Les Miserables Film

[Dave19]

Posted: 1/11/12 at 4:55pm

We all know that the show is fully sung and there are many big ballads. So how do you think the film will turn out?
I have to admit that I'm a bit worried to hear one ballad after another sung by people who can't really sing. This music needs exceptional singing voices that can make a piece of art of each and every note and give all the notes the right emotion. And that is something very different than "acting a song out, and pretend that not singing the notes well is acceptable". That is actually "avoiding emotion" in real singing.
The Phantom film was a disaster because of this. Mediocre singers and the usual autotune makes sure that all of the real emotion is gone. Real emotion in singing (John Owen Jones, Alfie Boe, Sierra Boggess, Lea Salonga) is impossible to achieve with mediocre singers as most of the people in this cast are. So if excellent singin is not what the director wants, it is about actors fighting their way through these songs, and hopefully still get some emotion out of it. (even though that emotions won't come from the excellent singing, and watching actors fight their way through the songs is horrble to watch, Gerard Butler in Phantom.red).


Then another subject. Will the film be very basic, realistic, and have scenes in small rooms etc? (Like the King's Speech, Sweeney Todd) or will it be grand and theatrical (Like Evita, Moulin Rouge).
The score is very theatrical. A song as "A heart full of love" is very theatrical and poetic. This works in a theatre show. But will it work in a realistic setting, when the 3 people of the love triangle are walking in the streets of Paris or sitting in a small, cold, dirty bedroom? I hope it doesn't turn out to be silly, empty and flat. The song and lyrics actually ask for a more theatrical setting.

Because it's a full musical film, the film has to be a big videoclip. With that in mind you would think that keeping it too basic and realistic wouldn't work at all. This asks for a more theatrical approach.

With hooper as a director, a wonderful film director, don't get me wrong, but does he understand the theatrical aspects?
The "realistic film-lovers" will be annoyed by the theatrical lyrics and music, and the "theatre lovers" will be annoyed by the grey, toned down, realistic-ness, that doesn't fit with the score at all.

My idea would be to keep the emotions and the heart of the film realistic and very true, but make it theatrical as well. So NOT like Sweeney Todd, but more like Evita and Moulin Rouge.

For example, use a beautiful, starry sky in "A heart full of love". Make it big, epic, and romantic, as a contrast to the rest.
What I also would love is if there would be a dream sequence of a young Fantine in "I dreamed a dream" with images of her running through fields, having a man, a sort of blast from the past of her better life".
Make the forest where Valjean finds Cosette big and scary.
I also wonder how they are going to film "One day More". I guess they are going to cut form one side of the city to another wher the characters sing their own lines, but in the end when they all sing together? I have no idea.

What are your thoughts and ideas?

[jo]

Posted: 1/16/12 at 8:01pm

Please don't sell Tom Hooper's talent as a filmmaker short!
Or the cast that he is assembling. They are accomplished actors, and some fell into singing because they also had the natural talent for this. A cinematic vision is way different from a stage production- it is the storytelling and the characterization that will matter most. So long as the singing is very compatible with the emotions and dramatic interactions being portrayed, that works fine in a movie setting. You want a pretty and note-perfect voice - why not go to the West End and watch the current stage production?

One other aspect you may want to look into -- can stage actors necessarily act as successfully on the big screen? These are two different mediums and require different kinds of acting talent and presence. Hooper is lucky to have found someone like Hugh Jackman who fulfills both acting requirements, with a musical theatre background and a strong, charismatic screen presence to boot!

In your other posts elsewhere you categorically took exception with Hugh Jackman's talent to handle the Valjean portrayal and songs. I would like to disagree with your calling Hugh Jackman a very mediocre singer. He may not have a very pretty voice but he sure can rise to the challenge of pretty much any song. He has a solid musical theatre background ( including a sung-through Lloyd-Webber composition Sunset Boulevard, and a classical Broadway musical Oklahoma!, both under the direction of Trevor Nunn). Nunn was the man who reimagined the original French musical version of Les Miserables and turned it into the universally-loved show it is now. He is also someone who has expressed complete confidence in Hugh Jackman's musical theatre ability ( both on the acting and the singing side). Check out the clips of songs he sang in Oklahoma! on Youtube, or better still, why not get a DVD of the RNT show revival?...And if you had a chance to see his recent show on Broadway -- one veteran New York theatregoer who happened to be seated next to me had this to say about Hugh's version of SOLILOQUY from Carousel: "In all my theatregoing years, I have seen quite a number of productions of CAROUSEL, and I can say without question that this is the best interpretation of SOLILOQUY that I have ever seen!". SOLILOQUY happens to be one of the most revered male arias in musical theatre!

It is the acting and singing interpretation that will matter most to me when I first view the movie musical LES MISERABLES! And how the story, revolving on the central character of Jean Valjean, flows and leaves me with an enduring memory of a story told mostly in song! The musical score is sweeping and dramatically appealing, but only if sung in the context of the story of certain characters fictionally appearing in that time of history in France! Don't get me wrong - I first saw the show in 1988 and have seen many versions of it on Broadway, in London, in Paris ( the Mackintosh production in 1992) and even here where I live. I am a great fan of the musical ( it is my favorite musical) -- but I am looking forward to a fresh, cinematic vision from Tom Hooper, a totally different experience with such a talented cast at hand!











Updated On: 1/16/12 at 08:01 PM

[jo]

Posted: 1/16/12 at 8:02pm

Sorry, double post. Updated On: 1/16/12 at 08:02 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 1/17/12 at 2:30pm

I agree that a cinematic vision is very different from a stage production, but that's what worries me. What experience does Tom Hooper have with stage songs, a musical and turning all this theatrical aspects to film? The Phantom films looks nice from a cinematic point of view too, but to me all the important things are missing, including the right emotions. Yes, they chose actors instead of singers, but why does one thing have to exclude the other?

In my opinion it is always better to have both. The songs will be sung in the film, so why not make it great, wonderful, emotional, epic and glorious? For example, I think Sierra Boggess is a wonderful actress. Certainly not weaker than Anne Hathaway. I think we all should look past this whole "hollywood" or "musical" lable thing. As if there are no good actresses that are not Hollywood names yet. I think someone like Sierra would have been a perfect Fantine. First is because she is a fantastic actress, and second, in a musical, whether it's on film or not, there are songs, and the biggest part of the emotion in songs is how the songs are portrayed, how each and every note is sung, with the exact right intention, the rising of the notes, the placement of the notes, the beginning, middle and end of each note, every little detail in a note creates a different emotion in the mind of the listener, it is art. This makes or breaks a song. For a film like this they need true voice artists in my opinion. Not people that can "sing a little but actually find it scary and unusual".

This is why "The sound of music" is still epic and "The Phantom" was a disaster.


"It is the acting and singing interpretation that will matter most to me when I first view the movie musical LES MISERABLES!"

Well, that's the case for me too, but the thing is, if someone is not a real singer it will show and will take all the emotion out of every scene, that happened to Amanda Seyfried in the Mama Mia film. When I watch that film I see and hear someone that is trying to sing but does not know how to make the notes rise into the right emotion needed for the moment, the voice control and finesse is not there. She might sing the right notes and make the right face, the true art that is needed for a song, to make the film audience experience all that important emotions of the song, is missing.

The most important thing for a film like this is to have excellent singers in the first place, that are excellent actors as well. So for example for Cosette I would have taken a magnificent soprano actress. I think that some people underestimate singing. The way Amanda Seyfriend sings, is almost like any girl that lives here in the street sings. That might be ok, it migh be acceptable, but that is not what I envision for a film like this. In 200, 300 or 500 years, what will people think? That Amanda Seyfried was the biggest singer of our time, because she is the leading lady of all musical films?

[darquegk]

Posted: 1/17/12 at 3:25pm

Your interpetation of musical theatre, emphasizing the "musical" far more than the "theatrical," sounds more in common with opera than conventional thoughts on theatrical voices, which typically hold that a passable voice with magnificent and medium-appropriate acting skills will trump a perfect voice any day.

Out of curiosity, do you prefer your LES MIS casts to have operatic voices? I notice your professed love of Alfie Boe, who is definitely more a singer than an actor, though he sings beautifully. But I don't personally need (or even particularly want) an operatic Valjean, or an operatic Les Mis at all.

[Dave19]

Posted: 1/17/12 at 5:38pm

That's a good question. Because actually I don't like operatic voices at all. At first I was against Alfie Boe because he sings way too operatic for my taste. I assumed he would sound like many so called tenors who deform their voice. BUT when I watched his performance, I noticed that this is his natural voice, and it is an excellent voice.

In shows, musicals, films or music in general I am looking for the same kind of quality. A singer has to have a certain "true-ness". He/she has to sing from deep within, their true self, their soul, like they mean it. Only then do I believe what they sing. They have to use their own voice and not "put on" a voice, like many singers do.

And 2nd, they need to have the ability to handle their voice so well that it just sweeps you through the emotions, even if it are 3 emotions in 1 note. Singing is an artistry to me, so the notes have to soar, every little detail and the building up and the placements of the notes is heard by the audience and brings out a certain emotion. What is done in the Phantom film and Mama Mia film, I don't even consider that as singing.

To give you a better idea of the kind of quality that I mean, here are some clips that I really like and where the singing is like art:

Lea Salonga:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjfmP7h3gBw


Whitney Houston:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_8SguJTgHA


John Owen Jones:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCPiAKDLjKY


Sandi Patty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHh12LJLJVE


Karen Carpenter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-wdyl_a1Eo






Updated On: 1/17/12 at 05:38 PM

[jo]

Posted: 1/17/12 at 6:46pm

I see that your real passion is all about singing. But musical theatre, by itself, is not just all about singing. It is the advancing of the story via song ( and dance) and acting out the characters. This is the reason why jukebox musicals are not a big hit with me, as they sometimes seem more like concerts. I was not a fan of the theatre version of Mamma Mia, but the movie version was more acceptable to me because it also focused on the character portrayals ( through Meryl Streep, Christine Baranski, Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, etc, even if singing was not always their strong points) amid the glorious background of summertime Greece. I can understand how it became the highest grossing movie musical of all time because it had universal appeal, even if I am still not a great fan.

And if singing is your main concern about the Les Miserables movie musical, then you may miss out on why Hooper took on the challenge of telling the story of Valjean, Javert, and other main characters, in song. It is the portrayal of the fascinating characters and how the storyline is advanced that is going to be the central focus of the movie musical, albeit singing is going to be one of the main mediums. That is why acting will probably trump the singing in fulfilling this promise for me.

Movie musicals are usually a hard sell with general movie-going audiences. In the case of the forthcoming Les Miserables film, it is how the actors are able to interpret the role ( via acting and singing the solos/recitatives or speaking the occasional dialog) that will probably connect with non-musical theatre fans. People will want to connect basically to the story-telling and the impactful character portrayals. The dramatic musical score is the going to be such a bonus!

Check out this link of Hugh Jackman singing THE SURREY WITH THE FRINGE ON TOP ( aka The Courting Song ), from the Oklahoma! revival - it is an excellent example of how an actor portrays a character ( cocky but charming Curly), uses singing to court his love ( add to that the accompanying acting gestures - his coaxing Laurey to lay down her head is so appealing), and advances the story of how he really wants her but is too unsure ( despite the brash character he shows outwardly) of how to tell her...and the same is true of the Laurey character ( who by song and acting gestures shows her on-off romantic feelings towards Curly)...and even Aunt Eller, who understands the relationship and wants it to proceed ( all with acting and singing performances)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAYLCXXCfUY&feature=related

Consider what LIGHT IN THE PIAZZA composer and Richard Rodgers grandson Adam Guettel said in an interview about musical theatre --

> Yet Guettel said that the best piece of musical theater he's ever seen was Trevor Nunn's 1998 London production of Oklahoma!. He praised Hugh Jackman's ability in the role of Curly to transition naturally between dialogue and song, helping the audience to believe a person can legitimately express themselves through music as well as speech.<<<

https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html>https://www.talkinbroadway.com/regional/chicago/ch22.html













Updated On: 1/17/12 at 06:46 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 1/18/12 at 10:59am

Thanks for that clip. Hugh Jackman does do a great job in mixing acting with singing there.

[bwayfan4life]

Posted: 1/18/12 at 1:11pm

I was pleased when I heard that they are going to sing during filming, I think this will really add to the emotion. That was one of the problems with the phantom moive in my opinion.

[Dave19]

Posted: 1/18/12 at 2:10pm

Yes, the Phantom film had no emotion AND no good singing.

At least we will have 1 of those things in the Les Miserables film then (emotion).

And hopefully a little bit of good singing here and there too. Which would add to the emotion.

My concern is, for Amanda Seyfried for example, if she has to sing all those high, difficult notes on set and give it her all to just reach them or to make them sound like singing, will she still be able to act properly while she is trying to do something else with all her might that is not in her nature? Will she be able to put on a lovely sweet face to Marius while she is fighting like crazy for that high c?

I truly believe there will be many studio recordings of the songs afterwards and a lot of post production editing will be done with the singing. I also can't believe that they let the whole ensemble sing "one day more" 100 times for every little shot they need to make, The thenardiers being somewhere else in the city as Valjean and Cosette and Eponine and the Students etc.

Updated On: 1/18/12 at 02:10 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 1/18/12 at 5:16pm

It could be heaven or hell but I don't think your reasons for concern are worth losing sleep over.

The cast has many very fine singers with stage musical and recording experience. The jury may be out on Crowe vocally but certainly not on the other principals. (btw dramatically, I'd be much happier if Crowe and Jackman would switch roles, but that's another kettle of fish.)

Hooper, in addition to The King's Speech, John Adams, Elizabeth I, Longford, and Prime Suspect 6, has directed two extraordinarily gorgeous and epic period literary adaptations for British television, Daniel Deronda and Love In A Cold Climate. If you haven't seen these, I'd suggest doing so. Daniel Deronda is on netflix. It stars Hugh Dancy, Jodhi Mary, Romola Garai, Greta Scacchi, Edward Fox, Amanda Root, Daniel Evans and Barbara Hershey - Eliot herself could not have cast her immortal characters better - it remarkably captures the novel to a t. Rarely have I seen a movie unfold as closely to the movie I pictured in my mind as I was reading the book.

The fact that he has not done a musical before doesn't discourage me. Some of the best directed musical adaptations were made by brilliant filmmakers who had not done musicals before, or at least were not known for them, including Robert Wise (West Side Story, albeit he did that with Jerome Robbins), George Cukor (My Fair Lady), Carol Reed (Oliver), Ken Russell (The Boyfriend), Norman Jewison (Fiddler on the Roof), and William Wyler (Funny Girl).

Compare these to the less that stellar work done by Gene Kelly (Hello Dolly), Hal Prince (A Little Night Music), Josh Logan (South Pacific) and Gene Saks (Mame). Each of them, with extensive experience in the theater. In Prince's and Saks's case, they actually directed the shows on Broadway.

Of course sometimes a brilliant director of stage musicals or plays makes a brilliant movie of a stage musical and a renowned filmmaker botches one. Bob Fosse gave us Cabaret and Peter Brook gave us The Beggars Opera whereas John Huston gave us Annie. Then there's stage vet Rob Marshall with one triumph and one abject failure. It's not an exact science.







Updated On: 1/19/12 at 05:16 PM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/18/12 at 5:22pm

It could be heaven or hell but I don't think your reasons for concern are worth losing sleep over.

That should be the disclaimer in every Les Miz movie thread from now until December!