Monday, January 14, 2013

Movie Mondays: Les Miserables

This week I want to take a stab at a movie which has been garnering all the acclaim for the past month or so: Les Miserables. Before I delve into things however, I'd like to thank my good friend Josh for the suggestion. Originally he suggested it as a topic for Wild Card Wednesday, but truth be told, it fit perfectly for today and I couldn't wait that long. (By the way, if you like history, science, and anthropology, check out his blog Nearly Noteworthy, you'll generate a couple new cortical synapses in the process.)

The movie poster (left) was no doubt a nod to the iconic Broadway musical adaptation (right).

Since Les Miserables is still a fairly new movie and some people haven't seen it yet, here's how I'm going to do this: First I'm going to give a very, very brief plot summary which is completely suitable for anyone who has not seen the movie and doesn't know what happens (and doesn't want to know yet!). Then I'll give my general thoughts about the film, again, which anyone can read without spoiling anything. After that however, I'll go into a little more depth which you might not want to read until after you see the movie (don't worry, it'll be clearly marked).

That out of the way, let's begin.

The Plot

From the late 1700's until the mid 1800's France was a place of turmoil and unrest as revolution after revolution swept across the countryside. Most promised social and political change, but often did little: replacing kings with emperors and nobility with aristocrats.

Les Miserables (the film adaptation of the critically acclaimed Broadway musical which itself is based on the famous 1862 novel by Victor Hugo) is set in early 19th century France (mainly Paris); a time which was noted for its political upheaval and class disparities. While this issue of social inequality is certainly present throughout the entire story, it merely serves as a backdrop to the primary narrative which follows the tale of one Jean Valjean (a recently paroled convict) as he tries to move past his mistakes of the past in hopes of a brighter future. For the sake of those who haven't seen the movie yet, I won't go into much more detail than that, other than just to say that grace and love are central themes and persist throughout.

My Critique of the Film
Leaving plot behind for a moment (we'll return to it in just a minute), I want to address the film for what it is: a film. That is to say, I would like to discuss its acting, cinematography, etc. As those of you who read my review of Skyfall know, I can be harshly critical of a movie which I feel is lacking in development or fails to live up to expectations. Les Miserables did neither of those things. In fact, it surpassed any preconceptions I had (which truthfully were rather vague given my limited knowledge of the novel or the musical) and impressed me with its ability to captivate the audience with empathy while at the same time generating complex metaphorical depth.

The tempered tones in which the movie was filmed helped to generate a feeling of intimacy which was only counteracted by the acts of obtuse humour generated by the likes of Sacha Cohen and Helena Carter. Yes, that's right, "Borat" is in Les Miserables. That might come as a surprise, and it sure did to me, but once the initial shock wears off, it makes perfect sense. Their lovably detestable characters provide the necessary comic relief in what might otherwise be seen as an all-too acutely realistic melodrama.

Surprised? So was I. They were so frustrating... and yet, so funny.

For the most part, the acting was entirely engaging. As anyone who knows me knows, I do not know actors and actresses AT ALL. Heck, I'm constantly having to use IMDB as a resource for names here, but one thing I can tell you is that Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe went heads and tails above any other roles I have seen them portray to date. Hugh Jackman, in part due to his attire and in part due to his excellent portrayal of Jean Valjean was nearly impossible to discern or to remove from his character nearly the entire film. Russell Crowe was more recognizable, possibly because the personality of Javert was so fitting to his own, but he certainly did no worse off.

Out of all the superb acting and filming, truly the only disappointment to me was the acting of Anne Hathaway. Now don't get me wrong, I really like Anne Hathaway and I thought she was nearly perfect in The Dark Knight Rises, but somehow her character in Les Miserables just came off as a bit... stilted, and dare I even say phony? Perhaps it is the sad result of excellent acting by Jackman and Crowe, but I just did not feel that she held up to the weight of the rest of the film. Fortunately, this was only but a small aspect of the tale in its entirely and did not wholly subtract from the rest of the movie, but it was noticeable and therefore I notice it.

Eh.

I'll end my critique by saying that the technique they used to film the actors actually singing the music, rather than dubbing as other musicals have done, was just as all the public raved. I thought it did an excellent job in eliminating that aspect of musicals which has bothered oh so many people for so long. I not being one of those people, have never minded too much, but I must admit that in the end Les Miserables felt must less juxtaposed in that regard. I give credit to whoever thought for the actors to actually sing in a musical.

IF YOU HAVE YET TO SEE THE MOVIE AND DO NOT WISH TO SPOIL ANYTHING, STOP READING NOW.

My Interpretation

Les Miserables was one of those unique opportunities as far as a movie goes for me: I truly knew next to nothing about the plot, the music, or really anything with regards to the subject matter of the story going into the movie. Of course I'd heard of the Broadway musical and the book, and I knew that it was set in France during the time of revolution and upheaval, but really I knew nothing but that. Thus I entered the theatre as mostly a blank canvas: minus my biased guess that it was likely to be a large a piece of class propaganda. Of course I was wrong: while the struggles of a very impoverished French peasantry does play a role in the form of setting and modus operandi for plot movement, it does not overwhelm nor subtract from the film's ultimate message as I feared it would. Instead, Les Miserables is about something far more resounding and eternal: grace.

That's right, Les Miserables is a story of grace. I won't rehash the entire plot since I assume everyone reading this has already seen the movie, but I will take a moment to hash out my own thoughts upon its very complex and intricately woven plot.

Many people view Les Miserables as a sad tale in which Jean Valjean is ruthlessly pursued and denied happiness by Javert, and by Fate. He dies as does Anne Hathway's Fantine and even Javert: none of those characters receiving the reward in life which perhaps they deserved by good merit and character. Instead, all three find themselves perpetually on the short end of the stick; continuously placed in situations where no decision is easy and no result is without it's consequences later on. I, however, left the theatre with the sense of joy and not sorrow as so many (including my girlfriend, yes I'm picking on you) did. I saw an immense happiness in the way which the story concluded and the resolution which was brought about. To me, the love and happiness and future which Cosette and Marius receive at the end of the film is the culmination of all the struggle and sorrow and pain which Jean Valjean and Fantine endure. All that is denied to their benefactors is given unto them, out of love, and because of love they are blessed to live in peace.

Redemption came at the price of sacrifice.

Something else I absolutely loved about this story: there is no true "bad guy". Sure, it's easy to villainize Javert for his unrelenting, unwavering determination to bring Jean Valjean to justice without any sympathy or remorse, but in reality there is nothing truly evil with the man. Simply put, he is the law, and as such, he only abides by the regulations which society has placed upon him. He does not stray from those strict boundaries even for a second, until the very end, for which he must pay the ultimate price. It's a fascinating accomplishment to evoke such dualistic emotions from the viewer at once: hate for Javert's stubbornness to duty, and admiration for that same exact quality. Honestly, I could write an entire thesis on this paradigm, but unfortunately I must continue along.

An officer of the law, Javert only did what his duty demanded of him.
 
So how did I feel about the story? What did I think it all meant? My personal interpretation may be wildly different from your own, but in many dimensions I saw this to be an allegory for the duality of God. Ok, maybe I seem a bit off my rocker, but hang with me for a minute. It became increasingly clear to me towards the latter third of the movie that Javert and Jean Valjean represented two sides of the same coin, that is, the two aspects of God: justice and forgiveness (or grace). Neither could be faulted in their course of action throughout the film. Just as Jean Valjean was given grace at the beginning of the movie, he gave unto others throughout its passage, even to his pursuer. Javert on the other hand, was excruciatingly true to the justice. Once a condemned man, he viewed Valjean as always a condemned man: short of the perfect expectations placed upon him by the law.

This is the conundrum: without the law, there can be no grace; but without grace, all fall short of the perfection required by the law. That is the duality of God. God is both perfect in His law AND in His grace. So how is this seeming contradiction to be resolved? Well, in the Bible, God gives up His own life in his Son Jesus Christ, and too, in Les Miserables, Javert willfully gives up his own life as the price to pay for extending grace to Jean Valjean. I feel it is a beautifully constructed metaphor which is rich in imagery and yet easily overlooked. Regardless of whether you agree with my interpretation or not, it cannot be denied that the religious undertones run very deep in this film/musical/novel.

Grace's ultimate price is death.

So there you have it, per a request, and an absolute pleasure for me to write; my review of Les Miserables. It's a longer film, but it's entirely worth it and I'd recommend it to anyone.

So what did you think? Did you enjoy the movie? What did you think it was about? Leave a comment below or on Facebook with your thoughts!

-JT

1 comment:

  1. Well now you've seen the movie you need to read the unabridged book.

    Also a note about Fantine. I feel that the weakness to her character and its portrayal by Anne Hathaway and others is due to Victor Hugo's original conceptualization of Fantine. The author did not have a very high opinion of women and this shows very clearly throughout his books. Fantine, Cosset, and Eponnine are not recognized as an entity in themselves but only in relation to the male characters. It is hard to explain in few words but if you read the book you'll see what I mean.

    [Also Thanks for the Shout To My Blog!]

    ReplyDelete