Film Review: Les Misérables

As musicals go, Les Misérables is considered among the best. It was previously adapted into a film in 1998, starring Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush, however that version wasn't generally as well-conceived or received as this version. Directed by The King's Speech director, Tom Hooper, this version of Les Mis is as personal as it is epic. Full of grand emotion and many a goosebump moment, this film does not disappoint at all.

The story is very familiar to any musical afficionado: set in revolutionary France, Jean Valjean, after serving a 20 year sentence for stealing some bread, breaks his parole and assumes a new identity. Whilst evading the clutches of ruthless policeman Javert, he takes parental custody of Cosette, a young girl to the down-trodden Fantine. Fast forward 8 years, Cosette is grown-up, falling in love with Marius, who has also caught the attentions of Éponine, while helping to rekindle the revolutionary flame. It is an epic tale, but it stays very personal and has a core of emotion that could easily have been lost during some of the grander set pieces. Yes, it's a familiar story, but even to a person who may have seen it countless times, it feels fresh and newly explored. This is mostly thanks to the direction of Tom Hooper. Usually, a musical film would have pre-recorded the musical numbers and had the actors mime them on set. Here, Hooper has the actors sing in front of the camera and the rest of the cast, on the set, and it brings a rawness to the film, especially in two songs in particular, firstly Fantine, played by Anne Hathaway, singing I Dreamed A Dream (which instantly erases all memory of Susan Boyle, which can only be a good thing really), and secondly when Éponine, played by Samantha Barks, who plays her on stage on Broadway as well, sings On My Own. In both instances, Hooper keeps the camera close to the actresses' faces, no cuts, one single take, and it works really well in delivering the emotional impact that the songs deserve. The voices echoing on the sets, instead of sounding studio fresh, give a much needed gravitas to the film, and when the chorus sing, it really is awe-inspiring.

The casting is pretty much spot-on. I say pretty much because, naturally, the roles are handed to actors and not singers, and this is evident with Russell Crowe, who plays Javert. Alongside such, frankly, amazing singing voices as Anne Hathway's, who is tragically beautiful as Fantine, Amanda Seyfried, playing older Cosette, and stage star Samantha Barks, Crowe falls a bit flat, though not through the odd bum note. He's pretty spot-on with his actual singing, he just can't seem to crank up the volume and blast his way through the songs when it's needed. Hugh Jackman, portraying Jean Valjean, has already proven to the film world that he can sing, doing a musical number while hosting the Oscars in 2009 (see below to watch) with Anne Hathaway, and he performs these songs pretty well. His voice is better than Crowe's when comparing the two, and he captures the essence of Jean Valjean incredibly well, possibly becoming the definitive Valjean for modern audiences. Every actor seems perfect for the roles they're given, and they all come together to deliver a fantastic, rousing film, but it's a shame that Crowe's vocals couldn't reach the volume of some of the other actors. A special mention must go to Eddie Redmayne, playing Marius, whose voice is, quite frankly, exceptional. It's powerful, and just magnificent, and his performance doesn't let his singing down either, giving  us a likeable revolutionary and a convincing romantic lead. Even the chorus are fantastique, and it is a real goosebump moment when they all sing Do They Hear The People Sing.

The general look and feel of the film is grand and glorious, transporting you and immersing you into the French Revolution, thanks to the production design by Eve Stewart and the costume design by Paco Delgado. The sets are as cinematic as they are theatrical, making it feel like it's being shown on a very big stage rather than a film set, though the certain battle scenes are incredible cinema, staying personal and making every character's death a personal loss as they've all been established well enough to be considered a 'favourite extra' (we all do it).

All in all, this is a fantastic effort of transferring one of musical theatre's most treasured possessions onto the silver screen, brought to life by some amazing performances and brilliant sets and set-pieces. A must-watch for fans of musical theatre or cinema, but bring your tissues, cos it's a weepy! (Though this particular reviewer did not cry, I did come bloody close at some points. Anyone who doesn't is a robot.)

Score: 8.5/10

Film Review: Life of Pi 2D

First and foremost, Life of Pi is a masterpiece. Let's get that point across. Everything from the camerawork to the special effects to the acting, everything falls perfectly into place to make a truly wonderful film.

The premise is, while basic, rather farfetched and could've easily been mis-handled by the director, in this case, Ang Lee, on top form. The story follows a young Indian boy, Piscine Patel, or 'Pi' as he insists people call him due to the similarity in saying Piscine and pissing. Pi is played by a total of 4 different actors in the film, but the majority sees us with the young adult/old teenager Pi, played amazingly well, especially for a debut actor, by Suraj Sharma. After his family decide to move the zoo that they run in Pondicherry, India, to Canada, the cargo ship transporting them and all of their animals is tragically hit by a storm, and only Pi survives, along with a zebra, an orangutan, a hyena and a tiger called Richard Parker. The storm occurs around 35 minutes into the film, and from then on we are on the lifeboat with Pi and the animals as they fight for survival. Religion plays a prominent role in Life of Pi, although, to be honest, you don't really pay attention to it, while also accepting it and acknowledging it. Pi is, in a very humourous dinner conversation, a member of 4 different religions, and he shares his belief in each equally, hoping to find each God working in different ways when he needs them to. By the end of the film, you will believe in miracles, but not because of the religion being externally fed to you, but more by the events of the film. It doesn't preach, but instead lets you 'find God' if you want to, and if you don't, you won't.

The cinematography is one example of this. One shot of Pi and Richard Parker on the lifeboat, floating in a completely calm sea, is a feast for your eyes. The boat, framed in the middle of the shot, looks like it's floating in the clouds, as we're unable to see the point where the sea ends and the sky starts through the reflection on the water. Throughout the film we see iconic images that beggar belief. I came out the film googling whether fish can fly, or it was just artistic licence used by Lee in the film. They can. I'm still astonished. But that's not the point. What I'm trying to get across is just how astonishing and remarkable and miraculous some of the things you see in this film are. Claudio Miranda, the cinematographer here, has done a brilliant job of creating iconic, everlasting images that could be hung up in an art gallery. The below image is an example, here is a whale jumping out of the luminescent sea between Pi's raft and the boat which Richard Parker has taken for himself. It's a strikingly beautiful image, one of many that you'd want to pause the film and just look at because of it's beauty. Rightfully so, this morning Miranda was nominated for an OSCAR for cinematography for Life of Pi.

The special effects department, also nominated, have created characters out of pixels, giving animals full on personalities. Richard Parker is a triumph of special effects and cgi, with seamless blends of actual tigers (4 were used, like for Pi, however these were due to different personalities rather than age difference). At times you can't tell if what you're seeing is a real tiger, or a pixelated twin. It doesn't really matter, because you concentrate so much on what's going on, but the fact that you easily accept that a boy and a tiger can be in the same boat and both come out alive, it's remarkable. Richard Parker isn't the only example of this. The scene I was describing before, would you believe, was done in a studio, on a greenscreen. All of the film that's on the sea was. The special effects aren't just cgi, but creating water that actually looks and feels like water with pixels is an achievement in itself, but then creating the sky and thousands of animals without ever tripping up and revealing it all to be an illusion, that's masterful.

Suraj Sharma. It's hard to believe that he'd never acted before. If you go onto his IMDb page, you'll see 4 acting credits. One is this, and the other 3 are all tv shows where he's appeared as himself. One film, one role, and he is fantastic. He even admitted that he only went to the audition to support his little brother, and instead, out of 3,000 other young boys, he was picked. It's inspired casting. He embraces every line, every wave thrown at him, every task he has to do, he does with determined joy. His physical transformation throughout the film as he and Richard Parker get ever more desperate for food and water, and land, is remarkable. Although he becomes thinner, he grows up and matures in a way that is unlike anything seen onscreen, especially since this is his first ever onscreen appearance. He's going to be around for a while, no doubt, hopefully, under the direction of Ang Lee again, as this director manages to get a raw and fully believable performance out of him. He's a cheeky lad, pretty much a normal teenager, and suddenly his life is, quite literally, turned upside down. The way he manages to anchor the film (another nautical pun, sorry) is incredible, especially as he's the only human onscreen for more than an hour of the film.

But more than worthy of a mention is Ang Lee's direction. Based on a novel by Yann Martel, Life of Pi has been nearly made by M. Night Shyamalan, Alfonso Cuaron and Jean-Pierre Jeunet since having the rights acquired by Fox back in 2003. It's among many books and literary works that have the tag 'UNFILMABLE' attached to them, but among many that have now been filmed, most really well. The transference from page to screen of Martel's words is amazing, Lee using imagery and symbolism as well as down-right magic to craft a fully coherent and beautiful film. By the end, though not a tear-jerker, Life of Pi manages to grab on to your heart-strings and pull tightly, as if you were on the boat with them, not watching but experiencing what they did as well. This is down to Lee's direction, not getting over-sentimental and involved, nor being too distant and objective. It has a perfect balance to it, creating another reason to immediately love this film.

Overall, as stated at the start, Life of Pi is a masterpiece. A director on top form, with inspired casting and special effects that blow you out of the water (SORRY! again) all culminate to make a truly great film. Labelled as a family film, it is for everybody to enjoy. It's a shame I only saw it in 2D, as there were some scenes, well, most scenes would've been embraced by the third dimension, the flying fish scene especially. If you have any doubts about seeing this film, throw them into the sea as this is a work of genius, already a timeless classic.

Score: 10/10

Below is the trailer, totally wordless, but beautiful. Give it a watch if you STILL can't decide whether or not to see the film.