Les Miserables was 1500 pages, so I don't want to hear any complaints about the length of my blog post.

Considering the vast array of Les Miserables reviews out there for the new movie, I wanted to avoid posting anything on it, just call it a great movie, and move on with my life.  That said, in September I finally watched the Off-Broadway production in Phoenix, finished reading the book in late December, and watched the movie the same day I finished the book.  As I have effectively Les Mis'd my face off, I feel compelled to discuss the movie as well as the book.

First, let me say, I feel it was especially entertaining to watch the movie right after reading the book.  It made the movie come more to life for me, and I gained a new appreciation for the musical, as well as some of the choices made in the movie.  The movie follows the book exceptionally well, considering it covered a nearly 1500 page novel.  The choices in the movie/musical that don't follow the book, are not bothersome, and actually make sense from a production standpoint.  For example, one of the later scenes when the Thenardiers show up at the wedding, you will see Thenardier and Mlle. Thenardier.  In the book, Mlle. Thenardier, was not there, as she died in prison.  In fact, it was his daughter Azelma, that was with him.  This worked well in the book, but it wouldn't have made sense in the musical or movie.

I could easily do a review over the specific performances, my thoughts on each character, and each actor, and how I felt each of them did, but the opinions are so varied and so across the board, that I'll refrain from going too much into depth there.  I thought Russell Crowe was average, and thought the Thenardier's could've been a little better cast, but overall, I don't have any major gripes.  I loved pretty much everyone else.  I thought the cast blended relatively well, and enjoyed most of the musical performances.  Not all, but certainly enough to walk away extremely satisfied.  That said, here are some of the less talked about reasons why I loved this movie.

1.  Gavroche and Eponine.

  Gavroche, played by Daniel Huttlestone, was fabulous in the movie.  I love the scene where the boys bound out of the elephant and run through the town.    Simply seeing that was enough to remind me of one of the more touching stories of the book.  In the book, Gavroche lives inside the elephant ( shelter he found for himself ) when he realized his parents would no longer take care of him.  His parents- the infamous Thenardiers, of course.  In fact, the Thenardiers have 5 children.  Eponine (the eldest), Gavroche, Azelma, and two younger boys.  So, yes, Gavroche and Eponine are, in fact, siblings! It creates an interesting contrast between the parents (dregs of society) vs. Eponine and Gavroche (poor, but putting others before them).  In a fabulous scene in the book, Gavroche finds two boys wandering around town. These two boys were previously sold off by the Thenardiers to a lady to take care of them.  The Thenardiers sold off their two boys for gain, and to avoid the expense.  However, in the book, the boys ended up losing the new family, and they begin wandering the streets aimlessly.  Gavroche spots the two boys and takes them under his wing.  When breaking a piece of bread he found, he hands the bigger pieces to the two boys and keeps a smaller one for himself.  In essence, he teaches them how to survive on the street.  (Gavroche did not recognize them as his brothers either).  So, the scene above in the movie, where the boys are following Gavroche, I don't see a bunch of random boys following him. I see two boys- Gavroche's brothers... the two boys he is essentially parenting, sacrificing what little he had, for two boys he didn't even know where his brothers.  Later, when Gavroche sees a need to collect more ammunition he bravely and brazenly goes from one fallen soldier to the next to help with the cause.  He was fearless, and constantly put others before him, even to his own detriment.

Samantha Barker nailed Eponine.  Period.  Eponine, who was essentially enslaved by her Father to a life of pandering, becomes engrossed with her neighbor Marius Pontmercy.  However, in one scene she stands up to her Father and the other gang leaders when they intend to raid Jean Val Jean's home, in an attempt to save Cosette.  Keep in mind, these other gang leaders weren't just any gang leaders... these were most notorious and feared thieves in all of Paris.  I felt this whole scene was portrayed fantastically in the film, and highlighted the bravery of Eponine.  She could have easily been as manipulative and amoral as her Father and just let the raid take place.  But Eponine wanted to protect someone that Marius adored, even if that was not her.  I don't think her death scene could have been done much better.  The build-up of her putting on boys clothes and entering the fray was well-orchestrated, and the timing of those scenes was captivating.  Great direction, and Samantha Barker lived up to the direction perfectly.  Her singing was not too shabby either.  Wow.

2. The barricade scene.

One of the main themes of Les Miserables is the idea of being trapped and the desire to escape.   A convict can't progress.  A poor mother turns to prostitution as a way to save her child.  And a barricade is set up to fight an impossible battle.  Everything seems to be a death trap.  That's why I love the barricade scene.  It is indicative of what many suffer when they have no one to succor them or help them out- they are hopelessly trapped.  Even Javert, during the barricade scene, finds himself that way.  Javert saw his capture as his end, and ultimately he can't reconcile being saved by a convict, a man, he thought, could not be good.  Thus, Javert, we see, is trapped in a different light- he is trapped by the philosophy that justice should always prevail.  The scene also encapsulates Eponine's heart being trapped.  She is trapped in her love for Marius, and goes on a suicide mission to save him.  Marius enters the fight, when his grandfather refuses to grant his blessing to marry him and when he believes Cosette has left for England.  He sees no other alternative- he, is hopeless.  Jean Val Jean enters the battle hopeless as well.  His struggle is different from the physical escaping he had done previously.  This last struggle was the most difficult of all- letting go of Cosette.  He saw no hope in moving forward without Cosette in his life, and in his choice to save Marius, he put himself in a position where he would ultimately lose the connection he had with her.

To me, that's why this scene is so powerful.  Everyone appears hopeless and trapped.  But with a further look at the scene, the barricade also represents hope and the desire to be free.  The last scene in the movie does a great job in showing the characters seemingly protected by a larger barricade, and they looked free.  They had escaped the world, and entered a better place.  A place of hope and freedom.  They had conquered the barricades and traps that so easily beset them in the world.

The scene is beautifully done, because it highlighted and intertwined so many individual struggles of the characters and deftly connects them.  I think this scene is where Russell Crowe is at his best.  The interaction with him and Jean Val Jean was done exquisitely, and Crowe's look of resentment was blistering and spot-on.

I love the part where Jean Val Jean fires two shots toward the opposition during the movie, and was pleased this was included.  In the book, he does the same thing, and Hugo is quick to point out that Jean Val Jean made sure he merely shot off the two individuals helmets and caused them to fall, but made sure he did not fatally wound them.  He had no desire to kill anyone on either side.  This scene in the movie reminded me of his generosity and love for all.

I also thoroughly enjoyed Enjolras and Courfeyrac in the movie, and thought they played their parts extraordinarily well.  The scene where they were cornered and shot, was especially symbolic of the hopelessness of their fight.

If I have one gripe with the barricade scene is I would have loved it to have included the scene where Marius's 80+ year old friend, M. Labeuf, rises to the top of the barricade to place the flag, then is shot.  Very powerful scene in the book, which would have been great in the movie.

3.  Marius is so much cooler in the movie, than in the book.

Marius is a very impulsive and passionate individual.  Initially a royalist, he discovers his Father (Colonel Pontmercy) had served under Napoleon and that his Grandfather had surreptitiously kept his Father and him apart by refusing to promise Marius any riches if Colonel Pontmercy was in Marius's life.  Marius, after discovering this deceit,  becomes a radical, disowns his Grandfather, and chooses to live poor.  Later he sees Cosette, and fawns over her immediately.  His first words to her are at the gate near the garden (as shown in the movie).  By then, he is already in love.  I appreciate the parallel with him and Cosette, in that they both grew up without seeing their parents. Cosette, never knew her Father, and couldn't remember her Mother.  Marius, never knew his Mother (she died when he was a baby), and couldn't remember his Father.  Cosette is always running, and Marius is running from his past life.

That said, Marius is definitely not nearly as confident in the book as he is in the movie, and in the book is someone who really could likely benefit from some Prozac or Klonopin.  Marius would not have been seen on the streets, standing by Enjolras as the leader of the revolutionaries.  In fact, when he enters the barricade, it takes him a while to even engage in the battle.  Only after seeing some fallen friends, does he enter.  In the book he comes in firing with two pistols (given to him by Javert in an earlier scene where Marius tips off Javert as to the Thernadier ambush against Jean Val Jean).  He really didn't become a leader of the revolutionaries until he pulled off his emphatic keg powder threat that bought the revolutionaries some time.  Marius really just had a death wish, considering he saw no hope in being with Cosette.  I enjoyed how they portrayed this conundrum (being with Cosette or fighting the battle) in the movie.  I loved Eddie Redmayne's portrayal of Marius.  Frankly, he made the Marius of the book cooler.  He was confident, sure of himself, and simply made the decision to fight, because option 1 was seemingly no longer an option.  He is a bit more steady, and you want to root for him.  His voice was surprisingly powerful and engaging, and he really became one of the more dynamic characters of the movie.

So, what did I get out of the movie coupled with my reading?
Simply put, the movie was a spectacular adaption of the book and musical and smartly illustrates the struggles of hopelessness faced by those in society.  It gives us a contrast of two different approaches to being poor or an outcast:  1.  The selflessness of Jean Valjean, Fantine, Gavroche and Eponine vs. 2. The dregs of society in the gangs and the Thenardiers.  It tells us that when you can't escape, there is still a choice to have hope.  There is still a choice to be good and kind.  There is still a choice to die with dignity and love.  It enshrines the issue of justice vs. mercy, highlighted by Jean Val Jean's mercy and Javert's desire to seek justice.  Politically, the book tells us that something must be done.  Hugo doesn't seem to have a direct answer. In one chapter, he disagrees with socialism and too much redistribution of wealth, but at the same time sees the need for a safety net for the poor.  Hugo, pleasantly appeared to be quite pragmatic in his political thought.  The movie, to me, did not come across as political (in my opinion, it didn't appear to choose a side), but rather it served as a wake-up call that we simply need to take care of each other.  That there is nothing more satisfying then doing good works for the poor, sacrificing ourselves for a child or a stranger, being open to forgiveness, and living our lives full of hope as we try and escape our fears, our trials, and as we try and escape the struggles found in our own conscience.  The movie, in the final scene, when the characters are atop the barricade, is illustrative of the freedom we can hope for as we fight through the incessant traps that so constantly consume our society, our struggles, and our own minds.

Finally, watch the movie for what it is- a movie.  Appreciate Tom Hooper's decision to record the singing live- it makes it more raw. Enjoy the imperfection behind the singing- it makes the characters appear more vulnerable and real.  Comparing it to a stage play and comparing it to the book is fun, but it takes away from what is obvious to me- the movie was brilliant.