Les Miserables (1998)

Okay, so I reviewed the 2012 adaptation of the musical version of "Les Miserables" (available here: http://deechanceyblog.blogspot.com/2013/09/movie-review-les-miserables-2012.html). But what you might not know is that there was another big-time film adaptation of Victor Hugo's 1862 novel. Released in 1998, this version is different, to say the least. How different, you might ask? First and biggest reason: it's not a musical.

Wait, you mean there was a "Les Mis" adaptation that's not a musical!? Why, yes there is! In fact, most of the movie adaptations are not musicals. Said musical only debuted in the 1980s. This particular adaptation stars Liam Neeson, already an Oscar winner for his role in "Schindler's List" and one year away from becoming known as Qui-Gon Jinn, plays Jean Valjean. Aside from him is Geoffrey Rush, five years from becoming better known as Hector Barbossa in the "Pirates" movies, playing Inspector Javert.

Directed by Billie August, this is more of a condensed, SparkNotes version of a 1,000+ page novel affectionately known as "The Brick". Instead of all the subplots, it streamlines the plot to focus on Valjean and Javert's adversarial relationship. Valjean is released from prison before the movie even starts and, in a bit of a departure from the musical, Valjean hits the priest he robs! In a way, this makes his redemption much more heavy-hitting. The rest of the movie zips past, but sometimes you don't even notice because it goes at a relatively slow pace.

In fact, compared to the 2012 film (and by extension, the musical), this one is quiet and... well, subtle. I mean, it's Liam Neeson. Do we have to go over his acting? No, we don't. Even when he's being restrained he's still doing a fantastic job. The court scene where he confesses that he's escaped convict Jean Valjean is far more powerful in this film than in the 2012 movie. We see the man accused of being Valjean humiliated by the court and then we cheer when Valjean confesses.

As for Javert, Rush also does a heck of a job, and yes, he's even better than Russell Crowe! Looking at Rush's Javert, there's a sort of restrained madness and obsession with catching Valjean, although he's shown to be doing other things. Right after Valjean confesses himself, Javert goes from calm disappointment to mad fury as he screams "I KNEW IT!!!"

Also along with them are Uma Thurman, who does a heck of a job as Fantine. Sadly, her performance would be overshadowed by Anne Hathaway in 2012. Claire Danes plays Cosette, who actually manages to outplay Amanda Seyfried! Yes, Claire Danes, with her wide eyes and blank expressions, outplays Amanda Seyfield! How? She has a personality, that's why! Sure, she's a hormonal teenager, but she's pretty rebellious and stands up for herself.

The rest of the cast is more downplayed. The Thenardiers only make a cameo, there's no Eponine and Enjolras's role is greatly diminished. Hans Matheson plays Marius, who takes a more active role in the June Rebellion, this time being the leader of Les Amis de l'ABC. I kinda like this Marius, since he's a pretty passionate guy.

But even though it's a SparkNotes version, I found there to be a bit of an expansion of the plot compared to the 2012 movie. Without all the bit players, we see just how Valjean was able to get out of the town he was mayor of, how he and Cosette got into Paris, and yes, Cosette and Marius courting. It also doesn't go much into the politics behind the Rebellion, but does explain why Les Amis revolted on the day of Lamarque's funeral.

Unlike the 2012 film where it's very stylized, grimy, filmed rather wonkily, all up in your face and kind of weird, this one is more like a production on Masterpiece Theatre. The period piece aspect is more pronounced, although it's not as dirty as the 2012 movie (I say dirty as in, there's a lot of much and grime in the 2012 movie). Also, whereas the 2012 movie goes right for the gut with the emotions, this one is more subdued. Although that doesn't mean that it won't hit you hard when it needs to.

So like I said, I kind of liked this movie. But it's not perfect. It's a shame one of the greatest novels of our time has yet to see a truly great adaptation, but then again, the book itself is so difficult to adapt. It didn't have the same emotional impact that the 2012 movie had, it did what it had to do. This version is, at least as far as I see it, an introduction to the novel for people who want to read it. It's essentially saying, "here's the gist of the novel". The 2012 movie and musical on the other hand, they're their own things. The acting is phenomenal, the pacing is actually pretty good and the characters are all really good. The sad part is, it's not great. But, I'll let you decide what you think.