The BBC version of "Les Miserables", in terms of the adaptation effect, is the kind of restoration of the main context, with excellent rhythm control, exquisite picture, neat connection, qualified performance and other technical problems above the standard, but if you look closely, only emotional scenes and The relevant characters are remarkable, and the rest are either lackluster or nonsense or bad fun adaptations of famous novels. The ashes of the original work, the powder of Javert, the powder of barricades, and the fans of history, looking at this may be PTSD, the evaluation is negative at light, and the main creator is hoped to be ashes - this is still revealed when the propaganda period of the main film is not considered. In the case of the love of vulgar taste and the self-confidence of the self-proclaimed "We Bibi Xi Da Bei is the most restored" to the musical.
I've scolded so much, it doesn't mean that this one can't be watched. After all, if the reference is the 4 movies (35 US version, 52 US version, 78 UK version, 98 UK version) made by the UK and the US in the past, this mini-series can be regarded as The English Great Tragic Film and Television sighed. Moreover, compared with the 34 French version, the 62 Italian version, and the 82 French version, which were filmed in the context of the original work, even if the technicality of the soundtracks for the photo performances listed in the listed films is improved to the level of 2018, the BBC version is still the worst. The boring and popular version. The several versions listed, taking advantage of the original work, can't avoid the complicated problems of the original work. I want to say everything, but in the end, there is no point. Therefore, in addition to the original book, the best comparison object for the BBC version is the 2000 French mini-series - a version that has not concealed the director's personal taste, or even bad taste, in addition to a drastic adaptation.
As for why I still love the French version of 00, but insist that the shortcomings of the BBC version are far greater than the highlights, I can wait for the 00 version I wrote to watch it (yes, I haven't written it yet...).
As I have said before, the highlight of this adaptation is the emotional drama, including love and family. And love scenes are the shortcoming of Hugo's novels. His old man held the banner of romanticism to write about martyrdom. Since Te was rescued, he was just an image of a rag doll with a blurry face and a dress up. There is a father in the front and a husband in the back, and the characters do not see any subjective initiative. The adaptation of this part has at least made Cosette a little bit more flesh and blood without breaking away from the framework of the original work, but without using too much force - the 98 version of Cosette is a rebellious girl with a love-brain, looking at the desire to fight she. This Cosette is still in love on the Marius issue, at least this adaptation is a highlight when listening to Thenardier cheating money with Marius at the end. At least to say, within the limited space, the paragraphs that let the young couple go to their father become smoother. You must know that the reasons for the estrangement between Cosette and Jean Valjean at the end of the original book are very complicated, and all three of Jean Mace need to be responsible for this. It's hard for the film version to be so comprehensive.
However, oversimplification is a double-edged sword. This version of the adaptation did not completely get rid of the problem that the first four British and American adaptations were crazy about family fun. That's right, in these four versions, none of the versions of Jean Valjean was dead at the end of the play, and they even gave the ending or strong hint of his daughter and son-in-law's hot kangtou. If you look at it from this perspective, the BBC version is likely to inherit this problem. It stuffs cookies in various places, which can be said to be a kind of routine of fan script. It doesn't mean it's impossible to stuff cookies all over the miserable world, but it always feels weird, especially when the story is already full of coincidences. So we see in-laws meet (Fantine and Marius Papa on the streets of Paris), father and son meet (Marius and Son), mother and daughter accompany (Fantine's hair doll and Cosette), and finally a dutiful daughter Cosette.
The direction of this adaptation can be summed up as high and low, and finally forcibly put things right in order to stop the family. Finally, I don’t forget to use the two stray orphans who are obviously not Gavroche’s brothers. The final scene, the straightforward criticism of the hypocritical property class, I am afraid no version dares to shoot).
Before the official approval, I have to praise the success of the Mariuste line and the Fantine line. Well, their scenes were basically filmed according to the book, and they even gave a considerable amount of space, so they were successful. Lily Collins' Fantine is probably the most sickly looking Fantine. Because of the success of these two lines and the fact that this version of the plot line fits the original work, the overall effect of the first two or even three episodes is not bad.
Just the overall effect is good. If you want to talk about the shaping of a single character, especially the magical deviation of the character in the last three episodes, then there is something to say.
Javert and Grantaire's adaptation is the scene of a car accident. The former uses a character who fell from the sky and walks the original plot, jumping off from time to time; the latter is reincarnated as Zhu Bajie R, referred to as Zhu R, with the color heart of Marshal Tianpeng and the ability of pig teammates. The main creator may have heard that they are part of the popular Xipi in the circle, so they chose to highlight their gay attributes.
Let's talk about Javert. For the original Javert, his story line goes like this: People are either black or white, the law is my belief → Jean Valjean tramples on my belief again and again → Jean Valjean is grey, I The belief is flawed → the gray Jean Valjean wants to live, the gray myself cannot live. That's right, Javert, a gluten in the original book, finally committed suicide because he lost his way in the double standard. Oh, by the way, Jean Valjean and Javert are mirror images of each other, and he also starved himself to death because of the double standard of being strict with himself and being lenient (the last time I saw the irresponsible way of dying by heartbreak) Still Padmé from Star Wars prequels, so please don't take Jean Valjean literally to death).
As for the BBC Shark, it is set by the sky and people - adhering to "Jan Valjean is a villain is my belief", law and work are floating clouds. First, he was forced to introduce himself in prison to be out of the mud and not stained (Ran: What are you doing in Versailles?), then when the MSM businessman Ma Di was mistaken for Ran, he resigned to the mayor, and finally made a fool of himself. Jean Valjean was the leader of the uprising. In addition, this person's work attitude is extremely problematic, and he believes that everything is the fault of Jean Valjean. He can be the leader of the Thenardier gang, and he can also be the mastermind behind the mob troubles. It was stated that he wanted to take to the streets to maintain law and order, and he rushed to the barricade on the grounds that "Jean Valjean must be there".
In the original work, a man like Javert who thought that he would be fired for falsely accusing his boss, and that he would jump into a river when his belief collapsed, became generous in the play and put on the "Best Thief Hunter" medal issued by the Paris police station, knowing that bread The thief Jean Valjean is still at large, the hypocrite who first receives the reward and then arrests. In the end, Javert looked at Jean Valjean, who was holding Marius at the mouth of the sewer, with a shocked expression, as if he couldn't believe that the object was cheating, and the plot of refusing his loyal subordinate to tidy his collar for him looked like a four-cornered love plot. There was no trace of Javert's belief that Javert had collapsed and was distraught. Even if he was sobbing at the end, after finishing his appearance and jumping into the river, it seemed like he deserved it - this scum-like ability to work as a policeman, the ghost knows how many people he has framed, it's better to die.
The BBC version of the dialogue between Javert and his subordinates actually summed up the psychological activities of the suicide passage in the book very accurately. However, compared to reciting Javert's letter to improve the level of prison management by narration, the final act of jumping into the river did not show the only way The 82 French version of the hat and cane that fell on the bridge rail, but the BBC version is more boring. Writing novels cannot rely on reasoning, but must be expressed from the side, especially in film and television. In addition to reading the letter, the BBC version made a superfluous summary of the most direct and short thoughts, but no matter how good the performance is, it can’t be pointed. Into gold. Even look at the practice of musicals. When the lines are reasoned, they use a lot of side descriptions, plus metaphors, confrontations, music and other forms of expression, but they can better convey thoughts and emotions. I would like to recommend the 00 version of Javert's suicide. Without considering the emotional bonus caused by the preference for Javert in front of this version, the few minutes from writing the letter at the post to disappearing into the water is also the most artistic and expressive. Strong version. If you're adapting, adapt to ideas, don't waste film.
As for Pig R, since ABC's first appearance, he said that he wants to share his wife (grass) with Marius. You say that the R in the original book is either nihilism or defeatism. After watching the BBC version, you will definitely think that this person was drinking too much and dancing at the barricade. He slept by himself, and in the end, in sleepwalking, he decided to engage with Enjolras and be shot to death... Otherwise, it would be impossible to explain that this pig R, who seemed to have no sympathy for the uprising and Enjolras, would run to give away the head.
In fact, it is Gavroche who has been changed beyond recognition. The original book was so disgusted by his parents' livelihood that little G, who ran away from home, became a little thief who went home to watch the ancestors lead the sheep after the incident in the old house. It's not that Little G isn't a little thief -- in the original book, he didn't mind taking the money from Parnas Hill and donating it to Uncle Mabeuf, because he knew that Parnas Hill wasn't worthy of the reformed money that Jean Valjean gave -- If something goes wrong while begging and running errands, the wild children on the street cannot survive. This little G obviously did not get the enlightenment ideas of Rousseau and Voltaire from the students, nor did he know what the Great Revolution was a few decades ago. Instead, he had an epiphany on the rough plaster statue of the Enlightenment thinker on the street. As for what he had an epiphany, we don't know. Because he arrived at the barricade, Xiao G just wanted to play, but he accidentally killed himself. Like Pig R, this version of Little G has nothing to do with his actions before and after, and forcibly died for the sake of the plot.
The shaping of this version of Jean Valjean is basically up to standard. As the protagonist, his inconsistencies are no less than the above three, but because most of them can be said to be the fault of Javert, who is too obsessed with him, it seems logically reasonable.
I can't accept that this adaptation simply assumes that Javert is infatuated with Jean Valjean and then deduces his follow-up behavior, but it is acceptable to assume that Jean Valjean has emotional control problems, and then deduce the way of character. In the bishop's redemption line in the book, it is stated many times that Jean Valjean is a violent person - which is reflected in his repeated description of him in the yellow passport - but judging from his various actions, he Not such a person. He considered smashing the bishop to death, but he didn't do it, and he didn't want to mix with other prisoners in prison. Instead, he often climbed the wall with his bare hands to see the scenery. As for Jean Valjean being an impulsive person, it can be inferred from the original work. This person is likely to do things without thinking - escape from prison many times, steal silver cutlery, enter the room at MSM in the middle of the night to give money, slap a soldering iron on his arm to show that he is at home, starve himself to death, etc... Therefore, Toulon In the play, it makes sense for the prison guards to smash stones and then run to save them. As for the boy who robbed the chimney, it seems unacceptable at first glance, but combined with this Ran's schizophrenia... For example, after he was forgiven by the bishop, he was still shaking his fist. It can be considered that he was indeed in conflict at this time, but not The kind that is immersed in its own world in the original book.
MSM town showed that Jean Valjean's in-depth detection method was a bit too much, and it looked more like a social fear. The magical Ran Fang line is the director's bad taste. In the past, there was Ran Fang flirting with eyes in the factory. In the past, Ran Valjean fired her directly when she knew that Fantine had children. In the back, she found her conscience and took her home. The way of expressing her arrogance, and finally Fantine was dying. He hugged Fantine too closely, which caused Javert to overturn the vinegar jar, which was so bloody and unnecessary.
In addition, there is a problem that appears many times in the episode, that is, the long reasoning mentioned above, which is rarely shown in the side, which leads to whether it is a detailed list or a conclusion, because of the lack of side description, it makes people listen to it. Left ear in right ear out. Due to the limited space of film and television dramas, every line must be 100% useful. Once there is a problem with expressiveness, it will easily become background sound. The first time I made this mistake was a discussion between the bishop and Jean Valjean about whether kindness and love can change a person. The second time was when Jean Valjean forced Cosette to see the convict and brainwashed her. The third time is Javert explaining to his subordinates why he collapsed.
Some silly details also make people look uncomfortable. Little G sent a letter to Jean Valjean for Marius and said directly to him, "Comrade, a lot of people died there." How could Jean Valjean, who lived in a big mansion, become a comrade? Barricade victims were haphazardly piled in the corners. Marius was sent back to his grandfather's house and laid directly on the steps. Enjolras looks at what looks like Guy Fawkes and sees what he says - we just need to light the dynamite keg now and this Paris will be drowned in flames - but people just want To blow up the British Parliament, isn't it about blowing up Huayuankou?
There are so many bad fun stalks like shit and YY: Pig R's communist and communist wife fantasy. Penny seduces the pony. Ran Fang's blood. The female clothing store owner's suggestion to Jean Valjean as a ghost father. Grandpa Pony's grandchildren rob women fantasy. Pony's Spring Dream. The X party attended by the three teachers and nine streams. The pee scene where Efantine and the other two female workers and the scumbag trio go out to play.
Among the above items, except for the first 4 items, the latter ones are completely logical and reasonable, but when you put so many things of the next three ways into the script, you can only draw a conclusion that the director, as a director, has not broken away from the low-level. Funny people are completely unprofessional. Therefore, we can only draw a conclusion that the director is a wretched man.
Here I want to talk about why the scene of the ghost father should exist, but it should be completely changed. In the original novel, Jean Valjean's feelings for Cosette are very complicated - the old bachelor who never loved poured all the feelings including love and family into his adopted daughter. Accidentally seeing a change of clothes is a perfectly reasonable plot of "I have a girl growing up in my family", and it can be a perfect transition to the plot where Jean Valjean gets jealous after seeing Marius the nympho in the park and takes Cosette away . As a result, changing clothes was not enough, and the creepy plot of breaking into the boudoir in the middle of the night and claiming to take Cosette to watch the sunrise and hug her to kiss her hair... What's more, he actually took Cora to see the hard labor. committed. It doesn't make sense at all! It's just a nonsense insertion!
I can quite understand the reasons why passersby give high marks. After all, the 6-episode film is very complete, the plot basically follows the book, the rhythm is good, the miserable people are still miserable, and there are a lot of cookies. But take a closer look, this must be taken by the British to insult the law! The French haven't photographed the great sadness of the original book for almost 20 years. As long as I photograph something that looks like it, I can get the "I know Les Miserables best" gold award. Bibixi still knows how to be on the cusp of guiding public opinion.
View more about Les Misérables reviews
