Les Misérables (1935) :
Brief Review -
A staggering tale of Humanity vs Law is dragged down by familiar human errors in the distinguished version of Victor Hugo's novel. Hugo's popular novel of the same name has been adapted 8-9 times into movies, but this version by Richard Boleslawski had many differences. I haven't read the original novel (not even interested, frankly), but I have read about the changes. The film is set in the early 19th century in France, where an ex-convict who fails to report for parole is relentlessly pursued over a 20 year period by an obsessive policeman. Without wasting any time, I shall now come directly to the mistakes. The screenwriting looked very problematic to me. Valjean, who was once a kind man with a heart for the poor, suddenly turns his heart into stone when Cosette tells him about Marius. Ok, so he was like a father, right? But the way he asks Cosette if she has anything for him in her heart.. yuck.. was he trying to be her partner/lover or what? That obsession on his face was like she was his girlfriend. Cosette, on the other hand, chooses Marius first and then, reluctantly, Valjean again. Then again, she asks him to be with her when he brings Marius to her. What was that? A basic human error. OK, so Valjean brings Marius home from that riot, but what's next? Were Marius and Cosette gonna be happy afterwards? I mean, at the same place as Valjean was trying to leave (with Javert)? There are some more faults which I shall not reveal, but I repeat, it's a script full of basic errors. Richard Boleslawski does fine in Valjean's role while Charles Laughton shines as the cruel and strict Javert. Boleslawski had a good topic like humanity against the law but couldn't use it properly. Overall, it's still a watchable film for the performances and the legacy of the novel, but don't expect too much.
RATING - 6/10*
By - #samthebestest.
A staggering tale of Humanity vs Law is dragged down by familiar human errors in the distinguished version of Victor Hugo's novel. Hugo's popular novel of the same name has been adapted 8-9 times into movies, but this version by Richard Boleslawski had many differences. I haven't read the original novel (not even interested, frankly), but I have read about the changes. The film is set in the early 19th century in France, where an ex-convict who fails to report for parole is relentlessly pursued over a 20 year period by an obsessive policeman. Without wasting any time, I shall now come directly to the mistakes. The screenwriting looked very problematic to me. Valjean, who was once a kind man with a heart for the poor, suddenly turns his heart into stone when Cosette tells him about Marius. Ok, so he was like a father, right? But the way he asks Cosette if she has anything for him in her heart.. yuck.. was he trying to be her partner/lover or what? That obsession on his face was like she was his girlfriend. Cosette, on the other hand, chooses Marius first and then, reluctantly, Valjean again. Then again, she asks him to be with her when he brings Marius to her. What was that? A basic human error. OK, so Valjean brings Marius home from that riot, but what's next? Were Marius and Cosette gonna be happy afterwards? I mean, at the same place as Valjean was trying to leave (with Javert)? There are some more faults which I shall not reveal, but I repeat, it's a script full of basic errors. Richard Boleslawski does fine in Valjean's role while Charles Laughton shines as the cruel and strict Javert. Boleslawski had a good topic like humanity against the law but couldn't use it properly. Overall, it's still a watchable film for the performances and the legacy of the novel, but don't expect too much.
RATING - 6/10*
By - #samthebestest.