TEN BEST OF 2012: Patrick's Picks

 By Patrick Gibbs

In publishing this list of my choices for the ten best films of 2012, it's important to point out that due to an unfortunate (and incredibly irritating error) I have not yet seen Zero Dark Thirty, the film that is topping so many awards lists, and that is one of the reasons why I have chosen to do my list in alphabetical order, rather than to rank them. But regardless of that film, 2012 turned out to be one of the toughest years in recent memory to narrow down. For example, it kills me to leave The Hobbit off of the list, but I felt the need to take a stand against Peter Jackson horrifying choice in shooting and screening the film in 48 frames per second, a choice that makes George Lucas and C.G.I. fish donkeys look like the greatest moment in cinema history, and Les Miserables hovered in place for some time before I decided that, in my opinion, the "Master of the House" sequence was just too sloppy, silly, poorly performed and clashed with the rest of the film. (I don't care if his singing was off, I actually loved Russell Crowe. Deal with it.).

Anyway, here goes:

ARGO

Ben Affleck's third film proves to be his best yet, and cements his place as Hollywood's most exciting young director. Rivaling any action film for suspense and any screwball comedy for number of laughs, this intelligent, fact based thriller has everything, including John Goodman.

BRAVE and WRECK IT RALPH

Despite not ranking the films, I'm still tying these two for a spot because I simply couldn't choose between them, and they are so utterly unique in that BRAVE is the better Disney film and WRECK IT RALPH the better PIXAR film, and yet their actual pedigree is opposite of this. Where many critics (and audience members) made a mistake was in thinking they had like one at the expense of the other.

CLOUD ATLAS

This film was lost on most of the public, and most of the press as well, but I was enthralled by this visually breathtaking, epic saga of interwoven stories throughout time, and was delighted by the awesome range of characters portrayed by Tom Hanks, who has two Academy Awards for Best Actor and still manages to be underrated.

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES

Christopher Nolan's groundbreaking and brilliant take on Batman came to a thrilling and emotional conclusion with this Dickensian tale, full of tragedy, sacrifice and redemption.Super hero movies don'tget better than this. MOVIES don't get better than this

HITCHCOCK

There's an undeniable delight in watching Hannibal Lecter direct Norman Bates, and the scene where the venerable “Master of Suspense” conducts the audience like an orchestra is my favorite of the year. But what really made this film soar was the relationship between Hitch (Anthony Hopkins) and his wife and creative partner Alma (Helen Mirren.).

SAFETY NOT GUARANTEED

A low budget indie film that did not get a wide release, this whimsical, charming and ultimately inspiring film is the one this year that you didn't see, but you should have. Mark Duplass and Aubrey Plaza are luminous in this quirky tale of unexpected romance and (possibly) time travel. Go ahead - watch the trailer and I guarantee you'll think "it can't be as good as it looks." Well, guess what? It is.

SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

Of all of this year's films, this is the one that resonated most with my on an emotional level, and I had seen three times by the second day of it's release. Writer/Director David O. Russell may not be easy to get along with in real life, but if anything his personal baggage only adds to this hilarious and touching tale of a man (Bradley Cooper) coming to terms with a broken heart and a broken mind, and the young woman (Jennifer Lawrence) who makes it that much harder, and that much easier. Redefining the term “feel good movie” for me, this may be the most pleasant surprise I've had in a theater in years. 

 

SKYFALL

Everyone praises Daniel Craig as “the Bond who can kick anyone's ass,” but he made an even bigger impression in this film as the Bond who had a past, and not only was capable of crying, but of making us cry. Few people would have predicted that Sam Mendes would ever direct a 007 flick, and even fewer would have guessed that it would turn out to be his best film.

LIFE OF PI

Ang Lee, the innovative and often unappreciated director behind Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon, Brokeback Mountain and Hulk (yes, I liked it) creates a visual marvel that touches the heart and soul. Quite possibly the most impressive visual effects ever on film are used to tell a gripping tale that will stay with you forever.

LINCOLN

Arguably the greatest director, the greatest actor, and the greatest U.S. President, is a tough trio to beat, and this is a movie that would have still been pretty good even if it had been terrible. But Daniel Day Lewis manages to somehow surprise once again with his lovable and all too human portrayal of the legendary figure, and Spielberg and writer Tony Kushner manage to make a Civil War film that is all but devoid of epic battles but portrays more interesting conflict and daring than has ever been captured before. A complete, unqualified triumph.

Runners-Up: THE AVENGERS, THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY, LES MISERABLES, LOOPER, MEN IN BLACK 3, MOONRISE KINGDOM, RISE OF THE GUARDIANS

LES MISERABLES

Reviewed by Patrick Gibbs 

GRADE: A

Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Samnatha Barks, Amanda Seyfried, Sacha Baron Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter and Eddie Redmayne

Based on the novel by Victor Hugo

Music and Lyrics by Claude-Michel Schönberg  & Alain Boublil

Screenplay by William Nicholson

Additional text by James Fenton

For a Broadway musical, the transition from stage to screen is not always pleasant. For every Chicago there is The Producers, and a light, relative newbie like Hairspray can be a hit while, for all the hype, a venerable old legend like Andrew Lloyd Webber's The Phantom of the Opera can come crashing down at the box office like a crystal chandelier, and Rent can . . . no, there's no way I can get away with that comment, so just forget it.

As such, the fate of Les Miserables, one of Broadway's most beloved institutions and arguable the most cinematic stage musical ever produced, has been a gigantic question mark, especially as to whether the casting of major Hollywood stars in a musical associated with powerhouse voices was going to be a disastrous choice. I'm actually quite fond of Gerard Butler's acting in Phantom, but there's no denying that he's hardly an angel of music. And then there was the choice made by director Tom Hooper to record all of the songs live, which has not been done since At Long Last Love, Peter Bogdanovich's infamous debacle featuring Burt Reynolds and Cybil Shepherd crooning old Cole Porter hits. On the other hand, this is a great piece of material, an Oscar Winning Director, and a tremendous group of actors, if not proven singers for the most part. As such, Les Miserables has been the biggest wild card of the Oscar season.

Fortunately, the elements come together for a winning hand.

Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) a Frenchman imprisoned for stealing bread, has broken his parole and must flee from police Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe). The pursuit consumes both men's lives, and after two decades on the run, Valjean finds himself in the midst of the 1832 June Rebellion in Paris. Along the way Valjean meets Fantine (Anne Hathaway), a tragic figure who is forced into a life of prostitution to pay to support the daughter she doesn't even know; the Thenardier's (Sascha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham-Carter), a loathsome couple who have had custody of Fantine's daughter, Cosette, and Cossette herself, whom he adopts. Then finally he falls in with a group of young revolutionaries, one of whom is destined to become his son in law.

The film gets off to a bit of a shaky start, and it takes a while to settle in. Some dialogue has been added and somelyrics changed in order to provide clarity for the unititiated, and while it's probably a a good choice, it's a bit jarring for those of us who have the musical memorized. Hooper also makes an usual choice in shooting the lion's share of the film in close ups, which is an odd approach for such an epic tale, but a brilliant one for an emotional, character based story. This technique works best for Hathaway's unforgettable rendition of “I Dreamed A Dream,” which is shot almost entirely in one take, and is filled with so much emotion, poignancy and truth that it easily the most riveting movie moment of 2012. While many Broadway stars have over milked this song to the point where it had become in danger of losing it's power, Hathaway infuses it with a heartbreaking sense of reality that is so overwhelming it makes you think she could make a musical version of Schindler's List work. Hathaway and Samantha Barks as Eponine fair best from a vocal standpoint (Barks was the lone Broadway cast member chosen to reprise her role on screen), but there are other terrific performances, and by the time we get to Hooper glorious staging "The Confrontation" the film has you completely hooked.

Hugh Jackman, as many well know, especially after his rather awkward turn as an Oscar host, was a musical theatre actor long before he was Wolverine, and it's about time someone cast him in a major musical. But whether the role of Jean Valjean was within his range was a subject for a doubt, and frankly, for the first forty minutes of the film Jackman seems to be doubting himself, choosing to focus far more on acting the role than singing it, and he struggles with a few notes along the way. But when he hits stride, he really his his stride, and by the time he gets to “Bring Him Home,” he has left any doubts behind. Jackman has shown star power for over a decade, but with the exception of the underrated Austrailia, it's taken this long for him to step out of the shadow of Wolverine and get a really memorable role in a genuinely good film.

But the far bigger question was Russell Crowe as Javert. The former king of Oscar-land has hit hard times, and even when he was on top his position as front man for a mediocre band, 30 Odd Foot Of Grunts, hardly qualified him as a great singer. Crowe wisely chooses to play it safe, keeping never trying to overreach his abilities, and as such never reaches the surprising moments of greatness or the abysmal moments of failure that Butler did as the Phantom. Fortunately, if there is one lead character that can get away with substituting presence for polish, it's Javert, and the stone face that never masks the conflict and anguish in his eyes works very well. It's not Crowe's best film performance, but it's a respectable one, and in fact, the brilliant sequence where Javert walks precariously on a ledge, balancing himself high above Paris while in constant danger of falling over the edge while singing “Stars,” is the second best scene in the film. Eddie Redmayne makes such a strong impression as Marius that Nick Jonas and Ricky Martin reportedly both melted in a slimy puddle of hair gel and mediocrity upon watching it, and Amanda Seyfried makes as memorable a Cosette as I've ever seen. That's not to overly praise Seyfried. I've never seen a truly memorable Cosette; the biggest failure of this musical has always been the fact that Cosette pales in comparison to Eponine and it's hard to see what is so special about her. But Seyfried, far from one of my favorite actresses, does a credible job and William Nicholson's screenplay does it's best to strengthen the relationship between father and daughter, amd there is a genuine chemistry between the two.

Faring worst are Baron Cohen and Bonham-Carter, who to be fair, have been given difficult roles that barely work on stage and simply do not translate to film. The Thenardier's are two disgusting to be funny and two silly to be scary, and between Bonham-Carter total lack of singing ability (previosuly showcased in Sweeney Todd) and Baron Cohen's tentative, almost bored performance, they are easily the biggest misfire in the film. They aren't terrible, by any means, they just fail to shine. But perhaps the most endearing performance comes from young Daniel Huttlestone as Gavroche, who really steals the whole movie.

But ultimately, the film belongs to Hooper, to the music and the story, all of which take on a epic journey that hits a few rough spots along the way but ultimately ends in triumph. This should not be viewed as the definitive production of Les Miserables, but rather as a bold and interesting staging of one of the greatest musical of all time that leaves room for many more viewings of the live version, but will also proudly preserve it as a film for the ages.

Les Miserables is rated PG-13 for violence, sexuality, vulgarity, profanity, and adult themes.

THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY

Reviewed by Patrick Gibbs

48 FRAMES PER SECOND VERSION: F

24 FRAMES PER SECOND VERSION: A -

Martin Freeman, Ian McKellan, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett

Based on The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien

Screenplay by Peter Jackson,& Fran Walsh & Phillipa Boyens & Guillermo Del Toro

Directed by Peter Jackson

This review is a few days overdue, and with good reason. The Hobbit, as we have long known, was to be split into two movies, which then became three movies. But to further complicate things, after my initial viewing of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey at an exclusive press screening, presented in the new 48 frames per second version, I realized that each chapter has in fact been split into two movies – the good version and the bad version. In order to review the film, I had see both.

For those who are not familiar with the concept of 48FPS, it's the setting on your HDTV that makes everything look like it was shot on a security camera. It is Not High Definition – High Definition is determined by the number of pixels, not the frame rate. But 48FPS provides a crisp, clear picture that is truly unparalleled. It's a perfect image. As long as nothing moves, I which case it looks jerky, almost as if the film has been sped up. Of course, this is merely a trick of the mind – it's actually closer to what we see in real life than an actual movie is. That being said, the photographs we see on the cover of Maxim are arguably more real than the Mona Lisa. That doesn't mean we should choose them over art.

In addition to the jerky movement, 48FPS provides an image that is genuinely TOO perfect. It provides no room for artifice: what you see if what you get. Every imperfection is right there in front of you, visible to the naked eye and glaringly obvious. This presents a problem for many films, as one can actually see the make up the actors are wearing, but when the film is an elaborate epic fantasy it's a genuine disaster. The Hobbit is filled with spectacular sets, computer generated visual effects and elaborate prosthetic and make up, and 48FPS renders all of these useless, because the art of illusion is dependent upon a certain distance between the audience and the subject. When actor Graham McTavish enters Bilbo Baggins home as Dwalin the Dwarf in the regular, reliable 24 frames per second version, we see a a broad shouldered dwarf with tattoos all covering his bald head, and a bulbous nose and long beard. When we see him enter Bilbo's home in the 4FPS version, we see at best an actor in heavy, if laughably unconvincing, make up, and at worst we see some idiot who's come to Comicon hoping to get his picture taken with Lucy Lawless.

The C.G.I. Looks more like a cartoon than ever before (Phantom Menace and Harry Potter and The Sorcerer’s Stone have nothing on this) and the lines around the image that have been superimposed are distractingly visible, and sets that would otherwise look completely convincing at locations in Middle earth look like tacky amusement park attractions. Metaphorically, you can see all the strings.

I spoke with Chris Hansen, perhaps Utah's most successful and respected film make up artist, and he had had this to say about 48FPS. “Though its all translucent silicone these days, it doesn’t matter. It looks like a documentary on bad prosthetics and bad CGI. Hollywood needs to understand what doesn’t work about their new technology. 24 fps and film grain built what we understand as cinema, and the new movement in 48 frames per second digital needs to adjust to this since prosthetics and CGI. cant, and never will.”

And if this isn't bad enough, 48FPS causes splitting headaches and nausea for some people due to motion sickness. I frankly wanted to crawl into a hole and die afterwards.

Among the reasons director Peter Jackson gives for this format is that reduces the motion blur that comes with 3D. There is some truth to this, but honestly the reduction is minimal, and when it makes every major motion look choppy throughout, it is hardly an improvement. This process is a complete failure on every level: the nicest thing I can say about it is that the raindrops coming down did look amazing. But is that really the only positive thing you want to get get visually from a film 2 hour and 45 minute film made on a $150 million plus budget?

Now, on to the movie. Because the 48FPS version does not deserve to be called a movie.

On the day of his 111th birthday, with his nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood) leaving to wait for the arrival of Gandalf the Grey in the Shire, Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm, reprising his role from the Lord of The Rings trilogy) decides to write down the full story of the adventure he took 60 years before, when Bilbo (now played by Martin Freeman) was coerced by Gandalf into hosting a party for Thorin Oakenshield and his band of Dwarves: a party that doubles as Bilbo's recruitment to serve as the Dwarves' "burglar" to help them steal their treasure back from Smaug The Dragon. Though Bilbo refuses at first, he decides to join the company on their journey to the Lonely Mountain.

Compared to the sweeping, emotionally charged, fate of the world in the balance tales told in The Fellowship of The Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of The King, this is light adventure. The Hobbit was an adventure novel somewhat akin to Treasure Island, where The Lord of The Rings was an unparallelled epic saga. It is to Jackson's credit that, for the most part, he recognizes the difference and, despite the padding out to three films, let's the story play as simply what it is rather than trying to make it more profound. He does take some liberties, adding more foreshadowing of the events that are destined to shake all of Middle Earth, most notably a meeting between Gandalf, Elrond (Hugo Weaving), Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) and Saruman (Christopher Lee.). This sequence is compelling, and it is fun to see Jackson fill in the blanks to explain the many odd disappearances Gandalf makes throughout the book, and I loved the idea that the reason for the these strange absences was that Gandalf was even then investigating the coming danger of the ring. Unfortunately, this sequence also dominates the Rivendell section of the film to such an extent that the transcendental beauty of the Elven Kingdom is underplayed, and I never felt the enchantment that Bilbo ultimately leads Bilbo to go back there so many years later.

But The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a wild ride, very well acted and full of exciting action and nice character moments. The dwarves a magnificent, McKellen's Gandalf as splendid as ever, and the relationship between Bilbo and Thorin (Richard Armitage) provides for many of the film's best moments. The action packed sequence in the Goblin Kingdom stacks up favorably with the “Mines of Moria” in Fellowship, even if, like George Lucas before him, Jackson has become a bit too reliant on CGI creatures, and many other sequences will keep audiences on the edge of their seats. Part of me does feel that some of the comedy with Gollum (once again brilliantly portrayed by Andy Serkiss) was a little too broad, but on the other hand, he was a much lighter and less grim character in this book than the pathetic yet frightening vision we see in Lord of the Rings, and it works well enough and provides a highly entertaining sequence, and the moment when Bilbo decides to spare Gollum's life is easily the best in the whole film. The Goblin King (voiced by Dame Edna) also had some moments that were too much for me.

Seen as a movie, which in this particular case means seeing it not as the director intended, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a delightful epic blockbuster that leaves you anxious for the next chapter. It may not achieve genuine greatness in the same way that LOTR trilogy does, but it really isn't meant to. It's meant to be exactly what it is, and it's a lot of fun.

But next time, if it's presented in 48FPS, I'm definitely skipping the press screening.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is Rated PG-13 for violence, suspense and very mild profanity and vulgarity.

HITCHCOCK

HITCHCOCK
GRADE: A
Reviewed by Paul Gibbs

       If I had to choose a single greatest film director of all time, I'd probably have to go with Alfred Hitchock. Yes, even as fanatically enthusiastic as I am about the films of Steven Spielberg. While D.W. Griffith invented the narrative film as we know it today, and Orson Welles revolutionized the artform with Citizan Kane, over the decades of his career and countless excellent films, Hitch did more to develope the possibilities of the art form than anyone else, in my opinion. And Stephen Rebello's book Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho is one of the two or three best books about fimmaking I've ever read, giving a facinating and detailed account of the creation of one Hitchcock's greatest films.

          So, does the new film Hitchcock, based on the aforementioned book and the genius who inspired it, live up it's lofty subjects? No, not really. In order to make the film more palatable to a mass audience and less specifically for film geeks, Hitchcock glosses over most of the detail on the making of Psycho and focuses instead on a fictionalized look at the complex relationship between Hitchcock and his wife and most trusted collaborater, Alma Reville. Director Sacha Gervasi is talented, but he's  bound to suffer by comparison when directing a film about a master. Forunately, the film is still very good, and entertaining enough for me to give it an enthusiastic recommendation.

        As the story begins, Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) has just released one of his biggest successes, North By Northwest. But he yearns to try something a little different, and he finds just the right material in Robert Bloch's novel Psycho, a lurid story of, as one excedutive puts it "a queer dressing up in his mother's dresses and killing people.". While every Hollywood studio has rejected the book, Hitch sees the potential to reinvent himself, and puts everything on the line to fund it himself. Meanwhile,  Alma (Helen Mirren) is feeling more than a little unappreciated, and is spending more and more time working on a writing project with author Whitfield Cook (Danny Huston). This personal plot takes up the bulk of the film, and that might be a real problem if Hopkins and especially Mirren weren't giving such great performances, explores the nuances of the complicated relationship between to brilliant artists. Hopkins captures the voice and manerisms of Hitchcock very well, even if his makeup looks a little silly at times, and is given a great deal of delightful dialogue which he delivers expertly. And Mirren's subtle, elegant characterization is heartbreaking and beautiful.

           While we don't get enough behind-the-scenes Psycho stuff, what we do get is a lot of fun, especially Hitch's meetings with an uptight censor (Kurtwood Smith). Scarlett Johanson may bear only a passing resemblance to Janet Leigh, but in scenes where she is reenacting moments from Psycho she captures the star's facial expressions so perfectly it's astounding. And James D'Arcy's Anthony Perkins is downright eerie. One of the most debatable aspects of this portion of the film is the portrayal of the relationship between Hitch and Vera Miles (Jessica Biel, who plays the role very well). The portrayal of the reasons behind their strangement is dead on, but there's a semi-reconciliation scene which I found sweet and touching, but arguably overstepping the line as there is no indication anything like it ever happened. And it's problematic to see Hitch seemingly resolving his obsession with the "Hitchcock Blonde" just before making The Birds and Marnie with Tippi Hedren, the most notorious Hitchock Blonde of them all. And it's disappointing to see Bernard Hermann reduced to a single scene, and Saul Bass never even mentioned.

          But what really matters to me as that the movie works. As a Hitchcock geek who has poured over more than 30 of his films, and read everything I could about him, I found it delightful to watch Hopkins play him as he creates a masterpiece. A scene of Hitchcock standing in the theater lobby listening to the audience reation to the shower scene may be my favorite scene of the year. And the excellent acting and humorous dialogue should make the film entertaining to most audiences who aren't nearly so familiar with the master of suspense (though they should do themselves a favor and see some of his films. North By Northwest or Rear Window are the ones I'd recommend to start with). I thoroughly enjoyed the film, and it joins my list of favorite movies about movies. If it doesn't live up to everything we Hitchcock fans wanted to be, well, that's an awfully tall order. Think of it as Ed Wood, except it's about the greatest director of all time instead of the worst.

          Hitchock is rated PG-13 for mild violence and some moderately harsh language.