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.

ANNA KARENINA

 Reviewed by Paul Gibbs and Patrick Gibbs

GRADE: F

Keira Knightley, Jude Law, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Matthew McFadyen, Emily Watson and Kelly McDonald

Based on the novel by Leo Tolstoy

Screenplay by Tom Stoppard  

Directed by Joe Wright

We often find ourselves debating with fellow film enthusiasts or filmmakers about the merits of innovation for its own sake. Should a great filmmaker be concerned with always doing something in a new and inventive way? Or should style be dictated by the needs of the story? A marriage of stylistic innovation and good storytelling (such as we got from filmmakers like Alfred Hitchcock,  Orson Welles or Martin Scorsese) is a joy to behold. A story held hostage to a director's need to prove him or herself a stylistic auteur (such as we sometimes get from filmmakers like Zack Snyder or almost anybody working for Jerry Bruckheimer) can be frustrating and impenetrable. Joe Wright's adaptation of Tolstoy's classic Anna Karenina is the most egregious example of the latter in recent memory.

Keira Knightley assumes the title role of Anna, wife of 19^th century Russian government offical Alexei Karenin (Jude) law, who becomes drawn into an affair with the supposedly suave and handsome Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson. ) . Wright has chosen to set his adaptation in a grand opera house, in a surreal style that evokes Baz Luhrman's Moulin Rouge! Except that Luhrman's had a method to its madness. The design and style of the film related directly to both the entertainment based world of the characters and the theme of the delirious feeling of first love. Here, it draws nothing insightful or thematic. It's just, as Moe Syzlak would say, "weird for the sake of weird." And, worse, it acts as such a barrier  to the story that not only is the film incoherent, it's impossible to connect emotionally with a single character or moment of dialogue. We couldn't even muster up heartfelt indifference. This despite a quality cast struggling valiantly in their roles, and a script from the great Tom Stoppard. 

      Most of the attention will likely be on Knightley, as she plays the title role. Kinghtley does fine with what she is given, but it's difficult to judge the performance as the character is so poorly developed. She has no chemistry whatsoever with Taylor-Johnson, who, while having having proved such a strong presence as the title role in Kick Ass, comes across here as Christopher Atkins circa The Blue Lagoon attending a costume party dressed as Timothy Dalton.

What is known as one of the all-time great love stories does not play convincingly as love, romance, lust, or even casual friendship (though, again, we feel we must place the lion's share of the blame on the director rather than the cast). Among the cast, Jude Law fares best. Though we never feel get to know Karenin well enough, Law is srill a powerful prescene who manages to improve the film anytime he's onscreen. Others, such as Emily Watson, are completely wasted in thankless roles. Matthew McFadyen does manage to get a few small chuckles in what seems to be the comic relief role as Prince Stiva.

      The film is a marvel of cinematography and production design. But Joe Wright has committed the most unpardonable sin of directing: he has chosen his need to demonstrate that he is a brilliant auteur over the movie itself at every turn, burying everything in a style so overbearing that sex scenes are staged as almost balletic sequences where in it is difficult to tell which of Knightley and Johnson is which, and where nearly every appearance by a character is marked by frustration at not being able to determine who he or she is supposed to be. It's very difficult to give the film any credit for how visually beautiful it is when the overemphasis on style is so instrumental in making it an abysmal piece of story telling. Ar what should be the most emotional and gripping moments, we are consistently pulled out of the heads and hearts of the characters because the filmmakers are more interested in turning confetti into indoor snow, or making grass grow in theatre seats. There's no denying that this is sometimes a beautiful film to look at if you can stay awake, but it's like trying to admire Denise Richards: no matter how taken you are with the sumptuousness of the body, there's no brain or personality to be found.

        As we were giving our thoughts on the film to the studio representative, the audience member behind us seemed genuinely offended that we referred to the film as "a disaster". "Did you hear that?" she kept repeating to the people accompanying her, "They called it 'a disaster'!". Yes, ma'am, we called it a disaster. And will continue to do so at any opportunity afforded us. Because it is a disaster. In an Oscar season wherein the successes have been triumphant and most of the failures have at least been worthy efforts, Joe Wright has created a candidate for worst film of 2012, ringing more empty and soulless than even the most inane summer blockbusters, and yet will be championed by many as "culture" because its source material is considered a masterpiece.  This emperor has no clothes. He's buck-ass nude. And we are proud to say so.

Anna Karenina is Rated R for sex, though frankly that seems quite harsh, since between the hyperactive editing in the sex scenes and the physical similarities between Knightley and Taylor-Johnson it is quite frankly too hard to tell who or what you are looking in the sex scenes, and though far from subtle, they fall within the range of PG-13 territory.

THANKSGIVING TURKEYS

By Patrick Gibbs

It's that time of year again when families gather together and honor the memory of the Puritans by parking themselves in front of the TV and pretending that there is nothing strangely homoerotic about watching large, sweaty men in helmets pat each other on the backside. It's that time when the Macey's Thanksgiving Day Parade comes along to showcase giant inflatable characters like Willard Scott, roughly 18,000 High School marching bands, and several high spirited production numbers from upcoming Broadway musicals, most of which are so bad they will close at intermission. It's a time when people complain that this special holiday is passed over far too quickly in favor of Christmas, which they whine has become all about commercialism, as they make sure they have collectively forked over enough money to the Norbest and Stove Top Stuffing Corporations to cover the national deficit.

As for me, having been a vegetarian for roughly ten years now, I spend a lot of time around now thinking about the turkey I won't be eating, content with a small helping of dinner rolls filled with cranberry jelly with a side of mashed potatoes. But I'm still thinking about that turkey. They call it Turkey Day for a reason, and it is in that spirit that I now plunge into a forced and clumsy segue to an article about bad movies.

The following is a list of turkeys that I am either thankful for, because of the unintentional laughs they provided, or, like so much over eating, simply made me nauseous. (No, I am not going to mention “TROLL 2” - that would be too easy, and frankly I am sick to death of talking about the damn thing.)

Happy Thanksgiving!

IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE (2007)

Set in the kingdom of Ehb, “In The Name of The King” stars Jason Statham in the role of a simple farmer, creatively identified to the audience by the name “Farmer.” It seems that Farmer is an orphan who was adopted by the village (which makes you wonder if his name used to be”Orphan” but he changed it when he got old enough to grow five o'clock shadow across his entire head.). When Farmer's wife and son leave to sell vegetables in the town of Stonebridge, his farm is attacked by creatures called Krug. Fortunately, this being a Jason Statham movie, Farmer happens to be an expert at every form of Hollywood mixed martial arts, and with the help of his friend and mentor, Norrick (Ron Perlman, who deserves far better), he fights off the Krug and travels to Stonebridge, while on the way encountering various obstacles, including a mischievous band of tree dwelling lesbians. I am not making this up.

Now, if you're going to make a medieval fantasy adventure, you of course need a Wizard and a King. And who better to cast as the evil Wizard and the corrupt monarch than . . . Ray Liotta and Burt Reynolds? Yes, that is really who plays these roles. And if you are asking yourself the questions “how' and 'why?” the answer is simple: this is a Ewe Boll film. For those unfamiliar with this great artist, Boll is the recipient of the Golden Raspberry 's Worst Career Achievement Award, and is widely regarded as having directed most of the the worst movies ever to be made based on video games. Think about that last one for a moment.

Ever the class act, Boll issued a press release in 2006 stating that he would challenge each of his five harshest critics to a 10-round boxing match. But his greatest claim to fame as a filmmaker comes from publicly announcing, in response to criticism of his work, that if a million people told him to stop making movies, he would do so. This was followed by a massive internet petition, and as of June 2011, there were 364,572 signatures.

THE CONQUEROR (1956)

And speaking of unique casting decisions, wait until you get a load of John Wayne as Mongol chief Temujin, later to be immortalized as Genghis Khan, in the Howard Hughes produced epic THE CONQUEROR.

The story follows Temujin in his early days, as he wages war and falls madly in love with the Tartar Princess Bortai (played by Susan Hayward – apparently, Tartar women were known for their red hair). From the moment they meet, Temujin is so excited he can barely keep his false mustache on, and he proclaims that Bortai is “Wuh-man. MUCH wuh-man.” With this kind of steamy, romantic dialogue, it's no wonder Hughes himself kept a copy of this film shut away with him, watching it over and over again by himself in his later years.

The site of Wayne earnestly stumbling his way through the role is initially amusing, and when you add to that the embarrassingly inept dance sequences by Hayward and company, and the presence of Agnes Moorehead (of “Bewitched” fame) as Temujin's mother, this really sounds like a bad movie to be savored, but sadly, THE CONQUEROR is genuinely an ordeal to sit through. By the end, you won't just be glancing at the clock, you will be staring at it in fascination in the vain hope that perhaps itl will do something entertaining.

This is one of the most infamous films of all time, for many reasons, but perhaps the most note worthy is the fact that while most of the movies mentioned here can at least make the lame defense that they never killed anybody, that is tragically not the case here. The exterior scenes of THE CONQUERORwere shot on location in Kanab, Utah, 137 miles downwind of the government's Nevada test site. In 1953, extensive above-ground nuclear weapons testing occurred at the site. The cast and crew spent many arduous weeks on location, and Hughes later shipped 60 tons of dirt back to Hollywood in order to match the Utah terrain to lend authenticity to studio re-shoots. The filmmakers knew about the nuclear tests, but the federal government reassured residents that the tests caused no hazard to public health. Director Dick Powell, actors Pedro Armendariz, Agnes Moorehead, and even the films stars, Susan Hayward and the legendary Duke himself passed away due to cancer that has been linked to the nuclear testing.

CABIN BOY (1994)

This movie is noteworthy if for no other reason than the simple audacity of trying to make a whole movie based on the idea that “it's funny because it's not funny.” This philosophy can be hilariously effective on LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN sketches (for example, the week long “Find Out How Much Gas Smokin' Joe Frazier Has In His Car” bit), but as a premise for a feature film, it is a bizarre oddity that really didn't work, but it's strangely fascinating for it's uncompromising, if asinine, vision.

Chris Elliot, who first gained fame as “that annoying guy on David Letterman,” plays Nathaniel Mayweather, a snobbish, self-centered "fancy lad", who has been invited by his father to join him in Hawaii by setting sail on the Queen Catherine. However, after annoying the carriage driver, he is forced to walk the rest of the way to the docks.

Nathaniel makes a wrong turn into a small fishing village and he meets the not-so-bright cabin boy/first mate of a vessel with the charmingly low key moniker The Filthy Whore. Nathaniel mistakes this for a theme ship, due to its condition. Actually it's a fishing boat that is home to four foulmouthed fishermen. It is not until the next morning Nathaniel realizes that he is on the wrong boat. So Nathaniel becomes a part of the crew, sharing in their “adventures.” Along the way, he falls in love with a beautiful young woman named Trina, who has been trying to break a world record by swimming around the world without any assistance or contact by another human being. The plot only gets more muddled and inane from here. Letterman himself appears in a cameo, speaking the now famous line “Would ya like ta buy a monkey?” Producer Tim Burton, who seems to have a strange penchant for deliberately alienating audiences, wisely decided to back out as director of the film, leaving that duty to co-writer Adam Resnick.

THE AVENGERS (1998)

Not to be confused with Marvel Studio's mega blockbuster, beloved by all, this 1998 clunker was based on a popular '60's television series which still has many enthusiastic fans, most of whom would like to forget this movie ever happened, as would the distinguished cast , as well as director Jeremiah Chechik (“BENNY & JOON”), who went on to direct episodes of “GOSSIP GIRL” and “JONAS.”)

The film opens with John Steed, played by Ralph Fiennes, a dashing and extremely proper gentleman, and agent of “The Ministry,” in a training course, which he finishes successfully. Next, we see Dr. Emma Peel (Uma Thurman)  at home, where she receives a phone call telling her to go to a gentlemen's club - no women allowed - where she meets Steed for the first time. The Ministry confronts Peel with an accusation of sabotaging the “Prospero Project,” a secret program to control the weather. Mrs. Peel claims she is innocent, and she is sent to work alongside Steed to find the real culprit. Enter August De Wynter, an old ally of The Ministry, played by Sean Connery (you get it? It's a spy movie, but the VILLAIN is played by Sean Connery. Isn't that clever?) De Wynter commands an army of evil doers in Teddy Bear suits, and together they have whisked the instruments needed for the Prospero Device off to a secret island. Emma and Steed arrive at the island, and Emma defuses the device just as a hurricane forms over London, while Steed and De Wynter engage in a duel. The film ends with a rousing song entitled “Strange Weather,” which has a tune that must have had two or three notes just different enough from “Goldfinger” to avoid a major lawsuit. Either that or Connery was the only person ever connected to the Bond franchise ever to see this dreadful film.

Early buzz was extremely enthusiastic – the trailer looked like colorful, campy fun, and the chance to see perennial Oscar nominee Fiennes in a light- hearted adventure, Sean Connery as a sneering villain, and Thurman in tight leather jumpsuits, seemed to appeal to both audiences and critics alike. Unfortunately, the final product is a plodding, jumbled mess, completely devoid of excitement and humor, played too seriously to be fun but written and directed too ludicrously to be taken seriously. In an effort to salvage this disaster, the studio chopped the film to bits in editing in the theory that if it can't be good, at least it can be short. To say that the stars have all fared better is to be charitable to the point of Mother Theresa of Calcutta. Thurman's one note, vampy seductress routine is even more forced and irritating than it is in “BATMAN & ROBIN,” and Fiennes seems to be experiencing severe intestinal discomfort throughout, especially when he is called upon to smile (and with this script, who could blame him?). Fairing marginally best is Connery, who seems to be channeling “Flintheart Glongold” from DUCKTALES, and frankly, was so used to making bad films at this point that he only occasionally seems to stop and wonder why he is waving a cane, wearing a kilt, and, I cannot emphasize this enough, COMMANDING VILLAINS DRESSED IN TEDDY BEAR SUITS. If this movie was a horse it would have been shot to put it out of it's misery. Sadly, it was not a horse, and instead it was shot to cause viewers misery.

SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS (1964)

The people of Mars, including Momar ("Mom Martian") and Kimar ("King Martian"), are terribly concerned that their children Girmar ("Girl Martian") and Bomar ("Boy Martian") are watching too much Earth Televison (Errtel?). The children are enthralled by the broadcasts from Eath, in particular station KID-TV's interview with Santa Claus in his workshop at the North Pole. Consulting the ancient 800-year old Martian sage Chochem (a Yiddish word meaning "genius," because no Christmas movie would be complete without a Jewish joke), they are advised that the children of Mars are growing distracted due to the society's overly rigid structure; from infancy, all their education is fed into their brains through machines and they are not allowed individuality or freedom of thought.

Chochem notes that he had seen this coming "for centuries", and says the only way to help the children is to allow them to have their freedom and be allowed to have fun. To do this, they need a Santa Claus figure, like on Earth. After careful deliberation, the Martian leaders, using all of their logic skills, conclude that the ideal Santa Claus figure would be . . . . SANTA CLAUS. The decision is then made to abduct Santa from Earth and bring him to Mars, stopping off briefly to attack Iraq (okay, I made up that part.)

When they arrive on Mars, Santa and the children build a factory to make toys for the children. However, the evil Voldar (no idea what that is short for) and his assistants, Stobo and Shim, sabotage the factory and change the programming so that it makes the toys incorrectly. Of course, it's up to our heroes to save the day, and to sing the theme song, “Hooray for Santa Claus,” as follows:

S-A-N-T-A, C-L-A-U-S

Hooray for Santy Claus!

You spell it S-A-N-T-A, C-L-A-U-S

Hooray for Santy Claus

Hooray for Santy Claus

Yay yay for Santy Claus

He's fat and round, but jumpin' jiminy

He can climb down any chiminy!

When we hear sleigh bells ring

Our hearts go ting-a-ling

'Cause there'll be presents under the tree

Hooray for Santy Claus!

Hoo-raaaaayy forrr Sannn-tyyyy Clauuuusss!

Hooray for Santy Claus!

SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS is a standard on any list of the worst films of all time, and film scholars love to point out that the young actress playing “Girmar” was none other than a young Pia Zadora, or at least they did back when anyone, anywhere, knew who in the hell that was.

ENTRAPMENT (1999)

For the last time, once nice shot of Catherine Zeta-Jones's butt does not make this a good film. Grow up.

THE THREE MUSKETEERS (2011)

Not since Geena Davis and Renny Harlin made the glorious one two punch of “CUTHROAT ISLAND” and“THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT” has there been a Hollywood couple so committed to the art of big budget bad cinema as Paul W.S. Anderson and his wife, Milla Jovovich.

So, the duo has moved on from video games to higher minded fair, and they decided to tackle classic novelist Alexandre Dumas. Unfortunately, they don't just tackle him, they leap on his back and beat him to death with shovels. They also apparently think that his last name is pronounced “Dumbass.”

In Venice, the Three Musketeers, Athos, Porthos and Aramis, with the help of Athos' lover, Milady De Winter (Jovovich), steal airship blueprints made by Leonardo Da Vinci, in a sequence that plays so much like it wants to be in a MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE movie that at any moment we expect to see Jovovich rip her latex mask off to reveal the face of Tom Cruise (which would be a marked improvement.). However, they are betrayed by Milady, who gives the blueprints to the Duke Of Buckingham, played by Orlando Bloom, who seems to have been told to play the character “sort of like a gay record producer.” When the Musketeers return home, Cardinal Richelieu forces them to disband to pay for their shame.

One year later, the young D'Artagnan (Logan Lerrman) leaves Gascony in hopes of becoming a Musketeer, like Chris O'Donnell before him, but he is mortified to discover that the Musketeers no longer exist, and at press time there are no plans for a reunion tour. It isn't long before D'Artagnan challenges the villainous Captain Rochefort to a duel, and along the way finds himself scheduling duels with Athos (Matthew MacFadyen), Porthos (Ray Stevenson) and Aramis (Luke Evans.) all for the same afternoon. Sound familiar? Sounds like a fairly typical adaptation of Dumas, right?

Well, we can't have that.

Before long, the movie seems to say “Book? What book?”and D'Artagnan and his new found friends are off to stop an evil scheme by the Cardinal and Buckingham, which, for reasons that I am still trying to figure out, involve giant airships just like the one Teddy Ruxpin used to ride on with Grubby and Professor Newton Gimmick, except that these come equipped with flamethrowers and steam punk Howitzers (for those of you who don't know, steam punk is a term used in popular fiction to justify adding stupid, anachronistic machines into stories where they don't belong.). The majority of the action packed final third takes place aboard these airships, which is refreshing, because the last thing we want when we go to see a version of “THREE MUSKETEERS” is a lot of sword fighting.

The performances range from passable (MacFadyen, Stevenson and Evans, capable actors who have given memorable performances in better films, but are given little to do here), to awkward (Lerrman, who is painfully out of place as the lone American trying to pass himself off as French in a cast full of Brits trying to pass themselves off as French), to laugh out loud terrible (Jovovich – is there really any need to say more? - and Orlando Bloom, who has become fashionable to bash, but honestly is not without talent, and showed in the “THE LORD OF THE RINGS” and “PIRATES OF THE CARRIBBEAN” that he could fight like a modern day Errol Flynn. Here he is reduced to prancing around like a fop, doing an a vague, unidentifiable accent (the Duke of Buckingham can't be British, after all – the French are British!) and delivering lines such as “Athos, as I recall, the last time we met you were down on your knees as well.” But the most jaw dropping performance comes from Oscar winner Christophe Waltz (“Inglorious Basterds”) as Richelieu. Waltz is clearly very aware that the material is beneath contempt, and that he is there to add prestige and pick up a fat paycheck, and proves once again to be a major addition to the Hollywood elite by, in only a few years time, giving up and churning out the same kind of half hearted, “eh, you still like me because I was good in that one movie you liked” style of utterly lifeless performance that it took Robert De Niro decades to perfect.

The only consent Anderson made to restraint was leaving the “D” out of the title following the word “Three,” and in truth, the 3D is actually pretty good, and the only reason to watch the film. But in an age when everything is made in 3D, this is hardly a selling point. If you want a Three Musketeers that leaves you satisfied, buy a candy bar.

So that's my list of Turkeys, and if you haven't seen any of these films, then you truly have something to be thankful for this year. 

SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK

Reviewed by Patrick Gibbs

GRADE: A +

Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, Robert De Niro, Jacki Weaver, Chris Tucker, Julia Stiles

Base on the novel by Matthew Quick

Screenplay by David O. Russell

Directed by David O. Russell

Director David O. Russell is, historically speaking, not the easiest guy to get along with in Hollywood. On the set of his 1999 film Three Kings he and George Clooney got into an argument over Russel's treatment of an extra that lead to the two men literally choking each other, and his fight with Lily Tomlin during rehearsals for I Heart Huckabees in a Youtube mainstay. Most recently Russell made a strong comeback with The Fighter, in which he re teamed with Mark Wahlberg . . . who then had a major falling out with Russell over the fact that the director opted to cast Bradley Cooper instead of Wahlberg in the lead role in The Silver Linings Playbook.

In all likelihood, Russell was not very tactful in how he handled things, but he made the right choice, and once again, this difficult but monumentally gifted artist has also made a terrific film. In fact, it may well be my choice for the best film of 2012. The Silver Linings Playbook is a heartfelt, engaging, joyous, touching comedy-drama-romance that deals sensitively yet hilariously with issues such as bipolar disorder, depression, medication and violent mood swings, and it's also the first time in years I've seen a romance that I actually cared about.

Pat Solitano (Bradley Cooper) has lost everything – his house, his job, and his wife. He now finds himself living back with his mother (Jacki Weaver) and father (Robert De Niro) after spending eight months in a state institution on a plea bargain after beating up the man he found committing adultery with his wife, Nikki. Pat is determined to rebuild his life, remain positive and reunite with his Nikki, despite the challenging circumstances of their separation. All Pat's wants is for Pat to get back on his feet. Meanwhile, Pat's father is convinced that his recent returned prodigal son is a good luck charm that will help him win big on the large bets he is placing on Philadelphia Eagles games.

But when Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) a young woman with problems of her own, things get complicated Tiffany offers to help Pat reconnect with his wife, but only if he'll do something very important for her in return. As their deal plays out, an unexpected bond begins to form between them, and silver linings appear in both of their lives.

The performances are more than good – they are nothing short of perfect. Cooper, a charismatic and talented actor who is often wasted in terrible films and has only once before been cast in something Oscar caliber (The A-Team) is nothing short of brilliant as Pat. This is a guy with real problems, and it's not always easy to like him, but throughout the film, you genuinely love him and root for him even when he's driving you crazy. He's easily the goofiest and most interesting protagonist in a mainstream Hollywood film in quite some time.

But the Oscar performance here is Jennifer Lawrence, who has been nominated once before (and should have won) for Winter's Bone. Her quirky portrayal of a tormented soul seeking happiness while manipulating others and allowing herself to be manipulated is a tour de force that mixes indelible strength with raw vulnerability. If I were De Niro's character in this film, I'd bet everything on Lawrence, because she WILL walk away with an Oscar this year. Ans speaking of De Niro, the brilliant choice made by Russell to actually wake the aging icon up before shooting really pays off, as we remember why it is this guy's name is synonymous with acting.

But still, getting a strong performance from De Niro may not seem impressive – but Russell also achieves the impossible by getting a restrained and likable performance from (I can't believe I'm saying this) CHRIS TUCKER. Now, understand, I've devoted a good portion of my life to hating Chris Tucker, and he is the only actor that I will flat out refuse to see a movie because of his presence, but because of the rest of the film's pedigree I broke my rule, and was delighted to discover that not only does he not ruin the film, he genuinely adds to it. And if that's not the mark of brilliant actor's director, I don't know what is.

In the end, this is a perfect match of writer-director to material, and it's hard to escape the feelings that Russell is more at home with these characters than most (indeed, he has publicly stated that it was important to be accurate in his portrayal of Bipolar disorder because his own son suffers from it.). As a writer, Russell gives us bitingly witty, he rapid fire dialogue that is as funny as it is profound, and this is likely to be up there with films like As Good As It Gets for quotability. And as a director, he manages to turn a dance contest into the most entertaining action sequence of the year.

The Silver Linings Playbook is a triumph from beginning to end, and I could see it a hundred times without ever getting bored, and walk away each time with a feeling of joy and rejuvenation. This is new addition to my all time favorites list.

To quote Pat, “Excelsior!”

The Silver Linings Playbook is rated R for a great deal of profanity, vulgarity, sex, partial nudity, and some violence.