I dreamed a dream in time gone by, Les Miserables was worth reviewing



The whole concept of singing most of the lines helped draw me into the film in ways it couldn’t have otherwise. Too bad every scene featuring the “comic relief” innkeepers completely broke my concentration every time.


I won’t dedicate two sections of this review to the awful innkeepers (or that snot-nosed brat with the inexplicable British accent), so instead I’ll say that Russell Crowe has a surprisingly decent singing voice.

Oh, and Samantha Barks was the best thing this movie had going for it.


Do you like off-centered shots of people’s heads? Have I got a film for you!

Product Placement

Obviously none. Come on.


Despite the singing keeping me interested, I think this one would become a chore to watch after a few viewings.

Today You Shared

38 comments on “I dreamed a dream in time gone by, Les Miserables was worth reviewing

  1. Aww! We’re in true disagreement Justin. I absolutely LOVED the film. Cinematography was at its zenith–shaky but still very meaningful; acting was superb. I actually thought the comic relief (present in the acclaimed musical too) was necessary, because isn’t 2.5 hours of depression just plainly boring? Also, I thought Russell Crowe’s singing could have improved. Otherwise, no better way I can think of in translating a great musical to the screen.

    I may be a bit biased because Les Misérables is my favorite musical, but that goes for so many people.

  2. Ha!!! I love your reviews they keep my laughing. I’m so scared to see this one because of all the singing, musicals can make me feel liking I’m watching crazy people on screen. Maybe that means I haven’t seen enough musicals in my life. Oh man I just not sure about this one!!!!!

  3. Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables is one of the towering literary achievements of all time. That it has been reduced to a movie musical is a shame. I refuse to watch this.

  4. Ha! This review just confirmed I need to buy 2 tickets to a “Phantom of the Opera” in NYC. That’s one musical I just love! 😉

  5. haha… i see someone already mentioned phantom of the opera… that’s the only musical i ever liked because to me it’s the only one that made sense for people to sing in… and I was surprised that Gerard Butler could sing so well…

  6. I still have to see this! Hopefully this weekend. I’m happy to hear that you appreciated Samantha Barks because she was part of the cast in the 25th anniversary Les Miserables in Concert. She has a beautiful voice and nails the role of Eponine.

  7. I have nominated you for the Blog of the Year 2012 award. You can check it out here: http://klling.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/blog-of-the-year-2012/


  8. Are you saying that “Les Miserables” was a “miserable” film?

  9. While I strongly disagree, good review. There is a 1998 version that has Liam Neeson and Geoffrey Rush that has no singing whatsoever. You might like that one more

    • I saw a copy of the dvd recently, but decided not to buy it. I didn’t know it was song-free. Maybe I’ll check it out.

      I actually liked the singing. It gave it a dreamy effect. The innkeepers had a “oh wait. We’re supposed to be singing” attitude that ruined it though.

  10. Jackman, Hathaway, and Crowe helped give the movie a strong start, but once the supporting cast moved in (the inn keepers, Cosette, and that guy who loves her) it started dragging terribly for me. Eponine was the only saving grace. No re-watch for me.

  11. Keep in mind the early rumors had Taylor Swift instead of Eponine. Can you imagine?

  12. […] I dreamed a dream in time gone by, Les Miserables was worth reviewing (todayiwatchedamovie.wordpress.com) […]

  13. Found I loved this film quite a bit, but I agree the shaky camerawork could have been dialed back a notch or two. I also thought Samantha Barks was great, but I found most of the cast to be really good.

  14. I saw this on Christmas Day with my all-female family (because nothing says Happy Merry like Victor Hugo) and as I hadn’t started Killing Time then I hadn’t reviewed it and I’m mostly around where you are on it. A lot of my problems stem from hating the musical and feeling it’s a bloated misery fest (hence the name) with three songs repeated over….and over. It was interesting to walk into the men’s room after the film and see all these guys standing around looking shell-shocked from having been clearly dragged against there will. “I thought it was over…and then there was another song…and then they sang again…why wouldn’t Wolverine just die?” It was like a support group with urinals. But my actual thoughts are that technically, Tom Hooper did a great job. I can appreciate it as a well-made movie with I thought brilliant cinematography. Anne Hathaway’s rendition of “I Dreamed a Dream” made all previous ones seem silly. It was the best five minutes of acting from any actress this year. She deserves the Oscar that’s been pre-awarded to her. Samantha Barks was just startlingly good. I kept thinking, “who is THAT? Can she and Anne do the rest of this?” Sascha Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter were bad. So bad. Russell Crowe can sing, he’s got his own band, but his voice is not broadway and I thought he stood out. Also I kept wondering why everyone in Paris was English….but my first thought after five minutes of singing dialogue-I have to be honest-was “Hey, it’s a Mr. Rogers musical!”

  15. I thought it was worth reviewing but all the recent movies I have reviewed have been so very L-O-N-G and I have around a 2-hour attention span before I start wriggling. I loved the live show but felt the barricades – the big scene – were sort of underwhelming. Samantha Barks is amazing. But – apart from Jackman and Hathaway – I rather like the pathos Russell Crowe puts into this. Too long, overall, and probably won’t trouble my top ten list of the year! Thanks for making me smile and think and thanks for the “like”.

  16. […] is incredibly underlit, and the shots are so weirdly framed that it makes the cinematography of Les Miserables look […]

Today You Left a Comment