Tom Hooper directing 'Les Miserables' film- Page 4

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 5:18pm

"It was a near perfect adaptation"

Have you SEEN the stage show?

[JP2]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 5:32pm

I've seen the stage show, and I think Burton's version is fantastic.

My ONLY complaint is that it's hard to watch at home. The film is so dark, and every line is whispered, if you're not watching it on a 40 ft high movie screen, it's hard to take it.

[lotiloti]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 7:34pm

Sondheim , loved the movie.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 7:48pm

I don't usually trust Sondheim as good as terribly good judgement of his own work.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 8:06pm

I didn't like the Sweeney Todd movie, either. One of my main problems was that the two leads just could not sing. They both had such untrained voices, which was a problem with many other cast members, too. But my biggest problem with the movie is that it's just so gross, and not scary. As the movie progressed, the excessive amounts of blood shown was so gross that I just forgot about any intensity the scene had. In Sweeney Todd, the phrase "less is more" certainly applies, as proved by John Doyle's thrilling production that managed to be absolutely terrifying without letting a single drop of fake blood come from someone's throat.

Now, on the subject of the Les Miz movie, I think I would prefer a filmed stage production. We have two concert productions, but no record of a completely staged production. In a hundred years (or whenever Les Miz actually closes), I would rather have a record of the original production of Les Miz to see what it was really like than a couple concert versions and a movie.

[Idiot]

Posted: 4/17/11 at 8:11pm

Talkin' loud, we disagree completely on the level of humor in the filmed SWEENEY. The original stage production was miss-a-whole-verse-because-I'm-laughing-too-hard funny. That's why it was so great -- it mixed Grand Guignol and comedy perfectly and in a way that people didn't expect to work, but did.

There are comedic lines in the lyrics that Burton removed -- from BY THE SEA if I'm recalling correctly. 'Now and then you can do the guest in' or 'bring along your chopper' -- comedy, removed. To say that he didn't 'remove the humor' is provably not the case.

[lotiloti]

Posted: 4/18/11 at 6:12am

Unlike many on this board,Sondheim recognises that film is a different medium.

[best12bars]

Posted: 4/18/11 at 7:44am

Really? I always wondered why I've never seen an understudy go on in a movie. Thanks for pointing that out. What a stupid, condescending jab, lotiloti.

There are also good film adaptations and bad film adaptations of stage shows. Sweeney Todd has many good things going for it, but it also completely misses the mark on several critical levels. And Burton's philosophy of "no choral singing" in film musicals is asinine and sucks a lot of the life out of the material. That, and "make sure you never talk above a whisper," which he told his wife to do as Mrs. Lovett, are two big "ooopses," right off the top.

As far as Sondheim judging his own material or having any perspective about it, he doesn't. Most writers and artists don't. He thinks "Someone in a Tree" is the best song he's ever written, and "I Feel Pretty" is embarrassing. I can think of dozens of his songs that are better than "Someone in a Tree," and "I Feel Pretty" is a classic song in American musical theatre canon. I once saw Edward Albee direct his own play "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wool?" starring Glenda Jackson, John Lithgow, and Cynthia Nixon. It was terrible and such a disappointment! He has always claimed that his play is really a light comedy and should be played mostly for laughs over drama, and that's exactly how he guided this production. It resonated about as much as a very special episode of "Three's Company." Completely defanged his own work. No perspective on it at all. And I'm glad Alan Schneider and Mike Nichols handled the directing jobs it the first time around, or we might think very differently today about that "classic" American play and movie, if we would even remember them at all.

[jo]

Posted: 4/29/11 at 8:17pm

Back to the Les Mis movie musical project --

It seems that there is some serious interest from Hugh Jackman re the movie musical version. In this interview with the San Francisco Chronicle ( basically about his upcoming Curran Theatre limited engagement one-man show), he has expressed that he would like to throw his hat in the ring for the casting of the movie version of Les Mis --

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/29/PKQJ1J3LH8.DTL


Hope it happens! It is unlikely that the movie version will simply be a filmed version of the sung-through stage musical but will likely offer a fresh cinematic and more dramatic vision. Probably more book scenes and less of the recitatives! Hugh does have the physicality, the singing ability, and the acting chops for the either the Valjean or the Javert role.

[JP2]

Posted: 4/29/11 at 8:47pm

They'd be stupid not to get him.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 4/30/11 at 4:51am

"What a stupid, condescending jab, lotiloti."

That wasn't a stupid jab at all. A great many people here don't seem to see the difference in the two mediums. It doesn't take much to see that.
Many people here seem to think that their obscure theatre world casting choices would make for great blockbuster material. Many people here think every song and scene in a show should transfer to the screen just fine. Many people here simply don't get the difference between the two mediums, how writing a screenplay works, how filming works, nor can they keep in mind that films are generally made to appeal to a broader audience and not just the theatre folk here. What he said seems to be more of a fact than a jab.
The true unfortunate part is that not every director really seems to understand the difference in the medium either. Joel Schumacher and Susan Stroman especially come to mind there.

[Tateh]

Posted: 4/30/11 at 8:10am

Please put Emmy Rossum away from Cosette or ANY role in this
Thanks

[vf]

Posted: 5/2/11 at 8:48pm

The writer of that San Francisco Chronicle article on Hugh Jackman added more info on his blog that didn't make it into the article:
"Years ago, in Australia, Jackman turned down the role of bad-guy Javert in stage prdouction of Les Miserables there. Now that Jackman has expressed interest in doing the movie of Les Miz, he says, 'I’d be more interested in being Jean Valjean.' The hero, of course."

Too bad he didn't ask him about the Houdini musical.

Is Hugh Jackman a tenor or a baritone?

Blog adds to San Francisco Chronicle's Hugh Jackman interview Updated On: 5/2/11 at 08:48 PM

[JP2]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 6:56pm

Looks like Tom Hooper is officially on board, and we have a star...

http://www.showblitz.com/2011/06/hugh-jackman-is-feeling-miserables.html
Updated On: 6/15/11 at 06:56 PM

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 6:59pm

I think he'd be a brilliant Valjean - they could go for a great style and look with the design and the costumes.

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:02pm

I think that website may not be reliable. The "Man from Oz"?

[JP2]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:02pm

I could definitely see him in either role.


"I think that website may not be reliable. The "Man from Oz"?"

It's Variety. As reliable as it comes. Updated On: 6/15/11 at 07:02 PM

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:07pm

Well, it's not exactly reporting anything surprising, so it might be safe to say it's based in fact.

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:19pm

*facepalm*
I feel like an idiot for not seeing that it was a report from Variety.

[Fan2]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:32pm

Hugh gave an interview recently where he said he was putting his name out there for the movie, and he said he would like to play the hero. So if he indeed gets a role, I expect it will be JVJ.

[JP2]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:34pm

Yep, THR is now saying is Valjean. Perfect casting.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hugh-jackman-talks-star-les-202114

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:34pm

I could see him better as Javer, but honestly, I was hoping he wouldn't be in it.

He sings like a bleating Willy Nelson. Not appropriate for either part, even if he looks right and is a good actor.

As far as the keys, forget it. They will change the keys for the actor. So he doesn't need to be a high tenor for Valjean.

[JP2]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 7:40pm

Even if Jackman was a high tenor, do you really think they'd have him sing that way in a mainstream movie? You want to appeal to audiences, not disconnect with them.

[mamaleh]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 8:47pm

Hugh J's voice is at its best when invested in a dramatic, classic musical theater role. So I think either Valjean or Javert would be a great fit for him. (When starting out, his audition song was "Stars.") I really do hope this happens.

[kec]

Posted: 6/15/11 at 8:53pm

Tom Hooper was in London recently and attended a performance of the musical in the West End. Alfie Boe, who has been in rehearsals to take over the role of Valjean as of June 23, was put into the performance that night.

I would really rather see Alfie play Valjean and Hugh play Javert.