Les Misérables Movie Review

Les Misérables is a story that has been told through the medium of film many times before. It's a classic novel by Victor Hugo and has had at least two film adaptations per decade since 1907. But the 2012 version is the fist film adaptation of the stage production. Les Misérables brought all the power and emotion of the longest running Broadway Musical ever to the big screen.

After 19 years in prison (five for stealing bread for his starving sister and her family, and the rest for trying to escape), Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is released on parole by the policeman Javert (Russell Crow). After a merciful Bishop (Colm Wilkinson, who famously played Valjean on stage) gives Valjean some precious silver to sell for money, Valjean turns his life around and makes himself a wealthy factory owner and mayor of a town in France. Javert is still hunting for Valjean since he did not meet parole. One of his workers, Fantine (Anne Hathaway), has a fight when the other workers discover she is sending money to her secret illegitimate daughter. When Valjean discovers that Fantine has resorted to prostitution to care for her daughter, Valjean swears to the dying mother that he will rescue and care for the girl himself. Valjean takes the young Cosette away from The Thénardiers (Sacha Baron Cohen & Helena Bonham Carter), and she grows into a fine young woman (Amanda Seyfried). Later Cosette falls in love with a young man named Marius (Eddie Redmayne) who is deeply involved in the French Revolution. It is through Marius's friend, Éponine (Samantha Barks) that Marius discovers Cosette. In the interest of keeping Marius alive for the sake of Cosette, Valjean aids the young rebels in their revolt while being ever vigilant to avoid Javert who remains hot on his trail.

When you see Les Misérables on stage you're watching singers act; but in this movie you're seeing actors sing. Several of the actors had some musical background, while others clearly did not. Russell Crow is a great actor, but not much of a singer. He sounds like he stifling a yawn while singing; but given his lack of vocal training, he hit the notes right and did a descent job. Eddie Redmayne's singing sounded nasal, and you could see his jaw and neck trembling with his vibrato. That's not necessarily bad, but it was distracting and an indicator of lack of vocal training. Hugh Jackman was phenomenal! He has Broadway experience and he did a great job singing this iconic role. I think the best performance was from Anne Hathaway. She did very well singing, but her emotional delivery simply blew me away.

Fans of the Broadway play will be head over heels in love with this movie version. As mentioned above, this is actors singing. The classic Broadway music is secondary to the story; the opposite of what happens on stage. I've heard these songs countless times before, but seeing an actual context for them made them much more poignant. In Les Misérables, we are shown close up images of the emotions and pain the characters are experiencing as the story progresses. I've heard “I Dreamed a Dream” before, but Hathaway's delivery made you really think about the lyrics and the pain the words are portraying. That whole song was filmed in one take; the camera doesn't move from her as she weeps and sings of broken dreams and abandoned love. It was powerful, and brought me to tears.

Possibly one of the things that made Les Misérables so good was that is was recorded live. Normally for a filmed musical, the individual actors sing the parts ahead of time in a studio before gathering together to film the scenes and lip-syncing to their own recorded voices. This causes the actors to have to make any acting decisions months before ever seeing their costars face to face. That removes some potential for the actors to act off of each other and generate emotional depth and realism in their delivery. For Les Misérables, the actors sung their lines as if it were the script and later had the music added. This allowed the actors to create a real sense of emotion and projection with their characters that has not been done before in a musical movie like this.

The sets were numerous and gorgeous. The bigger sets were probably enhanced with computer graphic additions, but it was so seamless. We got a feel for the French locations with sweeping exterior shots; it didn't feel confined to a stage. The historic costumes were so detailed and believable. The muskets fired at the barricade looked authentic and even the foley art was excellent.

There was very little actual spoken dialogue; the whole script was dependent upon the songs from the Broadway play. This made the interactions between characters seem unrealistic from time to time. The shots between songs were rushed; for example, one song ends and we see two or three short shots of the unconscious Marius being taken to a hospital, a doctor tending him, Marius walking again, and then suddenly he's at the old tavern where he and his friends used to hang out before starting in on his next song. That should take a lot of time, but we're thrown a couple of shots to suggest the passing of time in a matter of seconds to lead into the next song. While it's clear what has happened, it made the flow of the movie a bit choppy and rushed.

If you enjoy musicals, you will enjoy Les Misérables a lot. This was a powerful rendition of the Broadway classic, and it brings the story and characters to life on a level of reality that cannot be done on a stage. It's a classic story of broken dreams, unrequited love, passion, sacrifice, redemption, and the survival of the human spirit. I've never seen Les Misérables on stage, but this version does the story and music justice. If you don't enjoy musicals much on general principle, you'll likely be waving a white flag of exhausted defeat well before rebels wave the French tricolors. I think this was a beautiful movie and easily one of the best films of 2012. Not many movies can cause me to tear up multiple times, and Les Misérables certainly did. Go see it in theaters while you can. I recommend that you consider buying a copy for your home collection as well.

What is a Broadway Musical that you would love to see made into a major motion picture? Comment below and tell me why!

Hugo Movie Review

I see some movie trailers and think, “Yeah, I’ll catch that on DVD someday.” Once in a while I make that assessment and when I finally see the movie I kick myself for not taking the chance to see it on the big screen. I don’t think I was even 5 minutes into Martin Scorsese’s Hugo (2011) before I began lamenting that I had missed it in theaters.

In the middle of 1930’s Paris, orphan boy Hugo (Asa Butterfield) lives within the walls of a train station. He maintains and repairs the stations many clocks, a skill he learned from his father (Jude Law) and uncle (Ray Winstone). The only thing Hugo has left from his father is an automaton that doesn’t work. Hugo works to repair the automaton but he has to find its heart-shaped key to activate it. While eluding the Station Inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), he meets a cranky old man named Georges Méliès (Ben Kingsley), who works at a toy booth and his god-daughter, Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz). Hugo finds that they have a surprising connection to his father and the automaton. As the mystery unfolds, the old man begins to remember his past and his significance to the world of film-making.

The first half of the film centers around Hugo’s escapades as the mystery unfolds. The second half is almost a tribute to Georges Méliès who was a real historical figure and an infamous French magician. He actually did use his magician skills to make some of the first special effects used in the very early days of film. You may have seen his most famous short film, A Trip to the Moon (1902), about travelers in a space capsule which is shot from a cannon to the moon, and their capsule pokes the Man in the Moon in the eye. The backstory depicted in Hugo actually did happen to Méliès. Méliès’s life is depicted in a loving way to show the magic and wonder that films can have, both in making them and viewing them. Therefore, Hugo seems like a love letter from the masterful director, Martin Scorsese, to the art of film.

Hugo seems like a family film on the surface: child protagonists with skills beyond their years, a seemingly slapstick villain, and secrets that only the kids are able to uncover, etc. But each character in this film is deep and complex, far more so than the usual exaggerated kid characters in family films. Hugo is talented for a reason; he was an apprentice under two clockwork masters. Isabelle is knowledgeable because she is so enamored with books. This even comes out in her vocabulary-enriched dialogue. Even the bumbling station inspector is not just a goofy slapstick antagonist; there is a reason for everything he does. Every single character is delightfully deep and complex.

The visuals in Hugo were just astounding; everything was beautifully designed. There was a lot of CGI and other techniques that made up the train station and 1930’s Paris. The opening shot starts with a swooping tour of Paris, through the train station, and ends on Hugo peeking out of a small opening in the clock face high above the station floor. Every shot has so much beautiful detail that it’s almost hard to drink it all in, and yet it’s so masterfully incorporated that it doesn’t seem like it’s a gratuitous display of special effects. Even the automaton looks like a beautiful mechanism that will work if Hugo can just find the key.

Generally, I see 3-D movies as being very gimmicky. Even when watching their 2-D counterparts, you can often tell what scenes were tailor made to have things pop out of the screen at you. I did not see Hugo in 3-D, and I’m regretting it. 3-D shouldn’t be gimmicky, but should enhance the sensory experience of watching a movie. I think that in the hands of a master director like Scorsese, 3-D technology would be beautifully implemented. I want to get a 3-D Blu-Ray copy of this movie and find a 3-D TV I could watch it on. I really felt like I was missing out on Hugo’s full potential.

The pacing was a bit slow for younger children. It will probably bore some kids, but I think this is a fantastic film to introduce children to high quality cinema and wean them off  garbage like Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked (2011). Hugo was so exquisitely done that I could see this being used to teach film students. I highly recommend seeing this movie; it will be especially magical if you are a cinephile like me. I’d also urge you to consider owning a copy. Possibly even a 3-D Blu-Ray copy, just in case.