Ship of Fools: Les Mis

Thread: Les Mis - the movie Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=024635

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

Any others seen this? Any thoughts?

We have just seen it, and thought it was stunning - even compared to the other two films we have seen this year, both of which were brilliant (Life of Pi and The Hobbit) it was a step up. Probably one of the most intense and astounding cinema experiences.

And the message of Christian redemption is very clear and very significant in the film.

Posted by Gracious rebel (# 3523) on :

Seen it twice already! First time was in IMAX which was amazing (the sound quality oin particular - never seen a film in IMAX before)

Les Mis is my all time favourite musical, - I confess I'm a bit of a Les Mis junkie - I even have the CD of the original French production which inspired Cameron Mackintosh to produce the original London show ... so of course I had to see the movie! And I was not disappointed.

For those who know and love the stage show, there are a few differences, most of which are fine, even possibly improvements (and includes one brand new song). I did miss some of my favourite lyrics being cut though.

We have the soundtrack CD already, and will doubtless be getting the DVD when it comes out.

And yes the forgiveness/redemption message came across very strongly.

The cinematography is absolutely breathtaking, and the music is so 'real' as the actors were all recorded singing actually on set, rather than lip-synching to prerecorded songs.

Posted by Horatio Harumph (# 10855) on :

I found it absolutely stunning.

I would love to go and see it again ... (what is an imax cinema?)

I'm not really a film person to be honest, and was a bit apprehensive when I discovered a) how long it was b) it was a musical and so all songs.

I had no idea of the story line ... a friend gave me a little potted history as we went in.

Buts its blown me away.

I've been thinking about it since last night ... pretty much all day.

so many issues it covers :
oppression
justice
mercy
sacrifice
grace
forgiveness
acceptance and I am sure there are many more things that people draw out from it.

Its left me thinking about my own ideas of Grace and what redemption means ...

Posted by Gracious rebel (# 3523) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Horatio Harumph:
I found it absolutely stunning.

I would love to go and see it again ... (what is an imax cinema?)

IMAX

Interesting to hear how much you got out of the film coming to it with no prior knowledge of the book, or the stage musical which it it closely based on...

Posted by tessaB (# 8533) on :

I love the stage show. I have seen it three times and always start crying when the bishop gives Valjean the silver (even sad to say when I listen to the DVD.)
I am a bit worried about seeing the film as I am concerned it will ruin it for me.

Posted by lily pad (# 11456) on :

tessaB, if that is what you are worried about, you will not be disappointed. I don't want to say more and spoil it but it was wonderful.

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :

I got something in my eye a few times.

It's the kind of thing you could easily give a 21st century updating, with Occupy banners on the barricades and Tesco branding on the sausages.

Still, the plot's a mess. Ok - it makes perfect sense, once you realise that all the characters, given a choice about what to do, will do not what is most sensible but whatever will jerk the most tears. But it still ends up saying, never mind the poor and social justice and the revolution, look Marius and Cosette have a happy married middle-class life. Ok, Marius and Cosette are the wettest characters in the story so that's perhaps a bit more ironic than it looks. (He should have stuck with Eponine based on the film.) And it depends on whether you read the final afterlife shot as being purely about heaven or as also about some future earthly justice.

The book is better. Not because the plot makes any more sense, as because the book's massive accumulation of digressions and information dumps and backstory somehow puts all the melodrama in perspective.

Posted by Smudgie (# 2716) on :

Stupid question, but do you think seeing the film would spoil seeing the actual production? I saw it in Southampton and was spellbound and want my son to have the same experience (when I can afford it) in a West End setting. Do I take him to see the film in the meantime, or do I sneak there on my own?

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

I don't know what the effect of seeing the movie before the stage play would be. I saw the musical on stage 2 or 3 times but it was many, many years ago. I loved the movie. Some of the lead actors weren't as strong singers as a those who did it on stage but all the acting and singing was strong enough to keep me in the story. I thought it was really well done, and cried shamelessly throughout the whole second half (basically as soon as "Do You Hear the People Sing?" starts, I lose it).

I've always agreed that Marius and Cosette are the least interesting characters and it's sad that they are the ones left to carry on at the end (and that Marius apparently forgets all about revolution once he recovers from his injuries). But they do sort of deserve each other. Eponine has always been my favourite and I thought the girl who played her in the movie did a fantastic job. The character I'd never really noticed on stage who I thought just stole all his scenes in the movie was Enjolras, the leader of the revolutionaries. If this was a TV series I'd be shipping Eponine and Enjolras so hard.

I only noticed some of the missed-out lyrics when I listened to my old Les Mis CDs after seeing the movie. In the song "Drink With Me" I was particularly sorry they'd left out one of my favourite lines in the whole show: "Here's to pretty girls who went to our heads; here's to witty girls who went to our beds."

In general, though, I thought the movie was a great experience and a very worthy adaptation.

Posted by geroff (# 3882) on :

I really found this movie fairly dreadful.
Why wasn't there at least some information at the beginning that gave us a date, a time in history and even some geography?
The lack of actual spoken dialogue was silly.
Why did they cast actors and not singers?
Am I the only one that thought that Russell Crowe was actually Oliver Reed playing Bill Sykes in Oliver (1968 film musical version)?

As a result of this I am now tackling the book as I thought that returning to that I might just get an inkling of what was going on.

Posted by Amorya (# 2652) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Smudgie:
Stupid question, but do you think seeing the film would spoil seeing the actual production? I saw it in Southampton and was spellbound and want my son to have the same experience (when I can afford it) in a West End setting. Do I take him to see the film in the meantime, or do I sneak there on my own?

I've seen the stage show about six times (including a touring production, a number of shows in the West End, and one school production). I thought the film was possibly my favourite interpretations of the musical. I think that's partly because the sets left less to the imagination and you were closer to the action. (The sets on the West End are brilliant, but they're constrained by the laws of physics about what you can do on a stage.)

Despite that, I think I'd suggest seeing the stage show first. You're right, there is something magical about seeing the story unfold live in front of you.

Amorya

Posted by Amorya (# 2652) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
Marius apparently forgets all about revolution once he recovers from his injuries

To be fair, all the other revolutionaries died. What could he do on his own?

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amorya:

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
Marius apparently forgets all about revolution once he recovers from his injuries
To be fair, all the other revolutionaries died. What could he do on his own?

Inspired a new crop of revolutionaries!! Seriously, though, he seems to go pretty rapidly from "I reject my bourgeois family and I won't spend a cent I haven't earned from honest labour" to moving back home and having Rich Grampa throw a big society wedding for him. It's been so long since I read the book that I can't recall whether that's a fair portrayal of what actually happens to Marius or not. But I've always hated his character for going with Cosette over Eponine so I may be judging him harshly.

As a side note: my son briefly dated a girl named Cosette whose mother was, obviously, a big Les Mis fan. I told my daughter "You should be glad I'm not like Cosette's mom and don't believe in naming my kids after my favourite Les Mis characters, or you'd be named Eponine." She was suitably grateful.

Posted by Gill H (# 68) on :

Smudgie - as to affording it, cheapest tickets are £20 so not much more than the cinema.

Posted by sophs (# 2296) on :

I saw it on the day it came out with three friends and by the end we were all sobbing! I was handing out tissues to random people and everyone was talking about it to each other on the way out. I found it amazing how something I've known since I was a teenager were so powerful on the big screen. Loved it!

I've always found the mark of a good film is that on the way out a group of people who've never met start gossiping about the film, book and stage adaptations! Housemate has been to see it twice and says it's just as powerful the second time. I can't wait to see the stage production now!

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

quote:
Originally posted by geroff:
Why wasn't there at least some information at the beginning that gave us a date, a time in history and even some geography?

There was a note giving the date and the brief political situation at the time. Which was critical to understand the whole context.

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
Seriously, though, he seems to go pretty rapidly from "I reject my bourgeois family and I won't spend a cent I haven't earned from honest labour" to moving back home and having Rich Grampa throw a big society wedding for him. It's been so long since I read the book that I can't recall whether that's a fair portrayal of what actually happens to Marius or not.

In the book, his grandfather is so overjoyed that his grandson has survived that he converts to liberal values. Hugo was a liberal MP at the time of the 1832 Revolution, so he spends several chapters in the book explaining why the 1832 regime was not as bad as the revolutionaries thought it was, so that there were good people on both sides. Hugo's family background was suspiciously similar to Marius'.

On the whole, I agree with you about the film. But it's a musical about a failed revolution. What else is it going to do? It's not Sondheim. It's not as if most of us liberal middle-class people aren't compromised.

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

I kept suggesting to the Queen of Bashan that we go see it.

She finally said that she only wants to go to an early matinee on a weekday. She knows that she will start singing along, and wants an empty theater so that she will not get shushed.

Being married to a former theater kid has its unique challenges.

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by geroff:
The lack of actual spoken dialogue was silly.

And how could there have been an orchestra in the background in all of those scenes? I can understand there being one in the inn, but in a carriage, or a wood, or a sewer? It's just not realistic.

Auden says somewhere that the problem with singing all the way through is that people do not sing when they're feeling sensible, and it is hard to write a good opera plot in which nobody ever does anything sensible. Now there are many problems with the plot of Les Mis, but the characters spend too much time being sensible is not one of them.

Posted by sophs (# 2296) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:

She finally said that she only wants to go to an early matinee on a weekday. She knows that she will start singing along, and wants an empty theater so that she will not get shushed.

We sang along. No-one shushed us, infact i could hear a hum around the theater as people gradually realised that others were singing and sung a little louder during "Do you hear the people sing".

Posted by monkeylizard (# 952) on :

It was entertaining enough. Taken together with the Liam Neeson film version from the 1990's they fill out most of the book. Where this one was rushed the other wasn't, and vice-versa.

Examples: This one spent more time at the inn getting Cosette out where Liam's was rushed. Liam's spent a lot more time with Valjean and Fantine when he cares for her before her death. In this one, it's all of about 3 minutes from taking her to the hospital to running away from Javert.

Again, taken together the two films do a good job. Liam's at telling the story, the new one with getting the emotion.

Posted by The Weeder (# 11321) on :

I am still wondering about seeing it. i saw a wonderful amatuer production some years ago, with some friends in it, and am not sure I want to see the film,

Posted by Sir Kevin (# 3492) on :

I worked on the touring Broadway show as a stage technician when it was here a few years ago; we really enjoyed it last week in the local cinema at the top of our street.

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :

I'm pissed off with the way that with me being housebound I have to wait an indeterminate length of time to see the thing on Bluray if I want to play legally.

WHY COULDN'T UNIVERSAL RELEASE THIS TO BLINKBOX TO STREAM AT THE SAME TIME? I'd GLADLY pay up to a tenner...

It's already being torrented...

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

quote:
Originally posted by geroff:
Why wasn't there at least some information at the beginning that gave us a date, a time in history and even some geography?
There was a note giving the date and the brief political situation at the time. Which was critical to understand the whole context.

Indeed, the date/the passage of time is brought up multiple times in the earlier part of the film.

As for geography? That too, was referred to.

Having got that off my chest... thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It's over 24 years since I saw the show and I still got the same kind of teary, moved reaction to it.

Anne Hathaway is absolutely amazing and stole the show for me. Hugh Jackman is also very good. Russell Crowe is nothing special but then the part he's playing is not supposed to be terribly emotionally intelligent anyway.

Posted by geroff (# 3882) on :

Sorry - perhaps there was more information - frankly by the time I got to the end I had forgotten.
I also didn't realise I was posting on a fan thread. As you probably gathered I don't usually do musicals.
I am looking forward to reading the book now.

Posted by Gill H (# 68) on :

A tip if you do. The book is full of digressions and discussions - sometimes whole chapters.

If you find these hard going, scan your eye down the page, and if a character's name doesn't appear, skip it.

Posted by bib (# 13074) on :

I'd seen the stage production 4 times as it is my favourite musical, so I was interested to see it again on film. All in all it was an enjoyable production although I preferred the stage show, mainly because the audience seemed to be participants rather than passive viewers. This was particularly noticeable at the end when it felt as though we should all applaud and stamp our feet as we did with stage productions, but sadly the movie theatre was quiet and all you heard was the sound of people's feet as they left.
The cast was acceptable with a few vocal weaknesses, but I was very disappointed with the actors playing the Thenardiers. On stage they are portrayed as larger than life, but the film actors were weak and didn't seem to get into the parts they were playing.
I too felt the urge to hum along but controlled myself so that nobody could hear me. Unfortunately four teenagers in front of me whispered constantly and messed around with their mobile phones so that lights kept shining -very annoying and the ushers did nothing about it.

Posted by Gracious rebel (# 3523) on :

Both times I've seen the movie there was indeed some applause at the end - only time I've ever heard this at a cinema IIRC. It wasn't a massive applause though, just a small trickle that soon fizzled out in an embarrassing fashion.

Posted by Lucrezia Spagliatoni Dayglo (# 16907) on :

Oh dear, do people really sing along? : [Mad]

I too saw the original, bought the cds (including the original French version - the best IMHO)and read the book.

I think I'll just wait until the dvd arrives.

Posted by Otter (# 12020) on :

The Otter Pup and I were good and did not sing along. It was kinda hard at times, though. The Pup and I also exchanged "WTF?" looks several times over modified lyrics and the added song - we have the original French concept album CD, and the 2-disc and 3-disc English-language CD sets.

Unlike bib, we all (me, Mr. Otter, and The 19-year-old male Otter Pup)liked the Thenardiers.

The Otter Pup has long maintained that Marius and Cosette should be the ones who end up dead at the barricades. After the movie the Pup and I decided that it should have ended with Eponine and Grontair (which I've probably mis-spelled, the drunken student) moving off to the country with ValJean and Gavroche, and living happily ever after.

I also enjoyed Russell Crowe as Javert, he ended up more sympathetic than I expected he might. We did miss Gavroche's "That inspector thinks he's something, but it's me who runs this town" bit after Javert's soliliquizing solo (on the cathedral tower).

Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gill H:
A tip if you do. The book is full of digressions and discussions - sometimes whole chapters.

That's a gross understatement. There's about fifty pages telling the story of the Battle of Waterloo, merely to give context to a plot point that could have been disposed of in half a paragraph.

Reading Les Miserables omitting the digressions is a bit like reading Jane Austen without the witty asides or Don Quixote without the charging at windmills.

Posted by flags_fiend (# 12211) on :

I had looked forward to seeing this in the cinema since it was announced! I wasn't disappointed. Most of my favourite lines from the muscial were still there, although in some places I was slightly confused as to why they had changed the order of some of the lyrics. I'm probably biased though, I have read the book (in English), seen the touring production, an amateur production and listened to the CD's so many times that I basically know the words off by heart. Yet everytime I listen to the music I notice something else from it. However, my favourite realisation was when I noticed the soliquoys by Valjean and Javert are very similar (same music, similar lyrics) but manage to reach opposite conclusions.

Posted by birdie (# 2173) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:

The character I'd never really noticed on stage who I thought just stole all his scenes in the movie was Enjolras, the leader of the revolutionaries.

I've just got home from seeing the film and generally was a bit disappointed, but I agree with the above entirely - he absolutely stole all his scenes, he was wonderful.

As was Helena Bonham Carter, but I confess I like her in pretty much anything.

I'm still pondering what I think about it, but it certainly didn't (for me) live up to all I've heard said about it. I watched it with my sister, who felt similarly, and recommended the film with Liam Neeson, mentioned above, which I haven't seen but will seek out.

Posted by Gussie (# 12271) on :

I enjoyed the film for the way it looked, the overall story and some of the acting. The music left me rather underwhelmed. We saw a sub-titled performance and I must admit to spending a lot of time trying to second-guess what the next couplet was going to be.
I agree with various other people that Eponine was great, she was the stand out in it for me.
It has made me start reading the book, which I've never done before. I'm really enjoying it in all it's ramblingness.

Posted by doubtingthomas (# 14498) on :

I enjoyed the film a lot. I know the musical quite well, and (via a French television adaptation) some more of the plot of the book.
I think the film did add some coherence to the very abbreviated plot of the musical, both by added and rearranged scenes (even if that meant shortening others), and through some visual clues.

I have now been moved to brave the book (which, in a modern translation, is actually quite readable).

I also knew in advance what the film attempts to do with the music and the acting, so did not expect perfect theatrical music quality. That said, the different kind of singing experience of Hugh Jackman (West End musical) and Russell Crowe (rock band) have did rather show.

I find the effective hybrid between film and stage show very interesting and have already had a fierce debate on whether or not the hybrid works, and why (not).

[ 06. February 2013, 22:26: Message edited by: doubtingthomas ]

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I went to see the film yesterday, having finished reading the book last month. I've never seen the musical.

I found the film atmospheric, especially the battle scenes. The cast gave it their all, and brought plenty of feeling to their parts. Having said that, though, I had the usual problem - after reading the book I found the film to be strangely truncated. New characters were introduced without any subtlety, and too many relationships were established as important without any kind of backstory as to why. All that was too brusque for my taste.

Yet it's a good film, and highly worth seeing. I have to be grateful beacause it encouraged me to read the novel, which I've wanted to do for years. It brought the story to life for someone who may never get to see the musical.

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

I'm giving the novel another go as well, having read it back when I first saw the stage musical (which must be 25 years ago now?). I'm pretty sure what I read then was the abridged version and even at that I found it incredibly slow, boring and discursive. I'm enjoying it (uncut) much more this time around.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0