OK, LynnStairmaster. The Oscars are in 3 days.
Just attended the very first public screening of Les Miserables - PART 2 - THE OSCARS
|by Anonymous||reply 29||02/24/2013|
I'm going to wiiiii-in! I'm going to wiiiii-in!
|by Anonymous||reply 1||02/21/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 2||02/22/2013|
I wonder if Cameron Mackintosh will give the speech when Les Miserables wins best picture?
|by Anonymous||reply 3||02/22/2013|
I hope Jackman is happy to be nominated, because he has zero hope of winning.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||02/22/2013|
Not ZERO, R4. The NY Times has labelled him as the sole contender for it besides Daniel Day-Lewis. Day-Lewis will PROBABLY win it but you simply can't dismiss the film community's love for Jackman.
Hathaway is, more or less, a certainty for the win. Les Miserables (notice I've never referred to it as Les Miz?) could also win Best Sound Mixing and Make-up/Hair. It's now pretty unlikely to win much else.
As for Best Picture I know it's definitely a longshot. Unlike some of you I'm not implacable with my predictions. However if it actually won I'd be surprised but not shocked. There's a lot of love for this movie out there.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||02/22/2013|
[quote] Les Miserables (notice I've never referred to it as Les Miz?)
Why, because you're pretentious?
|by Anonymous||reply 6||02/22/2013|
Why no, R6, because I choose to call it by its actual name. I find the nickname "Les Miz" to be ...uhhhh...sort of cutesy. I used to like it when my British friends would refer to it as "The Glums."
|by Anonymous||reply 7||02/22/2013|
Gee, get a load of this...
|by Anonymous||reply 8||02/23/2013|
R7 Its actual name includes an accent aigu over the first "e."
(You can type this in Windows by holding down the ALT key and typing 0233 on your number keypad.)
|by Anonymous||reply 9||02/23/2013|
Oops. Sorry. Here's the link to something which may surprise some of you.
Thanks for the tip, FGT. Are you Marion Cotillard?
|by Anonymous||reply 10||02/23/2013|
Just saw it too. Dear God, what a wretched film!
Never mind the dreadful toneless singing and awful casting: every bit of humour and fun that enlivened the stage production has been stripped out. Baron Cohen and Bonham Carter were like two provincial amateurs compared to the brilliance of their stage predecessors. Cameron Macintosh must be banging his head against a wall.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||02/23/2013|
Yes because the stage version was considered a jolly good time.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||02/23/2013|
It was never boring. Which the film is.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||02/23/2013|
[quote]It was never boring. Which the film is.
Which Lincoln is too. Spielberg managed to drain the excitement out what should have been an edge of your seat story. People were snoring in the audience I saw and it's a shame he will win the Oscar for it and Day-Lewis for the same performance I saw at Disneyland thirty years ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||02/23/2013|
I agree with R14. Spielberg turned the most exciting event in American history into a snoozefest. Shame on him. Argo will deservedly beat it.
And I give you credit for responding to this thread, Lynn. A lot of wrong predictors would have stayed away with their tails between their legs.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||02/23/2013|
I was surprised that Master of the House was curiously flat. And their diction was so dreadful I missed many of the comical lyrics, which were clearly articulated on stage.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||02/23/2013|
Thanks, R15. Mama didn't raise no sissy.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||02/23/2013|
I couldn't get through a half-hour of Les Mis. the singing is dreadful. Especially Crowe. Too much overacting. Not my cup of tea.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||02/23/2013|
Les Miserables clearly made by someone who doesn't have a clue about musicals.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||02/23/2013|
R16, Master of the House should have been the number to provide comic relief and let the audience breathe and recover from the misery of the previous scenes but it didn't. It just fell flat. And I liked the movie very much, Russell Crowe's singing not withstanding.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||02/23/2013|
I had zero problem with Russell Crowe's singing and neither did anyone I saw it with it. In fact, we all had a conversation of how he is being unfairly attacked. Fans were expecting him to sound exactly like the original cast album and he doesn't.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||02/24/2013|
I loved the movie except for Amanda Seyfried.
One the most talentless people ever and she ruins every movie musical.
Hugh did an outstanding acting job. Daniel Day Lewis was hammy but that could of been because of the direction. I never would have guessed Abraham Lincoln was so smug.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||02/24/2013|
Couldn't make it through the movie, but thought Anne was good for what I saw of her.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||02/24/2013|
[quote] could also win Best Sound Mixing
It doesn't deserve that. The orchestrations were muddy at best.
I remember the excitement when this was announced which I think goes to the affection for the stage show. While it was an OK film in my books, it wasn't a great one and it didn't really do justice to the dominance of the musical version within musical theatre. The people who hate it, whatever it's strengths and weaknesses, are in the minority. It's lasted forever and overcame almost universal critical disdain when it debuted. Total popular triumph, though I am sure there's lots of theatre queens who can rip every aspect of it shreds.
The film for me was an adequate execution but nothing more. It won't have the legs of The Sound of Music or The Wizard of Oz by any stretch.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||02/24/2013|
Badly directed and incompetently edited movie. By comparison, Sweeney and Dreamgirls were great movies.
But I'm glad so many people enjoyed it and hope that it means more musical movies might be made.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||02/24/2013|
Totally hated the editing. Too many shots felt like they weren't established or didn't resolved. I came to like the endless close ups... the rest of the time I thought the steady cam operator had epilepsy.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||02/24/2013|
Some use of closeups - particularly during Samantha Barks's song - were interesting, but the editing was very bad. r26 you put it well with shots not being resolved. I felt the same way. Also, there were so few times - apart from the barricade and parade sequences, where Hooper had any command of composition involving more than one character, which the sweep and dynamic of the movie required as well as the dynamic between the characters in order to build an emotional connection.
It promised to be a very good movie, like Francesco Rossi's Carmen (but with much worse music of course) but it ended up being more like John Huston's Annie.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||02/24/2013|
It's not going to win a single award outside of possibly Anne. Not costumes, not design, and not sound.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||02/24/2013|
Oops. Lynn Faildisaster fails again.
What will be her next absurd prognostication?
|by Anonymous||reply 29||02/24/2013|