1101 Distinguished opinion
“The reputation of "Les Misérables" has suffered a setback. Unexpected, but reasonable.
Tom Hooper started his career filming TV series. He is an excellent TV director. His ability to capture actors’ performances deserves recognition, but the scheduling of shots, creation of atmosphere, use of light and extension of images are essential elements of movies. , but it is not his strong point.
“"The King's Speech" has been hailed as the most successful work in the Oscar for Best Director since the turn of the millennium. This is not groundless; similarly, "Crash" beat "Brokeback Mountain" to win the Oscar for Best Picture, which has always been controversial and criticized. , also because the former has too much of a TV feel, and the director’s control over the film is almost invisible..
"Les Misérables" directed by Tom Hooper strictly follows the context and pattern of the stage play version, which means that Tom's shortcomings are further magnified and completely exposed to the audience; on the other hand, Tom's advantages are also invisible. performance, completely overshadowed by the actor's personal performance and performance.
It's like placing multiple cameras in the Queen's Theater to record the all-star version of "Les Misérables" and then releasing it on DVD, making it a movie version that goes into cinemas. Such a drama is enough to be amazing and exciting. Praise; but such a movie cannot make people empathize with it.
After the London premiere, the first batch of reviews for "Les Misérables" ushered in a nightmare. Fourteen media released reviews. The overall media review was only 59 points, not even a passing grade..
In fact, such a terrible score is not the end of the world. There is only one critical review, and only one praising review. The remaining twelve reviews are all average reviews, and among the average reviews, the score It is also generally concentrated between 50 and 70 points, which leads to the average score failing to pass..
Among the first batch of reviews, the film review of "Empire" magazine is undoubtedly the most representative.
“Cameron Mackintosh's version of 'Les Misérables' is undoubtedly a wonderful work, with an excellent script, excellent characters, and excellent content, but the problem with Tom Hooper is that：
This work gathers a group of talented actors. The wonderful performances once again give life to the characters, but they are always separated from the movie itself. It is as if you are just enjoying the performance of another drama, but without the texture of the movie and the director's interpretation..
What’s even more frightening is that Hopper’s lack of grasp of details has led to gaps in the plot and simplified characters. Not only has the originally grand and profound theme not been improved, but it has also been weakened, eventually evolving into the current version.——
A movie made purely for the Oscars season, above the passing line, but nothing more. Can it win an Oscar nomination? That's a high probability; but is it a good movie? The answer is a resounding no.”
“"Empire" magazine gave it sixty points, just passing, no less, but no more. This also represents the views of most film critics..
People are praising Anne Hathaway's performance, and the Wall Street Journal even declared, "Hathaway can now prepare her Oscar acceptance speech. The wonderful performance is worthy of the best of her career; and The performances of Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter are also eye-catching.”
People are also lamenting that Hugh Jackman did not get more performance space. "Variety" magazine said, "He is completely limited to a frame, and all his talents cannot be displayed. Renly Hall shines brilliantly" In front of the version, it suddenly became eclipsed. This is unfair to Jackman, but it is true. And Tom Hooper is the one who needs to be blamed..”
People are still denouncing Russell Crowe's terrible performance. Ten of the fourteen media outlets have criticized him, saying, "Bad arias, bad performances, bad moves, and bad characters." , Crowe's stiff, clumsy, stupid and boring performance completely ruined the entire character.”
There is no doubt that among the cast, Russell Crowe has received the most criticism. The winner of the 73rd Academy Award for Best Actor is completely unsuitable for the performance style of the stage play. He looks out of place from beginning to end. In the first scene It had already received countless criticisms on the night of the screening, and now it was even ushered in a carnival of complaints..
It is worth mentioning that the "Times" wrote a special report comparing the Almeida Theater version and the movie version of "Les Misérables" and analyzing them in an all-round way. At the end of the article, They concluded that.
“Why was the Almeida Theater’s six-hour version a success? Or, even better, why the Queen’s three-hour version has such longevity？
The reason is: they gave the most wonderful performances in the most appropriate way, with full characters and solid scripts. Under the wonderful interpretation, they gave Victor Hugo's original novel their own version of understanding and sublimation. This is why they succeeded, and why the movie version failed.
When people mention the long six-hour version of the Almeida Theater, they will remember every character and every detail in it, and they can even talk about their understanding and reflection endlessly; and when people mention the movie version, Except for Fantine's "I Dreamed a Dream" and the Thénardiers' "The Masters of the House," nothing seems to be left..
People are discussing whether Hall is a better Jean Valjean than Jackman; people are discussing whether Hall would be a better choice to star in the movie version of Marius; people are still discussing whether Hall is a better choice than Jackman. Was it a wiser choice for you to give up movies and choose drama?.
Judging from the existing results, all the answers are yes.”
“"The Times" review is undoubtedly interesting and representative. In addition to the 50-point evaluation, they truly made a horizontal comparison between the two different versions, which also represents the mainstream view in the industry..
There is an eternal law in life. Without comparison, there will be no harm; after horizontal comparison, you can clearly judge the difference between superior and inferior..
There is no doubt that Hugh Jackman is a well-known actor. Although in the film field, the role of Wolverine has restricted his acting career; but in the theater field, in major cities such as New York, London and Melbourne, He has left behind legends that belong to him and is highly recognized by people in the industry..
This time, playing the important role of Jean Valjean, Hugh once again demonstrated his solid skills, outstanding singing skills and outstanding performance. All of these have been objectively affirmed by film critics, but in comparison, the breakthrough is really Too little, it can only be said to be average..
If there is no horizontal comparison, then Hugh may receive more praise. After all, he is the most important core in this movie and successfully completed his task; however, there is no if in real life..
Now, people in the industry generally believe that in comparison, Renly's performance immediately stood out. Renly had all the excellent qualities that Hugh showed; and further, the quality and level of Renly's performance showed a more... The many possibilities, especially the tension and explosive power on the dramatic stage, give Jean Valjean new vitality..
Among them, the most widely discussed scene is, not surprisingly, "Bring Him Home" - the highlight of Jean Valjean going to the barricade to try to save Marius.
It goes without saying that Hugh Jackman is excellent, but the fact is that his performance in this scene and this song was completely inferior. He only presented the content of the song in a straightforward manner, without emotion or background. There is no echo, it is so dry and tasteless, and even to some extent, it is divorced from the plot. The bland and boring performance has completely lost its soul..
What's worse is that under Tom Hooper's camera scheduling, he completely misunderstood and distorted the meaning and soul of the original song. Even the core of the theme was inexplicably lost. There was no Marius, no Enjolras, and no barricade. , let alone sublimation, people even began to wonder, "who" should be brought home?？
After the screening at the London premiere, one film critic was so surprised and surprised that he couldn't believe his eyes. He simply went to Hugh and asked what was going on in that scene and what went wrong. Why is the effect so disastrous?？
Later, neither party involved responded to this matter, as if it had never happened. However, there were rumors in the industry that after hearing the question, Xio spread his hands and shook his head to express his helplessness, "Sorry, I don't know either. What happened?" His face was confused and his eyes were full of regret, and he seemed helpless. "Maybe my abilities are limited..”
No matter how good an actor is, he will be helpless when encountering a mediocre director. In the final analysis, in movies, the actor's performance needs to be captured and presented by the director's lens; unlike on the theater stage, what the actor has is what he presents. Just what.
However, Xio is a gentleman and has a polite personality. He never likes to speak ill of others behind their backs. Even if he has no choice, he does not blame anyone. He just modestly takes the blame on himself, thinking that his strength is still insufficient and he has failed. The heavy responsibility of this scene. But the sighs and regrets between the lines are still regrettable..
In comparison, Renly's "Bring Him Home" is regarded as a classic and has been praised by professionals in the industry. Some even believe that Renly has given the song a new soul and faith. The wonderful performance is definitely worth it. collection.
From the lyrics to the melody, from the figure to the eyes, from the posture to the aura, Renly truly showed the essence of the performance, even the most picky theater critics and directors cannot find fault..
According to rumors, many senior actors who played Jean Valjean, including Claude-Michel-Schonberg, Alfie-Boe, etc., arrived in Alme in person The theater saw Renly's performance and gave it a very good review.
There is no level of art. Everyone has their own understanding and interpretation, but the quality of the performance can distinguish between good and bad. As the Times said, the answer is "yes".
Comments