Warm Bodies

Running time: 97 minutes

Media: Cinematic release

I saw this movie a few months ago after an aunt's birthday party, and I have to admit, I actually enjoyed this considerably. And while I normally tend to read the books of these book-to-film conversions, I didn't know that a book existed until I read about it in its respective Wiki article.

I kept looking at the two lead characters, R, the zombie and Julie the non-zombie, and I realized I had seen them in other movies recently. R is played by Nicholas Roult, who played Dr. Hank McCoy in X-Men: First Class who also became Beast in that film. Julie, is played by Aussie girl Teresa Palmer, who was the love interest in the Disney movie The Sorceror's Apprentice. It's a thing I do, it's not a sign of a mental condition or anything, I just try to recognize everyone I can in a film where possible, just for my own interest and curiosity... But I digress...

The premise of the film is that we have the post-apocalyptic world scenario where zombies are rife throughout the area in question, and there's small fortified cities where survivors venture out to find food, medical supplies, etc. It kinda reminds me of an iPhone app I have called "Zombies, Run!", which, I kid you not, is a fitness program to help with running away from virtual zombies! Anyhow, in one of these missions Julie and her somewhat ass of a boyfriend, Perry are trapped in some medical facility. Perry gets killed by R (that's all he remembers of his name... just the R), who proceeds to also eat Perry's brain... Now supposedly a zombie eating someone's brain somehow makes them telepathically aligned with the person they're eating, feeling their emotions and thoughts. So as a result, R starts having feelings for Julie, which turn out to be feelings of love as far as it can be told. Julie is freaked out about some zombie trying to woo her... And probably not as much as her dad, played by John Malkovich... Who thinks that the only good zombie is a dead one...

Just as an aside, here's a quick thought-provoking question. When R eats someone's brain, he absorbs their thoughts and feelings... If R were to eat some of his own brains... would he find himself in that restaurant scene in Being John Malkovich? I have no idea where that thought came from... I think my glass of Sprite may be tainted or something... 

Anyhow, R tries to woo Julie, and at the same time tries to avoid both of them being torn apart by "boneys" which are zombies that have gone off on a bender, never to return; or being killed by Julie's dad and his troops, as well as preventing Julie from being eaten by fellow zombies like R's friend, M (played by Rob Corddry). But it seems that not only is R changing, the love R feels for Julie is spreading to other zombies like M, and they're changing too... It's a little leap if faith on the part of the audience, but it does pay off a little... It's a kind of a feel good movie, but without the bubblegum goodness that makes you want to gag like you've had a cup of fake-cherry flavored cough syrup.

Now while I haven't read the book, I would suspect that the movie ties in very closely to the plot of the movie; and for that I am actually quite thankful. Though I may have to question the almost convenient way that the movie resolves to its final conclusion. It's a little cutesy-putesy to say the least, but it's tolerable, probably more tolerable than say, World War Z. I have to admit though, there were times that I thought that the zombies had more character than any of the non-zombie ones... Well, they seemed the funniest, after all, they were trying to become more and more human again.

In summing up though, Warm Bodies is one of those films that is a film that you could take your other half to see, as there is a somewhat touching relationship... You know, girl meets ghoul per se. The acting is fairly decent, even though Malkovich is seen as quite an obnoxious bastard. But the way the movie plays out the relationship being built up is quite enchanting and it does draw you in. I enjoyed this movie immensely and I'll have to look far and wide for the DVD or Blu-Ray to enjoy later. Warm Bodies receives a very heart-warming four stars.

World War Z

Running Time: 116 minutes

Media: Cinematic Release

The only reason I managed to get to see this was because my lovely wife is away seeing a friend of hers who just had a little boy... Me, I normally don't get time off... Wait, yes, listeners, that's right, I did say "wife"... I got married back in May and so far things are going rather swimmingly. It also explains my three month absence, so I do apologize... Things have been hectic with work and all, and so I have a number of reviews to write and little time with which to do them.

That being said, I decided to see this on a whim, seeing my wife was away and I needed some down time... and come to think of it I seriously need to find time to do yet another movie marathon... I am so itching to see six back-to-back... And who knows I may even be able to make it seven if I'm really clever... Anyway, I digress... 

Okay, World War Z... was conceptualized by Max Brooks, and yes, it is based on a novel... well, not a novel per se, but a "written oral history of the Zombie War" in a matter of speaking... I have read the novel, and it covers the geo-political, socio-economic, religious and environmental changes to society resulting from the spread of zombies and the ensuing battle for survival by the human race. That's the book. The movie, slightly different... It has Brad Pitt shooting, hacking, slicing and wrestling with zombies while at the same time out-running explosions and surviving miraculously with each turn in his quest to save humanity.

So naturally, what the book and the movie have in common is that they're both entitled "World War Z"... It's a bit of a stretch, isn't it? Well, here's where we have the closest thing to a plot in this movie. Brad Pitt a former United Nations investigator (it seems his "new" job now is to make pancakes for the rest of his family), called Gerry Lane, finds himself running from a swarm of rapidly turning zombies whilst waiting in traffic with his family. Miraculously, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations manages to reach him with pretty much clear reception and offers to pick him and his family up from some high point somewhere in Philadelphia where they manage to escape even more zombies, including the newly zombified family of a Hispanic child called Tomas, whom they take with them.

Guess what? The Deputy Secretary-General wasn't doing Gerry a favor. No, he needs his help... he's supposedly the only man for the job? No, there's a virologist who is to team up with him to help find the answers. It seems the virologist has a thing for loaded weapons, as audience members will soon discover... 

Gerry finds that he must travel to Korea, Israel and Wales in order to find the answers. And of course, he finds he just can't get away from those damn zombies, they're everywhere, man! So in his process of running from zombies, explosions and anything else preventing him from running, it seems that he finds solace in Wales along with a research team in Cardiff, only to miraculously figure out a solution that may help sort out this nasty zombie business... 

The climax towards the end, really isn't, because, let's face it, it's so f[CENSORED]king predictable that it just had to have that Hollywood type ending... And my worst fears were founded when the scene played right before my eyes, almost schmaltzy in nature... A whole spray can of Easy Cheese has nothing on this... To add insult to injury the anti-climax is followed by a thirty or so second scene which involves a soda pop dispensing machine; and will send you cringing as you try to stifle forced laughter as the disbelief-a-meter rises, and lo, and behold, the great Messiah Brad Pitt has pretty much saved humanity.

The only other name I recognized in the cast of the film was David Morse, who barely gets a mention as a toothless weapons merchant who sold guns to people in North Korea. Total amount of screen time? About five minutes... That's about 4% of the total screen time of this film... To be honest, he was there as filler, nothing more.

J. Michael Straczynski, who also wrote 92 of the 110 episodes of Babylon 5 was responsible for the adaptation of the book to film... Did he do a good enough job? I literally have to think about this... Yes... and then No... Yes, in the sense that there is enough action and thrills to get the heart racing and the blood flowing fast enough to make you watch to the end... And no, in the sense that there are a number of points in the film which are never mentioned in the book, as well as scenes which would make a Babylon 5 episode seem more believable. I found myself shaking my head at the time-again-tested predictability of the film. It was enough to make me want to cry at times... 

I also stuck around to watch the credits... And I just have to ask... why are there so many rotoscopers in the film crew? What are they rotoscoping? The last time I heard the phrase used it was regarding the graphics required for the lightsabers in the newer (but older) Star Wars movies.

To sum it up, the make up was good for the zombies, it seemed fairly suitable given the nature of the film, but everything was taken from the book and ramped up several notches. It's like taking a Bugatti, adding a nitrous oxide booster, and then slamming on the gas pedal... yes, you get a ride, but it's one that feels too out of control, too unbelievably fast and hard to escape from. And then the anti-climax comes and it's like driving that Bugatti straight into the walls of the Hoover Dam. Alonso Duralde of The Wrap reviewed this film as well, saying, "For all its effectiveness at portraying the horror of possible human extinction, the film's actual humans are so soulless that this could just as well be the movie version of the video game Plants vs. Zombies." I couldn't agree with Duralde more, there's no real advancement or development for the characters in the story save for that of Pitt, explosion-dodger extraordinaire. If it wasn't for the heart-jumping scenes at the start, this movie would have gotten far less than what I'm prepared to give it. When it comes to recent zombie movies over the last few years, even Warm Bodies will earn far higher than this. World War Z receives 2½ stars... You know, zombies may not be real, but after seeing this... I feel like my brains been eaten anyhow...

The Three Stooges

We ain't gonna take it any Moe.

Running Time: 92 minutes.

Media: Blu-Ray.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk! The love I had for these guys back in the 1980's was unfathomable, and now that this film was available on Blu-Ray actually made me want to see it more. I had little chance to see this film when it came out, especially considering it was also in limited release here in Australia. A real shame, as I would have loved it.

I saw one very adamant Youtube member post that he was boycotting the film, that it was disgraceful and that it besmirched the good name of the Three Stooges. Had he seen the film in its entirety? No. Had he considered that three minutes or less was sufficient enough to guarantee a suitable review? No. I had similar aspects with regards to Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, and look where that has led. I decided to give this film the benefit of the doubt and tried it myself.

Boy, was I far from disappointed! The movie has been "divided" into three separate acts, just like the old Stooges TV movies, and it graces many concepts that were essential to the Stooges genre. The hair ripping, the ear pulling, the nostril grab, face slaps, eye pokes, the list goes on. And I never laughed so much in my life.

The story revolves around the Stooges' attempts to raise $830,000 to save the orphanage where they grew up. Everyone else pales in comparison when the Stooges appear. Secondary characters appear here and there, as well as the tertiary characters, who appear maybe twice to three times throughout the entire film; but your focus is forever placed in the Stooges when they appear. Possibly my bias comes from having grown up on them, as well as the cartoons based on these three.

The casting for these characters was a tough process, Benicio del Toro and Hank Azaria were originally destined to play the role of Moe... Hank, I could see as a possibility, but Benicio? That's a bit of a stretch! Chris Diamantopoulos was eventually cast, and having seen some of his previously work (for example his amazing portrayal of Robin Williams in Mork and Mindy - The Unauthorized Story). His ability to mimic voices is uncanny. And the hair and make-up have virtually transformed this Hellenic-Canadian actor into what would be the spitting image of a 40-something version of Moe Howard. I was gob-smacked, the gob could very well have been smacked by Moe himself. I have to say, Diamantopoulos does an undenyingly brilliant job, from his vocal portrayal, to his scowl when facing his fellow stooges, to his commanding ability to out-poke and out-wit and out-hit Larry and Curly. Chris, if you are reading this, I salute you.

Sean Hayes, where do I start, he seems to work well as Larry Fine, though I have to admit, like the comedy shorts of the mid-20th century, he does seem to come a close second to Curly. He only took the brunt of Moe's wrath when he said something out of line or he interfered with something; this is no different in the film, which is not a bad thing. He actually pulls off the role play of Larry inasmuch as Moe is able to rip out giant tufts of Larry's hair. The "looking into the sun" look that Larry does is ever present in the film, and although this did come across as an issue I could raise, I kinda swept it under the rug. That said, I couldn't see a better pick for Larry than this. Now, bearing in mind that there was a possibility that Sean Penn was due to play the part, I'm actually glad that Hayes got the role. Hayes has a unique ability to generate laughter, he is a genuinely funny guy, and has made a lot of his success from his portrayal of Jack McFarland in one of my favorite TV sitcoms Will and Grace. I guess he's managed to bottle this and release it in sizable amounts within this film and many others he has starred since Will and Grace. The hair and make-up for Larry was well done, and I can still picture him now. The resemblance was uncanny.

Will Sasso, who starred in MAD TV for a number of years plays Curly. Now he stands a little taller than the other two, which kinda conflicts with the original heights of the three, as the original Stooges were all roughly the same height.  Despite this little oversight (and it is indeed little), Curly is well played, Sasso has no doubt studied the character long and hard and has perfected it to an art-form. The voice, actions, the dancing, and even the "Woo woo woo, nyuk nyuk nyuk!" is better than I can do... Sasso also has the right bulk and has the perfect ability to play the innocent numbskull demeanor (No offense, Will, I think you're incredible!) to play Curly and it shows. I find it amazing to read that Jim Carrey was once attempting to land this role, but gave up the role due to health reasons, as it seems he attempted to gain between 60-70 pounds to get into the role of Curly; but gave up after a 40 pound gain. Now, I know that 40 pounds is a lot of weight, and I can totally understand... but I personally feel that Sasso gave Curly Joe the justice he deserved, and paid homage to him perfectly, and without the weight gain. Will kinda reminds me of a humorous version of Michael Chiklis!

Other characters such as the nuns played by Jane Lynch, Kate Upton, Jennifer Hudson and Larry David no less, all seem to be upstaged and don't get their chance to shine; which is a shame, but our focus is forever drawn to our loveable loonies of Larry, Curly and Moe. Jane Lynch plays a moderately benevolent Mother Superior, whereas Hudson who plays Sister Rosemary shows up with a smattering of appearances throughout the film, and even has the opportunity to sing in the film, well... sort of... She's kinda interrupted in one scene, and another scene she's somewhat upstaged when singing with the Stooges. To me, she seems like she's there simply for her voice than anything else. Similarly, there's Kate Upton, playing the role of Sister Bernice, a very vivacious looking nun, who can be spotted in something that can only be referred to as a "nun-kini"... As much as I love Kate, and I do, she seems to have been exploited simply for the fact that she has an amazing body, and far be it for me to say this, but it's worked well, but I still wonder if it was for all the right reasons. She added comedic elements here and there, but only to the extent of her presence.

Larry David, however, playing Sister Mary Mengele is the real scene stealer. He... er, she (Mary Mengele) is sharp, crude and a laugh a minute, a perfect role for David, and it's as funny as Tracy's mom on Hairspray, but without the actual drag... A lot of controversy has been placed on the fact that "Mengele" is also the surname of Josef Mengele, one of the SS officers who decided the fates of Auschwitz prisoners. There was also controversy of this film being highly anti-Catholic... Seriously? Give me a break... this movie is a spoof, and should be treated as such. The elements of slapstick aren't capable of being done in real life without causing some genuine farm. Slapstick itself is a form of spoofing... And I'm willing to bet that if I searched for Mengele in the White Pages, I'd find maybe a half dozen people with that surname, who don't take offense of having the surname. I count at least fifty entries in the American White Pages web site. A name is simply that, a name. If people are going to poke critique on every little thing that offends them in a comedy, then they have the right to not watch the film; but to chastise others for watching it, or bemoaning the fact that it offends others... As a wise comedian once said, there's no such thing as "an inappropriate joke", it's inappropriate, that's why it's a joke. Comedy can't please everyone, it will always offend someone, and there's no way to correct either. The Catholic Church has gotten the poops as well because of the nun-kini that Upton wears towards the end of the film. This is a harmless poke at the versatility of the nun's habit (i.e. none at all), and so the nun-kini is also yet another joke. Let it be.

Complete the cast with Craig Bierko, Sofia Vergara and Stephen Collins, as a trio of con artists out to use the Stooges to get their hands on an inheritance and you have a very well endowed cast of actors who can pull off this comic juggernaught. Sofia is gorgeous as her usual self and emphasizes her ability to play the role of the gorgeous wife, as she does in Modern Family. I wish I had seen her with more lines in this film... Craig Bierko, of whom I last saw in The Thirteen Floor, and more recently in an episode of Elementary on CBS, plays the role of Sofia's lover, who seems to stumble along and suffer blow after blow with all the accidents he winds up in... Poor guy, I really do feel for his character... I would have loved to have seen more of him in the film too, a shame that it kinda wraps up a little toward the end, but it's fun to watch these two interact with one another and with the Stooges.

Overall, the film is wonderful, and plays homage to the eponymous Stooges with the way this film has been written out. The Farrelly Brothers excelled themselves in the direction and production and they definitely did their homework to ensure that Diamantopoulos, Hayes and Sasso embodied their roles. I will however, be stripping half a star for the slight gap with characters that seemed a bit out of place, the Stooges themselves are faultless and with the possibility of a sequel coming up, I am salivating at the prospect of grabbing my popcorn and sitting back in a cinema chair to watch. Four and a half stars.

The Sum of All Fears

Running Time: 124 minutes

Media: TV Broadcast

I thought, "Why not?" The idea of seeing Ben Affleck play the role of Dr. Jack Ryan was appealing enough, and I had attempted to watch this once before, and had given up... So last night, by the advice of my future father-in-law, I settled back and watched this film.

Tom Clancy, the author of the originating book, also plays the role of executive producer here... and it seems he was quite pleased with the results... Despite the fact that originally Jack Ryan was portrayed by Harrison Ford in Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger, and then by Alec Baldwin in The Hunt for Red October; it seems that Ryan is getting younger and younger...

But it seems that Ben Affleck is a good fit for this reboot of the series, though up to a point, and I will explain this further in my review. Surprisingly, there has been little encouragement since the film came out ten years ago to push for a sequel. A bit sad really, as I did enjoy this film, but once again, to a certain degree, and this too will be explained later on in the review.

That being said, there were significant changes from the book to film conversion. Tom Clancy joking admitted on the commentary track on the film's DVD that he was "the author of the book that he...", Phil Alden Robinson, the director, who is present with Clancy, "...ignored." And the fact that the author is happy to joke about the changes made is a good sign that it should be enjoyed. The strongest change was the deviation of the villains in the book from Islamic extremists to Neo-Nazis. This change was not due to the 9/11 attacks, as filming ended in June 2001, some three or so months before the 9/11 attacks.

Here Jack Ryan played by Affleck is brought in by the CIA director, William Cabot (played by the all powerful Morgan Freeman), to advise on the ever mounting tension between the United States and Russia, with the death of the former Russian president.

Alexander Neremov is sworn in as the new president, and he's supposedly a real hard-ass... Ciarán Hinds, who plays the role of Neremov is frightening, almost too scary too approach, but his portrayal is quite seasoned actor on both TV, stage and screen, he's done very well. He has this stone cold look, one that says "I can't feel a thing, I cannot show emotion." True, but sadly, he also looked like he also had suffered a mild stroke with his look. But given the nature of his role I am willing to let this slide.

Throw in a potential nuclear threat in the form of a dirty nuclear bomb to be detonated somewhere in the United States and it becomes a race to find the culprits before it's too late. With Ryan taking orders from none other than William Cabot, the director of the FBI, played by Morgan Freeman, one of the most charismatic actors of all time, the scene changes dramatically with every new revelation... The problem is, is that this change seems to occur a little too quickly. I mean, come on, granted, they have two hours within this film to bring us up to speed, but a lot of it seems to happen all at once, making you lose the flow of the plot. I had a little trouble trying to wrap my head around what was happening, and wondering why certain... "unnecessary" scenes were thrown in to make things connect together.

Freeman is great as Cabot, he plays the role well, and had me convinced of his leadership and ability to command, but then again, he seems to have that effect, doesn't he? I'm not sure what it is about him, but he seems to embody every role with such confidence. His demeanor in the film is such that he comes across as dry, but humorous when he needs to be. It makes the audience side with him and treat him as someone other than a cold and heartless man who is only concerned about his job. Thus, kudos to Freeman, as per usual.

Affleck... Ben Affleck, does he pull it off as a former military man turned CIA analyst? Yes and no. He works well as Jack Ryan, but having first seen  Patriot Games many years ago, I half-expected some of the grittiness of Harrison Ford to seep into his younger counterpart. Not so, as he seems somewhat unsure and  unready to tackle things head on; which kinda conflicts with his military history. It's not convincing enough, very amateurish, kinda like watching a newly-born giraffe get on his feet for the first time and walking. He kinda stumbles through the plot and discovers various things by pure accident, albeit a lot of it through secondary characters that seem to favor the odds to complete serendipity than focused research.

My final focus is on James Cromwell... This man has played presidents here and there, from West Wing as D. Wire Newman, to RFK, as Lyndon B. Johnson, and now as President J. Robert Fowler. My God, Fowler is a hard-ass, he's stubborn, he's emotional, he's a tortured soul... He's brilliant. I think having had played presidents after this one has confirmed his fit for such a role. Normally when I think of Cromwell, I think of peaceful characters, but he amazingly pushes through regardless of the madness around him. Cromwell is convincing enough to follow through.

Secondary characters abound, the convenience of Grushkov coming through towards the end, as well as the set up of the initial encoutner between Neremov and Ryan kinda spoils it toward the end. I also found the logic of the "engagement" between Ryan and his girlfriend a little strange, especially considering that they had only been together a few weeks according to the film (maybe I heard it wrong, but it seemed a little quick to me!)

Given the pace and the cast of the film, I was tempted to score high, but I'm compelled to score it three and a half stars as I'm not thoroughly convinced that they pulled it off completely, sure, it was wrapped up towards the end, but a little too neatly... It gave me one of those involuntary cringes when I discovered this tying up, and as a result I'm sticking to my guns. The Sum of All Fears as a result, get 3½ stars.

Les Miserables (2012)

Running Time: 158 minutes.
Media: Cinematic release (Hoyts Broadway)


True story, when I was seven, my mother had a number of books in French that I was interested in reading... There was Around the World in 80 Days, The Three Musketeers, From the Earth to the Moon, and Les Miserables. I couldn't help asking my mother "Who's Les? He's got a pretty awful surname...?"

Alright, you can stop laughing... I did think it was a pretty unfortunate surname. And I never thought to see the musical until recently, and now that I have seen this adaptation, I would love the opportunity to see this once it makes its way back to Australia... that and Avenue Q, but I digress...

I was really happy about seeing this widescreen, and I knew that being a 2½-plus hour movie, the category of "EPIC!" would consistently flash in my head as I watched it, I made myself comfortable. Being a late session there weren't many people around... in fact I would have been surprised if there were no more than ten people in this particular cinema. This made for a wonderful viewing session.

Moving on, Les Mis has managed to garner nine (count them, nine) BAFTA Awards, including Best Film, Best British Film, Best Actor in a Leading Role and Best Actress in a Supporting Role and eight Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress. Now given that Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway have already won Golden Globe Awards for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress respectively, the odds of them bagging an Oscar each this year are quite high... I wouldn't be surprised if this movie gets a clean sweep.

For those living under a rock, Les Mis, is the story of the struggle of one Jean Valjean (played by Hugh Jackman), who has made a promise to a former and now dead worker of his to look after her illegitimate daughter. Valjean is also on the run from parole after serving a nineteen year sentence for stealing a loaf of bread... Times were harsh back in pre-revolutionary France. Valjean's nemesis is a prison guard, Javert (played by Russell Crowe), who has made it his life's work to hunt Valjean down and bring him back to jail for breaking parole.

Cosette, played by the ever adorable Amanda Seyfried is the adopted daughter of Valjean, with her mother, Fantine, played by Anne Hathaway. The musical is such that very little of the script is spoken, it's sung through pretty much from beginning to end... which kinda reminded me of how it was with Evita. The music is wonderful and it captures your heart, because it is bubbling with raw emotion... especially from Jackman and Hathaway... all other characters kinda pale in comparison... Russell Crowe less so, seeing that a number of critics have said that his only real musical experience stems from his involvement in his band 30 Odd Foot Of Grunts, and an assortment of random appearances... But you know what? He pulls it off just fine, I like his performance as Javert. Javert is a very troubled character, and as a result, the singing must follow in a similar manner to reveal the character through their music. Valjean is hurried and passionate and loving and determined for survival, and his singing conveys that. Javert's character is focused and troubled at the same time, with an obsessive streak with finding Valjean and bringing him to justice, and Crowe's singing conveys this too.

Hathaway's... just... extraordinary, I had to shake my head in disbelief in how beautiful and heart wrenching it was... It put Susan Boyle's rendition to shame. Fantine (Hathaway's character) is only focused on one thing, not herself, but the life of her daughter, Cosette. She's literally sacrificed herself so that he daughter could live. I believe her portrayal of Fantine. I wanted to cry, I really did.

Jackman, though said by a number of critics as "not as good" as his 1985-1987 London production counterpart, Colm Wilkinson, is actually remarkable, he embodies that role... and he's quite believable. What I was surprised about though was how he managed to shape up for the role. He actually lost 15 pounds (6½ kilos), to become the gaunt and emaciated ex-convict Jean Valjean, and gained 30 pounds (13 kilos), to become the mayor, Monsieur Madeleine, the new identity adopted by Valjean. Jackman is known for the vigorous regimes he undertakes for certain roles. He had a similar regime when he underwent a high intensity weight training regimen to improve his physique for the role of Wolverine in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. He altered the training program to shock his body into change and also performed cardiovascular workouts. So that shot of him as Wolverine rising from the tank after having his bones infused with adamantium - no digital touches whatsoever.


Rusty's portrayal of Javert is complex, but you kinda feel sorry for him after realizing he (Javert) is only just trying to do his job... He's taken a lot of flack for his performance, and I can see why some people may think that way, but I feel he gave it his all in this role; and while though that may not be enough for some, without Javert there can be no Jean Valjean. For those who don't care, look towards the end of the film at Javert's final scene where his soliloquy kinda makes you understand why he spent all that time chasing Valjean, and the inevitable demise thereafter, but prepare to cringe at the very moment.

There are a few surprises scattered here and there throughout the film. Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter play Monsieur and Madame Thénardier; and they previously starred together in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, so their ability to work together musically is surprisingly upbeat. Bonham Carter looks like she tends to, a bit necrotic... She does star as a number of unusual roles, doesn't she? But she works well as Cohen's husband on-screen. Cohen works wonders as Monsieur Thénardier, and I think kinda steals the scenes he's in. He's a hidden jewel in the movie... a built in "easter egg" of sorts.

Who else, oh yes... For those playing at home, the Bishop is indeed Colm Wilkinson, the original Jean Valjean from the London production back in the 80's. I hear there's also a cameo of Frances Ruffelle as a prostitute who harasses Fantine, but I have yet to find her. I almost squealed in my seat when I did, not that the other ten or so audience members noticed... Being a late session I enjoyed this movie without much interruption, and I enjoyed it so much, I almost came close to singing along... But I didn't, but any musical that makes you feel like doing so must deserve some sort of credit for moving you.

That is why I am giving Les Miserables a 4½ star rating. It comes very close, but there's a feeling that it doesn't quite give you the opportunity to sit back and take in the performances, it's almost as if it wanted to finish a lot sooner than expected. I may also be docking the ½ a star due to the slight tranquilizing effect that Crowe gives as Javert in certain scenes. Although he does well for what I believe is his first musical, he doesn't bring it home. Sorry Rusty, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed your performance, but I feel that somehow you seemed a little subdued in the final edit; that could very well have been to direct our attention to Hugh, who knows? Four and a half stars.