If you never go to the movies or take in a show, this one is for you! You can project all of your bad taste onto one, big, fat movie with your favorite "hot" stars that you know so well from TMZ looking really awful and singing badly. See! The cameras shoved down actor's throats! Hear! The tentative froggy Russel Crowe not sing for 3 hours! Behold! The beautiful Anne Hathaway glamorously expire in the first act! Witness! The disasterous mis-casting of a baritone in a tenor part! Enjoy! All of your bad taste in all things all at once: obnoxious camera-work, pedestrian CGI, the worst score to ever win prizes, all in dolby digital! Only in theaters!
Just because you didn't enjoy a movie, doesn't mean if someone else likes it they have no taste. That is a rather distasteful, arrogant opinion you have. I don't mind that you disliked the film. I do mind that you shame everyone else who does.
You cannot assume every star is everyone's favourite. My favourite star is Anna Karina and she evidently is not in the film.
Stop shaming everyone who liked a film to make yourself feel intellectually superior. You are not. God forbid someone likes something you dislike.
When someone deactivates their IMDB account, ALL of their posts and the threads that they have started are deleted. I have done that and it happens that way. The person may have just decided they had enough of IMDB. I doubt IMDB would delete someone completely.
Not now. I felt that way when a SPECIFIC person left the thread. Another one said he was going to leave IMDB. I didn't know about a 3rd. I don't understand it but I am not losing any sleep over it. If people don't like how IMDB monitors their own site or deletes peoples threads, then by all means leave.
Not all critics have the same opinion. Some critics loved this movie. But wait...how can that be p-p-possible? Could it be...that different people like different things?
Yes, but at least all good critics can explain their reasoning. If you look more carefully at the reviews you'll find that the thumb-uppers and the thumb-downers have more in common than you might think.
This may not be the best film in the history of film, but it stirred emotion in me and I enjoyed it. Sorry if I do not have the snobby taste that makes me stick my nose in the air and look down on any film that is not perfectly produced.
The singing wasn't perfect, but I felt that made this film adaptation all the more believable and heartbreaking. It felt like real people experiencing life versus stage actors acting out life. Nothing wrong with that either. I enjoy the stage production as well. This was different and I don't think there is any shame in that.
Critics speak for everyone, let it be heard, we are robots without thoughts and must obey critics. I like reading them, but I won't blindly agree with them, hell often find them wrong in so many regards.
Strawish straw man argument I've ever heard repeated for the umpteenth time. When do critics ever insist you must obey? At most, they challenge their readers to learn how to get more out of their moviegoing experiences while exploring (in some cases, anyway) what it might mean to have more refined or more vulgar tastes in art. No critic is infallible. But taken as a whole, you can learn a great deal from them - from the crème de la crème, at any rate.
wasn't there a film years ago where someome was killing off film critics? What a great idea. I find them to be useless. A films success should be judged on word of mouth , not some wanna be film maker with huge issues to why they never made it.
Film critics are only useless to you because you refuse to accept the possibility (actually, the certainty) that some people know more about film than you do and partake in higher taste cultures than your own. And while it may feel good for you to describe all film critics as no-talent hacks with "huge issues," all you're doing here is contributing to the further dumbing down of popular culture.
Should a film's artistic merit be decided by kids and simpletons, then? If so, we should recognize both Star Wars Episode III - Revenge of the Sith and The Ten Commandments as two of the finest movies ever made.
I didn't give you any examples of great filmmaking. I gave you the converse. How anyone could misread a post written in such straightforward English is beyond me, unless of course English is your second language.
Wow, Your right. I must have read someone else's post thinking it was yours. But one thing is for certain, No one knows film better than I. We may differ on our opinion but not on the quality or technique.
But seeing as how the stage musical was a huge box-office hit, a movie version was inevitable. The reason for the 'in-your-face' cinematography in some parts was to hide the microphones just out of the frame. The other complaints seem less valid. Russell Crowe did get some flack for his singing, but there are plenty of well-trained actors and singers rounding out the cast, to make up for that. And this isn't really a CGI-heavy flick, nor was it marketed as such.
Les Miserables has 69% on Rotten Tomatoes so more liked it than not. The current vogue is for irony. It's as if there's
no such thing as genuine emotion. Les Miserables is totally un-ironic straight ahead emotional. It's great.
Well you are basically insulting the world's second longest running musical and probably one of the most successful phenomenons in musical theatre. It's topped the box office with no problem at all and is up for a few Oscars, not to mention that it's a fantastic book and one of the most compelling stories ever written.
I happen to be a huge fan of the musical and I loved this film. I do not think that means I have no taste, I think that means I appreciate fine music/literature.
You didn't like it, fair enough. Each to their own, of course. However, do not slate the ones who enjoyed it and thought it was brilliant and credit them with no taste. That is simply your own opinion.
This movie was made for people like you because it makes you feel like a consumer of fine literature without actually making you go through the trouble of reading the whole, and far more complex, book. And contrary to your misimpression, virtually NO professional critic thinks this movie is "brilliant".
So that's it is it? You either hate this movie or you have no taste? Door closed? You and I may agree on every other movie, colour, car, music, absolutely everything else but because I loved the movie, I'm hopeless.
Somewhat dramatic isn't it? Kind of like Michael Palin's reaction in the Monty Python dirty fork skit. "It's a filthy, disgusting, smelly fork and I hate it I hate it I hate it!!!"
Ever notice that movies for "people who have no taste" make way more money than movies for "people with taste"? I wouldn't exactly call Django Unchained a tasteful movie considering someone gets blown to bits every five minutes and they use the N-word like 10,000 times.
well said, shadaif - "django" is one of the most disturbing movies i have ever seen (very slow, screaming deaths/tortures of many people/actors in the film = terrible movie-going experience for me and some other people, too) - and there are at least a few people who will watch that movie and think, "hey, maybe i should shoot people like django does in the film", just because there are people with mental/brain problems in this world - one man (he said he was african-american i believe) on the "django" boards said his young son said, after watching the movie, "i want to shoot white people like django did!" - i want to see movies with people who treat each other with kindness, respect and luv, not physically torturing each other like in the "django" movie - and the fact that it and "inglourious basterds" (pretty much the same movie, from what i've heard, except for being jews vs. nazis as opposed to african-american slaves vs. white slave-owning families) have done so well at the oscars does continue to disturb me
You're way of thinking is wrong. No one watches a movie and goes "Man, that guy killed people in the movie! I didn't know that people could be killed, I'm gonna go kill someone. " If the person has the urge to kill he or she will kill wether they saw Toy Story, Django, Silence of the Lambs, or Twilight. People can tell the difference between a film, and real life. Just because you don't like a certain genre of film does not mean that those films are poorly made. Django is quite well made. That's they it's up for as many awards as it is. Also on the subject of the parent. This parent shouldn't be taking their child to R-Rated films if they can't see the difference between fiction, and reality. I wouldn't suggest taking kids to Tarantino films at all.
Actually the film's only an hour and a half long and Russel Crowe isn't in all of it, so really his singing at a generous estimate equates to less than an hour, maybe, of actual time during which Russel Crowe is singing. Actually Hugh Jackman is a tenor. Colm Wilkinson just sang it higher because he's Colm Wilkinson. And it was actually shot on film. Not sure if it's being shown on film or not; probably not.
You seem to have a very bitter reaction to this film. Know what that means to me? It was a success. The purpose of art is to inspire you to feel, and clearly your feelings for this film are strong.
Further, some of your criticisms seem to be the way the play was scripted, hardly the fault of the actors, director, really anything to do with the film. Fantine dies in the first act, as she always does. Why is that a flaw?
I'm curious, though, who was the miscast baritone playing a tenor part?