The following information is the greatest shock to my life. As someone who studied in a private school, I am expected to know what the story is about, without having the need to see this movie. What took me by surprise is that those whom I have observed to have also come from not so humble beginnings, are not aware of what the movie was about at all.
On one hand, I shall admit that it has been a while, and I am not as familiar to the story as I once was. But to go as far as to ask if this was a horror movie is utter disrespect to the writer of the book (Victor Hugo).
Now then, to the review proper.
As most of you will know, this is not just a book, for it is also a broadway musical. And a damn good one too. So once again we have the conflict of having a musical moved from theater to wide screen. And quite frankly, while I am torn by the idea of moving them, I will admit that this will suffice for me since it doesn't usually come by where I am. And I'm happy with this because this movie was also able to get significant awards in the 70th Golden Globes.
Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway won in their respective categories of Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress. Now, while some of you are curious as to why Hathaway is only a supporting cast, it is very simple. The story's actual heroine is Amanda Seyfried's character. In the movie, she doesn't have much of a role, but I'm damn sure the musical would show you why she's a significant character to the story. Also, the movie itself was given praise as "Best Motion Picture for Comedy or Musical". But for the "overall motion pictures", it failed to win in that category.
Now, if you're wondering why Jackman and Hathaway won their awards, let me break it down to you. Hugh Jackman won best actor for one simple reason. He's Hugh Jackman. If you can't comprehend that, then you can "go f*** yourself". Seriously though, Hugh Jackman knows very well how to sing. And since the movie was more oriented to his character more than the rest of them, his acting skills were put to the test, and it paid off.
As for Anne Hathaway, you have to see it for yourself to understand it. The movie in itself lacked the creativity of having multiple camera angles. This is probably to keep it from becoming too much of a movie, and too little to be a musical. Their director of photography also focused on too much of something. And that something is "depth". 85% of the movie shows only the singing characters, while the background is kept in a blur, thereby making the audience only see the singing of the characters, and not the surroundings of the scene (which is technically what you would do if you were in a theater). And among those who sang in the movie (yes, including Hugh Jackman), Anne Hathaway was the only one who was able to not just sing her part, but to actually put emotions in a scene where all you see is a black background, her head, and her bare shoulders (okay, maybe a little cleavage too). Don't get me wrong. Almost everyone who had solos were able to deliver in their singing. It was just Anne Hathaway who was able to pull it off perfectly.
Now, why did I say "almost everyone"? Simple, someone failed at it. And all fingers point to Russell Crowe. Though Crowe was able to sing in the movie, there were certain instances where a man with a more powerful voice was required to fully grasp the emotion of the song, and that power was outside (in my opinion) Crowe's vocal range. In fact, his solo probably had the least emotion of them all, and so most of his parts were (to a certain degree) dull.
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but most of my paragraphs start with either "now", or "as". If you have, then good for you, if you haven't, then you probably just looked at all my previous paragraphs and maybe (just maybe) gave at least a small giggle. The movie has that too. If you look at it based only on what I have told you so far, you'll know that the story would have been a drag. And everyone would fall asleep right after Hugh Jackman meets the younger character of Amanda Seyfried. Well I guarantee you that you won't fall asleep. Besides the excessive singing throughout the movie, there is also another source of entertainment in the movie, and they are provided for by the great Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter. Normally, when people see Helena, their instinct is to look for Johnny Depp or Tim Burton. Thankfully, neither of the two are in the movie. But that doesn't mean Helena's style changed. She's capable of pulling of only one character, and that is the "semi-crazy or entirely crazy woman". Well, her character isn't exactly crazy here, but she isn't of the norm either. Sacha, on the other hand, is known for comedic characters, and they don't always have a pattern. Which is why Sacha was able to entertain everybody in the movie. Although he used bits and pieces of his other characters, he was able keep the integrity of his character throughout the movie. Although I do feel at times that he didn't really memorize his script.
My last point of the movie will be if it will make you cry. Quite honestly, I'm not sure myself. My companions claimed that they didn't, while I shall admit and say that tears rolled down my eyes in the ending. And I actually saw another man wipe his eyes when he stood from his chair and walked away from the cinema. So if you're going to ask me if it will make you cry, my answer is "it will be entirely up to you". Honestly, I couldn't care less if you cried or not. What I would only care about is if you didn't like the movie. And if in case you didn't, then you better have a damn good excuse as to why.
No comments:
Post a Comment