"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" (2012) -- Initial Thoughts

It's been over a week since I went to see The Hobbit:  An Unexpected Journey, and I'm only now getting a chance to write up my thoughts.  Sigh.

I quite liked it.  I didn't love it, but I don't love the book, either.  People keep comparing this to the LotR movies, and I find that unfair, because you can't compare the books either, not really.  It's like comparing Just So Stories with Kim -- same author, same basic setting, very different themes, audiences, purposes.  So please, compare this to its source material, not to the Other Movies based on completely different source material.

But anyway, it was lovely to be in Middle Earth once more.  And I did love the little ways they tied this to the Other Movies, particularly Gandalf whacking his head on the chandelier in Bag End.  Which was about all I enjoyed about the first section of the movie (post-prologue).

I think the reason I didn't love this movie is because the whole business of the dwarves invading Bilbo's home made me very uncomfortable.  I know exactly how it feels to have your things imperiled, your snacks eaten, your orderliness disheveled, and your privacy trampled upon; I have three small children -- that's my life!  Or rather, that's an extreme version of all the things I like least about having three small children.  I sympathized so much with Bilbo that I disliked the dwarves for about the first hour of the movie.  Still makes me a bit testy to think about it.  This doesn't mean I thought that whole beginning to the tale was badly done -- obviously, if it elicited such a strong response in me, it was some strong work.  My dislike is purely a personal reaction.

Bilbo surrounded by interloping Dwarves

Speaking of personal reactions, I also didn't like how many parts of the movie seemed aimed squarely at ten-year-old boys.  Humor that bordered on gross, repulsiveness for the sake of repulsiveness (I'm looking at you, Goblin King!)... sorry, just not my thing.

Gandalf and the dwarves face down the Goblin King.  A Balrog, he's not.

But enough about what I didn't like.  What did I like?  Being in Hobbiton and Rivendell again!  And the cheerier version of Rivendell too, where it's the Last Homely House and no one is talking about leaving Middle Earth.  So charming!

Sunny, happy Rivendell

And I loved getting to see Saruman again!  I was not expecting to see him (been avoiding most reviews until I'd seen it), and I got all choked up when he appeared.  Not that I like Saruman, you understand, but I think Christopher Lee is a fascinating person, and I'm so glad he could be part of that world once more.  I imagine that must have pleased him a great deal.

Saruman the White (Christopher Lee)

Speaking of wizards, wasn't Gandalf just delightful?  Less weary and worried than in the Other Movies, with a mischievous twinkle in his eye.  I would watch an entire movie just about Gandalf wandering about Middle Earth, tending to the Affairs of Wizards.

Gandalf the Grey (Sir Ian McKellen)

Somehow, I've written eight paragraphs here without giving The Hobbit himself more than a passing mention.  Silly me!  I quite liked Martin Freeman in this, but then, I've liked him in everything I've ever seen him in.  Or, I should say, all three things I've seen him in before.  I didn't realize until just now that he played Arthur Dent in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005) -- I thought I'd only seen him in Love Actually (2003) and the pilot of Sherlock.  I loved him dearly in Love Actually (as I mentioned once here), so as soon as I found out he'd been cast as Bilbo Baggins, I relaxed a bit about this movie, as I felt quite sure he would fit the role perfectly.  I am delighted to say that I was right -- he's a sweet, serious, and stalwart Bilbo, as Hobbitty as I could wish.

Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman)

As for the dwarves, I did warm up to them eventually.  Especially Kili.  Quite liked him.  Since he's not the main character, but rapidly becoming my favorite, he'll probably fall prey to the great curse, ala Boromir and Sirius Black.  Hoping not!  I don't remember from the book, so if you know anything about his fate, please don't spoil me!

Kili (Aidan Turner)

Now, we can't forget to comment on Gollum, can we, Precious?  The first time I encountered this book, my mom read it aloud to my brother and I.  I didn't much care for it, which is why I didn't read The Lord of the Rings until the movies came out.  All I ever really remembered from The Hobbit was Gollum's hisssssssssing -- when I re-read the book a couple years ago, that's all that I recalled at all.  He was almost sweet here, almost naive in some ways.  Very pitiable, certainly.  Well done, writers and Andy Serkis!

Gollum (Andy Serkis, somewhere in there)

There's been a lot said about Peter Jackson's decision to make three movies from one book, beefing it up with material from Tolkien's other writings.  I trust him.  I think he'll do well by us.  Also, since I still don't love the book, I don't mind as much as some when he adds and subtracts and rearranges it.  After all, Prince Imrahil of Dol Amroth never made it into the Other Movies at all, so maybe he'll get to pop up here!  Or Tom Bombadil!  Or Glorfindel!  Who knows?

Peter Jackson showing Ian McKellen and us the future

"Les Miserables" (2012) -- Initial Thoughts

I cannot remember the last time I have cried that hard during a movie.  Not in the last year or two, at any rate.  I'm very glad I ended up seeing this myself instead of with my mom, which was my original plan, because I think that, even with someone who has known me all my life, I would have been inhibited and not allowed myself to connect so deeply with the characters on screen.

(WARNING:  This is going to be very long, very spoilage-ful, and probably a bit purple at times.  Forgive me, I have a heart full of love for this music and these characters, and for several of these actors, so I may very well wax poetic or maudlin or both.)

Where to begin?

Perhaps with the opening scene.  My first thoughts were, "A shipyard?  What?  Dude, no, this is all wrong -- it's supposed to be a quarry!  Aw, man, if they changed the very opening scene, what else are they going to mess with?"  But I get it now, the symbolism of the giant ship that failed to launch -- it's the failed French Revolution, which was big and mighty and powerful... and did not stay afloat.  The very opening titles inform us that there is a king on the French throne once again.  And so it is up to the looked-down-upon to try to salvage what they can and start again.

Okay, so I liked that in retrospect, though at the time I was nervous about the change.  I also liked how they spent a few tiny scenes showing us just how hopeless Valjean's life is once he's on parole, because it made his theft from the priest much more understandable.  I think I really began to connect with the movie during "What Have I Done" -- at first, I was having a little trouble thinking of Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean and not as Hugh Jackman, but with that song, I slipped into the movie and didn't resurface until about halfway through the end credits.

Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) on the outs

Before I saw this, I was not at all sure about Hugh playing Valjean, I will admit.  When I first heard, a year or more ago, that he and Russell Crowe were signing on for a movie version of the Les Mis musical, my first thought was how perfect Crowe would be as Valjean -- he's got the sort of burly build that really would lend itself to Valjean's feats of superhuman strength, plus the underlying tenderness that would make his adoption of Cosette very sweet.  And as for Hugh Jackman, well, I love Hugh Jackman!  And I could see him as a relentless, suspicious, bloodhound of a Javert.  Delightful!  I could already hear their "Confrontation" duet, with Crowe growling out "I am warning you Javert, I'm a stronger man by far -- There is power in me yet!"  And Hugh snarling back with, "Men like you can never change!  A man such as you."  Oh, it was going to be so delicious!

I'd still love to see a version with them in those roles.  I wish this was actually on stage, like Olivier and Gielgud doing Romeo & Juliet and alternating  as Romeo and Mercutio.  Ah well, I can dream, can't I.

Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe)

Anyway, this seems like a fitting point to discuss Russell Crowe's performance as Inspector Javert.  I've had several people tell me they were disappointed by him, and I could see how they might be.  He does not snarl and sneer like, say, Geoffrey Rush in the 1998 non-musical version.  He spends most of the movie looking very weary, his eyes veiled, hiding himself behind his uniform as it were.  Javert in the novel, if I remember aright (it's been a decade since I read it) did work hard to hide the fact that he was, as he sings here, "born inside a jail" and "from the gutter too."

Javert and Valjean during "Confrontation"

So I can accept Crowe's portrayal of Javert as very guarded, very private, very correct.  Especially since, when Valjean eventually saves his life, he turns savage, berating his nemesis for turning him loose instead of having his revenge.  Crowe's Javert comes to life there, shedding his carefully maintained persona to reveal his inner turmoil.  When he sings his final song, with "And must I now begin to doubt, Who never doubted all these years," I really felt him falling to pieces, undone by Valjean's act of forgiveness.

The only quibble I have with Russell Crowe as Javert, in fact, is all about the staging of his solo, "Stars."  It's BO-RING!  He's pacing along a rooftop, true, but he's got his arms stiff at his side, all soldierly and unbending.  I can see that they were trying to emphasize that unbendingness, his rigidity of purpose and person, but would a clenched fist raised aloft at the end have been too much to ask?  And while they were at it, couldn't they have transposed the song like half an octave lower so we could have had more of the menacing growl he lent to "Confrontation" and the scene where Valjean freed him?  But those are trivial issues, and ones not necessarily under Crowe's control.

Hugh Jackman was, to put it mildly, perfect.  But, then, isn't he always?  I have never seen him turn in a bad performance.  I've seen him in some roles I didn't care for, but that's a matter of my taste, not his talent.

As for the rest of the principles, I enjoyed them.  Amanda Seyfried was an ethereal, wondering Cosette, and I actually liked Eddie Redmayne's Marius -- I usually roll my eyes at Marius for being such a giddy schoolboy, and at Cosette for falling for a pretty face she doesn't know.  But Redmayne isn't pretty at all!  Kind of looks like a freckled frog, really, and so I felt like there was more to Cosette's liking for him than just "he's cute."  (I spent most of his screen time trying to figure out where I'd seen him before -- finally had to look on imdb.com when I got home; he's Matt Damon's son in The Good Shepherd.)

Marius (Eddie Redmayne) and Cosette (Amanda Seyfried)

I wished Fantine could have had more screen time -- Samantha Barks was winsome and wistful, and absolutely nailed "On My Own," my second-favorite song.

Fantine (Samantha Barks)

Speaking of favorite songs, I have two that tie for first:  "I Dreamed a Dream" and "Who Am I?"  And they.  were.  amazing.  I don't think I shall ever be able to hear "I Dreamed a Dream" again without envisioning Anne Hathaway's Fantine and bawling.  I think it will be a long time before I can bring myself to belt it out in the shower again.  They filmed that song in one long take, pulled so close in on her face that her anguish was almost visceral.  People say she's a lock for a Best Supporting Actress nomination, and I say she would deserve it based on those few minutes alone.  Anne Hathaway has not hitherto been a favorite of mine -- I like her okay, I've seen her in a handful of movies, but she's never really captured my affection.  Until now, that is.  Wow.  Hers may be the strongest performance in the film.

Fantine (Anne Hathaway)

Let's see, who have I not talked about yet?  Umm... ummm... okay, fine I'll briefly mention the Thenardiers.  I can't wait to see this on DVD so I can fast-forward through "Master of the House," because I LOATHE that song.  Helena Bonham-Carter made Madame Thenardier kind of sweet, though, which I wasn't expecting.  But it seems to me that she has become a female version of John Cleese -- John Cleese always plays John Cleese, and she always plays Helena Bonham-Carter, all Bellatrix-LeStrange-d to the max.  I do want to see The King's Speech because I'd like to see her in something where her hair isn't teased two feet from her head and she's not wearing prosthetic teeth.  Might be great!

I'd say my favorite bit of staging was how they did the finale on a giant barricade, harking back to the set piece for the stage version.

The finale

I also liked the first meeting of Valjean and Cosette, set in a fairy-tale-gone-wrong woods.  They're both tentative and shy, so very sweet.

The beginning of a beautiful friendship

Finally, though, I'm always irked by the tacked-on, modernistic "moral" at the very end:  "To love another person is to see the face of God."  Er, what?  No, no, no, the point of Victor Hugo's novel was much more than a touchy-feely catch-phrase.  It's more about the difference between living a life guided only by the Law, which ultimately leads to despair (Javert), versus a life filled with the Gospel, which leads to peace (Valjean).  Again, it's been ten years since I read the novel, but that is what I took away from it, so much more profound than just "love is important."

Well, there, those are my thoughts on this movie.  Whew!  Only took me about 4 hours to write, thanks to a few small interruptions children.

"Lady Susan, The Watsons, and Sanditon" by Jane Austen

I decided to round out my year of reading Jane Austen by reading her unfinished works too.  My mom gave me this collection for my birthday, and I managed to polish it off over the last couple of weeks.

I liked "Lady Susan" the least of these three -- it is finished, while the other two aren't, but I didn't like any of the characters, especially not Lady Susan herself, who is particularly disagreeable.  I enjoy the epistolary format as a whole, so that didn't bother me.  It concerns the selfish, wanton Lady Susan who spends the whole book trying to marry her daughter off to a rich, foolish man that her daughter despises.

I liked "The Watsons" the best, for it had characters I genuinely cared about and wanted to get to know better.  It seemed to be following a plot line similar to Pride and Prejudice, with an unwealthy family's daughters catching the eye of men of more money and position.  We do at least know how that one would have turned out, thanks to Jane Austen telling her sister Cassandra her plans for the novel.

"Sanditon" reminded me more of Emma, with a whole host of hypochandriacal characters similar to Mr. Woodhouse.  It's not long enough for its heroine to really gain shape, and was the least satisfying read, since there's no record of how Jane Austen intended it to end.  Here's something funny:  for years, I thought the title was "Sandition" -- it wasn't until I started reading this book that I noticed it only has one 'i.'  Silly me.

This is my last book review here on Hamlette's Soliloquy -- from now on, they'll be on The Edge of the Precipice.  I'll still be talking about movies and everything else that strikes my fancy here, though.

"Porgy and Bess" (1959) -- Initial Thoughts

I watched Porgy and Bess with my mom over the last couple of evenings, the first time either of us has seen it.  I don't know what she thought of it, but I must confess to being a bit disappointed.

I've wanted to see this musical since I was in high school and learned, while doing a research paper, that George Gershwin wrote it while living on Folly Beach in Charleston, SC.  Folly Beach is one of my family's favorite vacation spots, you see.  I know a few of the songs from it -- I love "Summertime," I like "Bess, You is My Woman," and I've never liked "I Got Plenty O' Nuttin'."  And I'm well acquainted with Bobby Darin's version of "It Ain't Necessarily So."  But I'd never heard them in context, and really knew very little about the story line other than that it involves a crippled man named Porgy and a woman of ill repute named Bess.

A few years ago, I read a biography of Otto Preminger that discussed the making of this movie, though I remember very little of it anymore.  But I do recall that Sidney Poitier didn't really want to make this film, and that Preminger worked with the cast to change some of the dialog so that it was less offensive.  Remember, the operetta itself is based in the early twentieth century and was first performed in 1935 -- by the time the movie was made in the late 1950s, people's attitudes and behavior had changed a great deal.  

But anyway, why was I disappointed in this movie?  I felt a lack of emotional oomph in it, if that makes sense.  And it's not the storyline's fault, because the plot of two outcasts, the kind, sweet man who takes in the woman no one else wants anything to do with -- that's right up my alley.  But I never got really caught up in the story, never felt anything more than a half-hearted sympathy for any of the characters.  I've really enjoyed the other Sidney Poitier performances I've seen, particularly in Blackboard Jungle (1955), Pressure Point (1962), and In the Heat of the Night (1967).  Perhaps his unwillingness to play the role kept him from fully engaging in it, or perhaps it's just the lack of chemistry between his Porgy and Dorothy Dandridge's Bess.  Or perhaps the characters just aren't all that well-rounded -- we never learn more about Porgy than that he's sweet, kind, understanding, and crippled.  And we never learn more about Bess than that she's an addict and has a taste for the wrong kind of men.  The other characters are equally thin -- Sammy Davis Jr.'s Sportin' Life is only around to tempt Bess back into drugs and sin, Pearl Bailey's Maria is the Strong Black Woman, Brock Peters' Crown is the Uncontrollable Black Man --  none of the main characters had any real depth to them.  Since this is the only version of this story I've ever seen, I don't know if the original operetta digs into the characters more, or what.  

I have to say that my favorite character in the movie, and the most interesting, was Claude Akins' Detective, who was clearly out of his element in the black neighborhood, but trying to do his best in a thankless job.  He runs the gamut from uncomfortable to patient to exasperated to weary, and I kind of wished we could just follow him around and see what his life was like instead.  This might be partially because I admit I have a soft spot for Claude Akins, but still, it felt to me like he was doing more with a tiny role than the principals were doing with all their screen time.

The sets, the costumes, and the staging I have no quibbles with.  There was one scene I really liked a lot, where Bess changes an orphan's diaper while Porgy watches, his eyes shining with love for this beautiful woman who has brought his life so much joy.

Both characters felt very real, very alive, and very in love in this scene, and if the whole movie had been like it, I would probably have loved it all.  But I am very glad I got to see Porgy and Bess, and I hope I will get the opportunity to see another version some time, to see if I connect better to the characters then.

"Jane and the Wandering Eye" by Stephanie Barron

This is the third Jane Austen Mystery, and I think I liked it a teensy bit better than the previous book, Jane and the Man of the Cloth.  It had more of Lord Harold Trowbridge, the Gentleman Rogue who keeps joining the fictional Miss Austen in her adventures, and I'm becoming very fond of him.  Here, his nephew is accused of murder, and Jane and Lord Harold sort out the tangle of deceit and intrigue that obscures the truth.  I don't have much else to say about it, other than that I look forward to reading the next book in the series.

I think I will be posting ONE more book review here, and then posting all new reviews only on my book blog, The Edge of the Precipice, starting at the beginning of next year.  So be ye warned:  if you want to read more about what I'm reading, go follow that blog too :-)

"The Black Arrow" by Robert Louis Stevenson

I must confess that I have owned a copy of this book for nearly five years, but only now managed to read it. I'm not sure why, as I love the other three of Stevenson's books I've read (namely Treasure Island, Kidnapped, and the somewhat clunky sequel to the latter, David Balfour, also called Catriona just to be confusing).  I guess I just haven't been in the mood for this sort of adventure novel until now.  Now, however, I'm deep in the throes of writing my first YA western, and it seems I wanted to read something exciting that young adults might enjoy, to help me figure out pacing and such.

So anyway, The Black Arrow:  A Tale of the Two Roses runs in the vein of Robin Hood and Ivanhoe and things like that -- it's about a young man named Richard Shelton who learns that the man who became his guardian long ago when Richard's father died is actually the man who murdered said father.  This happens just when the Lancasters and Yorks are engaging in what's called the War of the Roses, battling with each other for England's throne, as was their wont.  Richard runs off and joins up with these guys known as the Fellowship of the Black Arrow who are sworn to kill off four evil men (Richard's ex-guardian included) and are headed up by none other than Richard's dead father's best friend.  But Richard doesn't care much for them, as they're involved in a bit too much thievery for his taste, so he runs off again and joins up with someone else, and falls in love, and has lots of adventures.  This was originally serialized, so it has that Dumas thing going on where we have a cliffhanger at the end of every chapter/installment, and lots of excitement throughout.  Anyway, Richard ends up fighting side-by-side with the future Richard III at one point.

If you like rousing adventures where everyone says "ye" and "anon" and "by the Mass!" and "forsooth," this is quite fun.  I happen to like such things, so I quite liked this.  It's not of the same caliber as Kidnapped or Treasure Island (or Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, I expect, but I haven't read that yet), but it's quite enjoyable. I'm always trying to learn more about England's history, as it's all a bit fuzzy in my head, so this is helpful there too.

"Garment of Shadows" by Laurie R. King

The Novel Book Ratings blog has posted my review of Laurie R. King's latest Russell/Holmes mystery, Garment of Shadows.  You can read it here.  

Cowboy and I have started rewatching some of the Jeremy Brett versions of Sherlock Holmes movies, and I'm thinking that next year, I'm going to try to read/reread all of the original Sherlock Holmes stories.  We shall see.