After watching it, what I want to say is: the movie version should be 4 stars or more, or even 5 stars; the TV drama version should be given 3 stars.
Regarding the movie version, please copy the book first, from page 166 of "Western Disc Chinese Disc" (English film):
This edition deletes the Thenardiers and focuses on the conflict between Agen and Javert like a laser. The film opens with Agen being taken in by a priest overnight, and the background plot of him smashing the window, stealing bread, and being convicted of doing coolies for 20 years is brought out with only one or two lines ("Between hunger and no longer hunger, there is only a gap between With a piece of glass. Everything is so easy"). Similarly, the film ends with Javert committing suicide by jumping into the river, and no longer talks about the misunderstanding of Agen and the final reunion of the Marius couple. Javert played by Rush is the most brilliant in the cast. Thurman may be the one who looks like Fantine the most among today's stars, and her inherent poignant beauty has been brought to the fullest. This film replaces the epic spirit of the original with a prose style, which is the most acceptable version for modern audiences.
I basically agree with the above evaluation. As far as the introduction to the famous works I have come across, it is said that the novel is composed of the conflict between Jean Valjean and Javert. It should be very necessary for the film adaptation to eliminate irrelevant characters and plots. When watching the movie version, the contest between Agen and Javert has always attracted me. The TV drama version has a lot of plots to explain, which weakens the appeal of the conflict. The misunderstandings and happy endings that follow also feel like they fall into cliche.
It is precisely because of the focus of the film version on the main characters that the four leading actors (Liam Neeson, Jeffrey Rush, Uma Thurman, and Claire Dennis) are all vivid and full of vibes. Ajan's perseverance and integrity, Javert's paranoid vigilance, Fantine's misery and beauty, and Cosette's innocence are all very impressive. Especially the change process of Javert's character, from a paranoid defender of the law like a falcon to a discoverer of conscience who doubts that he denies his own conscience, Rush's interpretation is very convincing. The TV series version of Markovic feels a bit blunt. And Fantine, Uma Thurman and Charlotte Gansbu all performed a sense of hardship, but Uma also performed a charming performance, which may have something to do with the personal temperament of the actors. There is also Marius. In the movie version, he is a poor student from the lower class, who is determined to overthrow the old world. In the TV drama version, he is a hidden rich "rich second generation". He wanted to withdraw, and later misunderstood Agen with Cosette. He was hesitant and unsure from beginning to end.
I really want to see what Hugo's original novel looks like, and I regret not reading the original novel earlier. Come to think of it, the TV series version should be completely faithful to the original. It focuses on showing Ajang's life of ups and downs and kindness, but this loyalty is somewhat copied. The movie version has made great cuts and adaptations of the original work, focusing on the contest between the two powers of good and evil. At the end, Javert committed suicide with guilt, and Ajan moved forward with a smile. Good finally defeated evil and saved evil. This should be The most loyal to the original author Hugo.
View more about Les Misérables reviews
