Click on image to vie trailer
Director: Tom Hooper
Writers: Claude-Michel Schoneberg & Alain Boublil (Show Book), Herbert Kretzmer (Lyrics), James Fenton (Additional Text[?]), and William Nicholson (Screenplay)
Stars: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Sacha Baron Cohen, and Helen Boham Carter
We begin with song as prisoners toil to bring a listing French war ship into dry dock. At the end of their day of labor Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is presented his release on parole by Officer Javert (Russell Crowe). Branded as a former criminal for life Valjean is unable to find work and is harassed by the people. Eventually he finds sanctuary in a monastery through the kindness of the Monsignor. The kindness is repaid by theft as Valjean steals the silver in the night, but is quickly caught by the authorities and brough back to the monastery. But there he does not find condemnation but forgiveness.
The Monsignor once again extends a hand of friendship and gives Valjean the silver and a second chance. Overcome by the act, Valjean becomes a changed man. Renouncing his old life he also renounces his name and becomes Monsieur Madeleine. Years pass and he becomes a successful factory owner and town mayor. But then Inspector Javert enters his life again. Suspicious of Valjean after an extraordinary display of strength rescuing someone beneath a horse cart, Javert inquires into “M. Madeleine’s” past. But his suspicions are initially proved false when he discovers that Valjean has been recently captured and will face a court for breaking his parole. Once informed of this, the real Valjean suffers a guilty conscience for the wrongly prosecuted man and reveals his true identity. What follows is a cat and mouse game between Valjean and Javert through years, cities, and history by the end of which both become changed men.
Forgetting this is a film and not a Broadway show, William Nicholson the screenwriter is too slavishly loyal with his adaptation. Though I have not seen the show yet, it is obvious by the lovers that fall too quickly in love–Cosette (Amanda Seyfried) & Marius (Eddie Redmayne)–and the disjointed lapses in time within the same segment–Fantine’s (Anne Hathaway) fall from grace–that the screenplay does not veer far from the show book. What works on the stage where there is greater audience suspension-of-disbelief comes across as lazy writing of character development & motivation in a film. With the exception of Valjean throughout the film and Fantine in the beginning, why any character does anything is never properly shown. Also, great Hollywood musicals are films where characters speak to each other with dialogue and only break out into song at pivotal moments. Having every spoken word sung causes a distraction to regular dialogue and minimizes those moments where the songs are meant to be impactful.
As for the direction, Tom Hooper in wanting the audience to make sure we aware that the actors in fact sang while they were being filmed choses to show almost every scene in close-up. Though this is a powerful choice with the emotional solos of Fantine and Valjean, it becomes nauseous when more than three actors are involved and the shot is constantly cutting between performers. That being said, the choice of actually filming the actors sing their performance was an excellent one.
Anne Hathaway is rightfully praised for her performance of Fantine, and her moving rendition of I Dreamed a Dream. Hugh Jackman also holds his own both musically and by his acting as Jean Valjean. Russell Crowe has been unfairly maligned with his singing performance as Javert. When called to sing during the powerful songs and his solos Crowe succeeds, but falters with the sung dialogue. Eddie Redmayne is the biggest surprise as Marius, both for his acting and vocal abilities. Sacha Baron Cohen & Helen Boham Carter steal every scene they are in as the married con-artists and comic relief.
The set design is interesting; almost a stage production on steroids. The backgrounds are noticeably askew and a little unbelievable, but appropriate to the story. They are off, but in a good way.
Les Miserables in the end is a flawed film with great performances. The end of the film is emotional and impactful, but does not make up for what comes before. I was left more with a feeling of what could have been.
Grade = C
January 8th, 2013 at 8:31 AM
Hey Victor,
Where are you getting those water color (?) illustrations of the movie titles and quotes? Are you doing them? Just curious.
Mike
January 8th, 2013 at 8:52 AM
Yes, I am doing them. What do you think?
January 8th, 2013 at 9:38 AM
I like them. Are you doing them digitally? You should put a book together.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Yes. I use an App called Paper on the iPad. I’ll see about the book, though.
January 8th, 2013 at 10:34 AM
Yeah, I agree. I enjoyed the film but didn’t love it like everyone else. Hooper’s direction is especially distracting. Nice review.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:51 PM
I think he was so busy trying to make sure the audience knew the actors were actually singing that he didn’t care about any other type of camera shot.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:45 AM
Good review. I’m like everybody else it seems, and loved the hell out of it even if I do think it’s not perfect. But it still had me close to tearing up so that’s always a keeper in my book.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:53 PM
The ending gets you.
I’ll be watching the actual show in February (or March?). I’m curious to see if my assumption is correct. I’ll write a comparison post of the two after.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:56 AM
I’ve read mixed reviews about Les Miserables. I think the issue here was the directing.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:54 PM
I agree wit that.
I said it in an earlier comment reply, but I think Hooper wanted the audience to know the actors were actually singing he made everything else secondary.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:57 PM
Feeling a little miserable as I read more negative comments on this stage musical and now movie I find so moving as I’ve written previousky. Still I see where people are coming from. Two camps: the first that haven’t seen the stage show with generally lower movie ratings and camp two the stage fans who near totally love the movie. Both camps just as valid. Good review again.
January 8th, 2013 at 4:02 PM
I’ll be watching the stage show on March 2nd, then writing a comparison post between the film and show.
I don’t think my opinion of the film will change that much because my major criticism is with the direction and not so much the story. The adaptation to the screen could have been better, but the end of the film still moved me.
January 8th, 2013 at 5:28 PM
Agreed on most points. While I appreciated the fact that the actors sang on film, the extreme close-ups grew distracting. I also felt the film went on for too long — the last half hour or so really started to drag.
January 8th, 2013 at 6:39 PM
I think it would have been tough to bring this one down to two hours. The scope of the story needs the extra time, but the execution was off.
January 9th, 2013 at 10:16 AM
Great review! I haven’t seen it yet, but its on my watch list
January 9th, 2013 at 4:48 PM
Thanks.
This one is all over the place between people who do and do not like it.
January 9th, 2013 at 4:01 PM
I saw the show about twenty years ago, I read the book about 15 years ago, and I saw the movie recently, and I have to say the show blew me away, on a smallish stage, with stage scenery, while the movie, with close-ups and on the big screen left me terribly disappointed. I agree with the time lapses and motivations that don’t work in the movie as they do on the stage. But my biggest gripe is with the singing. I agree that it was annoying that all the dialogue was sung. Where I disagree with you is Hugh Jackman’s singing. I couldn’t stand it. It hurt my ears to hear his nasal mewling. He can sing, but only barely. He can carry a tune, but that’s it. Russell Crow was a little better, but I felt he was holding back all the time, as if his singing abilities–where this genre is concerned anyway–weren’t sufficient to be able to belt it out. Anne Hathaway made up for it all, though. I would like to have only the scenes where Fantine sings on dvd, to watch over and over again. The rest is forgettable. It’s too bad, because it could have been magnificent, and now it will be decades before the next attempt.
January 9th, 2013 at 5:00 PM
I like your point about Crowe holding back. He does have his own band that he sings for, but maybe it is more hard rock.
Frankly, unless someone is really good or really bad I am not the best judge of singing ability.
I’ll be at a performance of Les Mis the beginning of March and am looking forward to it.
January 9th, 2013 at 8:06 PM
Oh, you’ll love it! Yes, I heard Crow has a hard rock band, so he should be able to let it rip, but maybe not if it’s more operatic. Too bad. Other than that he was a good Javert.
January 9th, 2013 at 4:48 PM
[...] but I have very little time right now. So i’m being lazy and posting a comment I left on a post about Les Miserables. (How do you put accents on letters in [...]
January 12th, 2013 at 12:38 PM
[...] “Les Miserables” (2012) – Review (victorsmoviereviews.com) [...]
January 19th, 2013 at 1:03 PM
can’t wait for your comparison post after you see the live show. esp after the observations you made with the movie! Thanks for the review here.
January 19th, 2013 at 3:53 PM
Your welcome.
I am curious to see how the show is.