I have mixed feelings about this film. I'm not sure that they are entirely justified since Hooper & Co. did so many things right, but it's the sort of feeling that comes from watching something that could have been perfect, making the imperfections stand out all the more.*
First, the shoutouts:
- "I Dreamed a Dream" and the Finale were acted, filmed, orchestrated, and edited with great emotional impact. I really liked the giant barricade of Heaven; it was a great way to end the show.
- Anne Hathaway, take a well deserved bow, and probably an Oscar. Sam Barks (wearing a truly wtf corset) also did awesome, but I was expecting that. Hathaway was a surprise.
- A commitment to the essence of the musical and generally the book - they stayed true to the source material that hasn't been the case in other circumstances. Cameron MacKintosh held his ground.
Context: I'm just not sure that taking every song and sung dialogue made it into a better movie - just a more faithful musical (except why no Eponine + Fantine in the last scene - that harmony is SO GOOD). Removing a few of the songs out and adding some expository dialogue could have immersed us a little more in the screenplay in partnership with the scenes and staging; as it was I felt rushed from song to song to song for the entire movie. We need a director's cut that gives us more time to breathe. Then again, there have been many Les Mis movies already without singing, so that territory had already been explored. Eh.(update: here's some background info on those choices from the screenwriter)
Closeups: Also, running from close-up-shot song to close-up-shot song left no room for the epic context that we glimpsed in the zoom-out "scene change" moments. It was especially biting in pieces that were written for more than one person to sing together, like "A Heart Full of Love." The movie makes the factual situation clear, but the resonance of the scene isn't in the fact that Eponine is watching these two - it's in watching them AND watching her watching them juxtaposed, which was something the movie audience had to imagine instead of seeing directly. Showing us the zoomed-in emotions of each individual became a every-song-trope, lessening the effectiveness of later ballads like "On My Own" and "Empty Chairs," which as individual songs are actually all about the single characters. Hooper defends himself here, saying he cut the film this way since the close-ups had more emotional power, but it's a tragedy of the commons scenario. Each time this route is taken it lessens the effect later on.
Casting: My greatest gripe.. I get the appeal of big names, and it really worked with Hathaway, but Jackman, Sigfried, and Crowe grated on me a little. My Jackman gripes are about style, which is forgivable, and Sigfried's part didn't demand super power, but Crowe was outmatched by his part. I liked everything surrounding his character - the actions, the context of walking high, etc - but Crowe just doesn't have the full vocal muscle that many of these people have, and it showed. Vibrato only works when deployed correctly, and it wasn't often here.
Still an awesome movie, still probably a DVD I'll be buying, but it could have been better. Alas.
*As a fellow content creator I know that this is patently unfair, since there were so many countless things done right, with great effort, that no one noticed because they were done right. Derp.
Having never seen Les Mis before (and having shielded myself from all plot spoilers in an attempt to give this version an unbiased viewing), I have to say that Jackman really shanked it. Crowe made what could have been a rockstar part into a kind of boring tagalong character, but Jackman actively sucked the emotion out of any scene he injected himself into.
ReplyDeleteAnne Hathaway was in what, 10min of the movie? Yet somehow, she was the entire soul of it. She was what made me care at all, the only one who made the songs seem entirely natural because she was ALREADY portraying that much emotion, and because she brought them to life. This completely changed my opinions on her as an actress, and I hope it sets her career on fire.
I'm totally with you on the context/closeup commentaries. I also have to say, as it was my first exposure to it, that this was a WONDERFUL plot. I was so worried that Eponine was going to turn it into a typical overdramatic revenge-y love triangle thing, but she was just a beautiful person. It was incredibly bittersweet (as was most everything else).
TL;DR you're letting Jackman off the hook waaaaayy to easily there, though I admit it's easier to give Crowe crap because you'd think he of all people would be better at playing "self-righteous and indignant".
The thing about Jackman is that as much as I didn't like his barking, slightly manic Valjean, it's a valid interpretation of the character. Very much not Colm Wilkenson-y, but Valjean is kind of defined by his ticks and emotional weirdness. It's his actions that have power, and his words, not his manner about them.
ReplyDeleteAnd you should read the book to get the full Eponine tragedy.
Your "closeup" comment pretty well articulates my main gripe, although I couldn't put my finger on it-- I had that slightly dissonant feeling of being aware of the ways in which the cinematic intensity was trying to manipulate my emotions, but the cumulative effect was almost draining.
ReplyDeleteStill, a wonderful movie-- I was impressed (and occasionally pleasantly surprised) by the talent.