Les Misérables

The bouts between Rush and Neeson make the movie. Claire Danes ruins the rest.

Rush is wonderfully cast as Javert, and a reliable Neeson more or less acquits himself as Jean Valjean. Thurman and Danes' incarnations of Fantine and Cosette I didn't care for one bit, however. And, really, with at least three more accomplished adaptations of Hugo's novel out there, this is definitely more nice to have than need to have.

Good movie til Claire Danes grows up then it falls apart.

A decent film, but I gave it a low score because it's not my kind of thing and I don't want to give Criticker any ideas.

This shouldn't work, but it does. Liam Neeson, a big man with a kind face, is perfect in the lead. Over a decade after seeing this, I still sometimes think of him saying, "I am the man you want. I am Jean Valjean!" Geoffrey Rush is utterly terrific as Inspector Javert, too

Knewilikedthestoryenoughwhendonenormally+frees+samethendrownsself?lol

7????????????????????????/?????

Spending merely 2 hours to tell the story of Les Misérables is a futile effort to begin with. The story is naturally good, but the pacing is really quick at certain parts. Also the movie ends way too suddenly, right after a climactic moment. I would actually argue that it has no ending whatsoever. Nonetheless the picture has its good moments as well. Geoffrey Rush gives the best portrayal of Javert I have seen to this day, but I wouldn't recommend to watch it, only if you are really interested.

It's wonderfully epic and cinematic: the camera tells the story beat by beat. My problem is that the cast is underused: we've got incredible actors just standing on their marks, facing one of their co-stars, and reciting their lines. They still did a great job and get some terrific moments - but for each of them I found it very easy to think of another movie in which they were really given space to play out a scene, instead of having to just stand still while the camera watched them talk.

Based on the book, not the musical, so a bit more long and boring than the comparison.

really good 10 out of 10

Geoffrey Rush and Liam Neeson is one of the most spectacular lead pairs in modern cinema, yet this adaption of Hugo's classic is tragically average. It got all Cs in high school, and its girlfriend was a 6/10. I would have certainly never remembered this if it weren't related to the source work.

Neeson and Rush do admirably, and they are responsible for the only true moments of pathos in this movie. But all in all this adaptation falls flat and forgettable, and Javerts final turn ends up seeming ungodly overdramatic compared to the flatness of the rest of it. And I must question the logic of cutting out the Thenardiers - it makes the story about as fun as reading a french philosopher.

Too short, not enough miserableness, the end was well done, though.

A well rounded musical. I love the original play and I think they did a very nice job with it.

I really wanted Geoffery Rush and Liam Neeson to bust out "The Confrontation" , they really need to bring the musical to the screen. The actor playing Marius sucked shit, Uma Thurman was chesty, that part where she's lying in the bed and flicks the blankets off and mmmm ~*~My review~*~ (2012 edit: OH SHIT THE LISTENED TO ME)

Solid :)

Don't like musicals.

Wonderful story of redemption and grace; incredible cast and acting.

The film based upon Hugo's magnificent novel is a disapppointment. There is simply too much to cover in a film and situations are not included and the film seemed stale. The performances are good, the directing is not.

Different than the theatrical musical version, but a darn good story with great acting, scenery and costume.

This movie is just...great.

Reawarding emotional impact, and its handsomely lensed and directed.

i liked it