Not by much, both very good. This blog is mostly a comparison of the movie to its theatrical counter-part. If you don’t want to know or care, stop reading.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/themovieblog.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/10\/LMB_Web1Sheet.jpg\")
<\/p>\nFirst of all, Anne Hathaway out-acted and out-sang Hugh Jackman who was not bad either. Amanda Seyfried, as adult Cosette, was awesome. Samantha Barks made Éponine so much alive and memorable.<\/p>\n
You expect better acting and scenes from a movie. After all, theater <\/a>is, comparatively, much limited than what a camera can do. In this regard, the movie did not disappoint. 19th century France\/Paris was realistic. The miserable was indeed. If you have never been to the musical, the movie is not a bad substitute.<\/p>\n There is a magic about live performances. I can somehow better connected with a real persons singing on the stage. The movie is not bad at all, particularly with better acting. I am very impressed by those supposedly real singing. It is not easy to be an actor these days. They can probably out-sing many on-stage performers.<\/p>\n In a strange way, Javert’s falling into the river is less dramatic than the theater, yes, even with the bone crushing. I also felt the opening scene for Thénadier was more comical and enjoyable in the theater too.<\/p>\n I highly recommend this movie, even for those who have been to the theater.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Not by much, both very good. This blog is mostly a comparison of the movie to its theatrical counter-part. If you don’t want to know or care, stop reading. First of all, Anne Hathaway out-acted and out-sang Hugh Jackman who … Continue reading