ONE DAY MORE - complete song from film- Page 3

[hanabana]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 12:28am

Overall, I like it. I do have to admit though, that I've heard better when performed in a theater-setting. However, being that most of these stars are not really professional singers, I think this is pretty good. And I like how they put the scenes all together, it works better than I thought it would.

I was pleasantly surprised by Edward Redmayne - he can really sing! Aaron Tveit and Samantha Barks sound great in my opinion! The three of them will be great in the movie and I can't wait to see their performances. Russel Crowe is not bad, I was really worried because of what I have been hearing, but I don't think he's bad at all. I have definitely seen worse (Gerard Butler as Phantom - I love him as an actor, but his singing in there was lacking for me, and Pierce Brosnan in Mamma Mia, I don't know what to say about that...). Amanda Seyfried is okay, and since she does not really have any solos in the movie, I don't think I mind. Hugh Jackman on the other hand, I am a bit worried about. I saw a clip of Who Am I, and then this, and I can't say that he impressed me... Not that I have any serious problems with him, but his voice just doesn't seem powerful enough to carry this role. I really hope he'll change my mind once I watch the movie in full length.

I think this movie is going to be great nevertheless. I can't wait to watch it.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 12:35am

Having seen a screening of Les Miz, I can verify that some of your multiple concerns are well-founded regarding the sound mix with the orchestra. Though the voices often ring wonderfully well on the soundtrack, there IS a certain distance to the orchestration, as if the instruments are playing the score from a room or two away from the singers (and from the audience). That separation unfortunately hounds the movie all the way through.

That said, I will concede that "One Day More" IS one of the weaker musical sequences in the movie, sadly, but that other sequences work far better. Take heart, Les Miz fans, my view is that Tom Hooper gets far, far more of the film right than he gets wrong. It's just a shame that "One Day More" happens to be the scene they've released early.
Updated On: 12/19/12 at 12:35 AM

[Wishing Only Wounds]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 12:38am

Very underwhelming; especially Hugh's "One Day More(s)" at the end. I also expected a lot more from Aaron.

I actually didn't mind Amanda. LOVED Samantha.

[lull89]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 12:44am

I do think that this "One Day More" is trying to do something slightly different from the stage version, which might be the reason for the lack of energy many people are feeling. In the stage version, it has to literally stop the show for intermission, whereas in the movie, to create a huge crescendo of emotion and power and then keep right on with the story might feel too jarring or throw the pacing off.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 12:55am

I saw the movie tonight and this number was kind of underwhelming, but like lull89 just said, it does serve a different purpose in the film, since one of its aims isn't to send you cheering into the lobby at intermission.

I can see how the constant cutting is kind of jarring/annoying to some, but I think maybe someone that problem is just built into the song. Unlike the Tonight Quintet, which doesn't have everyone singing over everyone else until the end, this entire song is people singing over each other. Maybe a different director could have solved the problem more effectively, but like Someone in a Tree2 said, I think Tom Hooper gets it right more often than he gets it wrong. I do think there could have a few less cuts to Valjean's single "one day more"s, though.

Like I said in the reviews thread, this movie is not going to be everyone's cup of tea and I think a lot that will have to with expectations and pre-conceived notions. Fortunately, I got what I wanted out of it and really really enjoyed it.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 1:27am

If they had kept the scene on Valjean the whole time, he would have just been saying "One Day More" over and over again in the carriage. If I were Cosette, I would have looked at him and asked, "Have you lost your marbles, Papa?"

[Brave Sir Robin2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 3:16am

Its placement reminds me a lot of the WSS Quintet going in to the Rumble - this goes in to Do You Hear The People Sing and the start of the battle. I think Samantha Barks could have belted her lyrics in the counterpoint - live singing or not. It needs to be powerful. I really don't mind Russel or Amanda, but HBC is not cutting it for me.

[WicaS]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 3:55am

I thnik that the worst thing about this clip is the editing, but after watching it several times, I didn't bother anymore. IMHO, Samantha Barks will be the hightlight of the movie, besides Anne, of course. Russel Crowe's much better than I expected... And thank God thaht HBC is not whispering again. I'm glad to hear singing coming from her mouth. As for Amanda... I think she could do a lot worse, but at the same time, she could be so much better. Eddie outsings her bigtime (which is good, because I adore his voice :P).
Anyway, I think this movie's gonna rock... !!! Then again, this is just my humble opinion.



Updated On: 12/19/12 at 03:55 AM

[broadwayfever]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 3:55am

Hugh's singing and acting during this song just didn't do anything for me....I even cringed in the beginning.

Samantha Barks and Aaron Tveit were the only ones I truly liked.

[WicaS]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 3:55am

Double post.

Updated On: 12/19/12 at 03:55 AM

[Dave19]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 9:05am

I see a lot of people only liking Samantha and Aaron in this clip because their performances feel real/in the moment.

And a lot of people finding Hugh Jackman's performance to be "amateurish".

Now, the filmmakers really need to understand WHY this is.
Why does Hugh's performance come across as amateurish?

I think it is because his acting and singing are disconnected. He is a wonderful actor and tries really hard but this is something that has to come naturally. If it doesn't, it makes the audience cringe. Many things are wrong with his performance and make it feel very forced. In every sentence there are strangely placed words/intonations, it seems like a trick, a technique, holding a note for just too long with a fake vibrato keeps kicking me out of the story all the time. It does not feel real/natural.

I think there are only 3 people in this film that have the ability to make this material believable/natural and connect the acting with the singing in a believable way. Anne, Aaron and Samantha.

As a filmmaker you want to take the audience on a journey, you want them to believe every word. When are they going to learn that being a wonderful actor is not good enough to be convincing in a musical movie? It is all about the singing, and every little wrong intonated word or note can ruin it. Because the audience sees and hears every little word.

I would also like to add that I find Hughs performance way too theatrical. Like he is singing on a stage and tries to reach the backrow by giving the last word of each sentence an extra forced (not natural) vibrato. I have seen many stage Valjeans giving a much more "film-like" performance, more subtle and real.









Updated On: 12/19/12 at 09:05 AM

[broadwaybabywannabe2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 9:36am

CHILLS...and tears to see it come alive...wow!

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 10:16am

On stage the number was entirely stylized, building to the familiar crescendo and tableau with the lockstep choreographic precision. What I sense here is a strong desire to remove what was always the operetta component, to stress instead the storytelling. Yet as someone above wisely posted, the number basically re-states the positions of the characters without really moving them forward, Javert excepted (never thought of that until I just read it here). For all its theatrical power and uplift, the song contains little or no new information. To make that work on film, it needs to activate the players in specific contexts. I get it.

[someone.else's.story2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 1:50pm

Aaron Tviet and Samanta Barks really stood out to me in this song. I agree that you can't match the intensity of the stage version but It seems to me that they are playing things more naturalistically (since they can do close ups and subtlety will read where it won't on stage past the first few rows).

I'm still feeling pretty underwhelmed bt Russell Crowe but otherwise, this looks promising!

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 1:53pm

Dave19, you still haven't seen the movie, right?

[OperaBwayLover]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 2:05pm

Well, that was underwhelming. I get the feeling that when my boyfriend and I go see the movie, I'm going to have to show him a clip from either the Tony Awards or Hey Mr. Producer! to show how powerful the song can be.

And I did like the bits with the students preparing/Eponine disguising herself/the Thenardiers 'joining' in.

Still, one clip does not a bad movie make. Hopefully the rest is much better.

[finebydesign]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 2:28pm

Does this film bury Samantha's Eponine? I'm kinda surprised there isn't a Golden Globes nod, her character has a great arc.. I guess no-one is allowed to outshine Lady Hathaway. She looks and sounds incredible.

[someone.else's.story2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 3:22pm

Totally agree. I would guess its politics, as she is not a name performer in the way the many others are in this film. It's too bad, as it looks (from the clips I've seen) like she is amazing in this.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 4:05pm

Hathaway may be getting the best reviews because she's the only one lucky enough not to be in this number.

[Owen22]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 4:22pm

This is weird, when the screenings happened mostly all the postings on here were pretty positive...then the reviews came out and seemingly everyone has changed their minds.

No I'm sure the boards horrible, negative posters like Henrik and Kad would have hated it either way, but I'm seeing people who would seem to have more sense to judge a centerpiece musical number from a clip, without experiencing what came before, no matter how many times you've seen the stage show upon which the film was based.

I'm waiting to see the whole film before I call judgement on that number, I'm staying far away from the clip. I'll judge the whole film, the actors and their singling styles cumulatively and emotionally.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 4:53pm

This would not be the first time word of mouth from advance screenings has been extremely positive but word of mouth later on is not. Why? Perhaps because people are so excited to see something early on that they can't help talking it up? Perhaps those who see something early on and don't love it are less likely to speak their minds?

Thanks for calling me horrible and negative. Here's a question:

Why is it perfectly acceptable for someone to watch just a clip and find it extremely exciting and well done and then volunteer that opinion? But it is "horrible and negative" for someone to watch a clip and find it inept and then volunteer that opinion?

There is nothing wrong with anyone watching a clip, having a response to it - positive, negative or anything in between - and registering their beliefs. If there were something objectionable, there would be no reason for having people weigh in on a thread about a clip.

Or do you simply prefer a thread where a clip is shown, only people who love or like it weigh in, and those who have a different point of view keep their mouths shut?

Updated On: 12/19/12 at 04:53 PM

[Owen22]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 5:41pm

No, its just the consistent negativity of you and your ilk that I've noticed.

Let's face it, when we are young we love everything. Innocence. But by the time we're in, say, our late teens we realize to say something is "bad" makes us seem smarter. Now, I don't know why liking something makes us look a little less intelligent, and being negative makes us look more so, but that's the way it seems to be. Now, as we get older, we of course learn to moderate our tastes, but that little cue in our brains, that thing that makes us feel smarter, thus feel better, makes it so easy for us to go there and say something is "bad" when it just might not be to our tastes (I freely admit I fall into this category a little too often). And there are those who still need to feel superior and just stay in the negative to appear smarter-than-thou.

Now, if you've ever seen a real unpretentious intellectual confront something bad, they rarely say anything. Its almost funny. There's usually a look of confusion, but they have no need to talk negatively. They're usually silent. Or they are polite.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 6:07pm

You accuse me of being consistently negative. I'm curious. What are you basing that on? I'd be very surprised if I have that reputation either on bww or in life, but for some reason you seem to peg me as some kind of curmudgeon.

Next you accuse me and my ilk - I wasn't aware I had an ilk - of electing to find fault with something - in this case a rather lengthy clip from Les Mis showing most if not all of "One Day More" - in order to parade a presumption of my intellect.

Why do you think that? Merely because I might disagree with you about the clip? Isn't it at least possible that I genuinely find the number to be badly done and am expressing that opinion?

I have not questioned the genuineness of anyone who, unlike me, enjoys this clip. Why should you question my genuineness because I didn't enjoy it?

Finally you exalt those who, when confronted with something they find badly done, keep their mouths shut. As if the adage "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" applies.

I don't agree with you that those who can't say something nice should be obliged to say nothing at all. Or that the reticence of those who prefer to not speak negatively about something somehow speaks better for them by evincing a lack of pretension and genuine intellect.

Next you accuse me of not being polite.

If I have been impolite, I'd be the first to apologize. But I am not aware that I have been.

Ironically, you're the one who resorted to impoliteness by referring to me and Kad as "horrible."





Updated On: 12/19/12 at 06:07 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 6:07pm

No Owen22, some people say things because they mean it.

There is nothing wrong with negative opinions if that is what they are. It's only a good thing that they care about the material and go into detail in this case.

Just because you don't like an opinion because in your book everything has to be great and positive, does not mean it's negative. Ignoring the negative aspects/other sides is naive and negative in my book.

Your whole theory about "looking smarter" is beyond me.
That is the last thing that matters.

People who don't like certain aspects of the clip can explain very well why that is and what could have been better.





Updated On: 12/20/12 at 06:07 PM

[JP2]

Posted: 12/19/12 at 6:58pm

Just watched this. It sounds weird because it's literally just the singing and the music over the footage. It sounds much different in the film with the actual background noises in place.

But after seeing this last night, ODM was in fact a rousing number and a highlight of this film. It's just not translating on this tiny internet video with edited sound.

Updated On: 12/19/12 at 06:58 PM