Reviews

This would be the third adaptation of Hugo's book I have seen: the 1935 version, the musical, and now this. Sorry to entirely break with tradition, but I thought little of the 1935 version; there's no denying it's full of remarkable talent but I just felt it was too faithful to the novel. Ditto, in a way, the musical, despite the fact that it took a number of liberties.

Now, here's where I commit heresy - this abridgement of the book is better than *any* other adaptation out there. It also loses a number of the overly pretentious afflictions the book suffers from (notably the death scene). What a number of other people have said is that it doesn't compare to the book. I have read the book, and make no mistake, I consider it to be among the best ever written. But it is too long and suffers from notable flaws - the disappearance of the two major protagonists for excessively long periods of narrative; Thénardier (I won't apologise for that, since his character could be well enough done without - see the musical for proof of his annoyance factor - so kudos to the screenwriter for simply editing him out of most of the movie); and decentralisation. The story is about redemption, yes, but it is also about the relentless pursuit by Javert and the endless flight by Valjean. The book never quite manages to bring together these opposing strands. Most adaptations have unsuccessfully tried to juggle both strands and have failed (occasionally as spectacularly as the book itself does). The film concentrates mainly on the pursuit, and frankly it is all the better for it.

The Valjean we see in this film is already a redeemed character by the time we run into him in Vigau. He is incredibly compassionate and quite obviously transformed from our first impressions of him in the scenes at the bishop's house. To all the naysayers - this is why Valjean punches the bishop - to better show his redemption when we jump nine years into the future. It is effective. A single act of kindness has transformed the man - we see that the second we next come into contact with him. But despite his transformation, the violent streak in him still comes to the fore on occasion - witness smashing Javert's head against a wall, and slapping Cosette. The book unconvincingly portrays a man completely altered from his fundamental nature - I'm sorry, but I just don't buy that. Violence is still there, and it can be suppressed, but not always. Sometimes it erupts, given enough provocation. Reasonable enough, I think.

Javert is shown as completely uncompromising and certain of his moral stature, but we see towards the end that he wavers. Just as in with Valjean, a single act of mercy changes the man. But, unlike Valjean, he is unable to reconcile that change - it makes a seeming mockery of the way he has lived his entire life. This is effectively portrayed, and having Valjean there to witness it is ultimately what takes this film far away and above all previous adaptations. The scene is cold and sterile without extra human contact. Javert is obviously a cold man, and the presence of Valjean adds some much-needed warmth to the final scene. It gives it extra resonance.

And, to everyone out there who loves the book - the faux-spirituality in the death scene is quite simply absurd. It is pretentious and somewhat out of line with the rest of the story. Yes, Valjean is a good Christian man, and he trusts in the Lord. But, an intelligent reader (or, in the case of the movie, viewer) does not need quite so blatant an exhibition of his redemption. As any English teacher will tell you - implication is better than exhibition. Apparently a lesson Hugo did not learn, looking at his other novels.

For me, what makes the movie is not the beautiful score, the brilliant adaptation, the lush photography, or even the terrific acting. It is the final scene. It is truly beautiful. Look closely at the entire film and you will notice that Valjean only smiles twice. The first time is with Fantine, and it is only briefly - in this brief expression we see his love for Fantine, something he was unable to ever show her, since in repressing his violent side and dedicating his life to humanitarianism, Valjean had had to some extent disconnect his emotions. He never shows Fantine his true love, and it crushes him - it is worsened by the fact that he brings up her daughter. And, of course, Valjean can never be truly happy because he can never feel truly safe. Every second, on every corner, Javert could be waiting. Valjean can never let go of that fear.



But, at the end of the film, as Javert throws himself into the river, Valjean looks stunned. But, as he walks along the banks of the Seine, the sheer enormity of what has happened dawns upon him and we see his face slowly break into a great smile. At last he is free, at last he is safe. It is inspiring and breathtaking. This is what the book should have been like. Make no mistake. Beautiful.