Universal Pictures | Release Date: December 25, 2012
7.4
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 815 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
599
Mixed:
139
Negative:
77
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
10
megan_moviesFeb 19, 2013
Les Miserables is an amazing musical now created into an on screen film. The songs are sung beautifully and passionately, and all actors and actresses sing gloriously, including Amanda Seyfried, Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Samantha Banks andLes Miserables is an amazing musical now created into an on screen film. The songs are sung beautifully and passionately, and all actors and actresses sing gloriously, including Amanda Seyfried, Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Samantha Banks and Eddie Redmayne. I loved this film even more than the musical. Very moving and powerful and up there with a lot of the top films. Not surprised at all that this film has already won tonnes of awards and now nominated for several Oscars, including best supporting actress, best production design, best costume design, make up, original song and sound mixing!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
mikepariscriticFeb 16, 2013
A wonderful tribute to the 1982 French musical. And yes, time has passed since the 1980s and its torrents of emotion and tears but the initial concept is here, honored and magnified. Surely, one the best musical on screen after Moulin Rouge.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Pingu21Feb 14, 2013
I never read the book (or see the musical) but most of the story is part of general knowledge in France, everybody know Jean Valjean and the candlestick, the Tavernier or the song of Gavroche for example.
The film is great, really. The
I never read the book (or see the musical) but most of the story is part of general knowledge in France, everybody know Jean Valjean and the candlestick, the Tavernier or the song of Gavroche for example.
The film is great, really. The visual is amazing with several memorable shot, musics are splendid and most of the actors fits fully in their character (Russel Crow is incredible).
But the "98% song" of the movie is probably too much. I like musicals but song lose their impact when characters were already singing just before and continue just after. And few times it sounds quite ridiculous to heard someone sing just for 3 words. Plus I'm not sure that the story need a comic part with characters originally awful. Finally some turning point of the story don't have epic music like what could have been expected.
PS: the fact that all the writing and few single words are in French is a nice touch (necessary but nice)
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
ScornholioFeb 13, 2013
I HATE MUSICALS. But...this movie was fantastic. Thank God the singing was real and not recorded and then lip synched to the action. One of the best movies I have ever seen. High Jackman should get an Oscar for this movie!!! Totally NOTI HATE MUSICALS. But...this movie was fantastic. Thank God the singing was real and not recorded and then lip synched to the action. One of the best movies I have ever seen. High Jackman should get an Oscar for this movie!!! Totally NOT my type of movie at all but even I could see its brilliance and I really enjoyed it. The entire audience applauded at the end as if there were live performers. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
FilmisFeb 13, 2013
An amazing film! Emotionally draining but for good reason, although do not watch if you are tired. I have never seen the stage production but would definitely like to after watching the film. Anne Hathaway's performance as Fontine is tearAn amazing film! Emotionally draining but for good reason, although do not watch if you are tired. I have never seen the stage production but would definitely like to after watching the film. Anne Hathaway's performance as Fontine is tear jerking and amazing, it has such an impact on the whole film especially as she only has 15 minutes of screen time in a 3 hour film. Also brilliant performances from Eddie Redmayne and Hugh jackman. The singing is all recorded live apart from the first scene because of the water hazard, and this allows you to really connect with the emotions of the songs and enjoy the rawness of the voices with every crackle in the actors voices only helps to tell to tell their character's story. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
Cuba68Feb 12, 2013
Les Miserables is cinematic gold. It is the movie that has confirmed the renaissance in movie making. A healthy story line that is complemented by strong relationships between the characters is captivating from start to finish. Hugh JackmansLes Miserables is cinematic gold. It is the movie that has confirmed the renaissance in movie making. A healthy story line that is complemented by strong relationships between the characters is captivating from start to finish. Hugh Jackmans performance as Jean Valjean is exceptional and leaving me for one captivated along with many other performances. Anne Hathaway had me casting her as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady as I just admired her performance a performance to me that Hollywood has longed for. Even Russell Crowe had you warming to him in the end and surprised me in the way he gave such a Steller performance. Les Miserables is an epic in all sense of the word. For such a movie to be vying for attention with the likes of Argo, Django Unchained, Lincoln etc is a compliment in itself and the choice of using song as the narrative was maybe daring but certainly genius. Could the movie been made any more better. Personally the answer is no and the reason why I give this film such a high score. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
DheardziminFeb 12, 2013
Fabulous cinematography amazing acting (apart from Russell Crowe whose singing us abysmal) Hugh Jackman shines and Anne Hathaway us simply amazing. I did not expect to enjoy this movie but left the cinema completely in love with it
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
freeze10Feb 10, 2013
Let me start by saying that over all this was a great movie. It isn't necessarily as perfect as some people say it is. First, Anne Hathaway was incredible in every form of creating herself as Fantine and could connect emotionally winning overLet me start by saying that over all this was a great movie. It isn't necessarily as perfect as some people say it is. First, Anne Hathaway was incredible in every form of creating herself as Fantine and could connect emotionally winning over every audience truely deserving every award she is nominated for. The reason this doesn't exactly get a ten in my book is because not all of the actors in this movie delivered amazing performances. Amanda Seyfried turned a ten dimensional character into just one and I felt like the guy playing Marius was just static the whole time. Everyone also must remember that Les Miserables is a contemporary opera meaning that basically every word is being sung. Overall, the movie was fantastic and I recommend that everyone should see it. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
ChoicestGamesFeb 10, 2013
Really brought 19th Century France to life. Having never watched the musical, I'm not able to compare it to that, but it seemed to be pretty good in its own right. Music was great although some of the actors were really straining to singReally brought 19th Century France to life. Having never watched the musical, I'm not able to compare it to that, but it seemed to be pretty good in its own right. Music was great although some of the actors were really straining to sing their parts at times. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
Tulips111Feb 10, 2013
The whole movie is tedious. The singing was too much and acting was pretentious.
It's totally the opposite experience while I was watching Moulin Rouge. Moulin Rouge is way much better than Les Miserables.
1 of 12 users found this helpful111
All this user's reviews
7
mmh35Feb 8, 2013
It had been some time since the last time I saw a movie musical. I don't flock to just any. Mamma Mia and Chicago were the last ones I saw. When I heared that Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway were doing a movie together and that Tom Hooper whoIt had been some time since the last time I saw a movie musical. I don't flock to just any. Mamma Mia and Chicago were the last ones I saw. When I heared that Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway were doing a movie together and that Tom Hooper who directed The King's Speech was doing it I thought how could it miss? Well Hugh, Anne and newcomer Samantha Barks aside, I had some issues with it. Russell Crowe for instance. He's a really good actor. He's just not plausible in a movie musical. While I enjoyed Helena Bonham Carter and Sasha Baren Cohens parts and thought Eddie Redmayne was adorable the rest of the film felt overstuffed. Hathaway is the best thing about the movie. Jackman is the second best thing about it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
reddave2Feb 8, 2013
Two things to clarify 1. I am not a musical movie fan in general 2. I have never seen the stage show of Les Mis. With that in mind, maybe this film was always facing an uphill battle to impress me. However I had heard some great stuff fromTwo things to clarify 1. I am not a musical movie fan in general 2. I have never seen the stage show of Les Mis. With that in mind, maybe this film was always facing an uphill battle to impress me. However I had heard some great stuff from friends and family going in so I had the best of intentions. And for the first 45 minutes, things went fine. Jackman was immense (throughout), Crowe seemed a suitable foil and Hathaways short span in the film contained (for me) the best performance and song. So far, so good.

But then things started to sag. The songs didnt grab as the first few had (although not for lack of performance). New characters came and added little (I would even argue the revolutionaries detracted) and the plot wobbled along. Then in the final third it creaked and pretty much fell over. The love story is tacked on, at best. The resolution to Javerts pursuit of Valjean is... well, its bloody stupid to be honest. And by this point, my arse had grown numb thanks to the 150+ minutes running time. I left the cinema wondering what the fuss was about.

Still, as I clarified, maybe this was never for me. I can recognise that Jackman was terrific throughout and that some of the numbers are iconic. The set design in the first half is lovely too (the barricades near the end, however, look like a musical). But at the end of the day, I didn't enjoy it. Worse, it wouldn't encourage me to take in the actual musical either.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
StrawberryBlondFeb 6, 2013
Any film that features actors in singing roles is going to get criticism. I knew that Anne Hathaway could sing well anyway and Hugh Jackman came from a musical theatre background, so at least we've got two crucial roles that could be decent.Any film that features actors in singing roles is going to get criticism. I knew that Anne Hathaway could sing well anyway and Hugh Jackman came from a musical theatre background, so at least we've got two crucial roles that could be decent. As much as I liked Anne's rendition of I Dreamed A Dream, I just feel like she was trying a bit too hard to win an Oscar what with the repertoire of extreme facial expressions she crammed in there (at least it looks like not one of those actors uses Botox because I could count every wrinkle on their foreheads what with all the close-ups while they sang). I was blown away by Samantha Bark's performance and found it hard to believe that she was once that young girl from the Isle of Mann who was on the UK reality show, I'd Do Anything to win a role as Nancy in Lloyd Webber's production of Oliver. Back then, I didn't think her acting and singing were anything special, but after this, wow. She's clearly been well trained in the years since she became a theatre actress. I have to say, I preferred her the most out of all the actresses in this movie and I wish she could have got nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar because she certainly earned it. I can't say the rest of the cast had me gripped. Helena Bonham Carter has to be one of the most typecast actresses in Hollywood and her presence made the film seem too Tim Burton like, Russell Crowe didn't seem to be giving it his all and Amanda Seyfried just can't seem to get an amazing role where everyone can admire her acting. This 2012 adaption is what it is: an adapation. Not amazing, but not bad either. It is cheaper than seeing it at the theatre and it's condensed down more, but if you can afford theatre tickets and can last through a full length opera, best go see it on the stage, where the actors can sing and act to the highest ability. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
lasttimeisawFeb 6, 2013
A full-house weekend cinema viewing, maybe a second-row syndrome which left my anticipation unfulfilled. First of all, I never successfully accustomed to the “all sung script”bravura which blatantly dissolved the narrative into a mess ofA full-house weekend cinema viewing, maybe a second-row syndrome which left my anticipation unfulfilled. First of all, I never successfully accustomed to the “all sung script”bravura which blatantly dissolved the narrative into a mess of inconsistent singing ballyhoo, yes, I aware it is a musical film, but the semi-sing,semi-speak preposterousness is so distracting as if we were watching aliens perform their own performing art, a dreadful insouciant nonchalance has penetrated from the beginning to the very end. Secondly, the singing expertise from the cast is uneven, I don’t intend to name the black sheep here, just wonder what’s the advantage of adapting a musical into a feature film if the latter’s voice prowess cannot keep in the same level albeit putting money to create more detailed settings instead of simple tableaux on the stage. There must be some artistic reasons behind but for the profitable perspective with exponentially-surging attendance. I may opt for a stage musical against my film aficionado predilection. Special congratulations to Anne Hathaway and Samantha Barks, their solo renditions alone are worth the ticket (maybe a soundtrack is more felicitous), Hathaway will 99% sure win her first Oscar, and she should perform in the upcoming Grammy awards as well. Barks is a new-found gem, but whether or not she can leap into a stardom out of the genre is a moot. Hugh Jackman finally gets his hard-earned Oscar nomination, but impaired by the sketchy and episodic storytelling, it is far from an award-worthy leading performance. Eddie Redmayne and Amanda Seyfried are adequate, while Helena and Sacha pair engenders a Burton-esque high spirit to offset the dreary misery and wide-eyed revolutionist mirage. Fairly speaking, Tom Hooper’s workmanship doesn’t generate too much excitement, starts with his shaky camera, eerie and undetermined, the CGI surroundings can hardly be called innovative, as an Oscar-winning director, his unjust fluke will sooner or later boomerang on his own luck.

Sorry for grudging all over the place, I am pining for some involving lifelike revelations, clearly I am pigeonholing myself into the wrong consumer coterie, or simply don't watch any film in the second row.
Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
StevenFFeb 6, 2013
Masterful, emotional, and some of the best performances of the actors and actresses careers, Les Miserables is one of the best films to appear in the last several years.
The fantastically talented Hugh Jackman stars as Jean Valjean, a man
Masterful, emotional, and some of the best performances of the actors and actresses careers, Les Miserables is one of the best films to appear in the last several years.
The fantastically talented Hugh Jackman stars as Jean Valjean, a man who is granted parole after nineteen years serving under prison guard Javert (Russell Crowe) for stealing bread.
He soon seeks forgiveness and breaks his parole to start a good and honest life as a mayor of a small French town. Here me meet the troubled Fantine (Anne Hathaway) and of course the one of the best numbers of the film, I Dreamed A Dream, which, by Hathaway, is a beautifully crafted piece of cinema, its hard not to feel emotional and but utterly shocked at how brilliant it is.
Comedic performances from Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen are not to be painted over, they both a valued presence as the guardians of Fantine's illegitimate daughter Cosette played as an adult by Amanda Seyfried), who is later cared for and raised by Jean Valjean.
Jackman's rendition later in the film of "Bring Him Home' was powerful and solidified his performance as historic and hard to replicate. His entire performance throughout the film helps to recognise his character. know him, and feel his grief.
Amanda Seyfried's limited performance was excellent, mimicking her singing prowess from Mamma Mia!,
Anne Hathaway shows her diversity, after her captivating performance as Selina Kyle in last years Dark Knight Rises, her transformation to Fantine is remarkable.
The film debut of Samantha Barks, who starred in the stage show, plays Eponine, the daughters of Baron Cohen's and Bonham Carter's characters, her screen presence his excellent and lets hope this is the start of bigger and better things.
Its safe to say that Les Miserables isn't for everyone, at 158 mins long, it certainly is a long film, and the singing is constant, however, this certainly didn't deter me from watching a fantastic adaption, but it isn't difficult to see how this wouldn't satisfy everyone.
The live-set singing certainly benefits the emotional depth of the movie, its shocking to read the lengths Hugh Jackman went to to prepare for his role, and it certainly showed as he was the standout of the film, from start to finish. Les Miserables does set out to amaze, and with phenomenal performances, wonderful sets and musical numbers that won't be forgotten, it certainly is breathtaking and i left the cinema with a smile on my face. With joy and sorrow combined, this is one mixed bag of emotional wizardry that will live on forever.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
charlotteydwiFeb 5, 2013
A beautifully immersive take on a timeless musical. The acting and singing were equally amazing. I was definitely not disappointed with this film and would recommend a watch to anyone.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
BikerjamesFeb 4, 2013
I know now why they call it "Les Miserables". I was miserable watching it! First of all, there is no spoken dialog, so be prepared for that. When they are singing the dialog it is absolutely tuneless and meandering. I liked Hugh Jackman'sI know now why they call it "Les Miserables". I was miserable watching it! First of all, there is no spoken dialog, so be prepared for that. When they are singing the dialog it is absolutely tuneless and meandering. I liked Hugh Jackman's upper register but didn't care for his lower register, but his acting was flawless. Anne Hathaway also has a nice voice and turns in a great performance. People are complaining about Russell Crowe's voice, but I thought he did a fine job. He sings in tune, he just doesn't have a voice that projects. It's fine for the movie version. There are many unnecessary extreme close-ups throughout the film, and the film is a downer throughout. One over-dramatic moment after another. This is a long movie and I looked at my watch many times hoping it would end soon. The acting is good throughout, but the story was boring and I didn't care for the opera-style musical with no spoken dialog. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
4
ZarchonFeb 4, 2013
My wife and I both cried watching this movie. The problem is we cried for different reasons. She had an emotional attachment to the movie because of her childhood. I cried because this was horrible. Letting the actors sing live and goingMy wife and I both cried watching this movie. The problem is we cried for different reasons. She had an emotional attachment to the movie because of her childhood. I cried because this was horrible. Letting the actors sing live and going with that was a big mistake. I have to believe that people voting this good, even the Oscar nominations, are all because you are SUPPOSED to like this rather than anyone actually liking it. Every time someone other than Anne Hathaway sang, you are pulled out of the movie. I have heard better singers at a Karaoke bar. they need to go back and clean up the terrible singing before they release this on DVD. While this isn't the worst movie I have seen this year (Movie 43) this was far more difficult to sit through. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
sanyrubFeb 3, 2013
I´m not that into musicals and I was a virgin when it comes to this one: Les Miserables. I don´t know if there have been better adaptations before this one (I doubt it). I was a little afraid before seeing it cos such a long movie and allI´m not that into musicals and I was a virgin when it comes to this one: Les Miserables. I don´t know if there have been better adaptations before this one (I doubt it). I was a little afraid before seeing it cos such a long movie and all singing, or at least 90%, I had never experienced before... But damn, I was in shock at some of the songs, the performances, the atmosphere. There is a first part a little bit more tedious if you want (still with some amazing scenes). But the rest was just incredible. Could not wait to see what was going to come next and it was a big roller coaster of emotions non stop. So emotive and passionate. The performances: all of them so great including the kids. It´s true Russell Crow´s voice is not made for musicals but it was nice to see his different singing style in his scenes. So it was even a plus for me. Probably the highlight as a solo performance is Anne Hathaway´s "I dreamed a dream" but I´m serious when I say there are so many equally impact ful moments from the rest of the cast after that as the story continues
I was surprised and impacted. I need to check more musicals I guess
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
mmweissFeb 3, 2013
Self indulgent and pretentious. This defines pretty well what Tom Hooper´s Les Miserables is. The camera is always in the wrong place. The tight shots make the production design seem like a waste and the actors look bad, embracing theirSelf indulgent and pretentious. This defines pretty well what Tom Hooper´s Les Miserables is. The camera is always in the wrong place. The tight shots make the production design seem like a waste and the actors look bad, embracing their over-acting. There is no dialogue, everything is sung, there is no silent moment and there is absolutely no subtlety. Everything is bad, nobody can really sing (especially Russel Crowe) and the performances are so weird and over the top. The only thing that saves this movie from complete disaster is the beautiful production design. Definitely not a must-see. Expand
8 of 18 users found this helpful810
All this user's reviews
6
NedRyerson1Jan 31, 2013
Les Miserables, the new adaptation by Tom Hooper of the classic novel written by Victor Hugo is absolutely touching, emotional and overwhelming. There is nothing to say about the story because is a universal masterpiece, so the stronghold isLes Miserables, the new adaptation by Tom Hooper of the classic novel written by Victor Hugo is absolutely touching, emotional and overwhelming. There is nothing to say about the story because is a universal masterpiece, so the stronghold is the performances and the interpretations of the typical songs. The most incredible jobs are the ones of Jackman as Valjean, whose most amazing performance is Suddenly, the only original song in this version of Les Miserables; then we have the surprising Anne Hathaway, who with a heart full interpretation of I Dream a Dream in just one take, can make anyone shiver; also there is Crowe as Javert, who gives an excellent representation of the ambivalence of the character. Other well played characters are Gavroche and the Thenardiers. However the protagonist couple is deficient, Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne as Cosette and Marius are not believable at all. Other beautiful songs are Look Down, At the End of the Day, Empty Chairs at Empty Tables and Do You Hear the People Sing? This is a more than acceptable adaptation and Tom Hopper did a fine job in directing, apparently he likes to show an enormous conflict but from the perspective of a single human being trying to change his life, the same as in The Kings Speech. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
VinceMJan 31, 2013
This wonderful film version of the musical play is truly a delight on so many levels. Several years ago I viewed the theatre version in London and, although the music was grand, it was hard to understand the story - I had not read the bookThis wonderful film version of the musical play is truly a delight on so many levels. Several years ago I viewed the theatre version in London and, although the music was grand, it was hard to understand the story - I had not read the book by Victor Hugo. For example, the very funny sequence, "Master of the House," did not make any sense. Well, that is all cleared up in this film - some comedy is necessary to balance the enormous human suffering, both emotional and physical which is the plight of the masses in nineteenth centure France under the kings. This movie definitely has its flaws, especially going in and out of focus on the close ups of the solos and some of the singing - Russel Crowe sometimes is flat or off key at times. The director, Hooper, took great risks by filming the singing live instead of the usual methods. But, these matters pale in comparison to the power of the emotional drama and the impact on an audience. Crowe gives a brilliant performance as Javert. This film will go down as an extraordinary classic of the cinema. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
AD_PhoenixJan 30, 2013
As a person who isn't a huge fan of musicals, I was surprised by how good the film is. It drew me in with its amazing acting, inspiring music and visuals, and the vocals were truly immense; you could tell that each actor gave it 100% toAs a person who isn't a huge fan of musicals, I was surprised by how good the film is. It drew me in with its amazing acting, inspiring music and visuals, and the vocals were truly immense; you could tell that each actor gave it 100% to ensure that they acted throughout their music. A captivating tale featuring an extremely talented cast, especially the rightly acclaimed Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway, whose performances drew me to tears on more than one occasion, with goosebumps throughout. A classic musical helmed by a brilliant director, Les Misérables is sure to go home happy on Oscars night. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
LivvyRae14Jan 28, 2013
Les Miserables had several talented actors and actresses however it had too many slow parts to it. The movie really made me just want to fall asleep. I literally did fall asleep for about ten or fifteen minutes of it. I was alsoLes Miserables had several talented actors and actresses however it had too many slow parts to it. The movie really made me just want to fall asleep. I literally did fall asleep for about ten or fifteen minutes of it. I was also disappointed that Anne Hathaway was only in such a small portion of the movie. I expected her to have appearances the whole movie and not just mainly in the beginning. Also, the movie was just to long. I could not focus on the movie at all. I did not give it a rating of below a five because the one thing they did good was the graphics and the excellent musical aspects. I would recommend that everyone see's the movie, but wait until it is on DVD so you can start and pause the movie as it seems to drag on and on. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
Jamesj3111Jan 28, 2013
This movie is a Rorschach Test for moviegoers. Some people love it, some hate it. I'm in the former camp, and don't understand the vitriolic rants of the latter. Some of the anger that foments from this movie suggests to me that theThis movie is a Rorschach Test for moviegoers. Some people love it, some hate it. I'm in the former camp, and don't understand the vitriolic rants of the latter. Some of the anger that foments from this movie suggests to me that the reviewers might have more issues than the movie.

Come on. Its a musical. It's light entertainment to cheer you up, lift your spirits. In that regard its a wonderful movie.

Ok, let's evaluate the film on very basic levels: Entertaining=yes, Cast=great, Visually rich=yes, Music=great songs of course. Some users/reviewers actually base their rating/impression of the movie on the camera work ("the camera work was shoddy"). Go see it. Ignore the snotty reviews.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
Carol1000Jan 28, 2013
Rather disappointing considering all the hype...

IMHO, the worst thing about this movie wasn't any single performance since the acting was generally good and no better or worse than most big-cast movies...rather, it was the direction. When
Rather disappointing considering all the hype...

IMHO, the worst thing about this movie wasn't any single performance since the acting was generally good and no better or worse than most big-cast movies...rather, it was the direction. When you take a musical with a pretty full plot, it's not easy but the director did not take advantage of the fact that a movie was being made. Compared to Chicago, another musical turned movie, the direction and sets in Chicago made you feel believe the singing adapted and suited the plot and not nice versa. Some details, without any spoilers...
- there were way too many closeups of people's faces and for too long. This is what they do in musicals, i.e., focus on one character at a time. But this is a movie and you can zoom out and show the environment, give the audience a better feel of the surroundings, and create a scene that's not limited to what can fit on a theatre stage. I felt the director lost sight of this as during most songs, all you saw was one face on about 2/3 of the screen, and had no idea what, if anything, was in the background. I think this, above all else, ruined the film
- I don't think the plot was clear and wasn't laid out very well considering it was about the same length as the show and the show does it soooooo much better
- Too much focus on crying and not as much on acting
- Having known the plot in advance and having seen the rebellion before, I didn't think it was clear why there was a revolution at all
- Some very good performances, such as Jean Valjean, Gavroche, Marius, and to a lesser extent, Fantine
- Not so good performances included Javert, Cosette (her acting was fine, but she was the wrong voice type for her talent and I felt they just really wanted her to be in the movie), and young Cosette
- I was indifferent with the innkeeper, his wife, and Eponine. Again, not a lot of acting and too much concentration on getting the notes right (less so for Eponine who was a little better than that)
- I was impressed and not many will have recognized that the man who played the priest who takes pity on Valjean was none other than Colm Wilkinson, the original Phantom in Toronto, and who has also played Valjean many times on stage. That was a nice touch :)

1. Russell Crowe has tone but no power and cannot hold any of the long notes...sound like he was yelling. Also, not much acting as he seemed to be trying to concentrate on hitting the notes correctly and his facial expression never changed.

2. Anne Hathaway can sing but again, like Rusell Crowe, didn't have enough power in her voice. I'm being picky here but she has a number of bad habits in her singing, like taking a breath at times that seemed inappropriate with the melody of the songs

3. Hugh Jackman was worth watching and I would say he has the best voice in the cast as well as actually acted too.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
moonman1994Jan 28, 2013
Les Miserables was spectacularly done! It was beautiful to watch and was filled by outstanding performances by the entire cast. Yeah sure Russell Crowe was the weakest singer in the film but he wasn't bad. In fact I was surprised by the factLes Miserables was spectacularly done! It was beautiful to watch and was filled by outstanding performances by the entire cast. Yeah sure Russell Crowe was the weakest singer in the film but he wasn't bad. In fact I was surprised by the fact that he did a fairly good job singing the entire time. One thing I noticed while watching this movie is how well the atmosphere was set by the lighting and color saturation at certain times. Overall Les Miserables is beautiful to look at, engaging and filled with songs that will get stuck in your head for weeks. I'd definitely recommend it. And yes Anne Hathaway did have an amazing performance that could easily make grown men cry. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
foxgroveJan 28, 2013
It is now nearly thirty years ago that I saw the theatre production of Les Miserables and whilst I remember enjoying it at the time it hasn't remained prominent in my memory aside from THAT song. Therefore, I approached this new film versionIt is now nearly thirty years ago that I saw the theatre production of Les Miserables and whilst I remember enjoying it at the time it hasn't remained prominent in my memory aside from THAT song. Therefore, I approached this new film version with some trepidation aware that the first trailer for it had cheated somewhat by editing various images from the film to the aforementioned song. Also with Tom Hooper at the helm, and having been one of a minority of people who really disliked 'The King's Speech', I was doubly cautious. Gratifyingly all my misgivings are for nothing as the new film is nothing short of magnificent. In fact, the theatre experience is clarified and heightened here. The simple and effective story is propelled along by a stunningly beautiful score (I really didn't remember it being this good), a great sense of period, and committed performances which elicit emotional responses almost constantly. Tom Hooper has done the material proud and is well served by a magnificent cast. Hugh Jackman, it seems, was born to play Jean Valjean over punished for stealing a loaf of bread and then persecuted for ever after by Javert, played by Russell Crowe. Anne Hathaway is stunning and her delivery of the famous ' I dreamed a dream' is truly heartfelt. Eddie Redmayne, likewise, has a revelatory singing voice and also breaks your heart with his sorrowful rendition of 'Empty Chairs at Empty Tables' sung after his fellow revolutionaries are all killed. Samantha Barks' exquisite voice also has a great solo with the lovely 'On my Own', and Russell Crowe, after a shaky start, also pulls off a couple of songs with great aplomb, whilst showing us a conflicted character always on the edge (literally in a couple of scenes). It seems to me that he has been rather underrated in such exalted company, but he is excellent. Comic relief is provided by Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter during their rendition of 'Master in the House'. and only Amanda Seyfried comes over as a bit colourless and insipid. Hooper's decision to let the actors sing live is a very good one and adds to the cumulative emotional effect in scene after scene. Like wise, he opts for close ups when filming the big musical numbers, but he is in no way enslaved by them as the magnificent production design is often shown off to jaw dropping effect. Cinematography too is sublime and perfectly captures the contrasting worlds of the eclectic bunch of characters. The new song 'Suddenly' is slightly below par, and on a couple of occasions the score reminds me of the Lionel Bart musical 'oliver!' but this is only a fleeting recollection as Les Miserables is very much its own musical. At 158 minutes it is a long movie, and in truth there is a slight, if temporary, dip in interest around the 100 minute mark when the young revolutionaries take over the story. However, the big emotion emitted as the film races towards its finale soon puts any negative thoughts to bed. As the credits start to roll you sense the audience members just want to stand, as in a theatre, and applaud. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
canadianrugbyJan 28, 2013
If you hate musicals don't go see this, you will hate it. I went in thinking there would be a few songs, not that the whole movie would be non-stop singing and knew next to nothing of the story. I'm not a fan of musicals, but I am a fan ofIf you hate musicals don't go see this, you will hate it. I went in thinking there would be a few songs, not that the whole movie would be non-stop singing and knew next to nothing of the story. I'm not a fan of musicals, but I am a fan of well made movies. This was a well made movie. I enjoyed the story and the music, some of the performances blew me away. Anne Hathaway (sp?) singing "I dream a dream" was the best movie moment I've seen in a loooong long time. She will win an Oscar for it. I'm forced to give this movie a 10/10 even as not a fan of musicals. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
ClareizdacoolesJan 27, 2013
When I saw it the first time and started crying in empty chairs and empty tables and didn't stop till the end, i have never seen the play versions but i am positive that the emotion in them could not of compared with that of the movie. IWhen I saw it the first time and started crying in empty chairs and empty tables and didn't stop till the end, i have never seen the play versions but i am positive that the emotion in them could not of compared with that of the movie. I nagged my friends to see it for about a month and finally when they wouldn't allow us to see the rated R movie we planned on we went to see it. Before they said things like "that's not my kind of movie" and "i am not going to like it" but after it they gave me a hug and thanked me for nagging because that was the best movie they have ever seen. Me and my friends loved it and so will you! Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
KnowingspyJan 27, 2013
Director: Tom Hooper
Producer: Cameron Mackintosh
Actors: Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Russel Crowe, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Helena Botham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen If you haven't heard of Les Miserables or "Les Mis" before
Director: Tom Hooper
Producer: Cameron Mackintosh
Actors: Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Russel Crowe, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Helena Botham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen

If you haven't heard of Les Miserables or "Les Mis" before you are in for a treat. Well kind of. A 3 hour-long musical about the life of Jean Valjean and his adversary Javert may sound daunting for most people so if you despise musicals you may not bother going. There is little to no dialogue other than used to fill in a minute gap- I'm not joking. For example Javert tells Valjean to pick up a flag and then once it put down, they start singing again.

However, Tom Hooper manages to successfully bring the stage musical to the big screen by preserving what makes all stage musicals set above their polished counterparts- live singing. All the sharp notes and glorious imperfections have been preserved on camera and in my opinion, is all the better for it. For a musical that is driven by narrative it wouldn't make sense for a character like Fontine to be at her very bottom in life but still sound like she came from a recording studio. But this comes with its downsides; you may have heard about Russel Crowe- he isn't a great singer- and for many seemed like a odd cast considering he will be singing for the majority of the film. Is it a gamebreaker? No, I quite liked it but in a severly awkward, Dad singing at a bar kind of way. The lead Hugh Jackman acts his heart out but vocally, he struggles with the big notes in songs such as "Bring him Home".
Carter and Cohen act as much needed comic relief in the film, so don't need to be up to their best vocally and they know it.
I have to mention Amanda Seyfried. I know she can sing but personally, I hated her voice- so shrill and high and the way she does that vibrato-urgh! But mostly as a whole the singing and acting is solid with a special mention to first-time film actress Samantha Barks who reprises Eponine from the stage version. Wow!
This film offers something for everyone. It may not be the best version of this musical -go and see the stage version if you can- but it's a bloody good attempt at it.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
mau1133Jan 26, 2013
The was pretty intence at times, The casting was perfect and well it is a musical as you know, which i really prefer not to go see, but it was really well made and i guess i got used to every one singing instead of talking. Ann hathaway wasThe was pretty intence at times, The casting was perfect and well it is a musical as you know, which i really prefer not to go see, but it was really well made and i guess i got used to every one singing instead of talking. Ann hathaway was amazing, she sang beautifully. i felt it as a little long and it made me laugh a little to. there were a lot of other actors who did very well and i expect to be seeing them in other movies in the future. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
duromiJan 26, 2013
I love the story, but found this musical version perplexing. I understand the need for "stars" involvement to drive the box office, but the resulting effect was that while most acting was good, singing ranged from acceptable to downrightI love the story, but found this musical version perplexing. I understand the need for "stars" involvement to drive the box office, but the resulting effect was that while most acting was good, singing ranged from acceptable to downright painful. My prayers that Russell Crowe would just abandon any pretenses of "singing" and speak his part, went unanswered and I don't understand how the director/producers could have allowed this major distraction to go on, since it negated most of the pluses of this production. In the end the only feeling I was left with was despondency for what could have been. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
BunnyJan 25, 2013
A Sweeping, dramatic adaptation of the musical "Les Miserables" based on Victor Hugo's novel. Strong performances and beautiful cinematography make this a really good movie. Despite minor changes to the chronology of the play and small cutsA Sweeping, dramatic adaptation of the musical "Les Miserables" based on Victor Hugo's novel. Strong performances and beautiful cinematography make this a really good movie. Despite minor changes to the chronology of the play and small cuts in songs, even die-hard fans will enjoy this. One criticism? It was all at a big level of drama, with no room to breathe. This could be seen as positive to some, but all events and emotions are given the same heartbreaking treatment. Key moments: Eddie Redmayne singing "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables", Hugh Jackman's performance throughout and Anne Hathaway's portrayal of Fantine's downward spiral. Bring tissues. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
ClayMerrittJan 24, 2013
Tom Hooper took the classic book, and Broadway play, and formed it into an amazing 19th Century universe that was real and remarkable. I was skeptical about this movie and it being essentially a Broadway production in movie format. But asTom Hooper took the classic book, and Broadway play, and formed it into an amazing 19th Century universe that was real and remarkable. I was skeptical about this movie and it being essentially a Broadway production in movie format. But as soon as the movie started, I found myself enjoying it. The musical pieces were amazingly done, and the cast couldn't have been better chosen for a film such as this. What an amazing movie, a classic. Its a good thing sequels don't exist in the Les Miserables universe, because classics such as this don't deserve to be ruined by a sequel. Loved every single minute of this movie. The music may have seemed as the big focal point of the movie, but the story and the music were a perfect mix, especially when it came to Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe's encounters. Beautiful storytelling, and beautiful music, what more could you ask for? Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
10
kingofthekicksJan 24, 2013
Let me start by saying I know very little of the source material and the broadway show. But I felt this movie was just jaw-dropping. Les Mis has so many moments of intensity and passion; characters battling their own inner-turmoil on screen,Let me start by saying I know very little of the source material and the broadway show. But I felt this movie was just jaw-dropping. Les Mis has so many moments of intensity and passion; characters battling their own inner-turmoil on screen, ultimately rising above it to act with conviction. And I didn't even want to like Les Mis! I was angry that here was another two-and-a-half hour Oscar contender I had to sit through. Les Miserables rises above a pack of VERY worthy 2012 films. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
JohnnieWJan 24, 2013
I write this review as an avid fan of the stage productions of Lis Misérables - and ,yes, I still loved the movie. The plot is slightly cut down to size to fit a more reasonable theater run time (and it is still very unwieldy), and aI write this review as an avid fan of the stage productions of Lis Misérables - and ,yes, I still loved the movie. The plot is slightly cut down to size to fit a more reasonable theater run time (and it is still very unwieldy), and a few pieces from the stage production are cut ("I Saw Him Once" and "Dog Eat Dog"), while others are shortened. However, all of these changes were made by producers and directors who are veterans of their field (and, in fact, Cameron Mackintosh himself); whatever changes were made were certainly made for a reason, and to make the movie flow more smoothly. What works in a novel doesn't always work in a film, and I'm certain that the same can be said of stage productions.

Moving on to the cast: every last performer did an excellent job, as far as I'm concerned. Bear in mind that these people are not trained theater performers, for the most part; they're actors, and they perform to the absolute best of their ability. If you're looking for the rich tenor of Alfie Boe or the booming baritone of Norm Lewis, you're simply not going to find it. However, Ann Hathaway and Hugh Jackman lost a combined fifty pounds to portray Fantine and Jean Valjean accurately - Hathaway even sports a boyish cut for the latter half of her role, and Jackman apparently dehydrated himself and cut an ungainly amount of fat from his body to give himself a withered and wasted yet powerful look; simply put, these two actors went above and beyond to lend a beautiful authenticity to their roles. Ann's performance of I Dreamed a Dream is breathtaking and tear jerking beyond a doubt, and Russel Crowe even surprised me by learning to sing properly (having heard him sing with some of the cast members from Robin Hood, I can safely say this was not always the case). I'm not a huge fan of Crowe, but even he seems to have dedicated himself to the role of Javert and performs it very well.

All in all, the film portrays the plot of Les Misérables in a way that the stage production simply can't; I'll always be a bigger fan of any stage performances of the show, but the film has done an extraordinary job of bringing the story to life. No, the camera does not need to be bolted down; it sways and bucks in tense chase scenes, as is a staple of general cinematography. Yes, the vocal performances are a bit on the weak side, but once again, these are film actors, not stage actors.

The only reason I rate the movie a nine instead of a ten is actually because of the epilogue; one of my favorite pieces in the show is the duet between Fantine and Eponine during the epilogue, and in this piece Eponine is nowhere to be seen, which is a shame because Samantha Barks is a wonderful actress and beautiful vocalist. On the bright side, Colm Wilkensen portrays the Bishop of Digne and Frances Rufelle cameos as a prostitute early on the movie, as well as several West End cast members from the ABC club reprising their roles.

If you're disappointed by the film, all I can say is that you shouldn't have come to the film expecting a stage edition of Les Misérables. You should have come expected a faithful film adaptation, simple as. I came expecting a great movie, I saw a great movie, and I was immensely pleased.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
BreakingBradJan 24, 2013
Les Misérables is a stunning musical epic that will touch the even the coldest hearts, and it results in one of the best films of the year. I have been anxious to see this movie for a long time, as I have never seen the Broadway play,Les Misérables is a stunning musical epic that will touch the even the coldest hearts, and it results in one of the best films of the year. I have been anxious to see this movie for a long time, as I have never seen the Broadway play, but I have read the novel by Victor Hugo, and I am now excited to see the Broadway version of this story. It was also9 being directed by the brilliant Tom Hooper so how could I not go see this film? Well now that I have seen it, I can honestly say it Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
PaganostaghettiJan 23, 2013
The King
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
8
JonnyFendiJan 21, 2013
As a huge fan of musical movies, I had been waiting for thiz. It
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
pandaman3608Jan 21, 2013
This is an amazing movie!! The music is wonderful, heart-wrenching, and glorious all at the same time!! The actors are all great, especially with Samantha Barks' heartbreaking performance and her version of "On My Own", but Anne HathawayThis is an amazing movie!! The music is wonderful, heart-wrenching, and glorious all at the same time!! The actors are all great, especially with Samantha Barks' heartbreaking performance and her version of "On My Own", but Anne Hathaway steals the show as Fantine. Her version of "I Dreamed A Dream" is absolutely brilliant and devastating as she puts her heart and soul into her performance. She deserves the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress! This is a wonderful film that will make even the coldest people shed tears of sadness and joy! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
hacmiu36Jan 20, 2013
This movie is the best musical movie i have ever seen. It can make you laugh, smile and make you want to sing with them too. To some of you have said this movie was bad, i think you should watch it again and think of what you have said toThis movie is the best musical movie i have ever seen. It can make you laugh, smile and make you want to sing with them too. To some of you have said this movie was bad, i think you should watch it again and think of what you have said to this movie before Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
dharmaJan 20, 2013
Les Miserables is one of the most beloved musicals in recent memory, so this film adaptation has a lot to live up to. I have to admit though that I am a complete newbie, and I have not seen the musical before so at lest, I came into the filmLes Miserables is one of the most beloved musicals in recent memory, so this film adaptation has a lot to live up to. I have to admit though that I am a complete newbie, and I have not seen the musical before so at lest, I came into the film with a fresh perspective. What we have here is probably one of the most ambitious musical in recent memory. When it goes for the grand scale, Les Miserables does great wonders, especially in the first 15 minutes or so. However, for some of the musical numbers, Tom Hooper decided to use these extreme close ups, while allowing us to see the actors' facial expressions, prove to reduce the impact of some of the songs in many instances. The decision to shoot the musical numbers works most of the time though, allowing standout performances from Jackman and Hathaway. Javert's story arch though is a bit unclear, his motivations a bit murky and one dimensional; more of a script problem than Russel Crowe's performance more than anything else. In conclusion, well deserving of its Oscar nominations but too uneven to win. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
klb33Jan 19, 2013
Les Miserables is an amazing and captivating movie. It shows sadness and happiness. It takes place before during and after the French Revolution. Anne Hathaway nails "I Dreamed A Dream". Also, Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne have amazingLes Miserables is an amazing and captivating movie. It shows sadness and happiness. It takes place before during and after the French Revolution. Anne Hathaway nails "I Dreamed A Dream". Also, Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne have amazing chemistry during the movie. How all of the characters are linked together through out the movie, makes it easier to understand. I fell in love with this movie. I saw it once and i'm going to see it again. I recommend this movie to anyone. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
dkidlukeJan 19, 2013
Les Miserables. A very beautiful and powerful book of love and misery. The film was alright not groundbreaking, yet worth the watch. Though I will only watch it again to see the wonderful performances not the story. Each actor acted and sangLes Miserables. A very beautiful and powerful book of love and misery. The film was alright not groundbreaking, yet worth the watch. Though I will only watch it again to see the wonderful performances not the story. Each actor acted and sang perfectly for their role. Though i found Russell Crowe as Javert as the weakest in singing, i loved how the use of extreme close up gave a more powerful and emotional view of the singing and acting. Though it seems the close-ups were overused a little bit, though it does present the misery of the characters. The film seems a little TOO fast paced, i was about to cry after Anne Hathaway sang I Dreamed A Dream but the shift to next scene did not give me time to. This is proven when reports say that the film was supposed to be 4 hours but was edited to two and a half. Overall, the film is a collection of the wonderful and powerful songs and performances by the cast perfectly translated to film. Though not one I would watch for the story since they changed it so much. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
EssenceOfSugarJan 18, 2013
You could excuse this film for being showy, and perhaps pretentious, but the characters fill the void with their own spirit. Hugh Jackman especially had the most spirit, specifically with his humanity without showing off. The music isYou could excuse this film for being showy, and perhaps pretentious, but the characters fill the void with their own spirit. Hugh Jackman especially had the most spirit, specifically with his humanity without showing off. The music is shivery, particularly when it gets to the climax of the revolution. A very good film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
nathanrobertsJan 17, 2013
This epic and bombastic approach to cinema is perfect for les miserables! yes the cinematography wasn't as incredible as it could of been and it was shot in a very hurried way I think that made the film ,the imperfections of the sound andThis epic and bombastic approach to cinema is perfect for les miserables! yes the cinematography wasn't as incredible as it could of been and it was shot in a very hurried way I think that made the film ,the imperfections of the sound and camera work gave the sense of the pain and pace that Hooper was trying to achieve, what was best about the direction was it wasn't pretending to be perfect ! it was an epic story not an artistic revelation, we have seen film of this magnitude before and its been worse so that's why I loved it so. Hopper always had a world on his shoulders with this film and if he didn't get slated for the direction or cinematography then it would of been the story and he didn't have much control over that ! over all the best musical film ever ! Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
hollyvJan 16, 2013
There are two kinds of musicals. The "movie with songs thrown in" type - think West Side Story. And the "sing every line" type. Les Mis is the second type. Would have loved it if it had been a little more movie and a little less "singThere are two kinds of musicals. The "movie with songs thrown in" type - think West Side Story. And the "sing every line" type. Les Mis is the second type. Would have loved it if it had been a little more movie and a little less "sing every piece of dialogue." Anne Hathaway is perfect and kills it on her big number... but if a movie is going to be around 3 hours long? Don't sing every line.. Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
7
LeftyyJan 15, 2013
Whether you are interested in musicals or not, Les Miserables is something you should see. That's not to say you should see this movie specifically, but it's a story and series of songs you should treat yourself to knowing. Let's get this outWhether you are interested in musicals or not, Les Miserables is something you should see. That's not to say you should see this movie specifically, but it's a story and series of songs you should treat yourself to knowing. Let's get this out of the way - the musical pieces are incredible, and the initial draw to this film for me, like with so many others, was due to the fact that the singing is comprised of live performances as they're acting and are not pre-recorded/lip-synced. The musical's flagship song, "I Dreamed a Dream", performed by Anne Hathaway, is the chilling centerpiece for the movie, and will quite literally send shivers down your spine with the absolute intensity of her voice. This is true with many of the songs in the movie, and I recommend that if you aren't familiar with them that you listen to the soundtrack of the movie again after watching. There are problems with the movie, however. Russell Crowe's singing is just not that amazing. He's on key, for sure, but his voice isn't strong enough for the part nor does it contain the proper bass needed for the part. On top of this, many of the scenes themselves are a bore, especially in the French Revolution sections. Overall, I feel that the movie drags as a whole near the end, which unfortunately draws away from the alluring music. It really does become a bit of a crawl to reach the end unless you're absolutely engaged in the soundtrack. So in the end, it's not perfect, nor is it the best movie of the year by any means, but it still contains some amazing musical performances and is sure to please your ears. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
HeapsyJan 15, 2013
This was a pretty good portrayal of Les Miserables the musical, sadly, the vocal performances were not up to par.

Hugh Jackman tried, but failed miserably. His counterpart, Russell Crowe was even more dismal. The only vocal performance
This was a pretty good portrayal of Les Miserables the musical, sadly, the vocal performances were not up to par.

Hugh Jackman tried, but failed miserably. His counterpart, Russell Crowe was even more dismal. The only vocal performance which was good was sung by the actress who played Eponine. I know that she was also a cast member for the 25th anniversary performance of Les Miserables, clearly she has some musical theater background. Everyone is raving about Anne Hathaway. Yes, she did a good job. Yes, you felt her performance emotionally. However, her tears and whining got in the way of one of the vocal highlights of Les Miserables, "I Dreamed a Dream."

If you like the musical, go see the movie, it's a fun time. However, you might want to lower your expectations of the vocals.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
jzmeJan 15, 2013
I was so emotionally affected during the first ten minutes of the film. Actors did such a superb job at expressing themselves whilst singing. Not easy, but they delivered it. The message of the movie was clear, and Jean Valjean depicts theI was so emotionally affected during the first ten minutes of the film. Actors did such a superb job at expressing themselves whilst singing. Not easy, but they delivered it. The message of the movie was clear, and Jean Valjean depicts the image of Christ in this movie. Plot and script were good. The only things that could've been better were the 3D effects & the continuous musical throughout the whole movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
lahaine2012Jan 15, 2013
The movie that has divided critics all across the globe, proves to be an awesome film, in my opinion. Les Miserable, was an excellent film and its almost impossible to give an object review for it. Either you liked Tom Hooper's treatment ofThe movie that has divided critics all across the globe, proves to be an awesome film, in my opinion. Les Miserable, was an excellent film and its almost impossible to give an object review for it. Either you liked Tom Hooper's treatment of the beloved stage musical, or you hated it. Clearly, I'm on the camp that loved it. First of all, Hooper's decision to make his cast sing live was an excellent one. That way, he captured all there emotion and imperfection which added a lot of personalty to the characters each cast member was playing. His over use of long takes and close ups in his shots, only supplemented the emotional heft and captured every inch of the cast's facial expressions. Ultimately, all these directorial flares worked in the actors' favor. They all delivered honest and emotionally rich performances; each holding there own with their distinct musical numbers and more. As many may have heard, the standout was Anne Hathaway who killed it in her small but booming role. Also of note was Hugh Jackman, who finally gets a meaty role to chew on. He also nailed it as Jean Valjean. The film's production elements were all eloquently crafted, with special mention to the character and class defining costume designs. As its divisive reviews suggest, this is by no means a perfect film; but part of what made it so great were its imperfections. All of which resulted from Hooper's adventurous film making. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
ScottishSchemieJan 14, 2013
This is a sophisticated crossover between musical and opera.There are so many magnificent moving performances, especially Anne Hathaway and Eddie Redmayne. They could have perhaps made more of what is the First Act Finale. Overall the smallThis is a sophisticated crossover between musical and opera.There are so many magnificent moving performances, especially Anne Hathaway and Eddie Redmayne. They could have perhaps made more of what is the First Act Finale. Overall the small changes from the Stage version of this amazing musical worked beautifully. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
RedHopliteJan 14, 2013
Excellent film....I very rarely feel glued to the screen but this film did it for me..I am a fan of Les Mis and have both 10th and 25th anniversary DVDs....this film stands on its own and should not be compared as its a different art formExcellent film....I very rarely feel glued to the screen but this film did it for me..I am a fan of Les Mis and have both 10th and 25th anniversary DVDs....this film stands on its own and should not be compared as its a different art form but with the story you love and the songs you love... The music is superb the shots are superb Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway are Superb...they should not be compared to tenors like Alfie Boe...singing might not be as powerful but the film and acting and emotion more than makes up for it and then some!....
I would definitely go and see again!
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
8
rottenbananaJan 14, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Disclaimer: This review is merely an opinion of this movie alone. I have not read the book and this will not be based on the faithfulness of said movie to Victor Hugo's classic piece.

Les Miserables was not the perfect movie far from it but it is a great movie. The entire cast was magnificent even the bystander singers conveying the emotions intended, the mood matching every piece of music sang. The actors did not falter in their performance praise should be given to lead actor Hugh Jackman for showing the character of a repentant man willing to go to great lengths just to redeem his past actions. You will really feel for his plight by how he took care of Cosette and gave her a life worth living. This was Anne Hathaway's strongest performance for this year even much better than her stint in The Dark Knight Rises. Though short in screen time she no doubt had one of the strongest presence with the way she conveyed the emotions of despair, sorrow and at her last living moment (in movie) hope that her daughter would be in good hands. The musical score was some of the best I heard On My Own, Life that killed the Dream especially. Great narrative but one flaw is the faulty pacing.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
cnrcnrJan 14, 2013
Tom Hooper's direction is flawless, absolutely genius! Hathaway's performance steals the show despite being on screen for less than 20 minutes, but Jackman's performance is utterly stunning. The music is amazing and you can notice theTom Hooper's direction is flawless, absolutely genius! Hathaway's performance steals the show despite being on screen for less than 20 minutes, but Jackman's performance is utterly stunning. The music is amazing and you can notice the benefits of having the actors sing live, then recording the music to the singing, the scenes flow beautifully. The film is consistently entertaining, I didn't want it to end. An incredible film and it deserves every piece of recognition it gets! A true British Masterpiece! I simply don't understand people saying that it is overly emotional and over-acted... at the end of the day people, it is a musical!!! it is going to be emotional, very dramatic and yes, believe it or not there is going to be a lot of singing! if you don't like musicals like some people have said in their reviews, why go and waste money and time going to see it just to post a ridiculously stupid and inaccurate review. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
tiggerjeffJan 13, 2013
Now that the Academy and Golden Globes have nominated the film for so many awards the critics start rating this film positively?? What's with that?? The critics were giving this mediocre reviews until now. The professional critics reallyNow that the Academy and Golden Globes have nominated the film for so many awards the critics start rating this film positively?? What's with that?? The critics were giving this mediocre reviews until now. The professional critics really don't know what they're talking about. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
jordiJan 13, 2013
Espectacular puesta en escena. La actuación de Anne Hathaway es digna de Oscar, imposible actuar y dramatizar mientras está cantando. El resto del elenco también canta y actua maravillosamente. Pocas veces se oye en elEspectacular puesta en escena. La actuación de Anne Hathaway es digna de Oscar, imposible actuar y dramatizar mientras está cantando. El resto del elenco también canta y actua maravillosamente. Pocas veces se oye en el cine a la gente llorar y aplaudir al final. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
OverlyWhiteMaleJan 12, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First of all I should say that Les Miserables, the stage musical, is one of my favorites and I had VERY high expectations for this film. I'm happy to say that they were met. Hugh Jackman was awesome, as was Russell Crowe. Amanda Seyfried really surprised me, as did Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Barks. Sadly, I wasn't too crazy for Sacha Baron Cohen, who seemed too comedic and out of place. Helena Bonham Carter was... well... like she is in every other film.

Then there was Anne Hathaway... any flaws that the film had were completely eradicated by her performance. She appears in the film for barely 20 minutes, and she still steals the show. Any doubts of Anne's acting abilities should be gone after seeing this film. She is the heart of the film, and I dare you not to cry during her perfect rendition of I Dreamed A Dream.

Overall, a great musical, a great film, and a great experience. I can't wait to get it on Blu-ray.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
CranksyJan 12, 2013
I confess this movie is my first encounter with Les Miz. I rated it higher than I would have due to what I understand and assume has been the theme of the Les Miserables' story: the relative value of compassion and love vs. duty. Sasha BaronI confess this movie is my first encounter with Les Miz. I rated it higher than I would have due to what I understand and assume has been the theme of the Les Miserables' story: the relative value of compassion and love vs. duty. Sasha Baron Cohen's effectiveness at very broad comedy amused a relatively sophisticated audience and me. The CGI art direction gave a sound stage look to this film. The solo vocal performances were generally poor. Except for the interesting tension between the different values involved, I would have given this movie a "4." Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
HaithamBayazeedJan 12, 2013
This movie is absolutely, one of the best films of the year, the acting, the music, the directing, everything is very well done, really appreciate the idea of "Les Miserables" presenting the life of miserable people in France, this is whatThis movie is absolutely, one of the best films of the year, the acting, the music, the directing, everything is very well done, really appreciate the idea of "Les Miserables" presenting the life of miserable people in France, this is what miserable people look like, all around the world. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
Helly77Jan 12, 2013
This was the first time I had seen "Les Mis" in any for, and I have to say I loved it. I've read review with people complaining about the close camera work feeling suffocating, but i think that was the entire point. Being so close to theThis was the first time I had seen "Les Mis" in any for, and I have to say I loved it. I've read review with people complaining about the close camera work feeling suffocating, but i think that was the entire point. Being so close to the characters enhanced the despair and made you feel it with them. As for why did Valjean go to prison for 19 years for stealing bread... HE DIDN'T! He was imprisoned for 5 years for the original crime, the rest was for trying to escape. Yes it was excessive, but that's how the French did it back then.
The acting, especially Hugh Jackman, was fantastic. I was moved by the whole thing and by the end I was almost in tears. I am certainly looking forward to seeing it again, and again.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
csw12Jan 11, 2013
Oh boy, what a terrible mess. Acting horrifying, singing ear bleeding, a story of absolute garbage and a movie that suffocates you on the length. The talk and sing style trash isn't only irritating, it makes the movie almost impossible toOh boy, what a terrible mess. Acting horrifying, singing ear bleeding, a story of absolute garbage and a movie that suffocates you on the length. The talk and sing style trash isn't only irritating, it makes the movie almost impossible to follow. Les Miserables not only takes the title of worst movie of the year but of all time. Move over Chicago, we have a movie even worse. Expand
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
1
Trev29Jan 11, 2013
If it wasn't but some very brief moments, and I mean brief, this movie would be a complete disaster. It is so horribly long and boring with absolute no dialogue. It is filled with dreadful songs and melodramatic acting.
1 of 7 users found this helpful16
All this user's reviews
5
rasbury4Jan 9, 2013
Please bring the show back to Broadway--I so wanted the film to be better but it just didn't excite me the way the show has always done. It should have been a bigger spectacle and amazingly enough it felt much smaller. I guess because youPlease bring the show back to Broadway--I so wanted the film to be better but it just didn't excite me the way the show has always done. It should have been a bigger spectacle and amazingly enough it felt much smaller. I guess because you spend the entire film in the character's faces. The effort the actors made with the camera up their nose was incredible and they should win prizes for that. But the singing was secondary and added to the overall disappointment when you compare the show with the film. On the plus side, the film is much cheaper to see. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
4
jasherJan 9, 2013
My biggest issue with "Les Mis" is I don't buy into the main story. Why on earth would someone go to prison for 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread? Why would Javert be SO obsessed with capturing Valjean because he broke parole after beingMy biggest issue with "Les Mis" is I don't buy into the main story. Why on earth would someone go to prison for 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread? Why would Javert be SO obsessed with capturing Valjean because he broke parole after being released? Maybe that is the way the law worked at that place and time in history, or maybe it's meant to symbolize oppression, thus providing reason for the peasants' uprising later in film. Either way, that plot line is just hard for me to swallow as an American citizen in the 21st century, where matters of crime and punishment tend to be at least a bit more just than that.
Otherwise, I found the film to be both breathtaking and bewildering. The sets, costumes and several of the solo/duo numbers ("I Dreamed a Dream," "On My Own," "A Little Fall of Rain" and "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables" in particular) were enchanting and wonderful. The cinematography, on the other hand, was awful. Why did the filmmakers decide to shoot almost exclusively in close-ups? I felt like I was trapped in boxes with these people every time they sang, and while in real life I wouldn't mind being trapped in a box with Hugh Jackman (ha ha), it felt too suffocating while viewing this film. In almost every scene, the singing characters and their songs weren't given room to breathe on screen, and the narrow shots made it hard to perceive how other characters in the same given scene were reacting. I understand the need to show us the misery and desperation of these characters, but I think that could have been done in a manner more creative than just shoving the viewers down the throats of the performers.
So I suppose if you can buy the major plot line (or at least suspend your disbelief), you might enjoy this film more than I did, but it's hard for me to understand how anyone can rate this film "in the green" when the cinematography was so god-awful. It pretty much single-handedly destroyed this film.
Expand
0 of 6 users found this helpful06
All this user's reviews
2
RakkulJan 9, 2013
The acting was alright but this movie is a musical. Good actors but no singers. The plot was unoriginal and the movie progressed very slowly. This is a good movie for those people who give good ratings to poor movies but for the rest of us,The acting was alright but this movie is a musical. Good actors but no singers. The plot was unoriginal and the movie progressed very slowly. This is a good movie for those people who give good ratings to poor movies but for the rest of us, this movie is one that should be avoided. Expand
2 of 12 users found this helpful210
All this user's reviews
5
BKMJan 9, 2013
In the end Les Miserables is too much. Too much singing, too many closeups, too many underdeveloped characters and plot lines, etc. Its saving grace lies with its stars. Hathaway and Jackman provide an emotional kick whenever the filmsIn the end Les Miserables is too much. Too much singing, too many closeups, too many underdeveloped characters and plot lines, etc. Its saving grace lies with its stars. Hathaway and Jackman provide an emotional kick whenever the films starts to meander (which is frequently) and Russell Crowe provides an underrated performance as the heartless Javert. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
2
JMcJan 8, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's safe to say that Les Mis has ruined my week. My eyeballs hurt from all the rolling they've done. The only part I enjoyed was when Russell Crowe jumped off the bridge. At least we didn't have to listen to his wretched singing any more. I'm not even sure what the film was about -- well I THINK it's about a bunch of folk who pile some furniture up in the middle of the street in Gay Paree and then hide behind it for a while, but hey, that's just me.j Expand
1 of 8 users found this helpful17
All this user's reviews
8
survivorfan989Jan 8, 2013
It's a long movie and boy is there a lot of singing but there's no denying this is a great film. Full of outstanding performances from the talented cast and it's hard to single them out because as a whole they are all great. Storyline is veryIt's a long movie and boy is there a lot of singing but there's no denying this is a great film. Full of outstanding performances from the talented cast and it's hard to single them out because as a whole they are all great. Storyline is very interesting and spans three different time periods which is rather interesting! Honorable mentions must go to both Anne Hathaway & Samantha Barks who I thought were both amazing. Overall a fantastic musical well worth a look that fans of the play will love! Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
AMLJan 8, 2013
Even the lackluster and claustrophobic direction of Tom Hooper couldn't spoil the superb performances of the entire cast. I was frustrated by Hooper's talking head close ups - talk about a one shot pony - but the music and talented cast triumphed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
NormandJan 7, 2013
I thoroughly enjoyed this musical and by time forgot it was a musical. It was successfully captivating because of its natural believable characters. Rather than the professional repetitive opera rendition, it was more than refreshing toI thoroughly enjoyed this musical and by time forgot it was a musical. It was successfully captivating because of its natural believable characters. Rather than the professional repetitive opera rendition, it was more than refreshing to experience real acting with a tangible connection. I rarely applaud after a performance, but I couldn't refrain after this performance. Efficiently carried through and excellence on all accounts: costumes, sets, casting & direction. Perfect and exuberant. A unique movie-musical incomparible to any computerized, phoney, spectacles, we are accustomed to viewing. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
8
aaronmwolfordJan 7, 2013
"Le Miserables" doesn't hold its breath when in comes to delivering amazing vocals. Having no prior experience with the content, I walked both in and out of the theater excited, pleased, and giving of one of my top films of the year.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
BHBarryJan 6, 2013
Les Miserables
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
SDMOVIEGOERJan 6, 2013
Absolutely wonderful movie! I've seen the play many times. It's the story that is compelling, and these actors did an absolutely brilliant job! i will see this again and again!
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
8
JacobJan 6, 2013
Overall while there are certain aspects of Les Miserables that I felt like could have been handled better I really enjoyed the film. The cast was good for the most part. While I feel that some of the characters could have been better thereOverall while there are certain aspects of Les Miserables that I felt like could have been handled better I really enjoyed the film. The cast was good for the most part. While I feel that some of the characters could have been better there are some really good performances. I love how the film makers were not afraid to take some liberatities in what happens when and how. I especially love how the story gets expanded with songs and scenes that were not in the original story. Again I would have liked it if the film had done certain things in regards to cinematography and casting but a lot of things are done right some I am not going to be picky. If you are fan of Les Miserables I would recommend this one it Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
PoundedChickenJan 6, 2013
Beautiful production and sets. Standout performance by Anne Hathaway. Not so, Russell Crowe. At time's the singing seems becomes laborious, but with the film running about 45 minutes longer than necessary, that's to be expected. Less wouldBeautiful production and sets. Standout performance by Anne Hathaway. Not so, Russell Crowe. At time's the singing seems becomes laborious, but with the film running about 45 minutes longer than necessary, that's to be expected. Less would have been more. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
SummersausageJan 6, 2013
I liked it. I get the bad things like Tom Hooper having no idea how to shoot a big set and reaching a peek in the first 30 minutes, but it was fun. The music is soooo good and Anne Hathaway proved that she can act in this movie. TheI liked it. I get the bad things like Tom Hooper having no idea how to shoot a big set and reaching a peek in the first 30 minutes, but it was fun. The music is soooo good and Anne Hathaway proved that she can act in this movie. The grandiosity worked and the ending is beautiful. Not the best movie but a good 7.5 that rounds up. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
JSheets26Jan 5, 2013
I'm not much for musicals, but being a movie buff I had to see in theatres. Hooper seems to provide true passion for the source material and I love the addition of live vocals while filming. Voices and emotions are so much more powerful andI'm not much for musicals, but being a movie buff I had to see in theatres. Hooper seems to provide true passion for the source material and I love the addition of live vocals while filming. Voices and emotions are so much more powerful and raw because of this choice. Hathaway is brilliant and I expect to see her take this years Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. Beautiful performance. Seyfreid also surprised me with her vocal talent. I see that Russell Crowe is getting quite a bit of flack for his performance as Javert, but I enjoyed his place within the story. I only have a few complaints. The scale of Les Miserable proves a tad inconsistant in some places. At some points in the film the scale seems grand and epic, but at other times slightly repetitive and anti-climactic. Specifically in the case of the Revolution, as there is no clear closure as to what comes next. Overall, Les Miserable is a good film that provides genuine feeling and is sure to please many movie goers. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
brewsterJan 5, 2013
I saw it again, 2 days after seeing it the first time. Remember, I have seen the stage play 8 times, in 5 different venues, and adored every one. I have the 10th and 25 anniversary DVDs and play them a couple of times a year. The more II saw it again, 2 days after seeing it the first time. Remember, I have seen the stage play 8 times, in 5 different venues, and adored every one. I have the 10th and 25 anniversary DVDs and play them a couple of times a year. The more I think about this movie, despite its attractiveness as spectacle, it does the stage play a gross disservice. While Ann Hathaway is brilliant in her sadly brief performance, Hugh Jackman is acceptable, and Russell Crowe is abysmal. The inner torment of Javert is such a critical element of the story and is best articulated in his two solos: Stars and the suicide. Crowe totally misses this essential character element and, as a consequence, his portrayal is pitiful. The play has 2 essential and wonderfully executed comic reliefs: the Thenardiers Master of the House, and The Wedding. The director has destroyed the comic relief aspect, omitted incredibly amusing and vital portions, and grossly miscast Helen Bonham Carter as Madam Thenardier. Sasha Baron Cohen could have executed better, but didnt , either due to Hooper or his own limitations. Hooper fundamentally misunderstands where Les Mis, the play, gets its power. It's the music and how it is presented. Hooper spends too much of his energy on the spectacle and setting of 19th century France, and not enough on the magnificent music and the powerful story the music can tell. Damn shame too. Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
9
MarcDoyleJan 5, 2013
Hugh Jackman is nothing short of phenomenal in this film. There are a couple of scenes in which I felt both chills and tears within moments of one another. Anne Hathaway is also tremendous in a supporting role. Most importantly for me - asHugh Jackman is nothing short of phenomenal in this film. There are a couple of scenes in which I felt both chills and tears within moments of one another. Anne Hathaway is also tremendous in a supporting role. Most importantly for me - as someone who saw the musical over 20 years and did NOT enjoy it - I could hear every word of dialogue of very clearly, and every facial expression is captured beautifully, so I didn't have to struggle empathize with these characters. Revolutionary passion, wrongful incarceration, the unyielding rule or law, young love, and unrequited love - it's all here, and it's beautifully presented. Yes, the film vastly exceeded my expectations. I am surprised that the professional critics did not embrace it more enthusiastically. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
nirishan9Jan 4, 2013
Great movie, with great performances by the cast. The singing was raw and packed with emotion, and the characters were well sculpted with a helpful pageantry.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
RockXLightJan 4, 2013
I would wholeheartedly recommend this movie to not only anyone who likes musicals, but afficionados of cinema itself. Simply breathtaking from start to finish.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
PoochyJan 4, 2013
Flawless. One of the greatest musical adaptations I have ever seen, and all I can say without spoiling much of the film is that Anne Hathaway better win the Oscar.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
8
jeremypJan 4, 2013
It's big and it's brassy and if you like to listen to lyrics it gets you in the gut quite often. I usually hate musicals, and "Chicago" is the last one I saw-and liked-and I've seen, and liked, the stage version. The movie version allowed meIt's big and it's brassy and if you like to listen to lyrics it gets you in the gut quite often. I usually hate musicals, and "Chicago" is the last one I saw-and liked-and I've seen, and liked, the stage version. The movie version allowed me to hear the lyrics better, and I finally was able to get into Redmayne's great solo "empty chairs," (made me wonder how veterans would take it) and hated what Cohen and Bonham Carter did with "Master of the house." It was a tad long and had Cohen been cropped after his main bit it would have helped. You'll either get sucked in or be bored to tears. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
8
bdandrews4Jan 4, 2013
I found Les Miserables a very enjoyable movie. I'm not a big fan of musicals but I found myself humming the songs after leaving the theater. The cast did a surprising job of creating memorable characters and singing some of the most memorableI found Les Miserables a very enjoyable movie. I'm not a big fan of musicals but I found myself humming the songs after leaving the theater. The cast did a surprising job of creating memorable characters and singing some of the most memorable songs. The criticisms I have is that it is very long (2 and half hours) and some awkward scenes where the singing is forced. This isn't one of my favorite movies of the year but was more than I expected and something I would recommend seeing. Along with last years The King's Speech, Hooper has shown that he has the potential to become the next great English director and one who creates diverse movie experiences. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
greatmoviefanJan 3, 2013
I just saw Les Miz and was so aghast at how this movie was rated by a lot of critics. I read the reviews aa soon as they came out and was a little disappointed but since this has been my favorite musical for ages, I had to see it. I cannotI just saw Les Miz and was so aghast at how this movie was rated by a lot of critics. I read the reviews aa soon as they came out and was a little disappointed but since this has been my favorite musical for ages, I had to see it. I cannot imagine why it was judged so harshly but I am so glad that I went to see it anyway. This movie was as close to the stage musical as a movie can get and I thoroughly enjoyed it. If you have seen the musical, then you know that it is not necessarily an uplifting story but it is a beautiful one and the music is wonderful. I think the entire cast did an excellent job and I have to disagree with all of the critics than panned it. I would have thought that the accumulation of scores of the critics would have equaled somewhere in the eighties at the very least. I don't believe that true fans of the musical will be disappointed and hopefully those who are unfamiliar with the musicall will enjoy it also. I haven't heard as much about Hugh Jackman as I have of Anne Hathaway, but I think he did a great job. Bravo! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
MattyiceJan 3, 2013
Overall this movie was great. I was insisted to see it because of how much acclaim the play got and the acting nominations. Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, and others (Sasha Baron-Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter, etc.) were great, andOverall this movie was great. I was insisted to see it because of how much acclaim the play got and the acting nominations. Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, and others (Sasha Baron-Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter, etc.) were great, and this is a must see. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
m_eldersJan 3, 2013
Be forewarned: I had never seen the stage production of Les Miserables prior to watching the movie, nor had I read the book. All I knew about the story was that it was set in France sort of around the time of the French Revolution (severalBe forewarned: I had never seen the stage production of Les Miserables prior to watching the movie, nor had I read the book. All I knew about the story was that it was set in France sort of around the time of the French Revolution (several years later, I came to find out). That being said, the story FEELS like a story, rather than something that could actually happen (e.g., love at first sight is used as a major plot device, characters often find the characters they're looking for out of sheer coincidence, etc.). Despite that, it is still a very solid movie. The acting is phenomenal. Anne Hathaway's and Samantha Barks' solos are heart-wrenching, and really help bring the movie to life. And all the songs are recorded live, i.e., we're hearing what we see, rather than a studio recording. Again, I have never seen any other version of Les Mis, but it certainly feels like the director did everything in his power to bring this classic back to life. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
7
kglbltzJan 3, 2013
I really enjoyed this movie and thought that it did a good job of doing a great original story justice. Jackman and Hatheway are definitely the outstanding performers for me but the rest of the cast was good as well. At times the singing ofI really enjoyed this movie and thought that it did a good job of doing a great original story justice. Jackman and Hatheway are definitely the outstanding performers for me but the rest of the cast was good as well. At times the singing of dialogue seems out of place especially on Crowes part. I feel like the movie could have been better if the actual dialogue was spoken and acted out and then characters go into the big songs from the musical. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
9
Ken1319Jan 2, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The film was, to sum it all up in one word, amazing. Each individual cast member was perfect for the role that they played. Hot shots like Russel Crowe portrayed the unforgiving Javert with utmost perfection. Anne Hathaway's Fantine was heartbreaking and beautiful, especially during the wrenching and tortured performance of "I Dreamed a Dreamed." Hugh Jackman was a great Jean Valjean, showing, with clarity, the transitions that the character goes through throughout the years. This allowed the audience to clearly see his character development from ex-con, to Changed man, to a new father, protective father and throughout all these different times, he was always the man on the run. Amanda Seyfried was a wonderful Cosette opposite the charming Eddie Redmayne as Marius. I always imagined Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen as the infamous Thernadiers. The dynamic duo were, as I just said, DYNAMIC. Newcomer to the BIG SCREEN Samantha Barks was wonderful as Eponine. Watching her on stage and the Anniversary Concert, there is a clear difference in her portrayal of the character in the different mediums. Although there were large names in this movie, I must say that one of the actors that popped in his role was Daniel Huttlestone who played the street child Gavroche. His performance was comical and, at the end, very heartbreaking. He certainly held his own among an accolade of stars, making himself a star in his own right. Though the music was wonderful, and the idea of LIVE SINGING on the film set was a game changer, I have only one criticism: Russel Crowe's singing. Though his acting skills captured the role of Javert perfectly, his singing was not entrancing like the stage singers that have played the role. His voice was weak and barely had enough vibrato for the songs he was given. At least, however, he was on tune. His weak voice also, on a more positive note, gave the song "Stars" a more serenely haunting tone. Overall the movie was Great. Great actors. Great music. Great design. A must see for all those who appreciate the arts, music, AND, film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
TheDRauchJan 2, 2013
Tom Hooper's adaptation of the long running musical based on the novel by Victor Hugo has its fair share of problems. I found most of them to lie in the choices that Hooper made as director and by how frenetic and dizzying that damn cameraTom Hooper's adaptation of the long running musical based on the novel by Victor Hugo has its fair share of problems. I found most of them to lie in the choices that Hooper made as director and by how frenetic and dizzying that damn camera is. At times (particularly during the revolutionary scenes), I had to take a moment to rub my eyes and look away so as to not induce vomiting. I was so nauseated for the majority of the movie. Hooper also never lets the story take a breath and slow down, which might leave some viewers exhausted on par with the frenetic cinematography. This is a blunt, head-bashing, brash musical that is anything from subtle. It makes films like 'Chicago' and 'Moulin Rouge' look like highly philosophical works of art. All of my complaining aside though, this is a good movie. The production design and staging is quite impeccable and the story manages to remain comprehensible even across a near three hour running time. But if I am to say that anything redeems 'Les Miserables' it has to be the work from its dedicated cast. Everyone in the film gives great performances (even those who don't quite have the greatest singing chops). Many of the supporting turns, given by such new talent as Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Barks, threaten to brew into deservedly lucrative acting careers in the future. Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter (both in that classic, twisted musical from 2007, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street), provide much needed comic relief to the movie. Hugh Jackman, I dare say, is a pitch perfect choice for the part of Jean Valjean. He has great vocals and that pained, burdened kind of look needed for the role. Now to the final bit of business. To describe Anne Hathaway's performance as Fantine as a show-stopper, is just completely unfitting. She makes this movie. If any reason at all, see this film for her legendary performance of 'I Dreamed a Dream'. I expected that it would be the highlight of the film and I was right. She completely steals the show. This movie should grant her the first Oscar of her career and it would be more than well-deserved. So, to sum up 'Les Miserables', the movie is problematic and flat-footed, but I dare you not to leave the theater unaffected because, as obvious as it is, the movie works because of the acting on display. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
7
coreyg007Jan 2, 2013
The movie was actually just as entertaining as the book, and other various takes on in on stage productions and movies but this definitely seemed to be much longer than expected. The story truly draws you in; you laugh, you cry, and you getThe movie was actually just as entertaining as the book, and other various takes on in on stage productions and movies but this definitely seemed to be much longer than expected. The story truly draws you in; you laugh, you cry, and you get squirmy in your chair mostly due to the fact that it seems to go on and on, and on.... more like a 5 hour production. It was entertaining but I am so glad that I decided to go to the matinee and not take in a later showing because I'm sure I would've fallen asleep. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
drnineteenJan 2, 2013
From the second it begun to its end, I was not interested. The characters did not pull me and the singing was not that good, especially compared to the musical. The only part that was actually entertaining were the Thenardiers, they were aFrom the second it begun to its end, I was not interested. The characters did not pull me and the singing was not that good, especially compared to the musical. The only part that was actually entertaining were the Thenardiers, they were a very good comic relief for the boring plot. Altogether the story was boring, the singing wasn't up to par, and the characters were not interesting at all. Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
5
ovoon7Jan 2, 2013
The film affectingly stumbles over its own grandeur. While many of the actors do a fine and occasionally memorable job, they also seem to be given more freedom to express their roles the way they choose, which can cause serious problems. TheThe film affectingly stumbles over its own grandeur. While many of the actors do a fine and occasionally memorable job, they also seem to be given more freedom to express their roles the way they choose, which can cause serious problems. The structure of the film was shoddily slapped together and the director botched it. Such a shame as his previous work is of note. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
10
PreciselyJan 1, 2013
There has been a great deal of division amongst reviewers of Les Miserables. Quite honestly, the people with the most vocal and negative opinions are the people who don't really have any understanding of what they're talking about. TheThere has been a great deal of division amongst reviewers of Les Miserables. Quite honestly, the people with the most vocal and negative opinions are the people who don't really have any understanding of what they're talking about. The majority of critiques are from people who walked into the movie expecting and wishing it to fail. Naturally, when you want something to be bad, it will be. To you. Objectively, you will still be wrong and look like an idiot, but you can be wrong if you want to. That said, I really do not see how this movie could possibly improve. The vision for this movie was simply executed as exact as the project was planned. The cinematography was excellent, as expected. People complained that it was in peoples faces too much. That, to me, is just a childish complaint that isn't even worth paying attention to. There are just as much long distance shots as there are close-ups (I specifically looked for this). People are just giving unnecessary emphasis on the close-ups. It's fine, people. Get over it. Now, on to the concept. One thing must first be said. This is first and foremost a "movie." NOT a musical. The musical aspect comes second. This means the cast's acting must be judged at a higher priority than singing ability. Secondly, this is not a normal musical. Characters are not just singing songs, they are "acting" them. I can't tell you how many reviews I've seen claiming all kinds of "flat" notes that issued forth. Nonsense. Not only is that ridiculous in light of the refinement this project had before the final optimization of every single song, but it is a ridiculous claim in light of the project itself. Like I said, they are not simply singing the songs. They are singing some parts of the song, and speaking/yelling/crying other parts of the song. That is to be expected. However, some more ignorant people are overlooking this fact and seeing those parts of songs as "flat" notes.

Now, the cast. I'm sure nobody would disagree with me that the most controversial selection for this movie is Russell Crowe. It would be avoiding the elephant in the room to avoid talking about him. People are still to this day trashing Crowe's performance, some saying he ruined the movie. That's like getting a paper-cut and saying you're going to die. These people are so dramatic. Crowe's performance was more than excellent. There is no better Javert than Crowe, I'm sorry. Some people will say "...But his singing!..." -was great. Crowe was never flat, and his acting was excellent. If you know anything about Hugo's description of Javert from the actual book, you'll know that Victor Hugo spends the majority of the time describing in great detail the physical appearance of Javert, and the atmosphere/presence he gives off. THAT is most important, according to the "author" of this entire story. I'm sorry, that is more important than anything else. For example, Javert is described to look like a wolf and have an extremely intimidating presence. Crowe is biologically suited for this role. Someone like Norm Lewis (Javert, 25th Anniversary) may be considered better than Crowe vocally in terms of Opera, Lewis is far from intimidating. Also, you don't expect a character like Javert to have some clean, crisp voice. You expect what you get from Crowe. A rugged and rough voice. There is just no comparison. Crowe fits the uniform better than anybody. Nina Gold (Casting Director) knew what she was doing. Ironically, all this fuss about Crowe shows his performance was not forgettable. I hear not a single person talking about Amanda Seyfried's performance, because it was probably the most forgettable of the entire cast. Not to say she did a bad job (she didn't), she was just boring. One thing I find funny is that you can always tell the childish critic by one simple feature. Their review after the movie is identical to their review before the movie. They walk into a movie with bias and preconceived notions, and this effects their entire opinion of the movie before they even see it. It's a shame. If you're going to see this movie, understand first what you are going to see. If you understand that and go with an open mind (not expecting this to be just a parrot of the 10th or 25th anniversary), you will love this movie.
Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
10
L4DLegend91Jan 1, 2013
I personally can't believe how negative the critics reviews have been for the film. I think in terms of musical numbers, acting and story, this is one of the best adaptations from musical to film. Anne Hathaway, Hugh Jackman and EddieI personally can't believe how negative the critics reviews have been for the film. I think in terms of musical numbers, acting and story, this is one of the best adaptations from musical to film. Anne Hathaway, Hugh Jackman and Eddie Redmayne really knocked out of the park, while Russell Crowe (somewhat weird voice) did just fine. I thought the cameo additions of Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter was tremendous, adding a light side to such a dark tale. I don't know what movie a good percentage of critics saw. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
mhildenDec 30, 2012
I'm sure there will be plenty of people who feel this is an oscar worthy film, but for me, it was a disaster. The jittery camera work, and the forced vocals were just too overwhelming to rate this film higher for me. The costumes wereI'm sure there will be plenty of people who feel this is an oscar worthy film, but for me, it was a disaster. The jittery camera work, and the forced vocals were just too overwhelming to rate this film higher for me. The costumes were beautiful, the cinematography and grand sets were brilliantly done and probably worthy of an oscar.

I felt most of the female singing roles were well done. Ms Hathaway's performance should land her at least an Oscar nomination. The younger Cosette and the young rebellious boy sang beautifully. I believe Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne did brilliant as the older Cosette and Marius.

For me, that's where the brilliance stops. Hugh seemed strained most of the time and I never felt he had control of his voice the whole film. I'm not a music coach, but my ear knows what it likes. Russell Crowe was worse and never sold me on his character as Javert.

As far as musicals go, this was no where near what Chicago offered and makes me wonder why Mr Hooper decided to recreate an actual musical on the big screen. There's probably a reason why it hasn't been done before. I felt like I had been treated to a musical without even the option of an intermission. I would have rather watched a real musical than this mess of a performance.
Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
10
TheatreManDec 30, 2012
"To love another person is to see the face of God."
I hear the beautiful voices and see the magnificent acting as the movie vibrates in my memory. I will never forget this feeling.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
eldinalaaDec 30, 2012
Our plan was to see "Lincoln" but we reluctantly ended up with "Les Miserables" because of a time shift. What a pleasant surprise this was ! ... The movie was incredibly incredible to say the least. I have not seen such a well put togetherOur plan was to see "Lincoln" but we reluctantly ended up with "Les Miserables" because of a time shift. What a pleasant surprise this was ! ... The movie was incredibly incredible to say the least. I have not seen such a well put together movie from all its aspects for the longest time and I would indeed considered it a classic for the ages. The story and the picture glued me to my seat and connected me emotionally at all times. It is the sort of movie that you live in and somehow you do not want it to end because it is appealing to all your senses. I know already that I would acquire this movie for my home collection as soon as this is possible and will be visiting it frequently knowing that it will only get better with time. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews