, grief, honour, dishonour, conscience! Somehow and someway I am sure that almost every emotion is linked into this film, and that is no doubt the reason behind it tugging on your heartstrings willing a tear to fall. I am not sure if all this emotion within one film is a good thing, especially for those who can get teary eyed over less emotional scenes, but boy does it have an impact!

Tom Hoopers decision to shoot the scenes with live singing was absolute genius, it showed the raw emotion behind each performance and song that would  not have been shown had they been shot lip singing. His brilliant decisions with this and the casting of the film lead me to question his lack of nominations throughout award season for best director. Surely a nomination couldn’t have hurt? After all, the film was brilliant.

A Good Day To Die Hard - Review

To make it aware to anyone who doesn’t know, I am a bit of a Bruce Willis fan so I was excited by the release of A Good Day To Die Hard. However I will try to be as honest and unbiased as I can possibly be during this review.

The fifth instalment in the Die Hard franchise was released on Valentine’s Day, as much to my boyfriends dismay, 25 years after the release of the unmistakable brilliance that was the original film. Yet the newest film in the franchise see’s a change for NYPD’s famous officer John McClain, as he is now centred within a global terrorist attack with his son Jack trying to lead the way. John McClain, played by Bruce Willis throughout the franchise, visits Moscow in attempt to rescue Jack who he believes to be in danger, it turns out, Jack is undercover for the CIA. As not to spoil the plot, I won’t reveal anymore, also due to the fact that I got so lost during the film I couldn’t even begin to tell you what happened with the storyline after the first 40 minutes in the film.

As much as I would have liked to love this film, I was let down by the use of consistent action throughout. Although that was what should have been expected, with the other films in the franchise you have at least some time to comprehend who was just murdered, or, who’s helicopter just got brought down by a car! A Good Day To Die Hard left no time in which to do so before the next batch of dynamite was set off, so much so, that everything else within the film just got lost by the size and scale of the stunts. I can admit that some of the actions scenes were in fact well put together by John Moore the director, but it can not be denied that with expectations of the previous films being so high Moore also let the McClain lovers out there down!

John McClain should come across as an unstoppable action hero within this film, yet constant jokes referring to Willis’ lack of hair and almost non rememberable one liners he is so brilliant with, begins to suggest that 20^th Century Fox should quit while they are ahead with this franchise. Even so, it has already been announced that they will be scheduling Die Hard 6 in the near future, if done correctly could help bring the genius back into the mother of all action film franchises. All it needs is a compelling and easily understandable storyline, and a brilliant supporting villain! Just like Alan Rickman as Hans Gruber in the original.

I could in fact continue to criticize this film a lot more than I have, but in order to avoid bringing the name of Bruce Willis down anymore than it already has been after Death Becomes Her, I shall take a leaf out of my own book and quit whilst I am ahead.

To anyone wanting to watch a film jam packed with action and only one mention of the awesome quote that is “Yippee Ki Yay mother f***er” practically censored out by the low age rating. This is the film to see, but please, don’t let this one poor sequel cause you to forget the great Die Hard films that have already been produced.

First Review - Flight

It cannot be denied that Robert Zemeckis is capable of great things within the world of film, directing some all time classics like Forrest Gump and Back to The Future.  But it can also not be denied that his new film Flight, starring Denzel Washington, is not for lovers of action packed blockbusters as the trailer may have made out but for an audience wishing to see a hard hitting drama.

The film revolves around the legal battle surrounding Denzel Washington after piloting and landing a doomed plane whilst drunk and high on cocaine, as well as the personal battles he must face to prove his innocence. Washington meets others along this struggle who attempt to help get his life back on track, including Kelly Reilly’s character, Nicole, who I would have loved to see more of through the film as I feel her back story could have been expanded much further. Washington and Reilly’s characters bond over their similar drug habits and although they are both trying to change their lives she is much more successful at doing so.

Throughout the film there are moments leave the viewer wondering and praying that Washington’s character, Whip, will do the right thing for himself and those around him, these moments aren’t always followed by what could have been expected, one reason which I feel this film has its elements of genius. Although the narrative could originally be seen as sort of one dimensional, there are elements which leave surprise and gut wrenching anger towards Denzel’s character.

Whip Whitticker, this drunken, cocaine addicted pilot puts the lives of hundreds of people at risk before every  flight, yet Washington brings a performance to this character which makes you put aside how immoral you feel his actions are, in order to understand the difficulty he is going through. His character should have been hated, but it has been scripted and performed in a way that is well worthy of the academy award nominations for best actor and original screenplay that this film has received.

Negatives surrounding this film I feel are very minimal, if the drama genre is one that does not interest you then this film will not be of your liking, the trailer may have suggested a lot more elements of Denzel’s heroic actions within his plane however it was really only contained within the first twenty minutes. The film, running at just over 2 hours did seem to be dragged out for quite a bit longer than this, but for everything that it contains I feel as though this can be looked over as it is defiantly already going to be one of the best dramas released this year and we are only in February!