LES MISERABLES Film Official Reviews — Page 3

I'm surprised Mamma Mia! has not really been mentioned. Despite critical drubbing and scorn from theatre fans, it went on to make over $600 million worldwide. That is nothing to sneeze at.

---

Wickedrocks, I wasn't nearly as into Lincoln as I'd hoped to be either. I recognize the quality of the cinematography and the acting - Tommy Lee Jones, especially - but it ended up being underwhelming.

Right. It was extremely well-shot, well-acted, well-designed, well-edited, etc etc. But I was just...bored for 90% of it. I found it to be a pretty pretentious slog, for the most part. And I heard multiple people bemoaning how underwhelmed they were as I left the theater. As I said, its box office longevity is very shocking to me. I personally am surprised a film like LINCOLN would have such a widespread appeal and strong word of mouth when a film as charming and entertaining as THE ARTIST barely managed to make $40 million in its entire run.

(Yes I understand the subject matter of LINCOLN is inherently going to pique interest in moviegoers, whereas something like THE ARTIST has more of an uphill climb ahead of itself from the get-go.)

A somewhat optimistic article from the Times on this film as an opportunity to help revive the ailing Working Title Pictures: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/07/movies/awardsseason/working-title-films-looks-to-les-miserables-for-oscars.html?ref=movies&_r=0

Updated On: 12/7/12 at 11:12 PM

I am surprised Lincoln is doing so well box office wise as well. It is certainly talky. Personally I wasn't bored. Kushner's well crafted script, the topicality of the political machinations, and the assured presence of James Spader (who deserves but won't get an oscar nod), Michael Stuhlbarg, Jared Harris, Hal Holbrook and, in very small roles, Adam Driver, Colman Domingo, etc, among many others, kept my interest. My only - albeit predictable - gripe was Spielberg not knowing when to quit and going for the uberschmaltz only a couple of times (but in such unfortunate ways) near the end when so much less would have been so much more. But I still think it's a very fine film.

I enjoyed HITCHCOCK as well! It's certainly not without flaws, but I was pretty moved by Alma and Hitch's relationship by the end. Hopkins and Mirren deserve nominations, but I fear they'll both be shut out.

If Rachel Weisz (whom I love) is giving the best female performance of the year (check out New York mag), then anything could happen. I think Helen Mirren has a good chance for a nomination (an Oscar darling in a very weak year for women), as does Jessica Chastain if the film does well.

Why exactly is this being considered a "very weak year for [leading] women".

Marion Cotillard, Jennifer Lawrence, Emannuelle Riva, Quvenzhane Wallis, Jessica Chastain, Rachel Weisz, Keira Knightley, Linda Cardellini, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Helen Mirren, Maggie Smith, Emayatzy Corinealdi, Judi Dench, Meryl Streep, Greta Gerwig and Naomi Watts.

What are they chopped liver?

Sure, many big movies didn't have leading ladies, and not all of the above listed have even a slight chance of a nomination. And some are in movies that have been little seen (so what? last year Demian Bichir was nominated for a relatively little seen movie; no one argued it was a weak year for leading men).

At least six of the best actress possibilities are stars of movies that could possibly get multiple nominations in major categories including perhaps best picture: Lawrence, Riva, Chastain, Wallis, Knightley and, perhaps to a lesser extent, Watts.

And Chastain is the lead, and the only lead, in what now looks to be the frontrunner for best picture.

The last year a movie with even a nominated female lead won best picture was 2004 (Million Dollar Baby, Swank won the oscar). Consider the years since then:

2005: Crash won, no female lead (granted, there was no lead in Crash). And no other female leads in the other four nominated movies: Brokeback, Capote, Good Night and Good Luck and Munich.

2006: The Departed won, no female lead. And of the four other nominated movies only one (The Queen) had a female lead (the others were Babel, Letters from IwonJima, Little Miss Sunshine).

2007: No Country for Old Men won, no female lead. Of the also nominated Atonement, Juno, Michael Clayton and There Will Be Blood, two out of four had female leads (Atonement, Juno).

2008: Slumdog Millionaire won, no female lead. Of the also nominated Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk and The Reader only The Reader had a female lead.

2009: The winner, The Hurt Locker had no female lead. Also nominated Avatar (no female lead), The Blind Side (female lead), District 9 (no female lead), An Education (female lead), Inglorious Bastards (no female lead), Precious (female lead), A Serious Man (no female lead), Up (animated, no female lead), Up in the Air (no female lead).

Out of ten nominated best pics, 3 had female leads (each scoring a best actress nod).

2010: The King's Speech won (no female lead). 4 out of the 10 nominated movies had female leads (Black Swan, The Kids Are All Right (two female leads), True Grit and Winter's Bone. 3 of them had best actress nominees, the other had (True Grit) had its lead nominated as supporting.

2011: Of the ten nominated movies (The Artist - winner, The Descendants, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Help, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, The Tree of Life and Warhorse) only one (The Help) had a female lead (it had two actually). OK, maybe Bejo could be considered lead which would bring it to 2/10.

To repeat: Last year, 1/10 of the ten nominated movies had a female lead.

One could argue this is a pretty damn good year for women in leading roles. Certainly there have been many years that were a lot worse.

Updated On: 12/8/12 at 04:17 PM

It isn't considered a strong year for leading actress because Meryl Streep is not in contention (yes she did Hope Springs, but she had to pay for Mamie and Ben's wedding somehow= she did do Hope Springs for the $$ and not the art).

In reality there were no big female driven films this year, (the Help, Julie and Julia, Eat Pray Love or even Bridesmaids). Yes there was The Hunger Games and Twilght, but other than those two name another major film this year with a female protagonist.

Most films this year with female leads were indepent films meaning very few people saw them. There is no real "omg did you Meryl Streep in The Iron Lady" this year compared to men with a must see performances by Daniel Day Lewis, Hugh Jackman, and Bradley Cooper.

There were wonderful performances from leading actresses but none that really seem to get people thrilled and talking. There's no Streep v. Davis. There's nothing arousing passionate support.

---

Of those films only Hope Springs is not an independent film.

"Of those films only Hope Springs is not an independent film."

And that's a significant distinction because.... (especially in the era of the Weinsteins and well into their fourth decade)