Les Misérables: So, what did you think?- Page 14

[DAME]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 11:57am

The majority of the people seeing this film ( meaning not the fanatics and theater queens on this board) are probably enjoying it even more so because everyone in it doesn't sound so pretty or legit. They don't leave the theater saying.. "oh Hugh Jackman was struggling vocally" and all that horse crap. I think hollywood made a great film. The tour is still out there if you want to go see pretty. And I hope Jackman wins a oscar. They will probably give it to DDl for playing Abe in that snore fest.

Updated On: 12/29/12 at 11:57 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:03pm

Jackman has nothing on Daniel Day-Lewis' performance as Lincoln.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:10pm

Dame, I agree. I saw the film on Thursday and loved it. Although, I have been telling friends who have never seen the production and are unfamiliar with the music, that they make not like it as much as I did. I just don't get the critism. Yes, Russell Crowe is not as strong vocally as the others, but I still enjoyed his performance, as well as Amanda's. I think Hooper did a great job. It will win the Golden Globe, but I think thats about it. Anne has the best chance.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:22pm

I also hate the British accent film convention. It's the most jarring to me with Germans in World War II movies.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:23pm

Randomness. Feel free to skip, skip, skippitty skiiiiip.

What I don't understand is how is it that a 4-minute music video--which is often a lot more ridiculous and STAGEY than a movie musical--complete with choreography that is obviously an excuse to gyrate one's hips and look SEXY and manipulate into selling more of that 'artist's' records, so easily accepted by just about everyone when it's, essentially, a short musical film?

Is it the shortness of it? Meaning, most people can only tolerate musical films in 4 minute chunks at a time? Is it the style? Is the fact that a Rock musical isn't REALLY authentic Rock, but a fusion of elements of Rock music with the storytelling properties of a musical, is that what makes Rock musicals hit that glass ceiling where they never truly "cross over," remaining safely on the theatrical side?

What about those long ass Gaga music videos that contain dialogue and weirdness in a painfully obvious attempt to come across as "different," like a rebel, like a genius, like an ARTIST?

You have people flipping out and declaring a movie musical experience as a truly painful ordeal and they bemoan the musical's desperation in manipulating earnest emotions to flow freely from your heart, mind, wallet? Disgust is usually the sentiment expressed in this case.

Yet, the public at large fall all over each other happily allowing themselves be manipulated willingly by mainstream pop.

So, can we conclude that style, running time, and purpose are working against musical theatre's and musical film's acceptance by mainstream audiences?

I guess, but I don't think it's that simplistic.

AHHHH!! Make the voices stop!!!!

Kidding.

Updated On: 12/29/12 at 12:23 PM

[little_sally]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:32pm

Overall I enjoyed it (as much as I possibly could, considering I've become a bit Les Mis'd-out over the years) and thought all of the performances were uniformly good (although Gavroche stole the show).

My biggest complaint was Eponine. She seemed so extraneous in the movie, and I really think "On My Own" could have been cut. It seemed to come out of nowhere and just reiterated what we knew from the two songs before it. Also, to me, "One Day More" seemed out of place. It really worked better on stage because the film really didn't need this big moment. Once again, it just reiterated what had already been established.

[Kad]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:39pm

But I'm pretty sure there'd be a mob waiting to hang Tom Hooper if he cut them.

[broadwaydevil]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:43pm

Exactly, the purpose of "One Day More" is to end the first act with a rousing number that sort of summarizes everything that's happened. It's a musical theatre device that makes perfect sense for a stage musical but is bewilderingly out of place in a movie without an intermission. That said, Kad's right in saying people would be infuriated if it was cut.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:43pm

Indeed. No person with even the slightest shred of sanity would have attempted to cut either of those two songs.

[jasonf]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:47pm

That's exactly what I said about On My Own - the song was dramatically unnecessary, but how could you possibly have Les Mis and NOT include it? One Day More at least sets us up for Javert as a spy, if nothing else...

[Kad]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:48pm

I do agree that they became superfluous in the film. In fact, the film sort of just relegated/exposed Eponine as nothing more than a plot device.

"One Day More" was one of the major stumbles for me. Perhaps audience members really do need to be reminded of all the plot threads and characters. But Hooper, in my opinion, made a rousing number into a fairly low-key, unneeded one. Any impact was sucked out of it and placed instead into the immediately following "Do You Hear the People Sing?", which I thought was one of the most successful sequences in the whole film.

[Popular]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 12:49pm

I am trying to post this from my phone so I hope the link works. If not then YouTube search my parents reaction to Les Miserables.

While I was not as enthusiastic as the parents in the video, I did enjoy the movie immensely flaws and all (and yes there were some).
Funniest reaction

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 1:03pm

My Oh My: I was kind of thinking about Pitch Perfect, which had a lot of singing and also featured a cast that could really sing. The movie did so well that they're talking about a sequel.

[canmark]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 1:29pm

Finally saw Les Miserables. I thought it was well done over all.

Performances were fine (although I admit to shedding no tears, even over the emotional songs like I Dreamed a Dream, On My Own, Bring Him Home, Empty Chairs at Empty Tables), as was the production design, costumes, makeup, and cinematography.

Orchestrations were a bit different, but not as distracting as some of the singing. I didn't dislike Russell Crowe's Javert, but felt it was woefully undersung. Where was the righteous conviction in a song like Stars? Similarly Eddie Redmayne was fine as Marius, but I thought Aaron Tveit might have been more suitable as the idealistic pretty boy rebel. Tveit meanwhile lacked the manly leadership qualities of Enjolras. Would have liked Eponine to be more waif-looking, but Samantha Banks was IJ. I quite liked Hugh Jackman's Valjean (esp. What Have I Done?), however his Bring Him Home let me down (even moreso with Colm Wilkonson in the film, reminding us of how the high notes should be sung). I was not as moved by Anne Hathaway's Fantine as others. Fine, but not an award-winning performance in my book. I did like Daniel Huttlestone Gavroche, a role that's usually almost as irritating as young Cossette--except why did he sound more like the Artful Dodger than a Parisian street kid?

Although the 2 1/2 hours flew by, the movie felt long in the latter parts, even though they truncated pleasant songs like Drink With Me, Turning, etc. I kept wanting Valjean to hurry up and die so the movie would end.

I have no plans to get the film soundtrack. I think there are much better vocal performances in the Original Broadway or Original London Cast CDs (Colm Wilkonson, Frances Ruffelle, Randi Graff, Terrence Mann, etc.), plus some of the various other recordings and concert performances.

Updated On: 12/29/12 at 01:29 PM

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 1:32pm

My Oh My, you are not alone, I have often asked myself the same thing.

[broadwaybabywannabe2]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 5:43pm

i just saw the film in IMAX!...it is playing in only 4 movie screens in IMAX acros the country...and OH MY!...the sound was IMAX sound and the visuals were AMAZING!...even though i saw it in regular projection near my house i decided to drive into LA to see it at the AMC CENTRUY CITY IMAX...and it was like seeing it for the first time...and hearing it like i never did the first time...i recommend it if u have it in IMAX near u it is worth the second trip...

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 7:53pm

I don't think we need despair, My Oh My. CHICAGO, HAIRSPRAY and (God help us!) MAMMA MIA! all grossed well over 100 million each.

LES MISERABLES made $18 million on Christmas Day alone.

Even when the convention of characters singing seemed dead in the 1970s, THE ROCKY HORRY PICTURE SHOW was racking up millions (it seemed) of performances.

I do think they made a good decision to sing LES MISERABLES a little more intimately. Nearly 3 hours of operetta bombast might have overwhelmed us all.

***

As for "On My Own", a song I very much like, I watched the 25th Anniversary concert the night before seeing the film and found Eponine pretty much extraneous. It doesn't help that in a formal sense, she repeats Fantine's appearance: she appears, sings a great song, then dies singing a sad duet. (OK, Eponine appears briefly in Act I, but basically she is the Act II Fantine.)

I believe I wrote above that, dramaturgically, her stage time would be better spent establishing the adult Cosette. (All this being said, I loved Miss Bark.)

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 8:18pm

The more I think about it, the more I think listening to the London Cast Recording right before seeing the movie was a mistake. It put in my head what the characters should sound like, and for Crowe, made it an impossible standard to meet at least vocally. I was so put off that he did not sound like what I expected Javert to sound like that I was already in a negative frame of mind.

I may wait a bit and see it again (and not listing to the cast recording before hand) to see if maybe I was judging Crowe a little too harshly.

Regardless, I do think some of the very up close camera shots were too much (and I also kept thinking that some of them had very good teeth for that time period ...). I know that he wanted to personalize the story a bit, but I think he went overboard on the facial focus. Especially with those whose singing faces were not always the most attractive, regardless of their voice. (Redmayne, in particular).

Though I am not a huge fan of Seyfried's voice, and especialy her very fast vibrato, I think it was less distracting in this role than in Mama Mia. The Cosette role to me is waif like, almost childlike in her purpose to show the sacrifice for love personified.

Certain aspects of the movie have stayed with me after seeing it, so there is no doubt that that the film making itself was excellent. So, I may go see it again in a couple of weeks to give Crowe another chance.

[little_sally]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 8:36pm

I think I just needed a bit of dialogue or something before On My Own. It came out of nowhere, and it felt like a music video. Maybe it was a bad choice to cut the first verse ("and now I'm all alone again...").

[StageManager2]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 8:55pm

I also found it a bit jarring that as soon as "On My Own" finished (in fact, the last note hadn't ended yet), "One Day More" began immediately after.

[RooMcGoo]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 9:58pm

I created a web video to express all of my feelings about the movie (link below)...

An Incomplete History of Les Miserables

[Wishing Only Wounds]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 10:00pm

Saw it again today; I loved it even more. Russell Crowe really started to grow on me, as did Amanda Seyfried.

Is Aaron using an American accent? His few lines didn't sound at all British; same with Fra Fee and his Irish accent.

Also, what I noticed today, when Javert puts his medal on Gavroche, Bring Him Home is playing underneath... lost it.

Updated On: 12/29/12 at 10:00 PM

[michellek45]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 10:23pm

My Oh My and SporkGoddess: I think the difference between Pitch Perfect and rock musicals is that Pitch Perfect is a story with and about music while rock musicals are exactly what it says on the tin. People don't want to accept characters breaking out into song. My mother is great example of this- she loves old musicals or comedies (Sound of Music, Anything Goes, Legally Blonde, even Shrek). She doesn't so much care about the songs supporting the story, only that they are fun to listen to. She doesn't really appreciate serious shows (though she does appreciate serious works in other mediums), and she said to me after Les Miz, "What I don't like is how they sing while they're dying. If they have enough energy to sing, they should have enough energy to not die."

I think part of the reason is that the general public sees singing in musicals the same way they would see singing in real life: something extra, something more, something out of the blue. Whereas for me (and I would guess other musical lovers), in the world of the show, singing is a natural extension of emotional expression, like impassioned speech or something. It's a given, it's expected. Fantine singing about Cosette as she dies is the same as her speaking it. There's no extra effort involved to sustain or hit notes; it's natural. People don't seem to be able to accept that.

As much as I dislike it now, I have to admit I had high hopes for Glee, which I think is very much a part of this phenomenon. It was supposed to bring musicals back into the mainstream for the kids of my generation. But it's not a musical. It's a show about music, where the reasons for the music are defined clearly. Only on rare occasions do characters burst out into song; it's either justified in the context of the glee club itself or clearly set as someone's fantasy. It doesn't ask you to accept that characters are randomly bursting into song, and I think that's where most people will lose interest/belief in the story.

Mainstream pop, for the most part, isn't attempting to tell a story. It's not asking you to join a cast of characters in a dramatic journey. It's not trying to make you cry or make you think. It's existing to make you entertained. The music video itself, I think, is in part made to keep your interest focused on the song, since in our multi-tasking culture most people do not keep their focus on one thing. Music videos and pop music, in general, are trying to make a statement. They are too short to have a significant emotional resonance with their audience, and I think that's why the audience can buy them.

Whew...that was really long

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 10:30pm

I went back to see the film today and I found Russell Crowe's singing much less pleasant to listen to this time around. I still don't believe it was horrible but it just was not strong enough for the part. His acting is still good though. I did appreciate performances of everyone else though especially the ones from Hathaway, Jackman, Tveit, and Barks.

Updated On: 12/29/12 at 10:30 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/29/12 at 10:48pm

I guess I was lucky: I had such rock-bottom expectations for Mr. Crowe that I found him "not so bad".

On the other hand, I'm a little surprised at all the love for Aaron Tveit. Obviously, he can sing, but compared to others I've heard in the role, he seemed to lack the command necessary to sing young men into sacrificing their lives. Perhaps it was the "intimate singing" style of the entire film that was to blame and not the singer.