Les Miserables

User Score
7.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 707 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 69 out of 707

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Dec 26, 2012
    4
    Inert. Bloated. A relic of the 1980s that should have been left where it belongs. Needed to be edited down by at least 15 minutes--would not have affected storyline but the pacing would have been much better. A lot of time, energy and money used to produce a very mediocre musical.
  2. Jan 14, 2013
    10
    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 the benefits of having the actors sing live, then recording the music to the singing, the scenes flow beautifully. The film is consistently entertaining, ITom 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
  3. Apr 21, 2013
    10
    A beautiful, touching film with a wide and recognizable cast. Although the singing is slightly off at times, the atmosphere will sweep any doubts away.
  4. Sep 2, 2013
    8
    I`m not a fan of musicals at all, so I watched this expecting to hate it, but I liked what it was all about. If you can get through the singing and focus on the story it`s a good watch.
  5. Jan 24, 2013
    10
    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 OscarLet 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
  6. Dec 4, 2014
    7
    Even if it overstays its welcome, Tom Hooper's epic adaptation of the Hugo classic is remarkably well performed and finely staged with jaw-dropping sets and brilliant imagery.
  7. Apr 29, 2013
    7
    I had never seen the musical before I watched this film, and I'm confident enough to say that this was a good introduction to the multitude of Les Miserables's. The musical production in the film is amazing with live performances from Hugh Jackman and Academy Award Winner for Best Supporting Actress Anne Hathaway (who was only in the film for 20 minutes). Unfortunately though, there areI had never seen the musical before I watched this film, and I'm confident enough to say that this was a good introduction to the multitude of Les Miserables's. The musical production in the film is amazing with live performances from Hugh Jackman and Academy Award Winner for Best Supporting Actress Anne Hathaway (who was only in the film for 20 minutes). Unfortunately though, there are a few drawbacks. Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen play the caretakers of Cosette. In other words, THEY PLAY THE EXACT SAME CHARACTERS FROM SWEENEY TODD. Apparently, the director just resorted to whoever played two goofballs in the nineteenth century in a movie: THESE TWO. It was annoying seeing that they were only in the movie to play the exact same parts as in Sweeney Todd. It took me out of the movie and it always reminded me that these two are from an entirely different film. Other than a few camera issues, such as the infamous bobbing, the film is marvelous and rich with musical entertainment. Expand
  8. Oct 31, 2013
    8
    The first hour was brilliant. How Jean Valjean cheats authorities and his fate time and again, and how he finds redemption in a child. It was touching, and the feeling could have lasted had not what followed would have followed. Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway acted with such finesse that it would take something especially non-human not to feel for them. Even the songs during this durationThe first hour was brilliant. How Jean Valjean cheats authorities and his fate time and again, and how he finds redemption in a child. It was touching, and the feeling could have lasted had not what followed would have followed. Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway acted with such finesse that it would take something especially non-human not to feel for them. Even the songs during this duration were better. Alas, the feeling could not last. The movie quickly degenerated into a sort of love triangle. Who could give a damn about them when we'd just been exposed to possibly one of cinema's saddest protagonists? Yet the director persists and spoils any good feeling we might have about the movie, and we are on the brink of begging him to bring Valjean back. Fortunately the tone turns serious again and the plot focussed on the revolutionaries. But the lustre from before was lost and could not be regained. Not to mention that Eddie Redmayne is the most unmanly, overrated actor today. At over two and a half hours, it leaves you deeply exhausted to your bones. I was left with a headache, which shows I didn't enjoy the movie as much as I had wanted to. I couldn't help comparing it to Sweeney Todd, which was also a musical, but didn't go over the top and kept dialogue and singing balanced. One more Best Picture nominee that in my view didn't deserve to be nominated for the category. Expand
  9. Mar 23, 2013
    6
    "Les Misérables" isn't for everyone, but fans of the stage version will not be disappointed. While successfully "opening up" the musical far beyond the limitations of a theater-bound production, Tom Hooper retains its heart and soul. In many ways, the movie is more opera than musical. There's very little dancing and even less spoken dialogue. Visually, "Les Misérables" is a splendid"Les Misérables" isn't for everyone, but fans of the stage version will not be disappointed. While successfully "opening up" the musical far beyond the limitations of a theater-bound production, Tom Hooper retains its heart and soul. In many ways, the movie is more opera than musical. There's very little dancing and even less spoken dialogue. Visually, "Les Misérables" is a splendid spectacle, with set and costume design that is second to none. Hooper does an excellent job recreating 19th century France, and it's in this area that the motion picture separates itself from the live version. What it lacks in the intimacy of singers performing directly to an audience, it gains in cinematic achievement. That being said--to the causal movie viewer unfamiliar with Victor Hugo's novel; a timeless testament to the survival of the human spirit--it is a tedious, bloated, and exhausting 238 minutes you'll never get back. Expand
  10. Dec 26, 2012
    4
    This was an boring, overblown mess of a movie. Anne Hathaway's performance is the single highlight where she radiates pure pathos. Meanwhile, Russell Crowe was just embarrassing to watch.
  11. Dec 28, 2012
    5
    I really didn't like this film much at all, honestly. The film is much too Broadway and not enough like a movie musical. I hated Tom Hooper's direction, and while I respect the ambition, I would have preferred to see the musical version of this story told in a much different way. There is NO dialogue in film, almost none at all; every conversation and thought was sung, as it would haveI really didn't like this film much at all, honestly. The film is much too Broadway and not enough like a movie musical. I hated Tom Hooper's direction, and while I respect the ambition, I would have preferred to see the musical version of this story told in a much different way. There is NO dialogue in film, almost none at all; every conversation and thought was sung, as it would have been on stage...that it the major reason why Les Miserables didn't work for me. This film is like watching the actual Broadway production on tape, songs included. For die-hard fans of the musical, that's great, but for others who just love the story, or even those that love films, this adaptation of Les Miserables disappoints. By including every song from the musical, it included the not-so-great songs as well. This creates a film that soars for some moments, but bores in most others. Instead of including the lesser Les Mis songs, the film should have manipulated the structure of the songs, or even cut some songs entirely. I respect that the film wants to uphold the integrity of the musical, but as a film, it doesn't work. Some of the songs were brilliant, but many weren't, and some were plain awkward, thus weakening the emotional effect of the film.

    There are some amazing things about Les Miserables, though, particularly in the acting. Hugh Jackman gives the performance of his career; he's never been better, and Anne Hathaway is stunning as Fantine! Both are locks for Oscar nominations, and Anne will win based on her heart-wrenching rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream" alone. It's probably her best performance to date and while she's only in the film for 20 minutes, Les Mis is worth seeing just for her performance. The rest of the cast is okay at best, Samantha Barks and Eddie Redmayne both have their moments to shine and I enjoyed their performances/songs. Russell Crowe was a very poor Javert; he's not a great singer and it was clear he was uncomfortable in the role.

    As Les Miserables was coming to a close, I was very satisfied with the ending. I did not think it would come together as effectively as it did considering I didn't like the film, but it did still remind me of how a great musical version of Les Miserables is still to come at some point in the future, because this is not that film!
    Expand
  12. May 20, 2013
    6
    Les Miserables is a powerful and depressing which is just what the adaptation needs. However, despite Anne Hathway great acting, Tom Hooper basically just made the musical with more awesome sound eits. So my message to this mixed film is, if you want to be a musical, then dammit Hooper make a freaking musical for crying out loud.
  13. Jan 28, 2013
    9
    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 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.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 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
  14. Jan 8, 2013
    8
    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 very interesting and spans three different time periods which is rather interesting! Honorable mentions must go to both Anne Hathaway & Samantha Barks whoIt'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
  15. Jan 24, 2013
    9
    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 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 madeI 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
  16. Dec 25, 2012
    10
    Wonderful. Just saw the show with my wife. She wanted to stand up at various junctures of the movie and clap. We saw the broadway show at least 6 times and believe that the movie did the show justice. It is the rare movie that people we see it several times.
  17. Dec 25, 2012
    10
    Although I would have loved more background, I understand that you can't do everything in the book, in the movie. The acting, the singing, the pageantry - wow, what a musical. (Stars was SUPERB!)
  18. Dec 25, 2012
    1
    Laborious. Strained male voices. They should have worked on it in the cutting room a bit further. Hugo's story is a classic, but the attempt at the operatic style will not be loved by the average American I feel. Why do we need this in the theater now? Why couldn't they show what these "poor, innocent" Revolutionaries did to the aristocrats? No sign of the guillotine here! How manyLaborious. Strained male voices. They should have worked on it in the cutting room a bit further. Hugo's story is a classic, but the attempt at the operatic style will not be loved by the average American I feel. Why do we need this in the theater now? Why couldn't they show what these "poor, innocent" Revolutionaries did to the aristocrats? No sign of the guillotine here! How many times did the audience need to hear of the crimes of the man? I'm afraid it is mirroring what is happening in America today. They advertised it wrong. It was an opera, not a musical. I love these actors, but they should have hired singers for this movie. I love music and I couldn't even turn on the radio going home because my ears hurt so much. Those people ruined Paris and great art. Why are we rewarding them today? I'd love to see it as a good movie and not as an opera. I bet those men were embarrassed to sing like that. Sad, sad, sad. Expand
  19. Dec 25, 2012
    4
    The millions of faithful followers of this no-spoken-dialogue pop opera will flock to any incarnation. For everyone else, try to be kind. Producers clearly wanted the A-list actors (Hugh Jackman/Valjean, Anne Hathaway /Fantine, Amanda Seyfield/Cosette, Russell Crowe/Javert -- who auditioned like American Idol hopefuls) for two reasons: for box office clout, and to make theThe millions of faithful followers of this no-spoken-dialogue pop opera will flock to any incarnation. For everyone else, try to be kind. Producers clearly wanted the A-list actors (Hugh Jackman/Valjean, Anne Hathaway /Fantine, Amanda Seyfield/Cosette, Russell Crowe/Javert -- who auditioned like American Idol hopefuls) for two reasons: for box office clout, and to make the soap-opera-smaltzy sung dialogue seem almost credible, at least in super closeup. Anne Hathaway gives a moving performance as the ill-fated (and early departing) Fantine, and Hugh Jackman, who won a Tony for the Boy from Oz and played Curly in a West End production of Oklahoma, will probably be the greatest surprise to film fans. But when the "real" singers arrive -the young revolutionaries and the wonderful Samantha Barks as Eponine -- all the leads except for Jackman seem out of place. (I notice they didn't include Sam Barks in the finale.) More successful is the staging of the comedy numbers like "Master of the House" with Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter as the grifters, although those numbers seem odd set in director Tom Hooper's ultra-realistic Parisian slums. My suggestion: on a long trans-oceanic flight, try Kindle-sampling Victor Hugo's sprawling 1,500 page novel. Expand
  20. Dec 25, 2012
    10
    While not a perfect film, it was everything a Les Miserables fan could have asked for and more. The camera work was both intimate and sweeping, the art direction was stunning, and the performances really brought the music to life. While some of the singing left a bit to be desired (Russell Crowe's voice, while good, is not meant for musicals) the performances brought emotion and pathos toWhile not a perfect film, it was everything a Les Miserables fan could have asked for and more. The camera work was both intimate and sweeping, the art direction was stunning, and the performances really brought the music to life. While some of the singing left a bit to be desired (Russell Crowe's voice, while good, is not meant for musicals) the performances brought emotion and pathos to the music that the musical alone could not. Not in the least bit subtle, this adaptation expands upon the musical, adding missing information from the novel into the movie to tie the storyline together in a masterful way that makes the overarching themes of faith and redemption even more meaningful. A must see. Expand
  21. Dec 26, 2012
    10
    I fell in love with Les Miserables as a book first in high school, followed shortly by the love of the movie with Liam Neeson, and finally the musical. I cannot sing for the life of me, but I auditioned just to be in the background for the school production we were putting on. I have watched the 25th anniversary concert a million times. Finally, from the time they announced there would beI fell in love with Les Miserables as a book first in high school, followed shortly by the love of the movie with Liam Neeson, and finally the musical. I cannot sing for the life of me, but I auditioned just to be in the background for the school production we were putting on. I have watched the 25th anniversary concert a million times. Finally, from the time they announced there would be a movie, I have been obsessively following every announcement from casting, to trailers, to featurettes. To say that I am a die hard fan would be certainly putting it lightly. I finally saw this movie yesterday and I have to say that I am impressed. Some songs were out of order, and pieces of songs were missing, but I felt that it made sense to the storyline. Redmayne's performance of "Empty Chairs and Empty Tables" was brilliant and touching, Hathaway's Performance in "I Dreamed a Dream" had me in tears, Samantha Barks was just stunning and I hope this starts a long movie career for her, and finally Hugh Jackman did an amazing job. Crowe and Seyfriend both did adequate jobs to play their characters, but both paled in comparison with the others when it comes to singing alone. I feel that Crowe is an amazing actor, and he pulled of Javert's emotional side very well. He did a great job singing the part, but his real contribution as Javert was just how amazing he is as an actor. Most people portray the cruel side of Javert, but have a hard time showing the conflict inside him. Crowe did fantastic! The decision in the movie to have Javert leave his badge on Gavroche, was so good, especially when showing the emotional conflict that Javert is facing. Hooper did a great job. This is now my favorite movie and I cannot wait to see it again! Expand
  22. Dec 26, 2012
    9
    The source material and many individual performances saved the movie. The close-ups wouldn't have been a problem, if they had EVER done a wide shot during the scene. LOVED Sacha Baron-Cohen.
  23. Dec 26, 2012
    9
    Forget all the middling reviews, this is a terrific movie. You don't have to be "emotionally susceptible," as The Hollywood Reporter claims, to enjoy this film, but I do suppose you must have the capacity to be stirred by noble themes, great acting, and, of course, powerful music. Go see it.
  24. Dec 26, 2012
    10
    I am not sure why others are giving this bad reviews. The cast choice was amazing, and the singers were amazing. I am someone who lives and breaths music. These were top notch singers. My only complaint goes with Russell Crowe as Javert. It's not that he can't sing, I just think his style of voice wasn't as suited and didn't match up for this musical as well as the other stars of thisI am not sure why others are giving this bad reviews. The cast choice was amazing, and the singers were amazing. I am someone who lives and breaths music. These were top notch singers. My only complaint goes with Russell Crowe as Javert. It's not that he can't sing, I just think his style of voice wasn't as suited and didn't match up for this musical as well as the other stars of this musical. Overall, a very touching and uplifting movie. I would recommend it for anyone. Expand
  25. Dec 26, 2012
    10
    I wasn't thrilled about going to a musical but I have to admit, this was a really great movie! The scenery was incredible and the acting was worth an academy award! I think the critics will be out voted when the awards come out. This one is a masterpiece!
  26. Dec 27, 2012
    8
    Having seen the stage version multiple times, including both the original staging and 25th anniversary edition, I have anticipated the film version since announced. Overall, I was pleased with the result. The biggest negative for me is the acting of Russell Crowe as Javert. It's not that he can't sing or act. He just can't do both at the same time. His voice timbre and range are also wrongHaving seen the stage version multiple times, including both the original staging and 25th anniversary edition, I have anticipated the film version since announced. Overall, I was pleased with the result. The biggest negative for me is the acting of Russell Crowe as Javert. It's not that he can't sing or act. He just can't do both at the same time. His voice timbre and range are also wrong for the role. Compared to the rest the cast, Crowe just looks and sounds uncomfortable, and he rarely expresses through his face and voice the deep passion and reverence this character carries that drives his obsession across the years. Not to belabor the point, but only in rare moments did I not see Russell Crowe rather than Inspector Javert. On the other side, both Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman deliver as Fantine and Jean Valjean. This film version allows an intimacy that is just not possible on the stage. For me, the live singing absolutely works for nearly every performer. We get raw, emotional and heartfelt rendering of the music. Most of the changes made for the movie worked for me. I could quibble with of the director's choices for camera position and editing but for most of the movie, Les Miserables simply soars. Expand
  27. Dec 27, 2012
    7
    Having seen the Broadway show 4 times I was so excited going in. To me, it is very hard to bring some of those rousing stage numbers to the big screen without giving up the energy and passion of those songs. "One Day More" cutting from actor to actor was jarring and did not have the full impact; the same was the case with other songs. Eddie Redmayne, Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway and aHaving seen the Broadway show 4 times I was so excited going in. To me, it is very hard to bring some of those rousing stage numbers to the big screen without giving up the energy and passion of those songs. "One Day More" cutting from actor to actor was jarring and did not have the full impact; the same was the case with other songs. Eddie Redmayne, Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway and a few others really stood out. I thought The Tenardier's songs were more gross than funny and, although I am a huge fan of Sacha Baron Cohen, he looked bored and uninspired with his character. I also did not need his silly ad libs during his numbers. It was great to see Colm Wilkinson as the priest! Nice cameo! Russell Crowe was just o.k., not having the range for "Stars" did hurt him. Yes, I still filled up several times during the movie, but there was an emotional cohesiveness lacking. This is one movie which needed an intermission just so we, the audience, could relax for a moment instead of being thrust into a constant barrage of sadness, despair, pain and suffering, without a break. Expand
  28. Dec 27, 2012
    9
    This is one of the the most moving show I watched this year, it definitely made me cry. I love the acting and singing of the casts, especially that of Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway. Definitely recommended if you like musicals, and even if you don't you should catch it cause it has become a classic about love and redemption despite their harsh circumstances.
  29. Dec 27, 2012
    10
    Adored every second of this film. Suspend disbelief and you will be swept up into an emotional and cathartic love-fest. It takes the best of theatre and film and delivers a stunning rendition of the popular story. The close-up solos ( especially Anne Hathaway's Fontine) are literally breath-taking.
    I was skeptical of an operetta style ( all sung) but it worked. This film is a feast for
    Adored every second of this film. Suspend disbelief and you will be swept up into an emotional and cathartic love-fest. It takes the best of theatre and film and delivers a stunning rendition of the popular story. The close-up solos ( especially Anne Hathaway's Fontine) are literally breath-taking.
    I was skeptical of an operetta style ( all sung) but it worked. This film is a feast for the eyes and soul.
    Expand
  30. Dec 27, 2012
    10
    This is an absolute must-see! All the performances were phenomenal, and you'd have to be heartless to not get swept up in all the emotion beautifully conveyed through song. Hathaway, Barks, and Seyfried were all great. Jackman was absolutely breath-taking. You could just see how devoted he was, and I can honestly say that is an Oscar-worthy performance. Brought me to tears multiple times.This is an absolute must-see! All the performances were phenomenal, and you'd have to be heartless to not get swept up in all the emotion beautifully conveyed through song. Hathaway, Barks, and Seyfried were all great. Jackman was absolutely breath-taking. You could just see how devoted he was, and I can honestly say that is an Oscar-worthy performance. Brought me to tears multiple times. Also, Redmayne as Marius was extremely talented as well. Crowe, though the weak-link, was still fantastic. His acting was so convincing, and it really got to me. I can't wait to see this again in theaters as well as buying the DVD when it comes out. Even if you are not a fan of musicals, you will be for this one! Expand
  31. Dec 27, 2012
    10
    Great themes permeate the beautifully sung and brilliantly acted film version of the long-running stage show. In addition to updating the operatic form, the movie embraces its epic destiny. Instead of playing to the short attention spans of those who love the bloated excesses of Batman, or the adolescent charm of the Avengers, Les Miserables has the courage to examine just how hard it isGreat themes permeate the beautifully sung and brilliantly acted film version of the long-running stage show. In addition to updating the operatic form, the movie embraces its epic destiny. Instead of playing to the short attention spans of those who love the bloated excesses of Batman, or the adolescent charm of the Avengers, Les Miserables has the courage to examine just how hard it is to change anything for the better, and the redemption available for those willing to try. I have seldom been so moved by a motion picture and never by a musical. Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Eddie Redmayne, Aaron Tveit, Sacha Baron Cohen, Helena Bonham Carter and the luminous Samantha Barks shine. Cynics and those immune to the terrific score should maybe opt out. Those who can still feel their hearts beating should head to the barricades. Best film of 2012. Expand
  32. Dec 28, 2012
    9
    Les Miserables - An adapted musical drama of Victor Hugo's novel, Les Miserables.

    Casting [4/4] Excellently cast, specifically Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen, and Russell Crowe. Every actor was able to work effectively as a group, and the Hugh Jackman/Russell Crowe conflict was superb. Acting [14/16] Great performances all around, especially from
    Les Miserables - An adapted musical drama of Victor Hugo's novel, Les Miserables.

    Casting [4/4]
    Excellently cast, specifically Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen, and Russell Crowe. Every actor was able to work effectively as a group, and the Hugh Jackman/Russell Crowe conflict was superb.
    Acting [14/16]
    Great performances all around, especially from Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman. Jackman and Hathaway should both expect nominations in their respective categories. Then again, acting in a musical is difficult to judge, and despite many highlight performances, talent was occasionally wasted in lazy scenes.
    Costume/Make-Up [7/8]
    Visually appealing robes help create a realistic scene and often contribute to the character development (fr example, Baron Cohen and Bonham Carter's ridiculous outfits reflected their thieving lifestyles)
    Visual Effects [6/8]
    Grandiose and majestic, but often too exaggerated. The visual effects sometimes clouded the appropriate representation of the scene (although more frequently than not they aided in delivering the "pow" of the scene)
    Setting [11/12]
    Every scene was wonderful and had the true vibe of post-revolution urban France. Rich colors and vibrant hues maintained the turmoil or peace of each moment almost flawlessly. There were rate scenes, though, where the setting was right, but too blasé for the eye to handle.
    Script [11/12]
    Each musical number was unmistakably genius in the lyrics (adapted from previous theatrical performances, like that on broadway). The messages were unmarred by useless fillers, although some lines were difficult to understand (but fun to listen to).
    Soundtrack [12/12]
    Beautiful and unobtrusive, letting the vocals be heard clearly and the action scenes be enjoyed wholly. A superb job, indeed.
    Storyline [10/12]
    Sweet and heartfelt (sometimes tearful), but when you least expect it to, it'll trudge and march slowly (like the marching bands in parades that bore you, but get you excited for a much more fulfilling event in the near future). Nevertheless, the story was complete and understandable.
    Direction [14/16]
    You'd expect more from Hooper (after The King's Speech), but the way he addressed this dramatic tragedy is in no way shameful. He successfully incorporated the talents of each actor, the action and intensity of the revolution, and the personalities of the characters cleanly and neatly, all in the fun-to-view format of a musical.
    Additional [-2]
    2 hours and 40 minutes was simply too long for this film. Hooper should've shaved off at least 20 minutes from the film, especially in the tiresome revolutionary scenes.
    Final score - 87 [Must-See!]
    Expand
  33. Dec 29, 2012
    10
    I fell in love with this musical as soon as I heard the first lyric. I've seen it on stage countless times, I have bought the 25th anniversary show on DVD, and have every single recording of the show. I was afraid that the movie would let down the amazing show that is Les Mis. It did not. The scale of this movie is immense. The songs were sung on set, rather than recorded and dubbed later,I fell in love with this musical as soon as I heard the first lyric. I've seen it on stage countless times, I have bought the 25th anniversary show on DVD, and have every single recording of the show. I was afraid that the movie would let down the amazing show that is Les Mis. It did not. The scale of this movie is immense. The songs were sung on set, rather than recorded and dubbed later, making the songs 'acted' more than 'sung'. Some may see this as a bad thing. "This is a musical! The focus should be on the music!" I have heard time and time again. But when every song makes you cry because of the emotion infused in each actor, you forget you are watching a musical. You become inside the movie. You just want to say, "Don't worry! Jean Valjean will save you!" The characters become real rather than people just singing to a tune. Expand
  34. Dec 30, 2012
    10
    "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.
  35. Dec 30, 2012
    1
    I have never been more disappointed. I've seen the stage and concert versions and while it was great visually, Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe were PAINFUL to listen to. The power of the drama which comes from good singing was totally lost. One needs to hear a really good singer sing Bring Him Home (like Thomas Hampson) to know how truly BAD Jackman was. He just didn't have the voice toI have never been more disappointed. I've seen the stage and concert versions and while it was great visually, Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe were PAINFUL to listen to. The power of the drama which comes from good singing was totally lost. One needs to hear a really good singer sing Bring Him Home (like Thomas Hampson) to know how truly BAD Jackman was. He just didn't have the voice to carry it. There are plenty of people who could have done better! The best singers were the smaller parts. I feel they ruined what could have been a classic by using such poor singers. I don't care if they had a big name, they can't sing! This is a show that NEEDS good singing. I'm so very disappointed. Could go on and on. Expand
  36. Dec 30, 2012
    7
    Though the fantastic performances of Hathaway, Barks, Redmayne, and little Huddlestone carries much of this film, the astoundingly sub-par performances of Jackman, Crowe, and Seyfried hide the beauty of Hugo's novel. This rushed performance skims through the complexities and beauties of Les Miserables, seemingly to arrive at a "showstopping" number. With shallow depth-of-field throughout,Though the fantastic performances of Hathaway, Barks, Redmayne, and little Huddlestone carries much of this film, the astoundingly sub-par performances of Jackman, Crowe, and Seyfried hide the beauty of Hugo's novel. This rushed performance skims through the complexities and beauties of Les Miserables, seemingly to arrive at a "showstopping" number. With shallow depth-of-field throughout, the obvious focal point is the star cast, abandoning the setting which and the characters who make up Les Miserables. Expand
  37. Dec 30, 2012
    10
    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 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 seatOur 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
  38. Dec 30, 2012
    5
    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 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
    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 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
  39. Jan 27, 2013
    10
    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. 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. BeforeWhen 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
  40. Jan 1, 2013
    10
    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. 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.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. 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
  41. Jan 7, 2013
    8
    "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.
  42. Jan 2, 2013
    1
    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 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.
  43. Jan 2, 2013
    9
    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
  44. Jan 4, 2013
    8
    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 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 myI 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
  45. Jan 3, 2013
    9
    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 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 getI 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
  46. Jan 4, 2013
    8
    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.
  47. Jan 5, 2013
    7
    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 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.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 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
  48. Jan 27, 2013
    5
    Let us begin by acknowledging that this is a MUSICAL. Okay, now that we have that elephant in the room cleared, this movie falls short as a musical mainly because of its mainstream, Hollywood casts. The camera work was fantastic and the plot is universally cherished, yet what slashed this movie as one this year's undeserving hyped films is the lack of emotion among the casts when theyLet us begin by acknowledging that this is a MUSICAL. Okay, now that we have that elephant in the room cleared, this movie falls short as a musical mainly because of its mainstream, Hollywood casts. The camera work was fantastic and the plot is universally cherished, yet what slashed this movie as one this year's undeserving hyped films is the lack of emotion among the casts when they sing. It doesn't matter if the acting is ingenious in the musical when the cast cannot even stay on pitch. Though I despise musicals simply because characters SING their thoughts instead of the audience proactively engaging consciously with the character, the excitement of musicals come from each character's dramatic but hearty rich tone when they BELT out their emotions. Samantha Barks (played Eponine) was possibly the ONLY actor that solved this fundamental equation.

    ps I will hold my own revolt if Russell Crowe decides to release a full length studio album just because of this one gig...
    Expand
  49. Jan 6, 2013
    7
    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. The grandiosity worked and the ending is beautiful. Not the best movie but a good 7.5 that rounds up.
  50. Jan 20, 2013
    10
    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 to this movie before
  51. Jan 12, 2013
    9
    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 what miserable people look like, all around the world.
  52. Jan 7, 2013
    10
    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 to experience real acting with a tangible connection. I rarely applaud after a performance, but I couldn't refrain after this performance. Efficiently carriedI 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
  53. Jan 15, 2013
    7
    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,
    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
  54. AML
    Jan 8, 2013
    8
    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.
  55. Jan 9, 2013
    5
    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 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 forPlease 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
  56. Aug 28, 2013
    7
    Definitely entertaining whether it's above average I can't decide. In a movie where 99% of the dialogue is in song the actors have to be able to sing. Eddie Redmayne and Anne Hathaway are the best of the cast and sing perfectly. Most of the other actors are alright and sometimes sound like Mr Bean but there bearable. Amanda Seyfried is terrible at singing in this, she's better than me, butDefinitely entertaining whether it's above average I can't decide. In a movie where 99% of the dialogue is in song the actors have to be able to sing. Eddie Redmayne and Anne Hathaway are the best of the cast and sing perfectly. Most of the other actors are alright and sometimes sound like Mr Bean but there bearable. Amanda Seyfried is terrible at singing in this, she's better than me, but seriously get some lessons. Expand
  57. Jan 12, 2013
    10
    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 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 wasThis 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
  58. Jan 12, 2013
    9
    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
  59. Feb 10, 2013
    0
    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.
  60. Jan 13, 2013
    9
    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 really don't know what they're talking about.
  61. Jan 14, 2013
    9
    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 small changes from the Stage version of this amazing musical worked beautifully.
  62. Jan 14, 2013
    8
    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
  63. Jun 9, 2013
    8
    Les Miserables is one of the best musicals that I have ever seen. It is based on true story. The songs are very good, for example I like Javert. I really recommend this movie..
  64. Jan 17, 2013
    10
    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 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 beThis 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
  65. Feb 3, 2013
    9
    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 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 aI´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
  66. Jan 19, 2013
    7
    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 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 moreLes 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
  67. Jan 19, 2013
    10
    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 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 withLes 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
  68. Jan 24, 2013
    9
    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 theLes 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
  69. Jan 26, 2013
    5
    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 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 theI 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
  70. Jan 28, 2013
    4
    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
    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
  71. Jan 28, 2013
    9
    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 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
    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 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
  72. Jan 28, 2013
    5
    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 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 theLes 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
  73. Jan 30, 2013
    8
    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% to ensure that they acted throughout their music. A captivating tale featuring an extremely talented cast, especially the rightly acclaimed Hugh Jackman andAs 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
  74. Feb 5, 2013
    9
    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.
  75. Feb 14, 2013
    8
    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
    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
  76. Oct 20, 2013
    5
    when I finished watching this movie I did not know that was the rewarding feeling or was that a good movie or was because I hold an entire movie in which all the dialogues are sung
  77. Feb 4, 2013
    4
    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 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 likeMy 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
  78. Feb 8, 2013
    7
    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 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.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 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
  79. Feb 16, 2013
    10
    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.
  80. Feb 10, 2013
    8
    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 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 theLet 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
  81. Nov 17, 2013
    5
    Was all the singing really nesessary? No, with the budget that the director had, he should have made a proper epic. All the singing actually destracts from the story. As for the characters, this film would be falling apart if it were not for Crowe. Just a matter of personal opinion.
  82. Feb 12, 2013
    10
    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 Jackmans performance as Jean Valjean is exceptional and leaving me for one captivated along with many other performances. Anne Hathaway had me casting her asLes 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
  83. Feb 13, 2013
    7
    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 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 brilliantAn 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
  84. Feb 12, 2013
    10
    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
  85. Feb 13, 2013
    10
    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 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 liveI 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
  86. Feb 19, 2013
    10
    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 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 allLes 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
  87. Feb 23, 2013
    8
    Hugh Jackman you deserve an Oscar for your performance "All Cast take a bow superb performances" Russell Crowe you where great as always singing was in character loved your portrayal
  88. Feb 27, 2013
    4
    I do love musicals. I am a big fan of Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Ginger Rodgers, and Cyd Charrise, The greatest musical has to be either Fiddler on the roof or Singin in the Rain. The problems with Les Miserable stem from the actual Broadway musical itself. The story "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo is a chronicle of french life in the french revolution era. The purpose of the story was toI do love musicals. I am a big fan of Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Ginger Rodgers, and Cyd Charrise, The greatest musical has to be either Fiddler on the roof or Singin in the Rain. The problems with Les Miserable stem from the actual Broadway musical itself. The story "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo is a chronicle of french life in the french revolution era. The purpose of the story was to show the hardships and exploitation of the French people in the most important eras in French history. To create a musical based on these hardships would trivialize and take away Hugo's masterpiece. The other problem is the language.Why create a musical that is in predominately in English (yes, there are french translations) that totally disrupts and destroys the cultural context of what the story is suppose to be about? When considering the 2012 version, an adaption of a huge Broadway musical with a colossal amount of fans waiting to see it makes it a for sure money maker.Yet, it does not allow an unacquainted audience to embrace the story or music. The story is redundant and the music, while I admit is great, really gets boring after the first 20 minutes of the cast screeching it in my face and really forcing me to like it. I felt the film had great points in photography and costuming, the film felt long and tiring. The pace of the film was like a roller coaster ride that after the 15th rendition of the same three songs, I gave up. The lack of professional singers (i.e. Russell Crowe and High Jackman) really made me doubt their musical prowess and I just hoped they were able to hit the really high notes. Th final problem is the song dialogue. I felt it was gimmicky and unnecessary. The great musicals of "Singin in the Rain" and "Fiddler on the Roof" used dialogue to move the stories forward and make the songs more enjoyable. "Les Mis" oversang their songs that could have potentially be a great musical. Yet, it disappointed this musical lover! Expand
  89. Mar 23, 2013
    9
    I loved this movie especially the performances of Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman. The singing is well done even Russell Crowe, I know he's not as good as Hathaway or Jackman but I thought he was solid.
  90. Mar 16, 2013
    10
    That's the best musical ever with the role of Anne Hathaway portraying Fantine being one of the best roles in 2012 movies. Hugh Jackman has a nice voice.
  91. Mar 19, 2013
    10
    In my opinion, this is an excellent movie. Extremely touching form it's begining, altough i found really hard to watch musicals, this is a different one, based on a classic novel, tells a great story. I must said i didn't see the show, only the movie, so I based my critic only as a film addict, and not a les mis expert. The cast did a an excellent job. Hugh Jackman espectacular, AnneIn my opinion, this is an excellent movie. Extremely touching form it's begining, altough i found really hard to watch musicals, this is a different one, based on a classic novel, tells a great story. I must said i didn't see the show, only the movie, so I based my critic only as a film addict, and not a les mis expert. The cast did a an excellent job. Hugh Jackman espectacular, Anne Hathaway outstanding, great job of Amanda Seyfried and and Russell Crowe. Also reallly impressive Samantha Barks on her debut. Expand
  92. Mar 23, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm not typically one for writing reviews but I decided after suffering through this movie that I needed the catharsis of doing one. I'll begin by saying that I am a fan of the musical. I saw it with a touring group when they came through and I own the "Dream Cast" concert version. I believe Les Mis has some of the most beautiful music and themes I've ever seen in a musical, albeit presented through a loosely woven story. Unfortunately this latest version, while attempting to stay closer to the musical production, didn't seem to be assembled with the same quality. The most distracting thing to me was that many of the cast were weak singers. They were unable to reach their notes without straining or giving up before hitting them. Some of Javert's music was even rearranged to accommodate Mr. Crowe. I appreciate the actors' ability to break down emotionally when needed but the voices were not as strong as their performance and many times took away from the impact that a song could have had. Mr. Crowe and Mr. Jackman's solos were often muffled or nasal respectively. I cringed before Valjean began his "God on high" at the barricade uncomfortably fearing what was about to come. And Javert's Stars solo, which would normally be belted out with a strong baritone fell flat.

    The cinematography was done in an odd manner. There were a lot of artistic angles presented. Some were interesting, like the sweep over the cross into the city toward the beginning. Others were very distracting like the butterfly on the gate during Cosette's duet with Marius in the garden. Valjean was annoyingly upstaged by a large-eyed banner during his solo at the barricade. The camera seemed handheld much of the time as well.

    I greatly appreciated the cut during Fantine's first sexual encounter as a prostitute I was watching this with my family and questioned if I needed to do some editing of my own. Yet we were all taken aback at the decision to follow Javert all the way down to his bone crunching end in the Seine. I believe this would have been better had it been left to the imagination. It was actually distracting when done in such a blatant manner.

    All in all I appreciated the sets and some of the singing as well as most of the art. I am glad someone made an attempt to bring the musical to video. Sadly, I think I would have enjoyed it more had they just filmed the actual stage play (like the 2011 Royal Albert Hall Phantom of the Opera). I decided to rate this a "0" to even out the unrealistically positive reviews. This should really be around a 6 in my book. Thanks for reading if you got through this!
    Expand
  93. Dec 14, 2013
    8
    Through the stand-point of someone who despises most musicals in general. This one is actually my favorite! I got really into the style this movie tried to achieve and even the musical numbers given by this fantastic cast. While a little slow to get into in the beginning, it still picks itself up throughout the film and beyond. The best part of the movie for sure is Hugh Jackman'sThrough the stand-point of someone who despises most musicals in general. This one is actually my favorite! I got really into the style this movie tried to achieve and even the musical numbers given by this fantastic cast. While a little slow to get into in the beginning, it still picks itself up throughout the film and beyond. The best part of the movie for sure is Hugh Jackman's portrayal of Jean Valjean. He really reels in the best of all the songs with his incredible acting and even singing. Overall, truly the best musical I've seen in motion picture history! And that's saying something. I give it an A-! Expand
  94. Mar 24, 2013
    10
    I saw the musical version of Les Miserables, it was very good and I enjoyed this movie. It is very long, almost three whole hours, I loved it and I think everyone will.
  95. Mar 26, 2013
    10
    It's a great movie one of the best of the year as it has all actors, music, production, love, everything I loved it and it was one of my favorites to win the Oscar for Best Picture.
  96. Mar 26, 2013
    8
    Though I am not a fan of musicals, and though it took me a good 15 minutes into the film to adjust to the constant musical numbers, I became immersed into quite a theatrical experience I haven't felt in a long time (with an amazing line of acting from talented actors to support it). This movie will perhaps open my eyes and force me to reconsider the genre of musicals.
  97. Apr 1, 2013
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. N MY OPINION **MAY CONTAIN SPOIILER S** by CtheTav I had heard great things about this film going into it. It had Oscar buzz and had already taken multiple best picture awards. Apparently I saw a different version of the film because the film I saw was terrible! The "singing" in this film by the main cast is reminiscent of Mama Mia! Or Moulin Rouge as in big name karaoke at best. The majority of the big names can't sing with the exception of Russel Crow who is a bit better than the rest but still a long way off staring a singing career after this film, and to give Hugh Jackman the lead role when he is the worst singer of the lot is unforgiveable and a stupid move by the casting director. Another problem with this film is the fact that there is very little talking and everything is sing talked which, takes away from the songs as its difficult to tell when a song starts and ends which is why when initially writing this review I struggled to recall even 2 songs (2 hours after watching the film). Back to the plot now, so carefully hinged on the back drop of a French revolution showing that everyone's super poor or mega rich and the no one likes the king at the moment so it, revolution! There is no character development in this film at all after the first 5 minutes. Jon Valjean goes from angry thief to God loving good guy in 10 seconds or 8 years of unseen moments in the plot, feels guilty for not being granular about his employees actions, buys some kid, raises her and then realises "actually I lied to get where I am today but I'm okay with that", gets a mystery illness whilst lifting luggage and dies. Javert Javert goes from letter of the lawman (he literally sang a song about it) to a suicidal fool who can't deal with being given a second chance. The young revolutionary goes from tactician to screw it I'm in love over the course of 1 night (the same night he saw his entire friendship die horribly). At the end of this film the people at the barricade are all dead this is touted as a happy ending. This ending is miserable all of those who died as martyrs achieved nothing, so well done everyone, NOT! This film has the worst action sequences ever. Being shot in the chest and not bleeding? Why not? Did the budget not allow for fake blood to be used? Then the character has the audacity to sing for three minutes before dying, not dying immediately like most of the other idiots foolish enough to point the barrel of a gun at themselves and not just away from everyone Rubbish! Rating 1 out of 10 An awful film that received too much praise due to the stage production it was based on Expand
  98. Apr 16, 2013
    10
    Having seen the play, and having read the original novel, I don't think this movie could've been any better. Bits of the book that aren't in the stage musical are wisely added into the film. GOOD changes from the play are made in the film, and every actor involved, even those in smaller parts, are sublime. I wish more material could've been created for Hathaway and Samatha Barks, becauseHaving seen the play, and having read the original novel, I don't think this movie could've been any better. Bits of the book that aren't in the stage musical are wisely added into the film. GOOD changes from the play are made in the film, and every actor involved, even those in smaller parts, are sublime. I wish more material could've been created for Hathaway and Samatha Barks, because they were probably the best. Overall though, it's an extremely touching film that will make anyone with a soul, shed a few tears. Expand
  99. Apr 4, 2013
    10
    I'm going to make this short and say les miserable is the best movie I've seen seen all of 2012 to me a definite 10 out of 10 definitely see this movie you wont regret it.
  100. Apr 13, 2013
    9
    One of my most favorite movies of 2012 and worthy to be one of my favorite of all time. When first hearing about the film, I thought it would be overrated for being a Broadway production brought to the big screen, but I was definitely moved by the very memorable experience within the cast and wonderful music.
Metascore
63

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 41
  2. Negative: 2 out of 41
  1. Reviewed by: Helen O'Hara
    Jan 7, 2013
    80
    Occasionally, like its characters, ragged around the edges, this nevertheless rings with all the emotion and power of the source and provides a new model for the movie musical.
  2. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    Jan 1, 2013
    50
    We're all familiar with the experience of seeing movies that cram ideas and themes down our throats. Les Misérables may represent the first movie to do so while also cramming us down the throats of its actors.
  3. Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    Dec 31, 2012
    50
    It's a relief to see Sacha Baron Cohen, in the role of a seamy innkeeper, bid goodbye to Cosette with the wistful words "Farewell, Courgette." One burst of farce, however, is not enough to redress the basic, inflationary bombast that defines Les Misérables. Fans of the original production, no doubt, will eat the movie up, and good luck to them. I screamed a scream as time went by.