Rating: 
Summary: Good movie for book lovers, not the broadway crowd
Review: I am going to respond to the 12 year old reviewer by saying that this movie was based on the book LES MISERABLES by Victor Hugo, not on the hit Broadway show. It did not include Enjolras and Eponine for the sake of time. If you love the musical but have never read the book, do not buy this DVD because you will probably be disappointed. As for those who love the book, this is an excellent movie. The man who plays Javert does an excellent job. The movie has some tense parts in it and is not recommended for kids because of the violence. The only things I did not care for in the movie were when Valjean slapped Cosette and punched out the bishop and Javert because this never occurred in the book. Also, Fantine does not fall in love with Valjean in the book. The movie is the best movie out there on LES MISERABLES so far. For you musical fans (I am one of them) try buying the Dreamcast 10th Anniversary Concert. They have not made a movie of the musical yet.
Rating:
Summary: Classic Greatness
Review: A story of great pathos and a good production.Those who are disappointed by the departures from the book should just "get over it" and enjoy the movie as a "movie" and quit criticizing it as a "film." It is a movie that reaches rare heights of emotion and nobility of character.
Rating: 
Summary: I couldn't believe how bad it was!
Review: I love the story of Les Miserables. It's my favorite musical. And this version ripped it to shreds, turning it into a movie for the modern teen instead of the heartbreaking story of sacrifice for love and duty that it really and truly is.
First off-
Where were Eponine and Enjolras? Eponine was my favorite character, I was flabbergasted and angry that they omitted her. She may not have been "main," but she was important! Her death for Marius supports the theme of sacrifice for undying love. How could they not include her? And Enjolras, he was fantastic! He was the strong leader, the gung-ho man fighting for France. He needed to be there!
AND WHY WAS IT NOT A MUSICAL? I rented it expecting a musical, and it wasn't one! I was so annoyed, the music is the best part of Les Miserable! Not like they could have had songs like "On My Own" or "Do You Hear the People Sing" without Eponine and Enjolras.
And as for Cosette, good God, where do I start? She was not a whiny brat. She did not disobey her father like that. Marius snuck *into* the garden to see her, she never left the house to see him! And how did he find her? Eponine shows him the way- I guess they forgot that little fact!
And Valjean! He would never, never, never hit Cosette! And he wasn't there when Javert killed himself, and even if he had been, he wouldn't have smiled and walked away like that.
Marius- That was not the way he was portrayed! He wasn't a leader! And he was never going to be good enough to lead!
As for the Cosette/Marius relationship- that line, "tomorrow you'll be making love to her a free man?" They never slept together! They never would have! For heaven's sake, this movie was ripped to shreds and modernized!
If you've never seen Les Miserables, this movie just may be for you. But you'd have to see another version or read the book to understand what it was actually based on, what it was all about, and to see Eponine and Enjolras especially, and more on the Thenardiers. If you love Les Miserables, don't watch this movie and be outraged at how the story was destroyed, the same way I was.
All in all, this movie is a nice story. However, it is *not* Les Miserables. I feel bad for Hugo... at least he's not alive to see what's been done to his tale.
Rating:
Summary: An Entirely Different Story--And a Bad One, At That
Review: This isn't Les Miserables. This doesn't even remotely resmble Les Miserables. For heaven's sake, even the musical was truer to the story than this! The Valjean of this movie never really repents, which takes away the theme of the story. He is driven by self-preservation rather than duty to God. Javert is pitifully one-dimensional. Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush do an admirable job with what they have to work with, but it's kind of a lost cause. Their acting was the only thing that got this movie up to two stars. Fantine isn't too bad, but her romantic relationship with Valjean drove me to laughter, rather than making me cry. Claire Danes as Cosette makes me want to throw blunt objects at the TV screen. She portrays the easy-going Cosette as a whining, spoiled brat. If it's possible, Marius is even worse. He gripes, he's pushy, and he's not even cute in this version! And where have Enjolras and Eponine gone? Marius leading the students? Is this a joke? They've cut out the love triangle? That's kind of a suicidal move on their part-Eponine is the character everyone likes! Please don't waste your money on this pitiful excuse for a re-vamp.
Rating:
Summary: Okay Movie, Terrible Script
Review: This review gives away info about the movie, if you are going to buy it don't read my review. I didn't like the movie, lets leave that at that. The review: The acting was marginal at best, with some touching moments and some interesting scenes, but the characters were inconsistent and shockingly poorly developed. For instance Valjean standing there watching as Javert killed himself and then smiling and walking away is totally out of spirit with how they started developing him. Valjean was never tender, and didn't even seem to have found his soul as one would expect. Cosette was written as a spoiled teenager who has finally been freed from being sheltered. Overall I couldn't relate to any of the characters except Javert, who at least seemed consistent throughout and dedicated to his purpose. And in the end, he found himself unable to relate to a world that was turned upside down on him. I guess if I were part of this movie I might have wanted to take a dunk in the river too. I have seen the stage musical of this, even with the worst set of actors I have seen it done with, it was so much better than this movie. Even if I ignore the obvious turn away from the book in this movie, it still had very little that was good. The fact that they introduced an entire story line that didn't exist anywhere before while dropping important plot items is sad. I have now seen this movie twice, and when I watched it this last time I thought I hadn't seen it before, now I know why, I tried my hardest to forget. The worse thing of all, is that all of these actors could have done so much better. They are all very capable, and even with their ability the characters were just so shallow that they couldn't bring them to life.
Rating: 
Summary: Decent telling of a great story.
Review: This movie certainly isn't great. But it is solid, entertaining, and worth watching. I rate it somewhere between a 3 and 4, with the nod going to 4 simply because it puts on display just how great a story Les Miserables really is. Strengths? Liam Neeson brings an interesting balance of realism and extraordinary decency to the role of Jean Valjean. It is a subtle enough performance that it brings additional layers of complexity to the character that I was surprised to see. Valjean has, through years in prison, been redeemed, it appears, from a life and ethos which was not as pure and innocent as the stereotypical view of him might suggest. You get the sense that it likely was his almost two decades behind bars that brought almost all the way to redemption, coupled with a few acts of unnecessary kindness and mercy that completed his transformation. Neesons performance was so convincing that I truly came to expect him to dive into the frigid water to save his nemesis in what was disappointingly executed ending. Geoffrey Rush's performance was moving in its own way. Inspector Javert could easily have been reduced to one dimension--as many other actors have done. Not so here, although his performance is not so finely nuanced as Neeson's. Rush brings a satisfying degree of sadism to Javert's character that plays a logical twin to self-righteousness. Still, I've seen others do a better job with this character. Uma Thurman was terrific, too. Claire Danes? I still don't get Clair Danes. She could barely keep her accent straight, she has little or no magnetism on the screen, and she turned what could have been a moving, torn role into a throwaway.
Rating:
Summary: They don't make films the way they used to do
Review: Well, times have changed, nowadays, studios and directors certainly don't make films the way they used to, that is, making use of LOCATION SHOTS, instead of shooting 95% of the film in a studio. Yes yes yes, this edition of Les Mis certainly have more location shots than any recent film that I have come across, but still, the parisian street scenes, especially the barricade scenes, look so FAKE! And the Marius character in this edition has some of the WORST acting I have ever seen in ANY film! I don't know if it is the actor himself that is annoying to the extreme or his acting. This Marius is plain pompous, clueless, witless, and gutless while we are at it. Claire Danes in this edition has the honor of being the seond worst actor in this edition. My apologies, Titanic style teenage love story just doesn't cut it for a classic of this caliber. Aside from the weak acting found in the second part of this movie, this is a pretty decent movie, if one ignores the numerous deviations from the actual book.
Rating: 
Summary: Eponine was brilliant
Review: What can I say about this film? Liam Neeson as Valjean. Good choice, actor wise. He wasnt quite the right build, but a good performance. Geoffrey Rush as Javert. Perfect choice. Couldnt have had a more perfect Javert if they tried. Uma Thurman as Fantine. Brilliant. She was the best thing about this movie. She ranks up there with Ruthie Henshall as the best ever Fantines. Claire Danes. Okay I guess. She's a bit too teeny for the part, but she can really turn on the tears when she needs to. Sylvie Koblizkova as Eponine. She was great. Her performance moved me like no other. In fact, if you look really closely in the background of the Thenardiers Inn when Valjean goes to get Cossette, you can see her playing with Azelma. That's it. Was she in love with Marius? No. Does she take him to Cossette? No. Does she take Marius's bullet? No. Did she have lines? No. How about we remake Star Wars and get rid of Han Solo. Yes, I know what your thinking. That's insane. This was a terrible movie. For many reasons. They messed up the characters. Valjean would NEVER NEVER hit Cossette. NEVER. She was his life. Valjean doesnt bea up Javert. Valjean doesnt hit the Bishop. The man hits NO-ONE! Cossette would NEVER disobey her father! They seemed to find it neccessary to turn Cossette into a modern day teenager. She wasnt. She doesnt run away to see MArius, he sneaks into her garden. And since when did Marius have time to do any of the planning required for the revolution? That's where Enjolras was needed. They didnt cut Enjolras out of the film, they just didnt introduce him. THey ddint introduce any of Marius's friends. They barricade was huge. About 2 feet high. It was about 10 feet+ in the book. The most the films barricade would have done was stub the enemys toes. The film ended over 100 pages before the end of teh book. One of the most brilliant endings in literature was cut out completely. (SPOILER) and when Javert kills himself, Valjean is nowhere near him. Where was Thenardiers gang? Where was the attack on the Rue Plumet? Why did Fantine have ratty black hair? And Valjean DID know how to read! He taught himself in prison! duh! The film was beautifully filmed. When Javert hits the water....woah. But apart from that, this film ruined the greatest story of all time, removed one of the best characters ever (Eponine) and messed up one of the best romances ever. When Valjean hit Cossette, I'm sure I heard Victor Hugo turn in his grave. See this if you havent read, or have no respect for the book. Next time Hollywood wants to butcher a classic, they could at least have the courtesy to change the title.
Rating:
Summary: A book too good for Hollywood
Review: I warn anyone against doing what I did--finishing the fantastic book and then watching the movie shortly afterwards. The movie would have been fine in its own right, but it was a poor interpretation of the novel. Obviously no movie can fully represent all of the characters and scenes in a 1400 page book, but even the themes were badly altered. A deep and complex novel was reduced to a sappy teenage love story with a Harrison Ford-Tommy Lee Jones type chase thrown in for drama. Even the appearance of the characters was bothersome--Cosette was played by an actress who was about 8 years too old and the "hulking" Liam Neeson was about 50 pounds and 3 cycles of dianabol away from even hinting at the strength the main character was supposed to possess. But those were minor issues in comparison with the interaction of the two--Jean Valjean striking Cosette (which he never did or would do) and her forcing him to confess about his past. He hid this from her throughout the ENTIRE book and this sacrifice was one of its central themes. Not a bad movie if you haven't read the book, but if you have--get ready to cringe.
Rating:
Summary: "I've bought your soul... and now I give it back to God."
Review: There is perhaps no novel as gripping or emotionally draining as Victor Hugo's Les Misérables, the story of redemption, overzealous fundamentalism (justice at all costs) and selfless heroism. Which is probably why it has been translated into numerous languages, and portrayed on Broadway, television, and by Hollywood a dozen times over. Jean Valjean has been brought to the screen by many actors, but perhaps none with quite the charisma and on-screen passion of Liam Neeson, the Oscar-nominated actor from "Schlinder's List." With an ideal, stunning cast, a gorgeous soundtrack, and a premise that should touch even the most hardened of hearts, Les Misérables is a triumph.
If you worship the book, this adaptation may fall flat... but for this viewer, who had never before seen the story of Jean Valjean (and who now has become a fan of both book and film) this is a masterpiece. The story is spellbinding... Jean Valjean has spent nineteen years at hard labor in a French prison for stealing a loaf of bread. Released but still in bondage by a yellow passport that brands him as a convict, he travels the lonely roads of France seeking for redemption. Turned away by all the inns, he finds a place of safety and solace within the church, and by the hand of a compassionate old Bishop. But Valjean has grown hard and cruel in prison, and he betrays the man by thieving his silver and stealing away in the night. Fate, however, is not upon his side. He is caught and returned to the judgment of the church. But instead of judgment, he receives mercy... and a new lease on life.
But the past returns to haunt him in the figure of Inspector Javert, a merciless and overly-zealous member of the Paris prefix. Valjean, who has become the mayor of the small but prosperous town of Vigau, is able for a time to conceal his real identity... but Javert suspects and begins to seek information to use against him. This isn't even traversing into the side plot, the prostitute Fantine and her abused daughter Cosette, who is forced to work as a slave at an inn. To them Valjean will be tied... his fate bound with their own by a simple act of compassion. What unfolds through the two-plus hour epic is a touching story of renewed faith and moral strength in a time of revolution and cruelty. Valjean and Javert are two men of conviction. But in one there is an allowance for human failings; in the other, no exceptions are made. It has romance, suspense, action, a stunning soundtrack, and unforgettable performances. My first viewing left me in utter astonishment, captivated by the story that unfolded before me, managing to touch me so deeply that it has since retained a place of honor in my film case. It's a tale of compassion, honesty, transformation, morality, and forgiveness that might not adhere exactly to Victor Hugo's original but still leaves one with a sense of having spent two unforgettable hours in France. You'll never look at Paris -- or a convict -- the same way again.
|
