No, I understand the power of music and appreciate it. What I don't appreciate is, you're the one who jumped on me saying "Just because it's a musical doesn't mean that it can't be dramatic and emotionally powerful. and have i heard of sweeny todd ?" lol, very nice.
you communicated pretty terribly, so, yes, nice
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:48 pm
by ohnolookout
I'm so confused.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:20 am
by CountKrazy
Supern0va wrote:
TripExistence wrote:
Spoiler:
I think I understand what you're saying, but I feel like you still have this misconception that musicals take away the power and tragedy of heartbreaking stories by setting them to song, which is simply not true. You can't compare Les Miserables to the Sound of Music because while there are moments of tragedy in the story, ultimately the movie is about their escape from the Nazi regime. It was "delightful," as you say, because the tone wasn't meant to be a darker version of the tale. They're not trying to sanitize Les Mis, or make it into something 'catchy' that you're meant to sing along to. Rather, the music is meant as a bolstering of the redemptive power of the story, having the effect of enhancing its tragic tone.
I know about the poverty in Asia. I know about the oppression of the Burmese people by their government. I've spent more than half of my life living in Asia and my dad does missions work among the Karen. I would honestly not object if they tried to make a musical out of Karen oppression, but only if there was the mindset that it would be meant to highlight the sufferings of a people rather than contort it into a farce of song and dance. It could truly be powerful.
It might be important to note that there isn't really much choreography in Les Mis (at least, not that I can remember outside of the Thenardiers); it's not like every time there's a song the action stops for an elaborate routine. 98% of the movie is entirely singing. It's not for everyone but I wouldn't dismiss it, it's certainly a potent experience.
Huh ?? Most of what I was saying earlier is praising the earlier movie for producing valuable themes and roles played by a protagonist that most "heroic" movies today don't come close to it. that's all.
i said I enjoy broadway musicals -phantom of the opera, etc. I'm a person who enjoys ballet, opera and at the same time, i can say I've watched Rambo IV and I enjoyed it.
And you think I have this misconception that music is lame ???? lol.
No, I understand the power of music and appreciate it. What I don't appreciate is, you're the one who jumped on me saying "Just because it's a musical doesn't mean that it can't be dramatic and emotionally powerful. and have i heard of sweeny todd ?" lol, very nice.
Sweeney Todd is not a horror movie, it is a "Dark" themed musical and its violence is meant to portray some drama, tragedy and serial mind of his. Watching real neck cutting is the terrorist sawing off the soldier's head in real life with a blunt instrument.
Well, let me ask you this question. What if Every, and I mean Every movie in the world becomes a Musical ? Didn't you said music does not take away its tragedy and emotional trial ? Should James Bond be a musical ?
Whatever your answer is. LikeWise, I was expecting this movie to Not to be one.
Hence the reason I wasn't so keen on watching it but even though it is, I'm not saying, "it sucks", I would enjoy it. Never in all my post have I said, oh music, singing, dancing, is terrible ..... I love musicals myself. So, I don't think you have problem with that, do you ?
Even Lord of the Rings / The Hobbit had singing in there, but it's not claimed a musical. A Musical, IS a musical. The difference is just how much tragedy, the themes and kind of audience its attracting and their kind of music. Sound of music, Sweeney todd, Moulin Rouge are all musicals, they're just a different style.
Chozon1 mentioned reality different and I agree,
Spoiler:
Well, truthfully, reality holds far more pain than fiction. But it's not fair to apply that in a discussion on movies, since it is entertainment and fantasy being discussed here.
There is a point of entertainment, fantasy but not just only that but Inspiration, some hope, the beauty of music which can make a big difference.
So you understand the poverty in 3rd world countries. You understand, women are treated like crap, raped - a lot of prostitution business. Children sold off, I don't know about the value of humanity. There are violent gangs, drugs. If you want to make a musical out of it , be my guest.
Les Miserables is actually a good example of a musical, why ?
Because it holds all the necessary ingredients.
Tragedy - there's civil war, revolution and oppression from the government. There is love, family love, the uphold and struggle of a man, albeit a good man but the Downside is, they didn't wrote it, Hugo did.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:13 pm
by ArchAngel
Hey Arctic, I just found a little tidbit about the Les Miserables movie you might like.
Turns out, the actor who played the Bishop, Colm Wilkinson, originally played Jean Valjean in the 10th anniversary production. Really a beautiful cyclical statement.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:13 pm
by ArcticFox
That's awesome! I wonder how many more of those are in the movie...
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 6:20 pm
by ArchAngel
I know Samantha Barks, the girl who played Eponine, played the same character in the 25th anniversary production.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:42 pm
by ArcticFox
That part I knew, and I just bet there's a swarm of cameos in it.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:11 pm
by jester747
I saw it and it blew my miiind.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:05 am
by thelegend2004
Hugh Jackman was awesome. He said he didn't drink water for 3 days before the prison work seen to get the wrinkles on his face. He is always committed to putting a 110% into his roles.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:58 pm
by ccgr
Finally saw it last night due to Netflix sending the wrong disc, great movie (haven't seen the prior ones)
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:53 am
by ArcticFox
ccgr wrote:Finally saw it last night due to Netflix sending the wrong disc, great movie (haven't seen the prior ones)
Don't bother with the previous ones. They tend to be more true to the novel, and tell the story in a very depressing, boring, painful way.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:52 pm
by TripExistence
I will still champion the 1998 adaptation, even over this one.
Warning: Link contains a fair to heavy amount of language, there's even a mild swear word in the url. It's long, but I think it's well worth reading.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:40 am
by ArcticFox
I dunno... The guy makes understandable points but I come away from the article feeling like it all boils down to "It didn't like it because it's not the way I'd have done it." Yes, I get that he's trying to analyze it on a technical level which is meant to be objective, but it doesn't seem to me that any art form (films included) MUST follow a particular formula. That kind of thinking is what leads to boring conventionality and at the end of the day, Les Mis was a successful movie and I've never heard of a single movie this guy made.
Re: Les Miserables
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:00 pm
by ArchAngel
Wow, that was difficult to sludge through. I couldn't go on after reading about his cinematography class. If he thought the movie difficult to go through, I gander he never bothered reading through his own reviews.
From what I gleaned, I agree with Arctic. It sounds like a film student with a superiority complex and a stuck caps-lock key.
Palatable as in one you agree with. Look, I'm not saying that this version of Les Mis was a bad movie, and I certainly wouldn't go as far as the guy in the review that I posted. However, I was grateful for it in that it provided some means of explanation for why certain sections of the movie made me so uncomfortable, cinematic-wise. I felt the same way about Hooper's bizarre directorial choices in The King's Speech, despite liking the movie.