This one absolutely deserves its own write-up.
For anyone not familiar with this story, it's based on a book by Victor Hugo, set during the ongoing French Revolution in the early 1800's. It's a story of pain, anguish, justice, grace, damnation, sacrifice, love, and redemption. Has been performed in many different formats on TV, movies, and the stage, including the popular Broadway show. This movie takes the Broadway show and puts it to film (again), much in the same way "Phantom of the Opera" was a few years ago.
This one is EXCEPTIONAL. Purely EXCEPTIONAL. I started the film with a lot of skepticism--was this just another attempt at raking in cash from a known story? There are so many dangers when you try to re-do a masterpiece, and even MORE dangers when it's a musical. Would it be corny? Would it just try to stand on the merits of the story? Would they try to use famous actors to rake in more cash, at the sacrifice of a good performance, and particularly important, actors whose vocal talents can rise to the demands of such wonderful music? Would it just be a re-hash of that which we've already seen? (for a disclaimer, I've seen Les Mis on Broadway, and own the original cast soundtrack)
My skepticism steadily subsided, as the movie quickly did prove itself as a quality production. Right off the bat, Hugh Jackman looked amazing as Jean Valjean as a haggard prisoner. The casting turned out to be wonderful. I was worried about Hugh Jackman, but he not only acted his part wonderfully, his voice definitely fit the bill. Amanda Seyfried was fantastic as Cosette, Samantha Barks was an amazing Eponine, and the movie hooked me for good when Anne Hathaway did "I Dreamed A Dream". She turned in a stellar performance as Fantine, and when she sang, I could feel the anguish and pain in her voice. Any of the song performances easily could have been "show-tuney", but they were real, raw, and visceral. Eponine's solo of "On My Own" broke me down, and I just about lost it in the theater, literally shaking in my seat, as they transitioned to the reprise of "One Day More". Beyond beautiful.
IMHO, the finest performance from the movie, though, the actor that blew me away more than any other, was the young boy that played Marius, who is the suitor pursuing Cosette. Played by Eddie Redmayne, he is largely an unknown, but I was floored by his performance. Even Sacha Baren Cohen (who I was really skeptical of being included) and Helena Bonham Carter fit well. Honestly, the only person that I was disappointed by was Russell Crowe. He did a SUPERB job of acting the role of Javert, and I would say his voice was "solid" in his singing. But his voice lacks a level of power that I think was needed in some of the songs, particularly in the demanding music of Les Mis. Nothing bad, but it just didn't rise to the level of excellence that the other singers and the film itself had. (and even his own acting, which was again, wonderful)
Little trivia fact--something that I think REALLY added to things is that every song was sung live on set, during filming. This is in contrast to what usually happens, of the cast recording in a studio months before filming, then lip-synching to the playback of their own singing during filming. This approach had to be incredibly difficult, but added to an obvious realism, that enhanced the feel.
A note of warning--this movie is not for you, if you have been crafted by years of modern films capped at 100 minutes length, shaky cams that continually cut away in scenes, storylines that rush along, superficial plots, etc. This story takes its time, developing characters and their souls, and you have to pay attention not only to the performance, but what each character is singing as their life evolves. In fact, for some reason, the producers even added at least one original song, (maybe more) not included in the original stage show. I'm not quite sure why, as I don't think it was necessary, and it partially lagged in the middle of the 2nd/3rd act. (another similarity--the recent "Phantom" film also added extra songs) But if you are someone that can appreciate a truly artistic and deep, developed performance, you are going to love this film.
No doubt, a full :5: out of :5: Those of you who know me, know the significance of me rating and reviewing this as such--I would confidently say that this is the finest film performance I've ever seen of a stage show. That includes "Phantom", which I consider to be a superior play, and loved the latest film version of that as well. This is also the finest film I've seen for several years. I'll absolutely be purchasing it in HD Blu-Ray as well, and look forward to the high-rez audio in my theater. I'm curious how I'll like a 2nd watch of the film as well.
I can't recommend this highly enough.
For anyone not familiar with this story, it's based on a book by Victor Hugo, set during the ongoing French Revolution in the early 1800's. It's a story of pain, anguish, justice, grace, damnation, sacrifice, love, and redemption. Has been performed in many different formats on TV, movies, and the stage, including the popular Broadway show. This movie takes the Broadway show and puts it to film (again), much in the same way "Phantom of the Opera" was a few years ago.
This one is EXCEPTIONAL. Purely EXCEPTIONAL. I started the film with a lot of skepticism--was this just another attempt at raking in cash from a known story? There are so many dangers when you try to re-do a masterpiece, and even MORE dangers when it's a musical. Would it be corny? Would it just try to stand on the merits of the story? Would they try to use famous actors to rake in more cash, at the sacrifice of a good performance, and particularly important, actors whose vocal talents can rise to the demands of such wonderful music? Would it just be a re-hash of that which we've already seen? (for a disclaimer, I've seen Les Mis on Broadway, and own the original cast soundtrack)
My skepticism steadily subsided, as the movie quickly did prove itself as a quality production. Right off the bat, Hugh Jackman looked amazing as Jean Valjean as a haggard prisoner. The casting turned out to be wonderful. I was worried about Hugh Jackman, but he not only acted his part wonderfully, his voice definitely fit the bill. Amanda Seyfried was fantastic as Cosette, Samantha Barks was an amazing Eponine, and the movie hooked me for good when Anne Hathaway did "I Dreamed A Dream". She turned in a stellar performance as Fantine, and when she sang, I could feel the anguish and pain in her voice. Any of the song performances easily could have been "show-tuney", but they were real, raw, and visceral. Eponine's solo of "On My Own" broke me down, and I just about lost it in the theater, literally shaking in my seat, as they transitioned to the reprise of "One Day More". Beyond beautiful.
IMHO, the finest performance from the movie, though, the actor that blew me away more than any other, was the young boy that played Marius, who is the suitor pursuing Cosette. Played by Eddie Redmayne, he is largely an unknown, but I was floored by his performance. Even Sacha Baren Cohen (who I was really skeptical of being included) and Helena Bonham Carter fit well. Honestly, the only person that I was disappointed by was Russell Crowe. He did a SUPERB job of acting the role of Javert, and I would say his voice was "solid" in his singing. But his voice lacks a level of power that I think was needed in some of the songs, particularly in the demanding music of Les Mis. Nothing bad, but it just didn't rise to the level of excellence that the other singers and the film itself had. (and even his own acting, which was again, wonderful)
Little trivia fact--something that I think REALLY added to things is that every song was sung live on set, during filming. This is in contrast to what usually happens, of the cast recording in a studio months before filming, then lip-synching to the playback of their own singing during filming. This approach had to be incredibly difficult, but added to an obvious realism, that enhanced the feel.
A note of warning--this movie is not for you, if you have been crafted by years of modern films capped at 100 minutes length, shaky cams that continually cut away in scenes, storylines that rush along, superficial plots, etc. This story takes its time, developing characters and their souls, and you have to pay attention not only to the performance, but what each character is singing as their life evolves. In fact, for some reason, the producers even added at least one original song, (maybe more) not included in the original stage show. I'm not quite sure why, as I don't think it was necessary, and it partially lagged in the middle of the 2nd/3rd act. (another similarity--the recent "Phantom" film also added extra songs) But if you are someone that can appreciate a truly artistic and deep, developed performance, you are going to love this film.
No doubt, a full :5: out of :5: Those of you who know me, know the significance of me rating and reviewing this as such--I would confidently say that this is the finest film performance I've ever seen of a stage show. That includes "Phantom", which I consider to be a superior play, and loved the latest film version of that as well. This is also the finest film I've seen for several years. I'll absolutely be purchasing it in HD Blu-Ray as well, and look forward to the high-rez audio in my theater. I'm curious how I'll like a 2nd watch of the film as well.
I can't recommend this highly enough.
Comment