Rating: 
Summary: Not Les Miserables, but a good movie
Review: 1. Valjean does not looked as aged as he would or as dirty as he would if he just spent 20 years at a horrible prison that treated him like lower than dirt.2. Valjean punches the bishop out when he is stealing the silver. Valjean would NEVER punch out the bishop- but I guess they had to make it more interesting. The bishop didn't even wake up in the book when he was stealing the silver. 3. They completely left out the part when Fantine sold her teeth. This is very minor, but it would have given the movie more oomf and would wrench at your heart like it does in the book. 4. Javert did not beat on Fantine in the book- he simply arrested her! Why all of the violence?! 5. Valjean had no love interest in Fantine in the book. They make Valjean and Fantine fall in love. This is turning into a romance movie! 6. In the book, Javert did not kill Fantine by insulting her and saying that she will never see Cosette again. This was just something cruel that they added to the story. I guess it was so that you would hate Javert more. 7. Although you may have seen this in the musical, Valjean did not punch out Javert in the book. Again, more violence not needed. 8. The Thenardiers weren't as evil as they were in the book. Eponine and the other daughters were not mentioned. Gavroche was not mentioned. 9. Why did Enjolras suddenly become Marius? They do not even develop his character. Enjolras is not even in the movie, and his figure is VERY important in the book. 10. Javert did not tie up Cosette and call her a in the book. I am sure of this. 11. Javert did not commit suicide in front of Valjean. Talk about having absolutely no emotion! He had no emotion while committing suicide. A good movie if you have never read the book, but you will be angry if you read the book or enjoy the musical. Stick to the book, my friends.
Rating: 
Summary: Three years later and still disapproving
Review: I actually reviewed this show a long time ago (Jan 14 2000 - by now the review is buried under a whole pile of others) and just revisited this place out of curiosity to see whether such a bad show could actually garner good reviews. I'm surprised that so many people do think it is a good show! Well, it showed on local television a few months back, and I brought myself to watch part of it, thinking that I might have been overly harsh with it before. In the end I had to turn off the TV after a few minutes. It is just so bad. I'm bewildered by the way some reviewers say that this is a show for people who have read the book, not for fans of the musical, and that if you liked the book you'll like the show. What utter nonsense. I should think if you've read the book your blood is likely to BOIL even more than if you're just a musical fan who hasn't read the book yet. I have read the book 11 times since I was 11, and this show is OFFENSIVE to me. Haha I'm normally the mildest and least assertive of people, and the most objective, but this show - urgh - really brings out my DARK SIDE!!! :) That's why I'm being so vehement now - I really can't write a cool-headed review of this show!! I agree with ALL the reviewers here who wrote, "Did the scriptwriter actually read the book?" My goodness. Of all the versions of Les Miserables I have EVER personally watched (I've watched the 1952-French, 1978-British, 1982-French, 1995-French, this show, and 2000-French) this is the worst. It makes even the worst of the others look good!! It can't even be compared to the rest. This show wreaks havoc with Victor Hugo's fine novel and reduces it to a terrible movie full of gratuitous sex, violence and sexual innuendo. Man oh man. If I had not seen Liam Neeson and Uma Thurman in other shows before this one, I would have gotten a bad impression of them forever (and in fact that's why I do have a bad impression of Geoffrey Rush,having never seen him in another show before - I must watch Shine one day to wash away the bad taste!) Were they trying to appeal to a brainless teenage audience? Well, I'm a teenager and I must say it doesn't appeal to me at all. HAH! That was the [worst] show I have ever seen in my life. Les Miserables aside, even, it hardly stands on its own merit. With pasteboard characters and blatant marketing of sex and violence, it really insults the audience - even an audience who isn't already foaming at the mouth because it's read the book!! If I were a great writer and someone dared to desecrate my book like that I think I'd rise up from my grave and haunt the set and plague the production with problems so that the movie would never get made hahaha :) seeing that Hugo didn't do that, he must have been exceptionally tolerant! If you are looking for a faithful production of the book, personally I think the little-known 1982-French (d. Robert Hossein - sometimes the date of release is put at 1985) version is the best. It's hard to find though, so a more accessible version, and also very good version, is the 2000-French version (Gerard Depardieu; with a gorgeous Christopher Thompson as Courfeyrac!! :) be warned though, the VHS version doesn't play in colour on non-French VCRs). Most British productions are OK, I think. I haven't seen many of them myself. If you want to see famous people like Anthony Perkins, John Gielgud and Ian Holm playing Frenchies, then the 1978-British version's for you :) well, in the end, anything, ANYTHING, is better than this one!!!
Rating:
Summary: Not nearly as good as the Fox Family Channel Version
Review: I was generally disappointed with this take on Les Miserables, thinking a movie version had to be better than anything TV could offer up. I was wrong. A much better bet --Fox Family Channel's January 2001 remake of Les Miserables, starring Gerard Depardieu as Valjean and John Malkovich as Javert was far superior to this 1998 movie version with Liam Neeson. While Neeson makes a respectable Valjean; whoever played Javert turned in the most absurdly one dimensional character portrayal I have ever seen; if you are lucky enough to catch the Fox Family Version when and if it ever airs again, note Malkovich's vastly superior Inspector and the chemistry between Malkovich and Depardieu. The film version critiqued here deteriorates completely towards the end with the frustrated teenage Cosette and her thwarted attempts at romance with a one-dimensional revolutionary boy-toy. When Javert finally topples backward like a dead tree into the waiting river to his (by now timely) demise, perhaps the most dispassionate suicide in all of filmdom, I have to wonder if it's not total disgust with his peformance that drove him to this.
Rating: 
Summary: I honestly cried at the end of it, but not for a good reason
Review: After seeing Les Miserables on Broadway, I became an instant fan. Haven't read the book yet, but I read many excerpts and know quite a bit about it. While going through the TV guide one weekend, I was shocked to see that there was a Les Miserables movie on that night. My initial reaction was "YES! A Les Mis movie!". I got a blank tape ready to record it. Eventually, it came on. Hit the record button, and began watching. ..Sigh. I'll give it credit for the first half. Stayed pretty true to the story. However, Valjean was overly violent. And Valjean and Fantine's little romance? That made me laugh. A lot. But I dismissed it as minor things, and tried to enjoy the movie anyway. Then...it got to the point where Cosette was older. Okay, so far, so good. They showed a man making a speech...my first thought "ENJOLRAS! YES!"....but no. It was Marius. I got upset, but meh, I have patience. 'They'll show Enjy soon enough', I thought. As the movie continued, I inched closer and closer to the nearest sharp object. No Enjolras. No Eponine. No Friends of the ABC! What ever happened to Grantaire, everybody's favorite drunk cynic? Oh, I think he was in one scene, guarding Javert. About 5 seconds of fame. Yay for R. They...murdered most of the remaining characters, in a sense. And the ending....oh god, don't even get me STARTED. It was the source of jokes between me and my friend for...hell, we're still making jokes about it. Javert randomly deciding to handcuff himself, falling backwards into 2 feet of water, and sinking like a brick...while Valjean watches, then prances off smiling.... Why....WHY?! Don't watch this movie. Read the book, and/or see the musical. This movie is simply a huge joke. The only reason I'm giving it 2 stars is because it gave me a source of amusement for a long time. Between the ending and an earlier scene where Javert keeps telling Valjean "You must punish me"....hehehehe, we all know that he wan-- ::gets shot::
Rating: 
Summary: Definitely thumbs up - read why!
Review: I was shocked by the number of people who did not like this movie. I am a huge fan of _Les Miserables_. I have been in love with the book for years. (The version translated by Charles E. Wilbour is best.) _Les Miserables_ has also always been my favorite musical. I would like to say, first of all, that it is almost impossible to make a movie that is exactly like this amazing book without making the film nine hours long. So for the sake of keeping the movie as short as possible, there were a lot of parts cut out. Just because there is no Eponine (my personal favorite character) and no Enjolras (my favorite male character), you can't say that this is not _Les Miserables_. The movie was wonderfully adapted; I'd like to see anyone else try to make a movie based on this book. I also think that the actors did wonderful jobs portraying the characters. Yes, there were some things added in here that were not in the book. For instance, the love between Fantine and Valjean. And yes, that was a bit ridiculous, but it was to make the movie more dramatic. The first time I saw this movie was on television. I absolutely loved it, and could not believe my eyes when I saw all these terrible reviews. Granted, there were some that gave it the praise it deserved, but the majority seemed to be reviews from people who don't realize just how well-done this movie is. To all of you who are undecided as to whether or not you should buy this movie, I definitely recommend it. Ignore the fact that it is slightly different from the book and very different from the musical. Sit down, watch it, and enjoy just like you would with any other movie. And if you haven't read the unabridged version of the book, definitely give it a try. You won't regret it.
Rating:
Summary: satisfied my curiosity....
Review: My gut instinct on this movie was that it would [stink] (for lack of a better word) and I found out that I was right. After reading the extremely diverse reviews on this site I was nevertheless curious and rented it. *shakes head in shame* I couldnt agree more with the younger reviewers previously posted, and I commend their taste when it comes to identifying commendable work in the entertainment industry. How anyone could give both the broadway musical version and this lame interpretation of a classic novel highly praised recommendations is beyond me. And as for accepting its "good work" as a movie instead of critiquing the flick against the book/musical, well my opinion is this: If you are going to produce a movie based on a classic, it needs to be reviewed in that manner too, because that was the GOAL of the production in the first place. And scripts conflict are ridiculously obvious from charatcter omissions (Eponine) to serveral added scenes that never took place in any other account of the original story (Val-Jean slapping Cosette, and his presence as Javert's suicide), a common hollywood practice to attempt to give it that unneeded "flare".
As for the acting aspects of the movie.....UGH. Almost every actor portrayed a very misguided veiw of their particular character's personalilties. Clair Daines portrayal of a bratty whiny Cosette was disapointing but not suprising (Romeo & Juliet anyone??), and Liam Neeson almost made Val-Jean look like a unrehabilited villian the entire movie. it's not a wonder that extra flare was added, because the actor/character role relationships were just plainly not there.
Don't waste your money on this DVD, it's money better spent seeing the broadway show (well, after may it's only cycling off broadway) ...
Rating:
Summary: A Poor Adaptation
Review: Attempting to capitalize on the success of the Broadway production of the Victor Hugo novel "les Miserables" is this adaptation of the same novel. Liam Neeson stars as the forever haunted Jean Valjean. Valjean is a man imprisoned to hard labor for stealing a loaf of bread. He escapes after years of backbreaking labor to start anew. Inspector Javert (Geoffrey Rush) is a former prison guard who recognizes Valjean one day as he sees him lift a cart off of a man in the street. Javert believes that only one man has the strength to do such an act, that man is Valjean. "Les Miserables" is a long book even by nineteenth century standards. It even includes a detailed description of the Paris sewers, which become important to the story at a later time. Any adaptation of this novel must leave out much unless it is to run three or four hours long. At around two hours, 40 minutes, this adaptation is perhaps too short. Or simply does not include the right material. It is difficult for me to judge the merits of this movie on its own. Having read the novel (and liked it very much) it is difficult for me separate it from Hugo's story. For anyone who has read the novel, I would suggest skipping this poor adaptation. I unfortunately cannot recommend another one to try; but, I would be willing to bet that a French language version would likely be the best.
Rating:
Summary: Terrible.
Review: This movie left out a lot of important aspects of the Hugo classic,like EPONINE and the fact that Marius & Cosette would never have met if it weren't for EPONINE.And the Thenardiers are only in one scene.....I say this movie disgraces the book.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible Movie
Review: I loved this movie! Not only is it a classic, but it has some amazing spiritual conotations as well. The acting was very good. My favorite part is the end when Jean Val Jean is walking home. The expression on his face portrays all the emotion that he is feeling. It was incredible! I love this move and highly reccomend it!
Rating:
Summary: Superb!
Review: Hands down one of the best films I have seen in a long time. I kept putting off seeing this, for some reason believing that because it was Les Mis it would be somehow trite. Boy was I TOTALLY mistaken. Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush put on stunning performances, the storyline (Victor Hugo) has been adapted to the silver screen masterfully- even better than the Broadway version, and the music, setting, etc. are all brilliantly composed for this incredible saga. If you rent any one film in the upcoming days or weeks, please- do yourself a favour- rent or buy this film on video or DVD- you will not be disappointed. This is a very powerful film, and sinks like an anchor right to the depths of the soul.
| 
