Les Misérables (1998)

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Les Miserables by Victor Hugo is a complex novel, describing the development of complex people shaping and shaped by history. This movie takes away all of that - the actors portray characters stripped of internal complexity. This gets a 4 because the actors seem to have recited the lines invented by the screenwriter as typed, but they were given lifeless, insincere pap to recite. The actors did a job, but I have more respect for the actors and writers who walked away and did not participate. I am not a "musical" person, but the Cameron Mackintosh musical and the 2012 movie made from it delve deeply into Victor Hugo's complex ideas, while this movie cuts all that away. Gratuitous Hollywood rewrite, fueled by nose candy, sold by star recognition, and filmed in low-cost Eastern Europe still recovering from ideological damage. You can almost smell the bean counters telling Yeglesias what expensive parts to omit. For example, the character of Eponine, the woman who loved Marius so much that she died in support of his love for Cosette, is entirely missing. Eponine's wrenching internal struggle, and the internal struggles of Fantine and Javert and Valjean, could have been portrayed by capable actors like Thurman and Rush and Neeson, but they would have needed months to prepare and many takes to get right. Too expensive.If you want undemanding entertainment that will consume two hours of your empty life without improving it, this movie do the job. Perhaps it will help you get a job doing the same kind of "review stuffing" that made this movie come out at 7.5; when all the IMDb reviews for both sexes all ages come out so statistically uniform, it is either heavily skewed by software robots, or by people paid to act like them. If you dislike musicals, the 1935 movie version, with Charles Laughton as Javert, portrays Victor Hugo's emotional story and character development more accurately. Laughton can say more in with a quivering lip in black and white than a minute of 1998 color film. It will be hard to find - I found this 1998 version in the bargain bin for 50 cents.

Bille August's Les Miserables is a decent, somewhat faithful adaptation of the Victor Hugo novel set in 1800's France. This movie, hands-down, is acted extremely well and it had great characterization. What I truly missed in this film is the music. Even if it was one or two songs, I would have loved to hear what made the Broadway adaptation of this book a hit.This film is about a convict, Jean Valjean who served 19 years in prison. After his release, he becomes a mayor for this one town. He meets the ailing Fantine and he promises her that he will look after her daughter, Cosette despite being on the run from the persistent Inspector Javert.As I mentioned previously, this film is extremely well-acted. Liam Neeson and especially Geoffrey Rush were respectable in their roles. Rush makes a great villain. Claire Danes makes a very convincing Cosette as well.Overall, this is a pretty good history lesson based off France's rebellion in 1832. This movie has some slow moments, but the great acting takes care if that with no problems. I also wished that there were some songs here. I rate this film 8/10.

Bille August's adaptation of the classic tale of redemption, revenge and romance is not a faithful adaptation of the book. Characters are reduced to bit parts, or are eliminated entirely, whilst the ending is removed. But this does not stop it from being an excellent film. Dramatically shot and convincingly acted, this is one for the ages.The ever reliable Liam Neeson provides the film's soul as the repentant convict Jean Valjean, believable as both a former criminal and a saintly figure, touching with his female costars and smouldering when confronting his nemesis, the ever watchful Javert. The Javert of this film is colder and crueller than the professional of Hugo's book, but in the hands of Geoffrey Rush, he still garners sympathy as his duty -bound world falls apart. Uma Thurman provides pathos in her brief role as Fantine, as does Claire Danes, whose relationship with Valjean provides the true emotional heart of the film. Also notable is Peter Vaughan as the Bishop of Digne, the man who sets Valjean on the path to redemption.So if you are looking for a faithful adaptation, look elsewhere. But if you seek a moving, dramatic and entertaining film, you cant wrong with this version.

If it were not for this movie, I would have never been familiar with Victor Hugo or the Les Miserables novel. As I have difficulties reading lengthy books, it is wonderful to have such novels adapted into movies. I am aware that this particular movie does not do a proper job in telling the whole story. Apparently, the movie does a poor job in some of the characterizations and leaves out many important scenes. However, if like me, you have never read the book and do not prefer to watch musicals, this movie is quite satisfying. For those who like to watch movies that "transport" you to another period in time, the scenery and costumes do a good job in representing 19th century France. Both Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush do a great job as the main characters. The theme that stands out in Les Miserables is one of redemption- a concept that we all should be more familiar with.