[streetwise]

Originally Posted by chandleo

Again missing the point, I shouldn't need to be looking on YouTube video's to verify that an actor I've just seen in a musical can actually sing!

True, but I think it was a matter of direction. Once Tom Hooper decided to go for a 'live' singing take, the emphasis became more about the acting. Yes it was raw, but it was also good. For me, he made the right decision. Otherwise, they might as well have just filmed the stage show.

[tally]

Originally Posted by chandleo

Again missing the point, I shouldn't need to be looking on YouTube video's to verify that an actor I've just seen in a musical can actually sing!

No, I'm not missing the point. Fair do's if you thought he was miscast, personally I think he was the out and out singer/actor and completely deserves his Oscar nod, which of course he wont get as Daniel Day Lewis can start preparing a place in his trophy room for.
Because this was the first time they'd made a musical NOT prerecorded in the studio, I just thought your statement that he cant sing was so wrong I was politely pointing out that he has a magnificent voice that you could listen to as Hugh had no control over which take was used in Les Miz.
But I'm not going to labour the point.

[revans9]

have no intention of seeing Les Mis (was left nonplussed by the stage show) but this thread makes for an entertaining read! I knew when I saw the trailer that it was all-sung but there was definitely an attempt to hide this fact.

I've always enjoyed movie musicals but not all-sung musical theatre. yes, there have been musicals that have been all sung before but they are all adaptations of musical theatre shows (Jesus Christ Superstar, Phantom, Sweeney Todd, Nine etc)

By its nature, Les Mis is a very bombastic, in-your-face show and if you go in not realising what it's going to be like, you're going to struggle. I remember it took me years to get past the first 20 minutes or so of Moulin Rouge as it felt like i was being attacked by the film rather than watching it.

Whatever Les Mis is, it certainly isn't easy to watch with misery upon misery and i expect the film is the same

I do feel sorry for people who are dragged along by someone devoted to / obsessed with the show. Within 20 minutes you'll know it's not for you. Then not only do you have to sit through the rest but will then end up being argued with when you say it was a relief that it's over

[tally]

Originally Posted by revans9

have no intention of seeing Les Mis (was left nonplussed by the stage show) but this thread makes for an entertaining read! I knew when I saw the trailer that it was all-sung but there was definitely an attempt to hide this fact.

I've always enjoyed movie musicals but not all-sung musical theatre. yes, there have been musicals that have been all sung before but they are all adaptations of musical theatre shows (Jesus Christ Superstar, Phantom, Sweeney Todd, Nine etc)

By its nature, Les Mis is a very bombastic, in-your-face show and if you go in not realising what it's going to be like, you're going to struggle. I remember it took me years to get past the first 20 minutes or so of Moulin Rouge as it felt like i was being attacked by the film rather than watching it.

Whatever Les Mis is, it certainly isn't easy to watch with misery upon misery and i expect the film is the same

I do feel sorry for people who are dragged along by someone devoted to / obsessed with the show. Within 20 minutes you'll know it's not for you. Then not only do you have to sit through the rest but will then end up being argued with when you say it was a relief that it's over

Great post and a refreshing outlook about it! It's fine to hate it, every genre has it's obsessives, I just am a tad (Ha!) obsessive about Les Miz. Just like Harry Potter fans used to be queuing up at midnight to be the first to get their hands on a new book or film. Each to their own, eh?

I'm perfectly normal in my views on anything else. Honest!

[revans9]

Originally Posted by tally

Great post and a refreshing outlook about it! It's fine to hate it, every genre has it's obsessives, I just am a tad (Ha!) obsessive about Les Miz. Just like Harry Potter fans used to be queuing up at midnight to be the first to get their hands on a new book or film. Each to their own, eh?

I'm perfectly normal in my views on anything else. Honest!

i believe you! My Dad's been to see the stage show twice and enjoyed the film, a few criticisms echoing some of the things said on here. but he's already asked me when the dvd is coming out. oddly he doesn't like film musicals, just les mis, blood brothers and the like!

It's clearly a great film if you already enjoy the show or are prepared for what it's like. It's just not something I think I could manage to get through comfortably and it seems quite a few people are in the same boat

[Blah123]

FINALLY been to see it.

Hathaway was just sublime. Her performance was out of this world good. I really like Jackman, Seyfried, Barks and Redmayne.

BUT

Crowe was definitely miscast. His voice was too monotone - especially since he has the most numbers to sing. Kind of ruined it for me.

I also really liked Helena and Sasha - nice comedic interludes.

[ChrissieAO]

I am a huge Les Mis fan and been to see it 7 times. I enjoyed the film a lot, I thought Hugh Jackman was brilliant if a bit young for the part of Jean Valjean, or should I say he did not seem to age at all. I thought he was supposed to be old in the end and he still only looked about 40.
Eddie Redmayne was good but in my opinion nobody compares to the original Marius, Michael Ball.
My only disappointment was Russell Crowe's rendition of 'Stars'. I had the good fortune to see Michael McCarthy sing it, now that man has a voice...

[SULLA]

Originally Posted by Bluray

As I have said, I totally understand the passion and love for Les Mis, I myself am very passionate about certain genres and specific films but I certainly don't look down on people who don't immediately share the passion.

So please enlighten me where the inverted snobbery lies within my post.

Look down, look down,
Upon your fellow man!

Spoiler

Only joking

[streetwise]

Originally Posted by SULLA

Look down, look down,
Upon your fellow man!

Spoiler

Only joking

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."

[scragend]

Originally Posted by ChrissieAO

Eddie Redmayne was good but in my opinion nobody compares to the original Marius, Michael Ball.

Agreed about Michael Ball.

To be fair to Redmayne though, his performance was the one that I was most surprised about (in a good way). When he played Stephen Wraysford in Birdsong I didn't rate him as an actor, but I thought he was excellent in Les Mis.

[scragend]

Originally Posted by streetwise

"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."

In their multitudes...

[tracystapes]

I adore 'On My Own',

[SCD-Observer]

Originally Posted by ChrissieAO

I am a huge Les Mis fan and been to see it 7 times. I enjoyed the film a lot, I thought Hugh Jackman was brilliant if a bit young for the part of Jean Valjean, or should I say he did not seem to age at all. I thought he was supposed to be old in the end and he still only looked about 40.
Eddie Redmayne was good but in my opinion nobody compares to the original Marius, Michael Ball.
My only disappointment was Russell Crowe's rendition of 'Stars'. I had the good fortune to see Michael McCarthy sing it, now that man has a voice...

They did make a (rather good) attempt at making him look significantly older and more haggard towards the end. Wonder if you've been paying attention to his 'make up' after all?

[Mystical123]

Originally Posted by SCD-Observer

They did make a (rather good) attempt at making him look significantly older and more haggard towards the end. Wonder if you've been paying attention to his 'make up' after all?

I don't think that made much difference to be honest, even in the sewer scenes just before that he didn't look much older at all.

[SULLA]

Originally Posted by scragend

In their multitudes...

scarce to be counted

[SCD-Observer]

Originally Posted by Mystical123

I don't think that made much difference to be honest, even in the sewer scenes just before that he didn't look much older at all.

You need to watch it again. I've watched the film twice now and the second time I made it a point to see how the make-up of Hugh went, and he did visibly age over the 'years' the film was depicting.

[SULLA]

Originally Posted by SCD-Observer

You need to watch it again. I've watched the film twice now and the second time I made it a point to see how the make-up of Hugh went, and he did visibly age over the 'years' the film was depicting.

However, he didn't look like a bloke who was going to suddenly die a few weeks after carrying someone for 'miles'

[Mystical123]

Originally Posted by SCD-Observer

You need to watch it again. I've watched the film twice now and the second time I made it a point to see how the make-up of Hugh went, and he did visibly age over the 'years' the film was depicting.

I have watched it twice as well, and I stand by what I said. He looked ill, but not aged as such. But it's a common criticism of Valjeans in the stage show as well.

[ChrissieAO]

Originally Posted by Mystical123

I have watched it twice as well, and I stand by what I said. He looked ill, but not aged as such. But it's a common criticism of Valjeans in the stage show as well.

The Jean Valjean's I have seen on stage have looked and acted older, grey hair, etc and to be fair it is easier in the theatre because unless you are right at the front you cannot make out in detail the faces of the actors.
But even with make up in his last few scenes Hugh Jackman did not look an old man.
He looked like he was dying from a heart condition and in the book he actually dies of old age.

[SCD-Observer]

Originally Posted by SULLA

However, he didn't look like a bloke who was going to suddenly die a few weeks after carrying someone for 'miles'

He became sick after he carried Marius, did you consider that as the plot?

[SCD-Observer]

Originally Posted by Mystical123

I have watched it twice as well, and I stand by what I said. He looked ill, but not aged as such. But it's a common criticism of Valjeans in the stage show as well.

He looked older (more grey hairs on the side) and ill of course towards the end, esp. after he carried Marius through the sewers.

[Galinda]

Agree with all who have said Hugh didn't seem to age much. They didn't even make him go grey.

For anyone who has read the book (it's on my to do list!) does victor Hugo say how old valjean is during any point of the novel. Also does he describe valjean as having a beard? I'm used to him having a beard cos of the musical I find it weird he doesn't have a beard through out the film!

[SULLA]

Originally Posted by SCD-Observer

He became sick after he carried Marius, did you consider that as the plot?

As a fan of Les Mis, I just think that it's strange

[timebug]

I believe Valjean's age is never mentioned in
the book:BUT...he had served 19 years in
prison before his parole.Assuming he was
18 or 20 when he was originally convicted
that makes him around 40 at the start of
the story. He becomes the mayor and runs
the factory (no timescale given in the book)
BEFORE rescuing Cosette from the Thenardiers.
She then grows to adulthood.So,depending how
long he was mayor/building up the business etc,
that puts him nearer sixty by the end.
I don't know what the average lifespan of a man
was in those days,but given his hard times in the
prison,not an unreasonable age to die,given the
circumstances?

[tally]

I sat in the fourth row of the stalls the first time I ever saw it and while (obviously) I utterly adored and loved it from the start, the one off putting thing was the greasepaint aging which looked so fake up close.
As it was Colm Wilkinson it didn't make me cry less, but you so couldn't age like that on film, they have much better makeup for screen. I thought they could have gone a bit more with the grey, but it didn't make a wit of difference IMO.

On the Marius IS Michael Ball, I thought the same, Colm was the definitive JVJ and Philip Quast the best Javert ever.
I have now conceded after several watches and listenings, that Alfie Boe sings just as well if not better than Colm Wilkinson, but can he act as well? Same with Marius. I thought Eddie was fantastic and as Michael Ball said "Marius is a wimp" Eddie was allowed and scripted to make him a much deeper character and his singing was great.

I think Philip Quast is safe as my No 1 Javert, however.