The action takes place at the beginning of the 19th century. Jean Valjean, a fugitive convict sentenced to imprisonment, is forced to hide from cruel justice for many years. Inspector Javert of the Paris police considers his capture his life’s work. After the death of Fantine, the woman for whose fate Jean Valjean considered himself responsible, the only person close to him is her daughter Cosette. For the girl’s happiness, Jean is ready to do anything.
4k movies reviews
Les Miserables, the most anticipated event in cinematography in recent years, has had a very mixed, even contradictory reaction, on the one hand meeting expectations for acting and listening, but on the other, disappointing in its approach to the greatest novel and adaptation of the famous musical. The film’s creators included the original producers and screenwriters (Cameron Mackintosh, Alain Boublil, Herbert Kretzmer, Claude Michel-Schonberg), who created the cult musical in the mid-80s, which meant a fairly close to theatrical version. Of course, to realize an impressive two-volume book and intertwine it with musical elements (and successfully) is hardly a feasible task, but the producers felt that Oscar-winning Tom Hooper, who, in their opinion, has the right vision to make a successful production, would be up to the task. The principal roles were cast with Hollywood’s leading actors who sing and are familiar with musical theater, actors trying their hand at the subject of musicals for the first time, and actors who had previously worked in the original production of Les Miserables. But does such a talented and, most importantly, related to the theatrical production team imply the inexorable and undeniable success of the motion picture?
A musical-to-movie adaptation implies a variation of a theatrical production in order to portray it, so to speak, from a different perspective, using all the charms of cinema – opportunities that the stage does not have – while maintaining that theatricality and giving a new meaning to the musical side. However, there is hardly a verified recipe for a worthwhile musical film. The scriptwriters for “Les Miserables” (who, it has been said, are directly related to the original production) did an ambiguous job in developing the plot: despite the fact that they more than managed to fit all 50 (!) original songs, there was a palpable lack of screen time to reveal more events and story lines – a kind of gaps in the narrative, it seemed that everyone was in a hurry and clearly did not have time. For the sake of comparison, I’ll draw a parallel: about 70 pages of the book were rather superficially beaten in just 3-4 minutes. Of course, adaptations are meant to simplify the long dramatic mono/dialogs of the play (and the book too), but, for example, the second half of the movie was almost all filled with only musical numbers, continuously following one another, leaving no room for the same mono/dialogs. It can be assumed that the creators of the film decided to take such an extreme step to emphasize the musical component. As was known long before the premiere of the film, all the compositions were performed live on the set: with such an original approach, Hooper tried to achieve more sensuality, expressiveness and authenticity of musical numbers. However, this greatly affected the performance of the song (and this is not about the vocal abilities of the actors at all), for emotion and drama were brought to the fore, overshadowing the rich story each song tells.
Although there are no definite and rigorous aspects of musicals, and the whole style of directing is relative, it is difficult to call Hooper’s work a musical: it was a rapid kaleidoscope of rapidly changing acts and songs, the pace of the narration was very fast, making the narrative a little blurred. However, the emotional backdrop was masterfully created. Tom Hooper’s vision, delivered from the hand of cameraman Danny Cohen, was imbued with a haze of surrealism. The diagonal composition, the unstable shooting, the dynamic editing and the abundance of close-ups (especially during the musical numbers) created a sense of an unreal world, more like a nightmare with endless horror and suffocating despair. Most of the action takes place in the hours of darkness, but even the scenes under the sunlight are imbued with a kind of impending gloom. The atmosphere, imbued with despondency, bitterness of loss and the horrors of revolution, was also beautifully conveyed by the impressive sets, fine costumes, makeup and majestic music — that is, the secondary technical component.
As for the film’s ensemble cast, it’s safe to say that this is one of its major pluses. A Tony-winning singer, dancer and former Broadway actor, Hugh Jackman demonstrates a very different level of acting, selflessly approaching the role on such a large scale. His acting, from the vocal parts to the evolution of the character, was filled with power, confidence and conviction. Despite all the peculiarities of filming, Jackman managed to remain the backbone of the entire film, constantly capturing the audience’s attention with his believable performance, and becoming one of his main inspirations.
Another stunning inspiration of the picture was the incredible Anne Hathaway. To say that her performance was simply believable would not be quite right, for her portrayal of Fantine is another example of outstanding acting, when an actor empties himself and then, like a vessel, fills the feelings and emotions of the character, not playing him, but rather becoming him. Hathaway’s performance was imbued with depth and fragility, reflecting every nuance and every facet of the tragedy and hopelessness that haunted her character like an evil fate. And her rendition of ‘I dreamed a dream’, exposing all the pain that was killing Fantine from within, can safely be called one of the grandest and most mesmerizing variations ever performed, each chord intertwined with her words, a cry full of despair, and creating a unique atmosphere of tragedy of a broken dream.
As for the other actors, it is only worth saying that each of them fitted their character quite organically, thereby subtly framing the picture with expressive and strong characters, whether it was Cosette, played by the angelic Amanda Seyfried, Marius, played by Eddie Rayman (who, incidentally, has a Tony), the charming Samantha Barks, who is no stranger to playing Eponine, and, of course, the pair of M-d and Monsieur Tenardier, played by Helena Bonham-Carter and Sacha Baron-Cohen, who brought some humor to this dark epic. The only one who stood out from this rank ensemble was Russell Crowe, who looked a little awkward and even ridiculous as Inspector Javert.
In conclusion, it should be said that the film adaptation of the greatest musical Les Miserables turned out quite decent, presenting the performance with all its cinematic charms, for the sake of which, however, it was necessary to sacrifice such aspects of the picture as, for example, the plot. Having distinguished itself by its strong points, such as the musical component or a decent acting, the picture can safely expect many awards, which, by the way, it has already won. It is also worth noting that this film will undoubtedly become famous for the superb performance of the magnificent Anne Hathaway.
Info Blu-ray
Video
Codec: HEVC / H.265 (62.1 Mb/s)
Resolution: Upscaled 2160p
HDR: Dolby Vision, HDR10
Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
Original aspect ratio: 1.85:1
Audio
English: Dolby TrueHD with Dolby Atmos 7.1 (48kHz, 24-bit)
English: Dolby Digital 5.1
Subtitles
English SDH, Arabic, Bulgarian, Chinese (Cantonese), Chinese (Traditional), Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, French (Canadian), French (Parisian), German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Icelandic, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Latvian, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese (Brazilian), Portuguese (Iberian), Romanian, Russian, Spanish (Castilian), Spanish (Latin American), Swedish, Thai, Turkish.
