Les Miserables (2012)

This is such a cheery movie, it being all about unicorns and rainbows and the whatnot. Happy singing elves in the country of Happyland singing about life's continuous parties. La la la.
I think this film has caused me to suffer a bit of a cognitive break. Sorry about that.
Everyone is familiar with the story right? Some good people get put in bad situations and their lives get totally fucked and then it gets worse and then the hand of justice comes to fuck things up some more. I know. Right?
I didn't watch this to be cheered up or because I didn't know the story and got tricked into watching it. I watched this to see Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway. As a bonus I also got to see Helena Bonham Carter. Now, I was previously familiar with Jackman's and Hathaway's singing ability and was not let down. I was pleased to see that Carter did not embarrass herself which is kind of ironic considering that her character is somewhat shameless, made even more so playing opposite Sacha Baron Cohen as the Thenardiers. The real surprise for me was Russell Crowe, whom I had heard was tolerable as Javert - singing-wise as he is obviously a more than capable actor - yet found his singing to be surprisingly good. That's right. I like Crowe in this role. Broadway has a style that is somewhere in the middle of opera and pop music with pros and cons of each. I often do not like the singing style, even though I have mad respect for the performer's ability. I think it pretty much boils down to the extensive use of vibratto which I feel when used that much lends a melodramatic feel whatever the song or scene is supposed to convey.
I know from interviews I've seen and articles that I've read that Jackman, Crowe and Hathaway are very serious about their craft and if the role calls for them to do something extreme with their bodies, they will. At the beginning of the movie before Valjean has been released from prisong/slavery, Jackman is looking very thin and has the buzzed hair. I read that he had dropped some pounds for those scenes. Then we have Hathaway who gets her hair chopped off and also lost a bit of wait for the 'stylish' starving-prostitute look. Just take a look at her body weight in the other film she had come out last year, The Dark Knight Rises. Perhaps the biggest difference in weight was Crowe, however. He looks much like we have seen him in films the last few years, since he buffed up to play Robin of Loxley in the Robin Hood remake. But his film out earlier in the year, Fists of Steel, had him about 30 or 40 pounds heavier. (Just look at my blog for that movie to see what I thought about how he looked.) This is true commitment to your art. I am mentally sending sandwiches to Jackman and Hathaway, and one to Christian Bale because I'm remembering him in the Thin Man where he lost so much weight for the role that he looked like he might snap in two if someone sneezed on him.
My only complaint about this movie is that it's so long. Sure it's downright short when compared with The Hobbit, but it comes in at over two and a half hours. That's a long time to be subjected to the particular emotions the film illicits. Which I guess is how I ended up in that happy place full of unicorns and rainbows.

Les Miserables on IMDb

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

I like this movie in spite of itself. They really mess with the Marvel universe and the X-Men movies timeline to boot, but let me be honest, I will watch anything with a) Wolverine or b) Hugh Jackman, and Hugh Jackman as Wolverine is a must see for me.
One of the reasons I'm watching this movie now is that I just watched X-Men: First Class. Since that is the first of the films, I though why not watch all five in timeline order. I also watched the movie because movies are a really good way to escape reality for a little while and I thought that I could really use some Canuck action.
On it's own, this movie is pretty good. But, if you try and fit it into the X-Men movie timeline/universe it has a few problems, and if you compare it to the comics version, there are a whole lot more. But, before I get into the issues I want to say that the cast of this movie is great. Hugh Jackman is Wolverine. Liev Schreiber is an actor I enjoy watching whether it be on the silver screen or playing a cop on CSI, he gets into his roles and has not let me down yet. I also really liked Danny Huston as the villain of the story, Col. Stryker. I'm not sure what I've seen Huston in before but he has a familiar looking face. Will.I.Am, in the first movie I've seen him in, does an excellent job. Ryan Reynolds plays Wade Wilson pretty well, and I'm not sure how the Deadpool of this movie ends up like the comic book Deadpool, but I'd watch the movie with Reynolds that was trying to tell me. And last but not least is Lynn Collins who plays very well opposite of Jackman, plus I think she's a looker and I like looking.
Granted I think Schreiber is great as Victor Creed, he is not Sabretooth, and that totally sucks. Tyler Man plays a great Sabretooth in the X-Men movies (1 through 3) and it's a pity that he wasn't playing Sabretooth. Maybe Man doesn't have the acting chops of Schreiber, I get that, but you have this guy, Victor Creed who is the same height as Wolverine. How do you account for that? I'm supposed to believe that in the next 8 to 10 years that takes place before X-Men 1, that Victor goes feral, has his hair turn blond and grows a foot in height? Here's the deal Mr. Movie-Maker, I would totally buy that if you gave me a reason why. Actually, this might be the only incongruity between X-Men Origins: Wolverine and X-Men 1 through 3. That actually isn't too bad in sheer numbers, but in weight it's kind of a big deal.
Damn, there is one thing that bothers me, and it's not a timeline/character issue. It's right at the end when Stryker uses the adamantium bullets on Wolverine. How do the bullets og adamantium go through adamantium? And at least as important, how does Logan heal the holes? We see him do this and I don't mean the skin closing up, we see the holes in his skull heal up. I understand the need to use some plot device to cause Logan to forget, but a bullet up through the soft palette would really have made me more happy.
The problems with the internal consistency of these movies really comes out when you compare X-Men: First Class (XMFC) with X-Men Origins: Wolverine (XMOW). First, Ororo Munroe - in XMFC she's about 10 in 1962, but in XMOW, she look even younger in the 1980s. Second, Professer X - in XMFC paralyzed in 1962, on XMOW, walking around in 1990s. Third, Emma Frost - adult woman in 1962, young woman/older teen in 1990s. There are probably more things, but these were the big 3 that jumped out at me.
There are many differences between this movie and the comic book, like the fact that Canadian government being behind the Weapon X project is completely gone. Since Wolverine ends having a thing for Heather Hudson (not his mom - that's what they named her in this film) and being part of the Alpha Flight team. I love Alpha Flight - they're my favorite super-hero team. Disney, if you're reading this, if you won't give me an AF movie, at least put them in the next Wolverine movie (I know Wolvie in Japan is already done shooting).

X-Men Origins: Wolverine at IMDb

Real Steel (2011)

Hunky Hugh Jackman stars as Charlie Kenton a former boxer and now a robot fighter, well, in that he controls a robot which is fighting another robot, often in a competition to the explosive end. Dakota Goyo plays his estranged son, Max, who through an unfortunate chain of events comes to stay with Charlie for the summer. Rounding out the human side of the main characters is Evangeline Lilly as Bailey Tallet, the buddy slash love interest of Charlie.
What goes without saying (but will be said anyway)? The visual effects are stunning - there are lots of CGI scenes, but the filmmakers actually made full-sized puppet/models of all the robots in the movie (19 in all) which does lend to the realism if for nothing else than providing the actors with something to act against. Like Super 8, also by Dreamworks, this movie has a couple of bad words, uttered by the kid, that take this movie into the realm of PG-13, helped perhaps by some rather brutal robot-on-robot violence, but ultimately this film is very family friendly. The story follows a predictable arc, but does it well. While not groundbreaking, this film is solid and would earn a grade of B if I were to judge it on this alone.
What really is worth noting about this movie, is what doesn't happen. And I hope to god it's left out for the sake of a quality story and not because they were hooking for a sequel - a sequel would be great, just as long as it doesn't overturn the original. So, what's missing? Charlie grows as a character, but he doesn't leave character - he does not become the world's best dad, or even get custody of Max. Related to this, while Max's uncle is shown as a bit of a self-serving prat, his aunt, initially at odds with Charlie, has Max's best interest at heart the whole time, and is not vilified and ends up with custody of Max. Bailey obviously loves Charlie, but she is not the pushover who talks tough but always gives in, instead she is firm with Charlie when she needs to be, even when that means that he moves out of the gym she owns and goes on the road with no plans to come back. Fourth, there is a baddie, a rival of Charlie's from back in his boxing days, who in the climactic scene between the two, not only beats Charlie into unconsciousness (admittedly with the help of two thugs who use pipes), but he also steals not only Charlie's money but Max's money - and they never get it back. Max's robot, Atom is special, we get that, but in the end he's still just a robot. What a nice change from the hinted at possibility that he might have some form of sentience. Finally, in the final battle against the Zeus robot, Atom doesn't win. It does better than any other opponent, and the filmmakers leave us with the sense that given just another few seconds, it might have won, but he didn't - not by a 'knockout' or by score from the judges.
It's very satisfying to see an American movie that doesn't follow the usual American formula. I think while the biggest part of the credit should go to the director and writer, no insignificant part is that this film was made by Dreamworks, as opposed to Disney which I feel would have gone for the same-old, same-old because the emotional content is guaranteed. It is all of these factors that lead me to rate this movie. Well, to be completely honest I am only rating it because in a moment of over-zealous clap-trap above, I said it would have a "B" without the additional factors being included and then of course included them. That final rating would be an A-.

Check out Real Steel at IMDB