roushutsu said:
This was the first time I've seen anything Les Miserables, and overall I did enjoy the movie. Absolutely LOVED the songs, saw some really good performances, and I really liked Jean Valjean as a hero.
That being said, there was something that did bug me about the movie and I'm not sure if it's the same in the theatrical production or not (someone tell me if it is). The first half of the movie with Valjean I thought was great. It painted how fucked up France was during the time period, and watching Valjean, Fantine, and Cossette's plights was a great way to illustrate it.
But when we moved to the second half with the revolution itself, it felt really rushed. If everything we've seen before is supposed to lead up to these climactic battles, then why breeze through it all? It's like, "Oh, here is everyone now, GO FIGHT!" How can I sympathize with Valjean's struggle as a concerned father figure when I barely know how Cossette is like as an adult other than the fact that she's in love with Marius? Hell, why should I care about Marius at all? I see that Eponine is a beloved character and all, but I just couldn't get into her struggle since I really didn't give two shits about the guy she's in love with.
I kinda can't help but feel as if this should have been 2 movies, this way we could get more details and more attached to the characters before and during the revolution. But if that's how the stage version was then I guess we can't really do that. Or maybe I need to read the book.
It was my first experience with the musical (although I've read the book many times and seen many different movie adaptations) and like you I really liked the songs, and like you I found it really rushed, but since I have read the book and know the story, I can tell you the whole thing is rushed, not just the second half.
The thing is, it's a 2,000 page book we're talking about. You can't usually buy it as a single volume unless you're getting the ebook, it was originally published as 3 books, and it's divided into five parts in the text itself (so some publishers publish it as five books).
As I understand, the musical is longer than the movie. So the musical already shortened a huge story (I never even understood how people can make a movie out of it. It would work best as a series. Hopefully a HBO one) and then the movie shortened it even more.
So yeah, my one problem was that I felt you weren't given enough time to care about the characters or understand them.
However, I enjoyed the movie a lot. Sure, I was a bit surprised about the cast (physically, Jackman and Crowe look like each other's character should look. However due to their acting, they're better as their own character I feel. Valjean is supposed to have a lot of range in all the different identities he takes over the story, while Javert is always described as stiff and stoic and unchanging).
I watched the movie on its own merits, trying not to compare it to the book because it's one of my favourite books and I know anything that fits in a movie would pale in comparison with the complexity and depth of the original work. And of course I can't compare it to the musical since I'm unfamiliar with it. But seen as what it was, a musical version of the story, I enjoyed it. I think it had many very moving scenes, and I thought most of the actors did a great job.
I actually was pleasantly surprised with Russel Crowe, I expected him to completely botch the part (Javert being my favourite character, it made me cringe to see him cast as him), and went into the movie with these expectations, and in the end he definitely wasn't as bad as I expected him to.
He wasn't amazing either, but I found him ok.
In the end, I just left the theatre thinking "Les Misérables is basically the 19th Century's Song of Fire and Ice. Is HBO gonna pick it up already?" I think they'd do a fine job, and this way the characters and events that were skipped can be put back into the story.
And while I found the Thénardiers funny in the movie, I really didn't like that they were turned into comic relief. They're the creepiest parts of the books, and they're much less scary when you can't take them seriously. I understand why the person who made the musical made the decision to add some comedy to the story, but I don't think it's necessary, especially since compared to other musicals have seen (Notre-Dame de Paris comes to mind, or Roméo and Juliet), Les Misérables has a lot of happy stuff in it.