Archive for Musicals.Net Musicals.Net |
| Sweeney Hyde |
I'm sorry, but I find this to be an absolutely horrible idea. No kidding they're in France so they would be speaking French! It's called suspension of disbelief. |
||||||
| PqA |
Well, what I can think of with Who Am I would be rather like what they did in Epiphany in the Sweeney movie. How he's in his shop, and sort of steps past the corner of the wall into the street. Valjean could be pacing in front of his fireplace, and step out into the court room. Maybe? All I hope is that they don't dumb it down even more. Or cut things. Someone already said this, but I'd love to see something like the CSR+ the well scene. |
||||||
| Jemibub |
Almost every topic I read on IMDB, that has to do with a movie that takes place in a foreign county, has a title like "Why aren't they speaking in *insert language of country*" Clearly, not everyone knows the suspension of disbelief. The above suggestion could possibly quiet those who start topics like that. Though, probably not, knowing the average moviegoer lol. |
||||||
| Sweeney Hyde |
|
||||||
| Disney-Bway27 |
I love you. |
||||||
| Oli-Ol |
Brilliant idea. Why don't directors think like we do?  
|
||||||
| Brigantine |
Re: Les Mis, the movie - confirmed by Schoenberg
How the hell am I gonna get to Paris then??? |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
As far as casting, the real question on everybody's mind should be... who's going to play Vampire Michael Crawford? | ||||||
| CabaretGirl |
Mmm... Starring MICHAEL CRAWFORD as Vampire Michael Crawford |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
Haha, that's actually a very good idea. 
But personally, I wouldnt' mind seeing Mandy Patinkin as Vampire Michael Crawford either. |
||||||
| Vice |
It was done very well with German in Valkrie. If done right, it would work. |
||||||
| OldDeuteronomy |
(crosses fingers TIGHTLY that John Cameron's orchestrations are used for this | ||||||
| Quique |
Don't even get me started. |
||||||
| Disney-Bway27 |
Good show. I like the fancy lettering. |
||||||
| What you own |
I fell of my chair laughing! Monsier D'Arque I hate you for always makeing me laugh so hard that I fall out of my chair and hit my head.
|
||||||
| Kragey |
That made me laugh WAY too hard. I gotta give Crawford his props, though: when I heard Hello Dolly songs opening up Wall-E, my love for that movie damn near tripled, and it reminded me that Michael Crawford was one of the things I really loved about that musical. |
||||||
| bigR |
Does anyone with a Pro-imdb account know if there's been any developements? | ||||||
| GungaDin |
God, I hope Valjean goes to Johnny Depp and Javert is either Pierce Brosnan or Matthew Broderick. | ||||||
| Mademoiselle Lanoire |
Matthew Broderick? 
You are joking, right? |
||||||
| chanteuse |
If Matthew Broderick were younger, I think he'd be a good Joly.
|
||||||
| music is my life!!! |
open auditions in uk..... *fingers crossed*
!!! (look, i know i'd be too young for fantine, but there's still hope for ensemble and eppy!  ) actually, i think i'll focus on my studies this year, and on the school version auditions in May (although I get back from a wedding that morning :/)
|
||||||
| Mistress |
If he mentioned Brosnan, it HAS to be a joke...would you really give Javert to a guy who sounds like a dying wildebeast when he sings? I know he's too old, but Hugh Jackman could be an interesting Enjolras...I mean he's got the charisma and singing chops for it...no? |
||||||
| GungaDin |
Actually, Jackman would be great for Javert. He'd be too dynamic and movie-starish for Valjean. But he should do CAROUSEL first before LES MIZ.
Or Hugh for Valjean and Javier Bardem for Javert. But I hear that Bardem sings too beautifully -- not butch enough. |
||||||
| SmallTownIngenue |
I would love to see Kevin Kline as Javert. | ||||||
| GungaDin |
[quote="SmallTownIngenue"]I would love to see Kevin Kline as Javert.[/quote]
Ehhhh. Not really a global box office name. I say Jackie Chan. He could handle the suicide scene very adroitly. OK, Jackman as Valjean and Liev Schrieber as Javert!! (I think they're antagonists in the new Wolverine movie!!) |
||||||
| Mistress |
Bardem sings? That's great, even he doesn't have the right voice, because he certainly looks the part for Javert. You know...I might be with you on the Jackie Chan bit, if it weren't for his thick accent and if could sing in the right range (as far as I know, he's only tenor, but somebody please clarify)...not to be racist, but remember Antonio Banderas doing POTO? |
||||||
| SmallTownIngenue |
I would take an Oscar-winner and renowned actor over a "global box office name" anyday. |
||||||
| GungaDin |
[quote="SmallTownIngenue"][quote="GungaDin"][quote="SmallTownIngenue"]I would love to see Kevin Kline as Javert.[/quote]
Ehhhh. Not really a global box office name. I say Jackie Chan. He could handle the suicide scene very adroitly. OK, Jackman as Valjean and Liev Schrieber as Javert!! (I think they're antagonists in the new Wolverine movie!!)[/quote] I would take an Oscar-winner and renowned actor over a "global box office name" anyday.[/quote] Yeah, you would...but sweetie, you're NOT the one financing the major project. And in this tight global CREDIT squeeze, the producers HAVE to see a return on their investment. |
||||||
| lesmisloony |
Play nice.
Also, I've long wanted Bardem to be Javert in any film. Or musical. Or... a homemade movie on youtube. I don't care. It just needs to happen. |
||||||
| The Very Angry Woman |
Jackman was offered Javert, but turned it down to concentrate on film work. (Then he ended up in Oklahoma!.) |
||||||
| GungaDin |
[quote="The Very Angry Woman"][quote="GungaDin"]Actually, Jackman would be great for Javert. He'd be too dynamic and movie-starish for Valjean. But he should do CAROUSEL first before LES MIZ.[/quote]
Jackman was offered Javert, but turned it down to concentrate on film work. (Then he ended up in Oklahoma!.)[/quote] But I'm talking LES MIZ film work here -- NOT stage. |
||||||
| Forest |
Hi! I figured that now, on this thread, is as good a time and place as any to introduce myself as I couldn't see an introductions board. Course, I am in need of a trip to the opticians, so if I've missed it, I apologise! I'm from the UK, just finishing up my degree, and recently have got into Les Mis..again. (I tend to do this. I see a show and like it. Then I forget it exists for years, until stumbling upon it again and then having it actually take root).
This news has given me a lot of food for thought, and my gut tells me that this is going to be quite a rambling, stream-of-consciousness post, so if you're planning on reading it, I advise a bucket of tea Also, I'm not snarking at anyone in the post, just to note, so I apologise if it sounds as if I am. I don't actually know yet what I'm going to end up writing, but as I say, it will be stream of consciousness-y.
*sips tea* Right. Whilst I do think a filming of the stage show would be amazing and ultimately, to me at least, preferable, I'm really fascinated by how they're going to translate it to the screen as a movie. Now, I don't know if it makes me awkward or not, but I tend to alternate between how I get into fandoms. Sometimes I start at the source, but quite a lot of the time, it ends up being an adaptation of the original text that will hook me. Phantom, I got into because of Schumacher's film, and have since seen the show...read the book...yadayadayahtzee...and loved it all the more for it. But just because there are those that will explore the fandom further than others, does that mean that the latter ought to be condemned for not doing so? Time and time again I've heard the "original fans" snarl at the newbies because they're only into XYZ fandom because of the movie, which I always think is unfair. After seeing an adapation, I think there are a couple of ways things tend to go with newbies. 1 - If the adapatation is largely faithful to the original, they are more likely to stick just loving the adaptation. This is fine in its own right as they can still appreciate the fandom without missing out any major points in the plot etc, and also still actively contribute to the community. Having said that, there is no reason why these fans shouldn't read the source material too. I'm not saying there's nothing to gain from reading the source of a faithful adaptation - only that it's less likely to happen, and also often less crucial. 2 - If the adaptation is unfaithful, the newbies might just take it as "their version of the story". Whilst this can be very frustrating for fans who know that the original is far more well-rounded and satisfying, just remember that all the newbies are doing are depriving themselves by not attempting to get to know the original story. If they did so, they would learn far more about the story which would make them more of an asset to the community, and just in general doing themselves a service by getting to know the source material. 3 - Whether the adaptation is faithful or not, the newbies will get intrigued and read the source material. 4 - <insert intelligent observation here> (Yeah it really is 3:27am, isn't it? Brain's going fuzzy and blaah!) Having said all that, I don't believe it's ever possible to get a thoroughly accurate adaptation on film or stage of a book. There are always going to be stylistic presentation issues. That doesn't mean however that something can be inaccurately portrayed. Indeed, I never think there's any excuse for interpolation in general in films, stage or any adaptation. To create new scenes and characters from scratch, when the originals would have been fine, just puzzles me. But that's a whole different thread altogether, lol! Take the recent "Lord of the Rings" adaptation, for example. So many critics moaned that it "wasn't faithful" to the book. Why? Because it cut stuff out. ......I don't think those critics have every held a bound copy of the whole trilogy in their hands. I like to think of the stage adaptation of LOTR as a series of Kodak Moments which capture the most important aspects of the original text in order to tell the story, but don't leave anything out that's vitally important. With adaptation there's always going to be original fans who mourn for the loss of a favourite line of dialogue/favourite scene/favourite minor character, (I know, I do it myself scarily often...). But when you're looking at taking something as breeze-block like as Les Mis, and transforming it into a coherent, enjoyable film of the top-end average of 2.5-3 hrs, there's going to be a hell of a lot you need to cut from the source material. Then again, given that the show as it stands seems to work fine on its own as a story, I can't see Paula Wagner wanting to pick up The Brick and find nice little, interesting and meaningful scenes to add little flourishes to the film. There's no reason for her to do so. As a producer, she's already got all the material she needs in order to make a commercially successful film. She has a HUGE ready-made audience internationally, lots of whom are familiar with the show, or at least have heard of it in some respects. Even if you aren't a musical theatre fan, you may still have heard of Les Mis, just because of how iconic it seems to have become. Like Phantom, it seems to be one of The Shows That People Think Of when they think of the West End (or at least in my experience anyway). I think what existing fans now need to bear in mind that Paula Wagner is probably in this for the money. That is by no means a totally bad thing - it makes her a successful business woman. I think as long as people go along to the film to see a version of Les Mis, and are fully prepared to see its nails edited down to the quick, it will be fine. I think it's a mercy and a half that the show as it stands today, is pretty much the same length as your average film, and so, if Wagner has a good, intelligent head on those shoulders, she'll take that material, and transpose it onto screen in the best way that she can, and not change anything. There are some scenes you'd need to pad out a little to make them work on film, such as the beginnings with Valjean describing his hardships finding work after parole, the bishop etc, but it's totally do-able. I do hope though that the Powers don't what the writers did for the film of Sweeney Todd, and keep the dialogue sung. In film, that really is a hard one to pull off without it being a little jarring for the audience. Yes, they've come to watch a musical, but that doesn't mean they necessarily want to hear, "Aaand my slippers were heeeere, haaave you seen them, Bobbb?"
As far as casting Unknowns vs Hollywood stars goes...it doesn't really bother me too much. It comes down to the old argument of "if they can do the role justice, then hire them". There is nothing to really say that Tom Cruise couldn't surprise people can do amazing work with Valjean, or Javert, (or even Cosette, if you put a pretty wig on him!  ) Equally, a total unknown is just as likely to be a carcrash waiting to happen if they were to be cast in the role, so I really do think it swings in roundabouts. If they can pull off the role, then good!
Just because society's made the lives of celebrities into some kind of Peeping Tom entertainment circus, doesn't negate the fact that when you strip away the glitz and the glamour, these people are usually well trained actors and actresses, who just want to do their job well. Listen to any film actor who has been handed a role they can really get their teeth into, and the enthusiasm just radiates off them in their voice, their gestures...everything just says "Yes! Something I can work with and try by best to do justice to!" To me at least, that is an encouraging thing to remember. I'm going to stop rambling now as it's getting on for 4am. Oops. Time for sleep now I think! Night night, and lovely to be on this board. 
-Forest |
||||||
| operafantomet |
Seeing how incredibly soul-less and sub-par the Phantom movie became, I don't want the same for "Les Mis".
But on the other hand, you have movies like "Sweeney Todd", so... I dunno. Biggest beef is to find talented people for the lead roles (something Sweeney managed, while Phantom failed horribly). |
||||||
| GungaDin |
#1. welcome, Forest.
#2 - you were rambling. #3 - yeah, Hugh Jackman for Valjean; and either Liev Schreiber OR Gerard Butler for Javert -- for the film version that is. #4 - How is it going to be done? It'll all be a 'fevered dream' treatment of Fantine or of M./Mme. Thenardier, as any or all of them lay delirious on their death bed(s). #5 - I'd like Rob Marshall to direct. #6 - And of course, there will have to be a new song or 2 for the Oscar category and so everyone will have to buy a new "soundtrack" CD as well. |
||||||
| nabla |
Alan Rickman seems like such an obvious choice for Javert to me
I'd rather see Hugh Jackman as Enjolras, and maybe Ewan Mcgregor as Marius. |
||||||
| Moci |
Hugh Jackman is 40, McGregor is 37. Only if Enjolras and Marius were mature students. |
||||||
| Forest |
Actually, yes I could see Rickman as Javert. Especially going from his look as Brandon in 'Sense and Sensibility': http://yacht.zamok.net/DV/Potter/Posters/Rickman/colbrandonsm.jpg Having said that, I haven't the foggiest if he can sing. Anyone know? |
||||||
| GungaDin |
Oh, Rickman. Such a soussed face. I call him the English Harrison Ford -- with an unerasable CONSITPATED LOOK on their faces. And they call that acting??? | ||||||
| Forest |
Well, I can't speak for Harrison Ford as I've not seen many of his films, but I do think Rickman has the brooding, angsty thing going on. I do agree though that Javert does need to have a decent range of facial expressions, and needs to do a hell of a lot of eye-acting.
...I think I need to go back over and watch some of Rickman's stuff to remind myself of how he acts. Maybe he would be good for Javert, maybe he wouldn't...but I hope that whoever is given the job of casting, really takes it seriously. Ultimately, I suppose I don't really care who they cast, as long as whoever gets the role does it the justice it deserves. |
||||||
| Vanessa20 |
Slightly off topic
Maybe they could play the roles in Norway.
(No offense to anyone, but I don't get why these foreign non-CamMack productions so often cast older-looking students. That Marius in the Oslo pics is nowhere near the first one I've seen. I only hope the movie goes for age-appropriate casting with all the characters.) |
||||||
| nabla |
Well they probably wouldn't be my first choice but i can't think of many people and i'm trying to steer away from Zac Efron, lol. They look young for their age though and they can make them look younger, i mean look what they did to Brad Pitt in Benjamin Button |
||||||
| Disney-Bway27 |
Pssh, Zac Efron for Eponine. | ||||||
| GungaDin |
Effron looked like amateur-city beside the likes of Hugh Jackman. More exactly, like a deer-caught-in-the-headlights look. | ||||||
| Jagienka |
So true. I'd really like if they kept Hollywood stars far from it. Give me good singers who did t onstage. |
||||||
| lesmisloony |
Though I agree with you on that, there's still always the fear of turning it into another disaster like The Producers movie.
The thing that stresses me out about this topic is how painfully redundant it's becoming. I've seen "Alan Rickman for Javert!" and a bunch of variations on "Hugh Jackman for x!" and "Ewan McGregor for x!" so often that it's giving me a stomachache. |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
Okay. These aren't all my own particular tastes (none of them really are), but here are some NEW names to consider for the roles.
Rowan Atkinson as Thenardier Joseph Cross as Enjolras |
||||||
| mezzogeek |
That could definitely work 
|
||||||
| Forest |
Ooh, Rowan Atkinson could work well. I've heard great reports of his Fagin, so if he worked along that line and mixed in some charm, I think he could make an awesome Thenardier The other guy...I can't say I know anything about him, so I can't really comment. I do think though that Michael Maguire made a great Enjolras in TAC - very much "Rargh" and manly as a leader.
|
||||||
| Disney-Bway27 |
I cannot stand Michael Maguire. Yuck! 
|
||||||
| Jagienka |
Atkinson!Th�nardier? Not a bad idea, if he can sing, but I'd scream "MR. BEAN!" every time he'd show up and I'm sure lots of people would...
Mr. Bean is too cultic. |
||||||
| MlleTholomy�s |
While he's not that bad, I'd definitely take Warlow over him. |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
I'd personally rather see guys at most in their twenties. Warlow, great though he was, is WAY too old for a Barricade Boy now, special effects or not. | ||||||
| curlyhairedsoprano91 |
I love Michael Maguire, but I think he was somewhat miscast as Enjolras. He's definitely a baritone, and not a high baritenor, either. I can see him pulling off Javert nicely at his present age (with Warlow as Valjean? Ooh...)
But not for the movie. I like the idea of using Hugh Jackman ... I think he could possibly make a good Valjean. He's the right age for Prologue/Bishop Valjean, and aging someone on screen is not terribly hard. Generally my choice for Valjean would be Mandy Patinkin, but he might be a little old for Prologue!Valjean now. Or maybe not. I'd love to hear him sing the part, anyway. |
||||||
| LittleGavroche |
I really think it might be innovative to keep the dialogue sung. It's really never be tested on a widespread film audience before. Perhaps they might take to a sung-through musical. I find sung-through almost more accessible because there is no jarring change between dialogue and song. After the first ten minutes it seems normal that the characters are singing about mundane things, you know? I think it would be quite gutsy for the head honchos to give it a try. |
||||||
| Vice |
I'll let you know... That started lightly sarcastic on my part.
It was done fairly creatively in REPO. (Which is like... 90% singing.) |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
REPO had its spoken scenes and interludes, but, like much operetta, balanced them with full songs and recitatives more.
In the average book musical, not sung-through, recitative isn't a common choice, as it would be easier to just "have a scene." |
||||||
| Brother Marvin Hinten, S. |
Uh...you've never heard of Jesus Christ Superstar or Tommy, have you? Sure, they started off as records initially, but those are two sung-through musicals (Tommy became a book musical on stage, but is sung-through on film) that have been tested on a widespread film audience before. |
||||||
| lesmisloony |
Of course everyone's heard of those movies. You can make your point without sounding like a jerk. | ||||||
| Forest |
Amen. |
||||||
| jackrussell |
Unfortunately there is considerable public hostility to sung-through musicals on film. Phantom of the Opera was criticised for this, and it isn't even totally sung-through. So I suspect it would not go down well and they will not have the guts to try it. Hollywood producers are not known for courage anyway. In which case, rather than ruin it, better not to do it at all, in my opinion. |
||||||
| Brother Marvin Hinten, S. |
To make my point in a less jerky manner, JCS grossed something like 5 million pounds at the box office in England in '73, point being that if there is considerable public hostility toward sung-through musicals, it certainly wasn't in evidence then. | ||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
True. However, JCS was a huge cultural phenomenon in the mainstream pop cultural world. Les Mis... isn't. | ||||||
| Quique |
I saw the film version of Evita roughly 5 or 6 times at movie theatres (including the world premiere) and I will tell you now that half the theatre was either empty by the time the film was over or loud groans and sighs were heard at the start of every number.
It may not be like that the world over, but, in my experience, most people seem to find it difficult to sit through an entirely sung film musical. |
||||||
| lesmisloony |
^ Hahaha, that happened to me with Rent. I was working at the cinema at the time, and I kept having to refund tickets for people saying "Are they gonna sing the whole time?"
On a related note, I hate it when customers go to see movies without knowing anything about them. If I had a dollar for every time someone tried to get a refund to Slumdog Millionaire because they didn't know there would be violence in a movie rated R for violence I wouldn't have to go into work tonight. |
||||||
| jackrussell |
Also, many people went to see Sweeney Todd expecting a slasher flick, only to walk out in disgust when they found it was a musical. | ||||||
| Forest |
Tell me about it! I went to see that with my housemates and they wouldn't stop moaning about how they were expecting something more "Filmy". 
|
||||||
| lesmisloony |
And Sweeney Todd blatantly displayed Johnny Depp "singing" in the trailers... Rent wasn't so specific, if I recall correctly. | ||||||
| LittleGavroche |
Still, both Tommy and JCS were a generation back. This one may be accepting. It is yet to be seen. My friends (not theatre people, mind you) loved Sweeney Todd and the fact that it was almost sung-through. I honestly think some people might take to it.
And it is period after all. Unlike RENT, people find it easier to stomach period, sung-through musicals. |
||||||
| mastachen |
Sweeney Todd was almost sung through? | ||||||
| Mistress |
not so much that as people weren't expecting Johnny Depp to sing and were thown off by it (While the trailer did show Depp singing, it was for all of 30 s at most, and there was nothing else in the trailer to suggest that it was indeed a musical)... | ||||||
| Ulkis |
I'm pretty sure both the voice-over and the trailer said "the musical that defined a generation", so they weren't hiding per se. But they didn't actually show any characters singing, just 'Seasons of Love' or the finale in the background. As for Tommy, I think it's different to show that as a sung-through musical film than it would be to do Les Mis. Tommy is a giant acid trip. All the singing is part of it. Les Miserables is one solo after another. It's one thing to present solo after solo on stage. On film, it across as odd and boring. They'll end up showing endless scenes of the character walking- while-singing. |
||||||
| Forest |
[quote="Ulkis"]
That just reminded me of how Moulin Rouge was filmed, if I remember correctly. It's been SO long since I watched it, but though that wasn't advertised on the trailer as a musical, it had a ton of musical elements in it, and yet was very successful. I just remember when I was watching it, feeling like I was on some sort of high with the good ol'Green Fairy, and anything could happen on screen next, and it would make sense, because of how trippy the whole film was. |
||||||
| GungaDin |
[quote="Quique"][color=darkblue]I saw the film version of Evita roughly 5 or 6 times at movie theatres (including the world premiere) and I will tell you now that half the theatre was either empty by the time the film was over or loud groans and sighs were heard at the start of every number.
It may not be like that the world over, but, in my experience, most people seem to find it difficult to sit through an entirely sung film musical.[/color][/quote] Exactly. That's why it's NOT DONE much after that. To Little Gavroche, they are NOT going to risk $150 million (which is what I think a good-looking film version of LES MIZ would cost) on a technique which DOES NOT work on film. Experienced filmakers know the BASIC differences between film AND live stage techiques. |
||||||
| jackrussell |
There was an interesting article in yesterday's Guardian newspaper saying that the average age of the US moviegoer is 19, and in the UK it's 17. The writer argued that producers therefore target this age range and this is why most Hollywood films are so vapid. She contrasts this with television, which has to cater for a much wider demographic and so, although there is still lots of dross, there is also some more intelligent stuff.
No disrespect to the younger members of this forum, but the average teenager is not going to want to sit through 3 hours of solid music that sits somewhere between light classical and power pop. So I think GungaDin is right - it won't happen, and they will break it up with spoken dialogue. And if they do that, it will only be a pale shadow of the score we know and love. |
||||||
| Quique |
I was just pointing out my experiences with audiences, but that doesn't necessarily mean I don't want a film version made. Am I nervous about the possibility of it sucking? Of course. And sometimes I think it's just better to film the London production and air it on PBS. But if there is a good director out there that can make a decent version, then I'm all for it. |
||||||
| Colle |
So they really are holding auditions for a movie version, no joke? This looks like it might be a go then(one never knows, there has been talk about a movie for years). I don't mind who is cast as long as they are good. Also, I agree that Hugh Jackman might be a good choice as Valjean or some other role, it helps that he has experience in musical theater. | ||||||
| Mistress |
One name someone mentioned before that really piqued my interest was Liev Schreiber as Javert. I don'y know if he has the voice, but he definitely has the look for it.
And he looks awsome in sideburns :
|
||||||
| bigR |
Those are probably the annual auditions for the june cast change. |
||||||
| GungaDin |
[quote="bigR"][quote="Colle"]So they really are holding auditions for a movie version, no joke? .[/quote]
Those are probably the annual auditions for the june cast change.[/quote] It could ALSO be for supporting parts in the projected film...if it's going to be made in the UK/Europe. |
||||||
| music is my life!!! |
you'd be surprised! there are quite a few kids/teens who'd quite happily listen to the most amazing music ever, for three hours
If not, the older generations might be able to say "OK, we can't afford to go see it live - let's have a happy day out to the theatre to see it"
|
||||||
| operafantomet |
POTO wasn't criticised for being sung-through, as much as being criticised a plainly bad movie.... Cause it came off as pompous and rather soul-less, compared to the stage version. The direction really haltered, and the design was mostly candy-floss without content. I don't think it was the sung-through form that made is less successful than what it ought to be. And I really hope for something better for Les Mis, something in the alley of "Sweeney Todd" and "Chicago". |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
Tom Waits as Thenardier? | ||||||
| jackrussell |
Oh, I never doubted that. I just meant they're in a minority, that's all - compared to the number of kids/teens who are into Britney, hip hop, R&B or various other sorts of noise
|
||||||
| Jekkienumber24601 |
Despite Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper's reviews, Phantom was actually very well received by fans of the show.. Whilst Sweeney was amazingly received by critics, but fans of the show had their issues. Mine were mainly with Little Priest being humorless. |
||||||
| Mistress |
I just discovered that Robert Sean Leonard (yes I do mean Wilson from House-I nearly shit muself when I found these clips) is a good tenor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysu4x5-xU_k&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqJupTseVEc&feature=related Now I know he's 42, but his features are very youthful, and I'm sure that with the proper makeup he could pull of a good Enjolras...maybe? |
||||||
| Orestes Fasting |
I call BS. I was there in Phantom fandom for the fallout of the movie, and it caused a huge rift because of how unhappy a lot of the stage- and book-fans were with it. While with the Sweeney Todd movie, what I mostly saw was a bunch of stage fans who had issues with some aspects of the adaptation, but could recognize the movie (whether enthusiastically or grudgingly) as a work of art in its own right. |
||||||
| Moci |
And a very good ice skater it seems. You're right though, if he can pass for an 18 year old Asian American girl, then a French student shouldn't be a problem. The man is a chameleon.
|
||||||
| Mistress |
Sorry...I honestly don't know how Michelle Kwan got in there ...I swear a copied an RSL Music Man link...
This is the clip I meant to post http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9nT7faxgKk |
||||||
| bigR |
Well, he can sing, but to be a decent Enjolras you need to SING (with capital letters).
And his looks could be appropiate for a stage production, but never for a movie. There's no way he can look like a teenager on a movie screen. |
||||||
| Ulkis |
Isn't Enjolras 25? (Not that I think Robert Sean Leonard can pass for 25 either.) | ||||||
| Orestes Fasting |
Hugo says he's 22 in 1828 (but looks 17), so during the revolt four years later he'd be 26. | ||||||
| lesmisloony |
And look 21? | ||||||
| Orestes Fasting |
Probably, unless you take it as a subtle hint that Enjolras was secretly FtM trans and will therefore always look like a teenage boy. | ||||||
| GungaDin |
So...is this movie really going to happen -- even with the worldwide credit crisis?? | ||||||
| elvine |
Jackman for... anyone, reallyI'm sort of new here, though I used to visit the board quite frequently years ago. Now, I watched a lady sing I dreamed a dream on Britain's got talent the other day and it threw me back into a les mis frenzy like the one I had, like, a decade ago.Anyway... If Hugh Jackman were cast in a film version of les mis... I swear, I wouldn't know if I should have an orgasm or die. Please God let that happen! 
|
||||||
| wtfchuck |
Who would Hugh Jackman play in les mis anyway? He's not old enough to be Valjean or Javert (In my Opinion) and he is too rugged to be Marius.
Maybe an Enjloras or something. |
||||||
| Monsieur D'Arque |
I had a hilarious image in my mind last night of Jason Segel and Neil Patrick Harris as Babet and Montparnasse, in the Attack on Rue Plumet. | ||||||
| Vice |
XD LOL ... OMG, If this does happen... NPH SHOULD be in it. : DDDDDDD |
||||||
| mastachen |
Hugh Jackman is 41. I think that's the perfect age to play Javert. He can look early 30s, and with makeup can look as old as he wants. |
||||||
| Mistress |
Wait...Javert's in his early thirties in the beginning? |