Musical Mondays: Les Miserables (2012)

This is the first of a new series of reviews I'm (hoping) to do. I love musicals and, as I feel they are sadly overlooked these days, I've decided to review a musical film once a month on Monday. This week I'm tackling the 2012 adaptation of one of my favorite novels...

     Les Miserables is a musical film released in 2012. It is adapted from the stage musical by Claude Micheal Schonberg, which was based on a novel of the same name by Victor Hugo. It is directed by Tom Hooper and stars Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Amanda Seyfried, and Eddie Redmayne. It tells the story of Jean Valjean (Jackman), an ex-convict in In 19th-century France, who for decades has been hunted by the ruthless policeman Javert (Crowe) after he broke his parole. He agrees to care for a factory worker's (Anne Hathaway) daughter, named Cosette (Seyfried) when he finds her dying in the street. Valjean must continue to escape Javert's pursuit and take care of his newly adapted daughter amidst the turmoil of the 1832 June Rebellion.

     It's no secret to anyone who regularly reads my blog (if there is indeed anyone who does) that I unabashedly love Victors Hugo's Les Miserables. This gives me a somewhat unique perspective on this film. At just under 1500 pages, Hugo's novel is rather difficult to adapt. One would have to either focus only on certain characters/incidents (admittedly a wiser approach) or try to condense as much of the book as possible into a 2-3 hour film. Hooper, following Schonberg's model, opts for the latter choice. The book is both a personal story, of Jean Valjean’s journey to redemption, and a wider historical retelling of the 1832 Paris Uprising. This film, like the play it's based on, succeeds well enough with the former and not at all with the latter.

     Jean's journey, akin to a sort of martyrdom, is depicted as a series of struggles. First, he must decide how to use the opportunity given him by the bishop who lies to protect him from being arrested again. He chooses to amend his life and live to help others as the Bishop helped him. Then, years later Valjean, who has now taken up a false name and become the mayor of a small town, must choose between letting an innocent man, who is mistaken for himself, go to prison or giving himself up. As he won't betray his conscious he chooses to reveal himself. Finally, he must decide what to do concerning Marius, the young revolutionary who his daughter has fallen in love with but who threatens to disrupt his anonymous existence with Cosette. While these struggles are somewhat truncated, they work well enough to carry the film.

     Where the film really stumbles is in its depiction of the Paris Uprising of 1932. The script contains very little real background for the events that lead up to this uprising and we, as an audience, are given no real idea what the motive behind the rebellion is. Certainly living and working conditions in Paris are depicted as being pretty terrible but how this is connected to the current French government or how an armed rebellion will help is anyone's guess (unless your familiar with the real history). We don't even really know what Marius and his friends hope to accomplish beyond incredibly vague ideas like "a new day" or "freedom". This might work for rebellious teens looking for a vicarious outlet for there frustrations but it's not really good storytelling.

     The musical relies on big emotional outbursts from the players in order to really hold the audience's interest. In order to translate this to film Hooper uses long takes and records much of the singing live. This has advantages and disadvantages. On one hand it allows for a feeling of immediacy and intimacy with the performer, similar to what one might feel during a play. On the other hand it limits what the director can do with framing and blocking and can become obtrusive if overused. Similarly, these crescendos themselves only work in certain, more emotionally charged scenes. By featuring them practically back-to-back more than once Schonberg, and Hooper by extension, risk exhausting the emotional weight of the piece as a whole and I'd be lying if I said that the director doesn't occasionally overstep his bounds in this regard.

     Because of its reliance on this kind of emotionally intense storytelling, Les Miserable lives and dies on the strength its performances. Fortunately, they're pretty solid here, for the most part. Hugh Jackman is especially effective as Valjean, bringing a perfect blend of vulnerability and gravitas to the role. Anne Hathaway is every bit the world weary, desperate Fantine. Eddie Redmayne and Amanda Seyfried do as well as they can with, admittedly, thin characterization. Samantha Banks shines as the forsaken Eponine and Sacha Baron Cohen's take on Thenardier is particularly slimy. There are a few weak spots. Russell Crowe's singing is rather rough around the edges. According to him this was a conscious choice, but I'm not convinced that it worked. Helena Bonham Carter, though she seems like a natural fit to play the cantankerous Madame Thenardier, decides to go for an overly sexualized/damaged performance and singing style that, frankly, is just off-putting.

     In the end Les Miserables is a bit of a mess. Its attempt to truncate a long, expansive novel into a 150 minute film won't work for everyone but it works, well enough, for me.

Score: 7/10

Western Wednesdays: The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

SPOILER WARNING 

     The Last of the Mohicans was released in 1992. It is directed by Micheal Mann and stars Daniel Day-Lewis and Madeleine Stowe. During the French and Indian War, three Mohican frontiersmen, Hawkeye (Day-Lewis), Uncas (Eric Schweig), and their father Chingachgook (Russel Means), on their way to Kentucky come upon a small British party and save them from a Huron ambush. They must escort the survivors, including Major Duncan Heyward (Steven Waddington), and Cora and Alice Munro (Madelien Stowe and Jodhi May), the daughters of the commander of Ft. William Henry, to the fort.

     At first glance The Last of the Mohicans may not seem like a western as it takes place not in the western U.S.A. but upstate New York. Then of course, at the time this film takes place upstate New York was the frontier. This film contains some common western themes or tropes. Chiefly, the corruption of civilization represented by the British and French soldiers vs. the purity of the wilderness, represented by the settlers and the Indians. This comes up again and again throughout the film. Despite obtaining an agreement from General Webb guaranteeing that they can protect their families if endangered, Colonel Munro refuses to release them. Cora chooses Hawkeye over the respectable Hayward, though he still shows that he cares for her. Finally, Magua is corrupted by his contact with the white man. As Hawkeye tells the Huron Chief Senaca when trying to convince him to release Alice and Cora, "Would Huron fool Seneca into taking all the furs of all the animals of the forest for beads and strong whiskey? Those are the ways of the Yengeese and the franais traders and their masters in Europe infected with the sickness of greed. Magua's heart is twisted. He would make himself into what twisted him."

     Outside of a few monologues like this, the script for this film, written by Micheal Mann and Christopher Crowe and adapted from the novel by James Fenimore Cooper, is hardly verbose. This is rather appropriate actually as this story is breathlessly paced and the characters are defined chiefly, by their actions rather than their words. As a result of this much of the character depth comes from the performances which are all really solid especially Day-Lewis and Wes Studi as Magua. Of course, the camera work and editing are incredibly important as well. Fortunately, Micheal Mann is more than up to the task. He excels at visual storytelling and his frequent collaborator Dante Spinotti, contributes some really gorgeous cinematography to the film. The score, by Trevor Jones and Randy Edelman, is infused with a Gaelic sensibility. It drives the movie forward and gives it a distinct ethnic flavor. Editor's Dov Hoenig and Arthur Schmidt effortlessly blend the score with Spinotti's visuals to create some really unforgettable sequences. Despite the movie being cut down by nearly an hour, it still succeeds incredibly well.

     The film is not without certain flaws. Because so much material had to be cut, the relationship between Uncas and Alice is not very well established. This is particularly problematic at the end of the film. I shouldn't really buy that Alice throws herself off of the cliff in the climax. In addition to the fact that her despair over Uncas' death isn't well set up the whole situation is somewhat contrived. If Uncas would simply have waited for Hawkeye and Chingachook to catch up he may have fared much better than he did on his own. There's really nothing in the story that makes this situation urgent. Yet somehow the scene always feels urgent. It works for me emotionally even if, intellectually, I know it shouldn't. If that doesn't speak for Mann's talent as a filmmaker I don't know what does.

    The Last of the Mohicans is one of the best westerns of the 1990's. It features solid performances, an unforgettable score, and is the work of a talented director at the top of his game. It may have its flaws but, in many ways, those flaws just leave me wishing for more. Here's hoping Mann's original 3 hour work-print is released someday.

Score: 9/10

Western Wednesdays: 3 Godfathers (1948)

I saw this movie when I was a kid and remembered it being pretty solid. As it has a Christmas theme I thought it would be a good western to watch over the holidays which, I realize, are now over for most people.

     Three Godfathers is directed by John Ford and stars John Wayne, Pedro Armendariz and Harry Carey, Jr. In it, cattle rustlers Robert Hightower (Wayne), Pedro "Pete" Rocafuerte (Armendáriz), and William Kearney (Carey) rob a bank in the town of Welcome, Arizona, and flee into the desert, pursued by a posse led by Sheriff Buck Sweet (Ward Bond). Searching for water they come to a water hole, only to find that it was inadvertently destroyed by a tenderfoot, who then left his pregnant wife to chase after his livestock. They assist the wife (Mildred Natwick) in the birth of her son. When she dies and names the men the baby's godfathers they must now keep the baby alive while avoiding the sheriff's pursuit and reach a town where they can get water.

     One of the first things I noticed re-watching this movie was the beautiful cinematography courtesy of Winton Hoch who also worked with Ford on She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, The Quiet Man, and The Searchers among others. Like those films (and most John Ford movies really) 3 Godfather is incredibly picturesque. You could pause the film at almost any point and get a beautiful still photograph. Similarly, Ford made this film during the peak of his career and his command of visual storytelling was rarely better then it was here.

     Unfortunately, the story that Ford and Hoch are telling is a rather inconsistent one. For the first two thirds of the film everything, for the most part, is pretty solid. After the robbery in Welcome the film turns into a fairly tense chase movie, with bits of humor dispersed throughout. Its after the three men run into the mother and her baby the film takes a strange turn. Finding a bible in the wagon after the mother dies, William becomes convinced that their finding the baby was the will of God and that they should head for the town of New Jerusalem, like the three magi in the Gospel story. The problem I have is that this religious element comes, seemingly, out of nowhere and the rest of the film is bogged down with heavy handed talk of faith and destiny. What makes it worse is that the film becomes tonally inconsistent at this point. On the one hand there is the sense that God is indeed guiding these men to save the baby, but then one of them dies a terrible death of dehydration and heat exhaustion and another one commits suicide after falling and breaking his leg. Surely it would have been wiser simply to surrender to Sheriff Sweet at this point. Finally, the film's resolution feels overly drawn out, as Hightower seeks to retain custody of his godson after he serves his year in prison. After all the violence and hardship these scenes simply lack dramatic weight.

     Despite all this I still feel compelled to recommend 3 Godfathers. It's still one of John Ford's most visually arresting films and the story works well enough until the last act.

Score: 7/10