Here's what you need to
realize: if you love this story, then the film version of Les Miserables will
prove to be the closest adaptation of the novel you will ever see. If you
are a fan of the sweeping broadway musical, hang your expectations about vocal
power and sweeping melodies on a rack at home. This is not the place for
them. In order for the characters to supremely and wonderfully
expose the emotions they are feeling, and the emotions laying not-so-dormant in
the lyrics by the inimitable Alain Boubil, they do so by
exchanging vocal prowess for gritty realism. The music is the medium
through which they tell the story. It is not, as is the case in musical
theatre, the centre of a lavish production.
The language of cinema, the
scope of cinema is a dream for all of us who have been dying for a close
adaptation of Hugo's outstanding work to hit the screen. I first read the
Norman Denny translation at 12 years old and have read it somewhat 18 to 20
times since. Les Miserables is my favourite novel, the reason I am
a bookworm and the reason I pursued literature at university and subsequently
publishing. I think I would be hard pressed to find someone as passionate about
this novel as I. The novel is my first love. Due to the love of the
novel, I sought out every available film adaptation of the book (I have seen a
few from all decades: some in French, some silent, some "classics"
)and have visited the musical on stage at least 8 times: having seen Colm
Wilkinson's Valjean thrice, and having seen the Broadway and West End
productions. The story ....the heart of the tale.... the Gospel mirrored
in the transformation Valjean undergoes through one redemptive act of grace
and, subsequently the grace that shatters the character who acts as his parallel:
garnered by Law and having not yet experienced the righteousness not of the
sword but of the cross ....is, in my estimation, the most powerful ever told in
literary form.
It is quite believable that the tales claiming
prisoners and sinners have come to Christ within its pages and its narrative be
so. It is that powerful. It is the reason, even though you may not
know it, that you are so deeply moved by the spectrum of this story. You may
not realize it, but I believe the entire opus is divinely inspired. I believe,
as I did the other day, in an almost ghastly quiet theatre without the usual
cell phone screeches or popcorn chomping, that people are surreptitiously moved
in a way they may not fully understand. Such is the power of this story. Such is the power of the emblem of redemption
when one man is convinced to turn his life around for God: and the ripples of
grace he is able to impart upon his conversion.
The film is keenly aware of its reverent impact
and thus explores it in a broad and compelling way that closely mirrors the
novel. There are several “insider”
moments for those who love the book as I do. Here is a list that my friend Gina
and I were able to compile (Gina, I am totally bringing you into this): the
cross in its emblem follows Valjean everywhere.
If he is in a scene, a crucifix: whether crudely atop a hill or on his
desk or in his hand at his factory as he shows the work of those grisettes
stringing rosaries to Javert is ever close by.
The stark and lovely contrast in the Rue Plumet house which exposes
Valjean’s plain and cold bedchamber against Cosette’s lovely and floral canopy
is a sheer match for the several, several chapters which flourish their sweet
relationship. Marius’ grandfather, M.
Gillenormand is shown and Marius’ status as the son of a Baronet and a wealthy
successor in his own right is shown. Further, Marius’ flat within the same
sector as the Thenardiers’ ---as a neighbor to Eponine--- is also established.
Readers of the novel are familiar with the
gruesome upturn in Fantine’s life, including the selling of her two front teeth
after the sells her hair and enters prostitution. Here, it is her two back
teeth.
I love the scenes when Valjean (then referred to
as the Man in the Yellow Coat) visits Montfermeil to fulfill his promise and
claim Cosette. Readers are aware that it is Christmas Eve and the movie paints
it as so: the “Master of the House” number includes a few festive parlays as
well as the rather crude (but authentic ) inclusion of a St. Nicholas
character. Moreover, while sisters
Eponine and Azelma are spoiled with toys and presents, Cosette is deprived of
girlish flounces until Valjean buys her a doll from a beautifully adorned
window. Readers, THAT is here too (it is so exciting)
For further authenticity, look no further than
the rebel meetings at the Café Musain and the July uprising. The positioning of
the students: from Grantaire to Courfeyrac, the over-taking of the Lamarque
funeral, the furniture being tossed from windows into the streets to form the barricades:
it is all here. In glorious truth. I was
so moved seeing how my imagination wrought those long-ago events to real life.
More still, in a scope the stage could never hope to provide, we are given the
real terror of the students as they are cornered and overtaken by the
Guard….right until the untimely death of Enjolras and Grantaire, staying strong
together as their world ---ideally and literally---falls beneath them.
Well done casting department for making these
students so young and vulnerable and pained and scared. I have seen numerous stage adaptations
(including the rather awkward casting of the 10th Anniversary
Concert ) where 30 and 40 year olds are trying to convey the youth and
innocence of the ABC Society. These boys are just that ---boys! Hugo would be
proud.
The stage production, as mentioned several
times, cannot hope to convey the beauty and spanse of Hugo’s 19th
Century world. Readers know that he
spends several pages in deep digression on the squelching terror of the Paris
Sewers. Here, in the muck and mire, the potency of Valjean’s sacrifice: first
for adorning his old service uniform and acting as a volunteer at the
barricades and then saving Marius by dragging him through the muck of the
sewers is seen here in full force. Though
they eliminate the “Dog Eats Dog” number sung by the sneaky Thenardier, his
presence is welcome and accurate.
I could seriously go on and on and on about the
little ways in which the film touches on aspects of the novel we have not seen
in previous cinematic adaptations or on stage; but I want to get to the meat of
the film itself. It blew me away.
Indeed, I cannot remember the last time (if
ever) I was so moved by a film. I was
sobbing to the point of convulsion at the end of our Christmas Day screening (
I went with my family after turkey dinner) and had to compose myself over
credits to finally leave the theatre.
The story, its inspiration, its realization of God’s grace to the
unfortunate, to the everyman, to the deserving and the non-deserving is enough
to pummel you over. Hugh Jackman was
largely responsible for my emotional response.
He was breathtaking and he blew me away.
He has a power instinctive in his physicality and his haggard appearance
and world-weary eyes that strip away any familiarity you have with him as an
actor. Indeed, my sister didn’t
recognize him in the film at all. From
the glorious opening scenes as he works the galleys of a ship through his
eventual conversion at the benediction of a kindly bishop (shout out to COLM WILKINSON),
Jackman is a man lost---little more than a dog of the street--- cajoled and
beaten and downtrodden.
In his eventual reformation and his breaking of
his parole, he becomes a distinguished yet tortured figure: prominent in his
position as M. Madeleine and the Mayor of Montreuil- Sur –Mer yet still haunted
by his past and still so convinced he is an underserving specimen in need of
continual reformation. His disbelief at
his blind eye toward Fantine is especially heart-breaking.
Speaking of Fantine: I was skeptical of Anne
Hathaway mainly because of her physicality: Fantine is clearly a blue-eyed and
blonde haired beauty and Hathaway is so dark featured; but she wrings out all
of the pathos of the character from the moment she completely loses her dignity
to her tortured performance of I Dreamed
a Dream. Here, the octave change on
the word ‘shame’ is more than just a set-up for vocal prowess: it becomes a
heart-shrieking wail as she realizes that her life is over. That all she hoped
for and wished for and that all her poet-lover Tholomyes inspired in her is
completely lost.
I was shaken.
I could speak of Valjean forever ( Jackman
carries the movie and then some); but I should touch on other characters.
Note: I could speak on this subject… the subject
of Les Miserables forever---
Javert is my favourite character in the musical:
largely because I feel he is given the best musical numbers. Russell Crowe is
by far the weakest musical link and yet he is has the physical presence and
physiognomy of the tortured inspector.
The Confrontation scene is
powerful: more still because Valjean and Javert (often parallels or duals when
explored in literary resonance) are physically well-matched. The scales will always tip in Valjean’s
favour; but not without a fight.
The Thenardiers are just as bawdy and
under-handed as is to be expected. The greatest sin the musical commits is
de-villainizing them into comic characters; but there, they are at least true
to their stage incarnations.
Marius Pontmercy is played by Eddie
Remayne. Immediately, when I first saw
the trailer and it showed a clip of Marius standing tall aside Enjolras at the
barricade, I breathed a mea culpa for my universal skepticism in exchange for
my wonderment at Eddie Remayne. He looked like the Marius of my mind. He did not let me down. His Empty Chairs at Empty Tables is a
brilliant, brilliant attempt at reconciling a happy life with the lost lives of
his friends.His shaking off the bonds of his privileged
background, his immediate infatuation with Cosette and his impulsive need to
support the members of the ABC Society at the barricades are all marvelous.
Dude can act.
Eponine was also lovely. She has a far grittier role in the novel and
I sometimes cringe when she is romanticized beyond the crass and discordant
street figure she is. Nonetheless, she was extremely touching: never more still
than when she saves Marius’ life at the barricade.
Gavroche is a sweet thing: from ducking behind
that gargantuan Elephant to hopping in and around the carriages trundling
through St. Michel.
Cosette ---as played by Amanda Seyfried--- is
given a weak and airy soprano; but again, is pitch perfect in the looks
department. Marius and Cosette have such
a spark, a chemistry, a lasting love. I
was especially moved by her presence at Valjean’s deathbed. There’s one lovely
little gesture where he taps her nose with fatherly love: This, thought I, this in a
simple movement encapsulates the relationship so strongly explored in the book.
When Valjean first tips his hat at the young
Cosette, frigid and afraid in the wood, your heart melts. Boubil and Schonberg scored a new song for
Jackman to sing as he muses on his new charge while they rumble away from the
Thenardiers in a carriage, and while not musically strong, his sense of
wonderment at the duty before him is well-felt.
I could seriously go on about this forever. I was completely unfounded in my skepticism
for the following reason: I sacrificed momentarily my love for the power of the
story in exchange for being preliminarily off-put by the soundtrack. You will not listen to this soundtrack on
repeat for long car rides or at work as you will, well, any cast recording with
Colm Wilkinson. The theatre is a
different medium that expects its vocal power to act in a different way. Here, we have the magic of film: the close-ups,
the sets. The music is not the center of the story (as is the case with the
stage musical), it is the filter in which they tell the story. The story is at the centre. The characters are
at the center in a more imminent way than could ever be experienced at a seated
distance in the live theatre. You can see their tears and experience their grief
in close-ups. The camera, here, is your ally. It exposes the Hugo-world in a
sweeping and majestic way, it upturns the lives of the poor with their open
scabs and blistering closeness, it paints the revelatory sojourn of a convict
who inches toward redemption. I bless
the camera for bringing to my mind the scenes and landscapes I could only but
picture in my mind’s eye from the novel;Those which previous film adaptations
have never rightly wrought.
Contemporary society can speak onward and upward
about the lack of Faith in film and yet, and yet this exists. The clearest and most powerful emblem of
Christ’s love you are likely to see in the popular sphere. If you are sitting through Les Miserables you cannot separate its
religious influence from your passion for the story; because they are one and the
same. You will be moved in ways that
steal through your spirit and surge something in you that perhaps you are not
able to name. That sense of strong conviction is one often perused in Christian
circles but largely evaded in a secular society so used to the more negative
influx of current evangelism. Let me
then state that as a person of Faith, Les
Miserables makes me proud. The story: its slight and beautiful treatise
on God’s love mirrors the Christianity I am so familiar with and imbibed with
and try so hard to emulate. Jean Valjean is one of our greatest apostles. Hugo penned a work so utterly wretched and
yet so saturated with Christ’s hope that the two cannot help but intersect and
climax with a telling moment of righteousness and life beyond the weary
world. This film is a wonderment. In my
opinion, as a self-proclaimed Les
Miserables expert, it is the closest thing we have to Hugo’s tale. Go, go
and be moved.
6 comments:
Loved your thoughts and I so agree that I think my favorite thing about this movie is that they incorporated things from the book that aren't in the stage production. And for the first time ever I liked Marius! That made me happy. (Usually I find Enjolras the more intriguing of the two.) And I loved that the faith themes were accentuated, not downplayed. Hugh Jackman was amazing. I will definitely be seeing this again--and owning it!
I too appreciated your review of Les Mis. As a fan of the musical for years, I was eagerly anticipating the film version. It was great seeing it all on the big screen, with the advantage of seeing the faces & emotions of the characters up close. I do wish they had cast a stronger Javert, and I was not all that impressed by the choices made for the Thenardiers. But Hugh Jackman was exceptional as was Anne Hathaway and Eddie Redmayne (I was surprised to learn that this was his first professional singing role!) While the stark, gritty realism of the prison & street scenes made for a greatly expanded experience from the stage musical, I felt the film could have done without some of the depictions of sexual encounters (the scene with Fauntine and the one with St. Nicholas - quite gratituous, making for some uncomfortable moments for those who don't choose to frequent movies with graphic sexual content.) But those things aside, it was an engaging and inspiring movie even for those of us who know the story & music by heart. And I agree that the Christian message came through quite clearly. So glad for that.
Bob: I was perhaps anticipating the more bawdy scenes with the Thenardiers due to my familiarity with the musical so, as such, they were not a surprise to me.
I personally thought the first encounter Fantine has as a prostitute to be well-founded. They didn't show anything (it was more suggestive than not) and I found it established the stark contrast between the life she thought she would have and the lengths to which her sacrifice for her daughter Cosette would go.
On the upside, every stage production I have seen has starred a Grantaire who makes very suggestive use of a wine bottle at the Cafe Musain. We were spared this "Don Juan" portion in the movie :D
Great review!
As one who had never read the book and has only known the musicals, I was not prepared for the grit. It was wonderful, however, and very needed. It made me appreciate the characters far more than the glorified stage versions ever had.
Equally, I had been VERY skeptical of Hathaway as Fantine but she brought me to tears. Though Jackman did a good job, he wasn't able to bring that out of me for some reason. Sacha Baren Cohen was unexpected and I think he did a fabulous job of both being a horrible person and comic relief. I'm afraid I wasn't sold on Marius though as - though it may not be in the novel, I don't know - I liked the calousness of his stage character as it added another layer of awful for me. I always had the impression that he was young and foolish and probably wouldn't stay in love with Cosette long after the marriage, thereby showing the dark side to this high-society living as well. This Marius actually seemed quite genuine and I felt he lost some of the poignancy from that. Which is he in the book?
Lastly, I was very sad about them cutting one of my favorite songs into just two lines: the one given by Gavroche and his fellow street urchins.
Overall, a great rendition of the book, as you say, and not centered on the musical. Thanks again for a great review!
Lovely review. I adore the book, and can't wait to see the movie (it's releasing in England this Friday). And it's great to know that they've been truer to Eponine in the movie - both in terms of character, and her saving Marius' life, which is utterly omitted in the musical.
I wonder though, if they've had the courage to make Marius the more negative character that he is in the book (throwing Valjean out of his house), as opposed to the musical.
Thank you, a great review and you gave words to some of my thoughts. I'm going to quote some of this on FB page, but I'll link to your page as well.
Post a Comment