This is the first part of a three part series here at The Rock dedicated to previewing the Best Picture category at the 85th Academy Awards. We will be reviewing three nominated movies in each part leading up to the Oscars. Hope you enjoy!
This year, the Oscar movies bring with them a bit of controversy. Some people were not happy with certain aspects in the films, such as slavery, torture, and Russell Crowe’s singing voice. I hope that my reviews aren’t controversial as well. I’m not a professional movie critic. I’m not going to use a bunch of fancy words to make it seem like I know what I’m talking about. Real people don’t talk like that. I’m just going to write about these movies like I’m talking with my friends leaving the movie theatre. With that said…
That was amazing!
I didn’t know if I could love this movie any more than I did after seeing it the first time, and I was wrong. I loved it more the second time. The second time around you pick up on little things that you didn’t notice in the first go around, and it makes it that much better.
All of the performances in this movie were great. Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper know how to play crazy people. It’s amazing how, in the real world, we shy away from people who are so brash and upfront and try to avoid them. But Lawrence and Cooper make it so that we actively root for them and become engrossed in their lives.
The best is how Lawrence and Cooper’s characters are the ones who are deemed the mentally unstable ones, but everyone around them is just as insane. Maybe even more. It just shows that everyone’s a little crazy in one way or another. Who knew the guy from The Hangover could be so deep?
I don’t know if I got it. I mean, there were a lot of messages and themes presented in this film, but I don’t think all of them hit home for me. This movie is definitely for thinkers. There are the simple people, like me, who watch this movie and get the basics. Here was my thought process during Beasts:
“They’re clearly not happy with the way Hurricane Katrina was handled, nor should they be.”
“This little girl is awesome at acting.”
“I should get a hybrid. I don’t want the North Pole to melt and bring back prehistoric monsters”
“This little girl is really awesome at acting.”
That’s pretty much what I got out of this movie. I don’t know if that’s a failure on the filmmakers’ part or my part. I don’t even know if that’s a failure. Maybe it’s a success. I don’t know anything anymore. All I know is that girl, Quevenzhan Wallis, was awesome.
“Les Mis” was a very up and down movie. By that I mean literally up and down. While Anne Hathaway was in it in the beginning of the movie, I was bawling my eyes out and loving every minute of it. Then 20 minutes went by, she was no longer there, and I didn’t like it anymore.
There were some entertaining scenes after Hathaway’s departure, but in between was stuff about a revolution that I didn’t really care about. The problem is that we should’ve been invested in the characters instead of the revolution. For instance, I wanted more interaction between Hugh Jackman’s character and his adopted daughter, Cosette. I understood that he rescued her and they were probably close, but it was hard to buy into that relationship. I also wanted more of a love story between Cosette and that guy who sang really well.
Instead, I got a handful of revolutionaries trying to protect themselves from cannons with chairs and dressers (not the best strategy in the world) and Russell Crowe’s character being a jerk by relentlessly chasing around Jackman and singing terribly. Going into the movie I didn’t want to be one of those people that complained about Crowe’s voice. I figured it couldn’t be that bad. But he was just shouting and possibly sang the most behind Jackman. It’s so hard to watch “Les Mis” and not think about how the casting crew couldn’t have found someone better than Crowe. It makes zero sense. They should’ve just let Hathaway play his part too.