Les Miserables (2012) is a GREAT addition to the different rendition of Hugo's Classic Novel.

Wow. Pro really loves Les Miserables. Which makes me even more surprised at the stance he's chosen for this debate. I've only read the novel (English translation) and seen the musical. I didn't even know about the other film and TV miniseries.So I'm not sure if this is one of those sarcastic debates. If it is, I hope Pro puts a winking emoticon in the next round or something to tip me off. Because how could he like this movie? And praising the opening scene...he has to be joking. The resolution: the movie is a great addition. To win this debate, Pro needs to prove that the movie adds something that was not there before to our understanding or appreciation of Hugo's novel AND that the addition is "great". Some of the reasons why the movie is rubbish.It's a musical. Therefore, the music matters. My opinion is that the singing matters more in a musical like Les Miserables than in an ordinary musical because it's all about the emotion expressed through the songs. Pro has conceded that there is "less voice quality" than in the Broadway version. Ha! The singing was all pretty bad. The central relationship is Javert vs Valjean. This relationship and the comparison between the two characters is what the whole thing's about. Yes, Russell Crowe was the worst (why? he can act, can't he? why didn't he?), but I thought Jackman was unconvincing too. For example, in that duet where Valjean goes: I am warning you, Javert, I'm the stronger man by far... it's like, there's no way Jackman's the stronger man by far unless he has magical powers. Also, that line's supposed to be torn from him, like his bad former self is coming out under pressure. Which is the other problem I had with Jackman. No inner struggle. For me, Valjean has to fight against who is to become mayor. He has to be rough. But Jackman looked like he just popped on his mayor's outfit and there he was. And of course, Javert. In the duet when he goes: you know nothing of Javert. I was born inside a jail. I was born with scum like you. I am from the gutter too. This really has to mean something. It's a psychological moment. And the stars song of course. When it's done well it's so beautiful and tragic, and it's relevant to everyone: the seduction of absolutes. Or you can interpret it as scientific thinking vs Christian thinking. To my mind, this IS the musical. This is its central moral theme and it's central relationship. If it doesn't work (and I'm sure even Pro will admit that it doesn't in the film), the whole thing doesn't work. Helena Bonhan Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen were funny, at least, and the movie was bearable when they were on. However, again, their characters should have meant a lot more. They are supposed to, single-handedly really, show the futility of revolution and how the benefits and the people who benefit differ so greatly from the idealists' intentions. Am I wrong?No. The movie just reminded me of how good it should have been. Compare this with Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet [1]. I don't know if Pro has seen this or if he likes it, but for me this is an example of a GREAT addition to a genre. Although I knew the play, when I saw this for the first time I kept seeing different ways of understanding the words, different resonances, and subtle things were highlighted. That is, Branagh shows us how great Shakespeare really is.But this adaptation of Les Miserables shows us nothing. Extreme heat is as bad as extreme cold? Or the other way round? Pro is joking, I think. Right?[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...