It is no secret that I love the story of Les Miserables. It is one of my favorite novels and my favorite musical, so I suppose it isn't too surprising that now it is being added to one of my favorite movies.
In spite of some of my earliest fears, I was very pleased with the casting choices. Hugh Jackman is a favorite actor and I have really appreciated Anne Hathaway's roles recently. Finding the right Eponine was very important to me and I am glad they went with one I was familiar with. And Amanda Seyfried's Cosette was sympathetic (as opposed to some versions, where she is annoying). The Thenadier's were the right balance of self-importance and humor - enough humanity to make them tolerable, but enough arrogance to make they despicable, if that makes any sense.
One of the problems with the musical is that if not done just right, the second half looses momentum or the first half feels just like a long prologue. This version, however, I felt got it exactly right. The history built up the second half but didn't overshadow it. In fact Javert's response to the "miserables" held the story together. At the same time, the audience was able to get to know new characters without feeling overwhelmed or getting lost.
Perhaps my favorite bits were little references to the book that you just can't get from a stage performance. One was Valjean's jump in to the water after the hospital scene references the way he was caught and taken back to hard labor, was presumed drowned, but had really escaped to go get Cosette. Another was the elephant that Gavroche lived in with the street boys. Also, after Eponine dies, the camera rests briefly on Gavroche, who we know to be her brother from the novel. The death of Grantaire and Enjolras also referenced that horrible, yet touching scene in the book. Little things like that, and there were many, and I am sure I didn't catch them all because the book is not fresh in my mind, added depth to the story.
In fact, the camaraderie of the students let me like them better than I have before. I mean, I liked Marius and Enjolras before, but I liked that all of them were noble and passionate characters, and completely human at the same time. In fact from the "Red and Black" scene on, I knew that the barricade would break my heart. They were good friends, they laughed together and at each other, but they also worked together and would (and did) die for each other. It made Marius's "Empty Chairs and Empty Tables" all the more heartbreaking. I half thought during that song, there would be flashbacks showing them all-together again instead of their ghosts appearing like they do in the stage version. But because you saw that camaraderie before, their absence was felt without being shown.
In spite of how much I loved it, I did find a few things distracting and a few things that I didn't really like. Many people have written about Russel Crowe's voice. The only place I wanted it to be bigger was when he sang "Stars" because in that song, he isn't appealing to himself, but a higher law, and I wanted his voice to reflect the grandeur he saw in that law. But I suppose it isn't quite fair to compare him with Philip Quast who sings it on my recording. While on the subject of voices, there were a few songs where I thought they were just a little out of Hugh Jackman's comfortable range. He could sing them and hit all the notes, but I felt a that in a few places he wanted to be quieter, but couldn't because it was just too high. That made me wonder if he is more of a baritone/bass than a tenor/baritone. I don't know, I just wonder. I also didn't like his song "Suddenly" - the one about getting Cosette and that changing everything, and the reference later when he said that she taught him to love, because I felt that was contrary to all the story until that point. He learned to love after the priest showed him God's love and forgiveness. Taking Cosette was just one outworking of that love.
I think my biggest complaint was the use of close-ups. I know that it was intentional because the director wanted the audience to see everything going on underneath the surface of the face, but I felt that it was over-used. I wanted to see not only what the character was thinking and feeling, but also the space he was interacting with. The way Thomas said it was, "If you have that much screen, why only use close-ups?" Grandeur and intimacy, freedom and condemnation, hopelessness and joy can be shown by focusing on the face, but also by putting the face as part of a bigger picture. I wouldn't say don't use any close-ups; I just felt they were a bit over-used.
My final complaint was Heaven being depicted as the barricade. The words, "We will live again in freedom in the garden of the Lord, we will walk behind the plowshare, we will put away the sword..." being linked with the large red flags and the barricade seemed to be rather ironic to me, as if even although they are all together, they still have a battle to fight. I thought that it would be beautiful imagery if they all started pulling apart the barricade: fixing the things broken, using them for their intended purposes, making the tables back into a place to share food together, the beds back into places of rest, and the piano back into something that could bring joy to everyone. But I suppose that could be difficult to show and really convey the meaning.
In spite of these complaints, which I know are matters of preference and personal opinions, I loved the movie. My favorite part was Colm Wilkenson playing the part of the priest, then singing at the end, "And remember, the truth that once was spoken, to love another person is to see the face of God." I love his voice and his acting, but I also love the fact that Colm Wikenson has passed on the torch of Jean Valjean to Hugh Jackman (who many people will very likely see as "the" Jean Valjean) just like the priest passed on the Love of God he received and started the story of giving Love to others.
No comments:
Post a Comment