So the approach they took with this adaptation was essentially to transpose the stage musical directly to screen, which has pros and cons. Foremost among the pros, given that Les Mis has been the musical as far as I'm concerned since seeing what I'm pretty sure was its last main stage production in Melbourne back in 1998 for a school french excursion (I also read the book extracurricularly, brick of a thing, around the same time), is that it then becomes essentially a glossier, and at least potentially more spectacular, version of the musical, with the bonus of movie stars in the main roles.
Three fairly significant cons, though:
1. As a direct transposition, it drags a bit in places on screen, particularly at two and a half hours long, with the shifts from one scene/song to the next more jarring than on stage.
2. More generally, the suspension of disbelief needed to be really carried along by the spectacle and larger than life-ness of the thing is significantly harder with a movie than on stage.
3. The singing is variable, and extremely shaky in some cases, which was actually surprisingly distracting. (On that front, pass mark for Jackman (though a bare pass), not so much Russell Crowe (just doesn't having the singing chops to sell Javert), Anne Hathaway pretty good, likewise Eddie Redmayne as Marius (also the actor who plays Enjolras); Amanda Seyfried not terrible but a bit shrill; Samantha Barks as Eponine possibly the best of the lot, but then I've always had a particular soft spot for that character).
Having said all of that, even an only so-so adaptation taking such a faithful approach, and with watchable leads and secondaries as this has, was bound to be pretty enjoyable, and this was. The big moments come through and it's stirring and emotionally affecting in places, as it's meant to be - so, all up, while not without its problems, pretty good.
(w/ Cass)
Three fairly significant cons, though:
1. As a direct transposition, it drags a bit in places on screen, particularly at two and a half hours long, with the shifts from one scene/song to the next more jarring than on stage.
2. More generally, the suspension of disbelief needed to be really carried along by the spectacle and larger than life-ness of the thing is significantly harder with a movie than on stage.
3. The singing is variable, and extremely shaky in some cases, which was actually surprisingly distracting. (On that front, pass mark for Jackman (though a bare pass), not so much Russell Crowe (just doesn't having the singing chops to sell Javert), Anne Hathaway pretty good, likewise Eddie Redmayne as Marius (also the actor who plays Enjolras); Amanda Seyfried not terrible but a bit shrill; Samantha Barks as Eponine possibly the best of the lot, but then I've always had a particular soft spot for that character).
Having said all of that, even an only so-so adaptation taking such a faithful approach, and with watchable leads and secondaries as this has, was bound to be pretty enjoyable, and this was. The big moments come through and it's stirring and emotionally affecting in places, as it's meant to be - so, all up, while not without its problems, pretty good.
(w/ Cass)
