|
|
Post by mamaleh on Nov 21, 2012 12:57:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Dec 18, 2012 13:38:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Dec 27, 2012 15:04:28 GMT -5
For those who've read the book, this question came to mind when some annoying poster on a theater site said he was put off by the "eww" factor in a grown man meeting up with a young girl in the woods. (I know, come ON!): Is JVJ supposed to be a lifelong celibate? Did he ever have a relationship with a woman, even pre-arrest? If not, is that because he doesn't want open himself up to attention that might lead to his capture? Inquiring minds want to know.  Ellen |
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Dec 27, 2012 16:33:47 GMT -5
For those who've read the book, this question came to mind when some annoying poster on a theater site said he was put off by the "eww" factor in a grown man meeting up with a young girl in the woods. (I know, come ON!): Is JVJ supposed to be a lifelong celibate? Did he ever have a relationship with a woman, even pre-arrest? If not, is that because he doesn't want open himself up to attention that might lead to his capture? Inquiring minds want to know. Ellen A subject of much speculation for 150 years! Neither JVJ or Javert had any women. Pre-arrest he was a young man of about 20 and a wood cutter (or something) just trying to help his sister and her 7 children survive. In the book he's walking through the woods because he buried some of his money there while he's on the way to the town to get Cosette. Nothing ewww about it. Although it is love at first site it's paternal. Sue |
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Dec 27, 2012 20:23:37 GMT -5
So when JVJ sings, "...if God had granted me a son," a proper response might be, "You might want to start with a date." Sorry, couldn't resist. Ellen |
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Dec 27, 2012 20:59:55 GMT -5
So when JVJ sings, "...if God had granted me a son," a proper response might be, "You might want to start with a date." Sorry, couldn't resist. Ellen Yes Jean, dinner and a show would be a good start, then a son! 8-) |
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Jan 3, 2013 9:29:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Jan 3, 2013 14:26:22 GMT -5
I was coming here to post that link to. What a fantastic interview with these two creative geniuses! I love how open they are about the creative process and making the necessary changes to bring their work to the screen. Very humble men, both of them. I'll bet Hugh enjoyed working with them a lot! I think that Lambert kid should read it to see what real creative minds think of the process and performances of THEIR work before he shoots off his mouth again.  It's too bad that some people haven't allowed themselves to appreciate, or just "don't get" the techniques used for this film and how completely different it is from anything else they have seen before. If they would open their minds and hearts they'd probably discover what an emotionally beautiful experience the movie truly is. Sue |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,456
|
Post by jo on Jan 3, 2013 19:49:33 GMT -5
Sue, I posted the interview on IMDB in full, so people can readily read it. But nah - no one was interested enough to make a comment. If they only knew how insightful the whole interview was and that it would have answered many of their questions about the show, the movie, their development processes -- but no, it was not controversial enough for them to spend a few moments to read or comment on. And they say they are " true" and "diehard" fans of Les Miserables. Boublil and Schonberg, in their tribute to the Hugo novel are the true heroes of the musical! Their loss  Jo |
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Jan 3, 2013 21:21:01 GMT -5
Sue, I posted the interview on IMDB in full, so people can readily read it. But nah - no one was interested enough to make a comment. If they only knew how insightful the whole interview was and that it would have answered many of their questions about the show, the movie, their development processes -- but no, it was not controversial enough for them to spend a few moments to read or comment on. And they say they are " true" and "diehard" fans of Les Miserables. Boublil and Schonberg, in their tribute to the Hugo novel are the true heroes of the musical! Their loss Jo Ah Jo, you're such a trouper hanging in there at IMDB, still fighting the good fight! You go girl! :-/ It does make me sad that a lot of people just don't appreciate what an artistic achievement this movie is and how much loving work, by everyone, went into it. I really hope it sweeps the awards, it so deserves it. I've seen most of the contenders now and I haven't seen anything that comes close to the stunning visual impact, the emotional impact and the level of acting that everyone brought to it especially Hugh and Anne. All the technical awards, especially for sound design & editing should be a no brainer too. It's doing such good box office which should zoom up quite a bit on the 11th so some of these nit-pickers must realize that they are rapidly becoming a minority opinion. Most of what I see on twitter & YouTube is quite positive from real people who are seeing it. It must be hell having to wait so long. Hope the time goes by quickly for you. I might be seeing it again on Sunday now that my cold seems to be improving. I think I'll appreciate it more the second time because I was paying too much attention to how this or that was done the first time instead of just letting it sweep over me. I think I'll feel it more this time. Sue |
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Jan 3, 2013 22:46:37 GMT -5
Why do u care what others think?we love it love hugh most people think the movie was incredible !
|
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,456
|
Post by jo on Jan 4, 2013 1:27:59 GMT -5
Because the negativity which is all over the place can affect Hugh's chances at an award  ATC, BWW, IMDB, Print media, drama critics, bloggers, social media, film sites, everywhere, are being snarky . Try reading Charles Isherwood ... As Ellen said, he savaged Hugh's singing voice and even suggested that it was only his charm which won him audience's attention on Broadway in the past. Hrmmphhh... Although I find it a little reassuring that the least criticism of the singing is actually found on the IMDB Movie Awards board -- they criticized it initially but it is no longer a factor when discussing the possibility of actors ( Hugh, included) getting an Oscar! And the movie getting an Oscar! Jo |
|
|
|
Post by cccartzee on Jan 4, 2013 2:30:43 GMT -5
Also, there is much praise for Hugh on Twitter and many think he should get the Oscar! I'm thinking that Twitter and Imdb represents the main movie population as a whole; whereas the bloggers and all those that post on BWW, ATC are just a small group that enjoys being snarky as they don't have anything better to do Carol |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,456
|
Post by jo on Jan 4, 2013 4:57:13 GMT -5
The Les Miserables Main Page on IMDB is one of the, if not the snarkiest, among online communities. It used to be a fairly great community...but some of those who were originally monitoring the movie when it was still being filmed are not encouraged too much to post anymore because the negative new posters are all over the place. It is not just Hugh who is getting the negative treatment but also Russell.
It is really the Movie Awards board ( different board on IMDB) which now simply looks at awards chances more or less.
True, Tweeters have been much more positive to Hugh (overwhelmingly so!) and think he should be nominated and win. Adam Lambert's tweet however was sensationalized by the media, as it was particularly unkind to both Hugh and Russell.
By January 10, when we know the AMPAS ( Oscar) nominations, and Hugh makes it to the top 5, at least there is vindication that the most important thing is overall performance, not whether he reaches a tenor note or not!
Hopefully, the Golden Globes ( Jan 13) will also bestow on him the Best Actor award in the Musicals/Comedy category. Only fly in the oitment is Bradley Cooper who is being pushed by Harvey Weinstein!
Jo
|
|
|
|
Post by foxie on Jan 4, 2013 8:21:41 GMT -5
What did Adam say?
|
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Jan 4, 2013 8:55:51 GMT -5
Agreed, Jo, that the barrage of negativity is worrisome, as we are deeply into awards season. Why did Isherwood's column have to appear on the last day of Oscar voting? Couldn't it have been held back a day? Lea Salonga was no help, either, even though I have a feeling Hugh would agree with her that Colm Wilkinson "owns" "Bring Him Home"--which, after all, was crafted for Wilkinson's falsetto and high range. I did like the quote I read today from a Daily Mail story in which Hugh says: ‘Cameron Mackintosh talked about the need to put yourself into a position of discomfort — not always to sing in the key that you find most comfortable, for example — so you have something to work against if you are searching for emotional angst, which I was, and he was spot on." That's something of an answer to critics of his song interpretations. The whole article is here (we also learn a new tidbit about the day his mother left). www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2256937/Les-Miserables-Hugh-Jackman-starved-food-AND-water-gruelling-role-ever.htmlEllen |
|
jo
Ensemble
Posts: 46,456
|
Post by jo on Jan 4, 2013 11:10:53 GMT -5
Thanks for the link, Ellen.
I am hoping that CM will speak more and more openly in defense of the live singing approach because he is the one person that the Les Miserables theatre fanatics may listen to! I have also read that he agreed to the choice of Tom Hooper precisely because Tom made live singing as his pre-condition!
One more week and we will know if the AMPAS has acknowledged the excellence of Hugh's tour de force performance!
Jo
|
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Jan 4, 2013 11:40:27 GMT -5
He basically said that the movie suffered because it had great actors "pretending to be singers"...and a few more things. You could probably find the exact quotes (he did several tweets) by either looking at his twitter page of just googleing it since it's been all over the internet all week. He supposedly tried to clarify his statements in more recent tweets but to me they sounded very much the same. In a way, I wish Russell hadn't answered it because the media decided that his answer meant he was agreeing with Lambert. I just wish that Lambert had half the class of Hugh. He could learn a lot from Hugh about not badmouthing fellow performers. Sue |
|
|
|
Post by birchie on Jan 4, 2013 11:54:05 GMT -5
The Les Miserables Main Page on IMDB is one of the, if not the snarkiest, among online communities. It used to be a fairly great community...but some of those who were originally monitoring the movie when it was still being filmed are not encouraged too much to post anymore because the negative new posters are all over the place. It is not just Hugh who is getting the negative treatment but also Russell. It is really the Movie Awards board ( different board on IMDB) which now simply looks at awards chances more or less. True, Tweeters have been much more positive to Hugh (overwhelmingly so!) and think he should be nominated and win. Adam Lambert's tweet however was sensationalized by the media, as it was particularly unkind to both Hugh and Russell. By January 10, when we know the AMPAS ( Oscar) nominations, and Hugh makes it to the top 5, at least there is vindication that the most important thing is overall performance, not whether he reaches a tenor note or not! Hopefully, the Golden Globes ( Jan 13) will also bestow on him the Best Actor award in the Musicals/Comedy category. Only fly in the oitment is Bradley Cooper who is being pushed by Harvey Weinstein! Jo Guilty...I'm one of the deserters of that board! It was fun in the early months right about up to when the screenings started. It began to be more and more nasty comments from newbies to the board and the early adapters started dropping off. I've never been a fan of the IMDB boards in general and hardly ever comment on them, so I lasted on that one far longer than any other one. IMDB seems to really attract the lowest common denominator for most of the boards I've seen. I'm just too thin skinned to hang out around all the negativity that exists over there. I will be deliriously happy when the movie and performers get the nominations and awards they so deserve. Especially Hugh! I've finally seen Lincoln and don't think DDL gave half the performance that Hugh gave in Les Miserables. I can't imagine Bradley Cooper getting any award over Hugh unless it really is all rigged! I hope the voters look at the actual performances when they fill out their ballots and not just the names, hype and salesmanship! Sue |
|
|
|
Post by carouselkathy on Jan 4, 2013 14:22:40 GMT -5
I understand what Adam was trying to say. He, and many theater purists are used to those songs being belted to the balcony. Also, "Bring Him Home" was written for Colm's falsetto quality. Hooper and MacIntosh wanted a close up rawness that would add realism to the suffering. For Hugh's Valjean, grief isn't pretty. You can't belt when you're singing live with the camera in your face, so it's strained and raw. Maybe Hugh doesn't have a falsetto. O.K. Maybe they could have transposed down into a more comfortable key. Critics would jump on that too. Choices were made and the film is finished. Live singing is something new. They could have printed takes with better vocals (the CD has different versions), but they went for acting first. It's good. The film will be nominated. Hugh will be nominated. Anne will be nominated. I hope Eddie will be nominated ("Empty Chairs" was glorious!). Yes, there are better sung versions of the songs, but this is a film that told the story beautifully. It will receive its accolades and awards.
|
|
|
|
Post by JH4HJ on Jan 4, 2013 16:14:57 GMT -5
I did like the quote I read today from a Daily Mail story in which Hugh says: ‘Cameron Mackintosh talked about the need to put yourself into a position of discomfort — not always to sing in the key that you find most comfortable, for example — so you have something to work against if you are searching for emotional angst, which I was, and he was spot on.' Thank you so much for sharing this info, Ellen. As I watched the movie I was discomforted that practically everything Hugh sang (with the possible exception of "Suddenly") didn't seem to be in the correct key for him. (I keep telling people out here that "Wolverine" can sing, based on my Broadway experiences with Hugh. They always look at me cock-eyed when I say that, and this movie did nothing to change their opinions. I was "like totally" ARGH! dealing with their reactions to him in this movie.) - Anyway, I'm happy to know that it was the Director's decision - and sorry that he took that route. I think he should have had more confidence in the ability of the performers he cast to act the "emotional angst" of their characters and didn't feel they needed to be quite literally straining to deliver the material appropriately. More than one stunning/soaring song was diminished to just so much more recitative by this decision IMHO and though I feel it "served the medium of film" quite well, it was an enormous departure from the (more familiar to me) theatrical production. I don't think I was quite prepared (despite the extensive pre-show info I'd gathered here and elsewhere) for just how "different" this interpretation would be. Hugh's involvement notwithstanding, the soundtrack for this film will never replace the "Dream Cast" recording of the theatrical version for my personal listening enjoyment. I've only seen it once, so far. It was gut wrenching and an amazingly emotional experience. (Tissues were required on multiple occasions.) It is an incredible film. Since I received numerous movie passes (Christmas gifts from friends who are aware of my fondness for Hugh and Les Mis), I will definitely see it again (something I don't usually do until movies make it to cable TV). I think that after the "shock and awe" of the initial experience I will find a repeat viewing more "enjoyable" than the initial inundation. Once again, Hugh has absolutely blown me away with his ability to "inhabit" a character. I'm hoping he takes home an Oscar for this performance, and that the wider, more long lasting effect is to see him in better film roles in the future. [BTW: Even in rural Wyoming, there was applause at the end of the movie. I started it, of course, but almost everyone in the theater joined in immediately... and quite a few of us remained and talked about it afterward. I've never seen that happen at the movies out here before.] |
|
|
|
Post by Kelly on Jan 4, 2013 17:01:32 GMT -5
I understand what Adam was trying to say. He, and many theater purists are used to those songs being belted to the balcony. Also, "Bring Him Home" was written for Colm's falsetto quality. Hooper and MacIntosh wanted a close up rawness that would add realism to the suffering. For Hugh's Valjean, grief isn't pretty. You can't belt when you're singing live with the camera in your face, so it's strained and raw. Maybe Hugh doesn't have a falsetto. O.K. Maybe they could have transposed down into a more comfortable key. Critics would jump on that too. Choices were made and the film is finished. Live singing is something new. They could have printed takes with better vocals (the CD has different versions), but they went for acting first. It's good. The film will be nominated. Hugh will be nominated. Anne will be nominated. I hope Eddie will be nominated ("Empty Chairs" was glorious!). Yes, there are better sung versions of the songs, but this is a film that told the story beautifully. It will receive its accolades and awards. Excellent summarization, Kathy. |
|
|
|
Post by mamaleh on Jan 4, 2013 17:06:42 GMT -5
I did like the quote I read today from a Daily Mail story in which Hugh says: ‘Cameron Mackintosh talked about the need to put yourself into a position of discomfort — not always to sing in the key that you find most comfortable, for example — so you have something to work against if you are searching for emotional angst, which I was, and he was spot on.' Thank you so much for sharing this info, Ellen. As I watched the movie I was discomforted that practically everything Hugh sang (with the possible exception of "Suddenly") didn't seem to be in the correct key for him. (I keep telling people out here that "Wolverine" can sing, based on my Broadway experiences with Hugh. They always look at me cock-eyed when I say that, and this movie did nothing to change their opinions. I was "like totally" ARGH! dealing with their reactions to him in this movie.) - Anyway, I'm happy to know that it was the Director's decision - and sorry that he took that route. I think he should have had more confidence in the ability of the performers he cast to act the "emotional angst" of their characters and didn't feel they needed to be quite literally straining to deliver the material appropriately. More than one stunning/soaring song was diminished to just so much more recitative by this decision IMHO and though I feel it "served the medium of film" quite well, it was an enormous departure from the (more familiar to me) theatrical production. I don't think I was quite prepared (despite the extensive pre-show info I'd gathered here and elsewhere) for just how "different" this interpretation would be. Hugh's involvement notwithstanding, the soundtrack for this film will never replace the "Dream Cast" recording of the theatrical version for my personal listening enjoyment. I've only seen it once, so far. It was gut wrenching and an amazingly emotional experience. (Tissues were required on multiple occasions.) It is an incredible film. Since I received numerous movie passes (Christmas gifts from friends who are aware of my fondness for Hugh and Les Mis), I will definitely see it again (something I don't usually do until movies make it to cable TV). I think that after the "shock and awe" of the initial experience I will find a repeat viewing more "enjoyable" than the initial inundation. Once again, Hugh has absolutely blown me away with his ability to "inhabit" a character. I'm hoping he takes home an Oscar for this performance, and that the wider, more long lasting effect is to see him in better film roles in the future. [BTW: Even in rural Wyoming, there was applause at the end of the movie. I started it, of course, but almost everyone in the theater joined in immediately... and quite a few of us remained and talked about it afterward. I've never seen that happen at the movies out here before.] Good for you, Valerie. Hey, someone's got to start clapping! Yes, when I read that quote, I thought, wow, did they know what a can of worms that decision to sing in a different key or have something to "work against" would open up? I truly hope it doesn't cost Hugh the only Oscar nomination he's ever been touted for. Ellen |
|
|
|
Post by carouselkathy on Jan 4, 2013 17:23:30 GMT -5
Ellen, I truly believe Hugh will be nominated. He's earned it. Deb can call Donna Karen and order 3 new dresses: One for the Golden Globes, one for the SAGs, and one for the Oscars. I'd like to see her in a royal blue, a pale pink, and a silver sparkly. |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Jan 4, 2013 17:35:40 GMT -5
Full length to the floor :-)
|
|
