Due
to the musical version of Les Mis, most of you are probably familiar with this
Victor Hugo tale. Liam Neeson plays Jean Valjean, a poor man who's served a life
sentence for stealing a loaf of bread. After being released, he is given a shot
at a new life. Thus begins an epic that spans almost two decades.
First
and foremost, Les Miserables is a story that really isn't all that interesting.
Although it has many powerful moments, it doesn't work as a whole. A biggest problem
with the movie are the huge lapses of time. Following the first few scenes, the
film jumps nine years ahead. And again later on, the film skips yet another decade.
I haven't read the book, but in film form I thought these gaps were disconcerting.
I found myself more interested in finding out what happened in those time frames
that weren't shown. If Les Miserables would have been expanded, it might have
been a better film.
What
does work is the acting. Liam Neeson soars as always. Uma Thurman gives her best
performance since her nominated turn in Pulp Fiction. Claire Daines, in a very
small role, is continuing to prove that she'll be around for a while. And then
there's Geoffrey Rush, from Shine. Although his character, Javer, is so callous
it's almost unconvincing, he proves he is a major screen presence. The film is
also beautiful to look at. The cinematography and art direction are quite impressive.
Les
Miserables does have impressive acting, but it's lacking terribly in the story
department. The musical Les Mis has a beautiful score to fall back on. Unfortunately,
this Hollywood version just falls short.
