1.
Sara was stunned. Without another word, she turned and left.
2.
Richard was so awesome. He plunged to his death.
3.
Mikey ate a delicious apple. He held the core in his hand.
2.
Richard was so awesome. He plunged to his death.
3.
Mikey ate a delicious apple. He held the core in his hand.
Have you figured them out? There are three stories right there, concerning different characters. However, something is missing.
Every story needs a clear beginning, middle, and end, or else I'm afraid it just doesn't make much sense. There are methods to leaving them out temporarily over the course of the story, because those things build up suspense, or produce a hook for your audience. Story 1 lacks a beginning. Why was Sara so stunned and what was it that made her walk away from the situation? Story 2 lacks a middle. Why did Richard die? He was awesome! This shouldn't be! Story 3 lacks an end. What happened to the apple core? Here is how they should have read:
Now let's take a look at Les Miserables. The story was originally written by Victor Hugo. The book is massive. Like, seriously, it gives the bible a run for its money. It is broken down into sections. One section for Jean Valjean's life in prison and shortly thereafter until the Priest gives him the silver, then another section for Fantine, then a section for the revolution, then a section to finish up the story.
Looking at the story, in terms of the sections, there is a clear beginning, middle and end. The beginning is when Valjean leaves prison and his backstory is revealed. The middle is when he becomes a changed man, and adopts Cosette, and the end is when he dies and Cosette gets married. Simple enough right? Leaves plenty of room for detail and character and greatness.
Not with the musical, though. It is three hours long, and still doesn't feel like a complete story is told. The first problem, and I have this with alot of musicals, is that trying to time a character arc with the beat of music is very tricky. Trying to time falling in love to the beat of music is even harder. Trying to fit all of that into a play that has a billion other stories to tell is impossible, and Les Mis the musical does not shine from the rest. Just needed to get that out of the way for the REAL problem.
Les Mis the musical is a very abridged version of the novel. This wouldn't be a problem if the adaptation had a focal point, a piece of the story to make the main focus, but it simply doesn't. It tries to fit just about everything from the novel into the musical, and ends up taking away from them all. For instance, near the beginning, Valjean steals some silver from a kind Priest. When he is about to be arrested, the Priest comes to his aid and says, "Valjean! You forgot these pricey candlesticks I gave you, along with the other silver!" This dude lies for Valjean, hoping earnestly that Valjean will make a change in his life for good. It is an entire story on its own, and a good one to boot, however, the musical treats it as merely part of the introduction to Valjean, leaving out the rising and falling action. It just sweeps from one event to another.
Basically, by the end of the first Act, you've been treated to 90 minutes of introduction. All of the characters have been introduced (some killed, before we even had a chance to care about them.) and it looks like things are about to steady out into a story. Then maybe after an hour, we'll get a sweet climax, and then another 20 minutes to tidy things up and leave everyone with a tear in their eye.
Nope.
When the curtain raises, the revolution has begun and is over-with in 30 minutes. Several people die (again, nobody cares because we can hardly remember their names) and then it just coasts for the last hour. There is no middle. The beginning blends right into the end. More specifically, the beginning goes until the intermission, then the end starts. Where is the rising action? Where is the building tension caused by a central conflict? By abridging the story and trying to make Jean Valjean the main focus, you end up with the entire story, and only 3 hours to tell it. Pick any incident from the novel, and you have a complete story. Pick the ENTIRE NOVEL, and you have too many stories to tell to make a coherent identifiable plot.
So that is my major gripe with Les Mis. I'm not saying it is bad, I'm not saying that the production I saw was in any way less than great. I'm just saying that the adaptation is fundamentally flawed at its very core.
A few minor gripes:
Singing the entire thing was a poor choice because no one can interpret lyrics perfectly the first time they are heard (Those that are classically trained to listen for vowel sounds and such do it better, still, no one is perfect). Everyone misses a line here and there. So when they try to condense so much plot into 3 hours, EVERY SINGLE LINE IS IMPORTANT TO THE STORY! And we only catch about 75% of what is sung, therefore, we miss a good portion of what is going on. This would not happen if some of it was spoken. This is not a problem if you buy the CD and listen to it 20 times. However, if you paid 20 bucks to see it live having never really heard the music, you really miss out.
Some songs are completely masturbatory. That is, they only exist to make the actors/writers feel better about themselves. Master of the House contributes to the plot in no way. Just prior to the song, we are introduced to the Thenardiers, some scum-bag tavern-owners that treat Cosette like a slave girl. Hearing them sing about ripping off customers and doing whatnot with the local prostitutes is time better spent informing the audience just what Eponine sees in Marius since WE ALREADY KNOW THEY ARE SCUM BAG TAVERN OWNERS!
Many of the songs put a grinding halt to the plot. Master of the House is a particular offender, but a good portion of the other songs are just there to describe something that could be furthering character development.
Valjean's character arc is over in the first 30 minutes, culminating as a result of his choices and experiences with himself becoming a successful businessman and Mayor, a true success story... Oh wait, now he's going to raise a daughter, now he's going to be in the military... now he's going to run from Javert... where is this going? Oh yeah! He dies. For a story about him, you'd think his character development would be spaced out a bit, eh? (Note: May be a flaw in the source material. I don't know. I never read the entire book.)
As far as things I liked, Valjean having super powers was a cool plot-twist. No one lived past 30 in early 19th century France, yet Valjean lives to nearly 60? Suspicious. And this crate thing (Wagon I guess in the original story) that he lifts off of a man in the street? Heavy verification. Though, whenever I direct Les Mis, that is, reimagine it, he will lift a water-tower off the dude, breathe life into him from 6 feet away and fly off into the sunset.
Les Miserables is a great story. However, it is my opinion that its current adaption to musical theater is flawed as a form of conveying the story. The music is just fine, and if you like that aspect, awesome, I like the music too. Just don't call it a masterpiece in terms of storytelling.
Every story needs a clear beginning, middle, and end, or else I'm afraid it just doesn't make much sense. There are methods to leaving them out temporarily over the course of the story, because those things build up suspense, or produce a hook for your audience. Story 1 lacks a beginning. Why was Sara so stunned and what was it that made her walk away from the situation? Story 2 lacks a middle. Why did Richard die? He was awesome! This shouldn't be! Story 3 lacks an end. What happened to the apple core? Here is how they should have read:
1.
Jim slapped Sara across the face. Sara was stunned. Without another word, she turned and left.
2.
Richard was so awesome. He felt like bungee-jumping, but his bungee snapped! He plunged to his death.
3.
Mikey ate a delicious apple. He held the core in his hand. Later, he fed a delicate dove with the leftovers.
2.
Richard was so awesome. He felt like bungee-jumping, but his bungee snapped! He plunged to his death.
3.
Mikey ate a delicious apple. He held the core in his hand. Later, he fed a delicate dove with the leftovers.
Now let's take a look at Les Miserables. The story was originally written by Victor Hugo. The book is massive. Like, seriously, it gives the bible a run for its money. It is broken down into sections. One section for Jean Valjean's life in prison and shortly thereafter until the Priest gives him the silver, then another section for Fantine, then a section for the revolution, then a section to finish up the story.
Looking at the story, in terms of the sections, there is a clear beginning, middle and end. The beginning is when Valjean leaves prison and his backstory is revealed. The middle is when he becomes a changed man, and adopts Cosette, and the end is when he dies and Cosette gets married. Simple enough right? Leaves plenty of room for detail and character and greatness.
Not with the musical, though. It is three hours long, and still doesn't feel like a complete story is told. The first problem, and I have this with alot of musicals, is that trying to time a character arc with the beat of music is very tricky. Trying to time falling in love to the beat of music is even harder. Trying to fit all of that into a play that has a billion other stories to tell is impossible, and Les Mis the musical does not shine from the rest. Just needed to get that out of the way for the REAL problem.
Les Mis the musical is a very abridged version of the novel. This wouldn't be a problem if the adaptation had a focal point, a piece of the story to make the main focus, but it simply doesn't. It tries to fit just about everything from the novel into the musical, and ends up taking away from them all. For instance, near the beginning, Valjean steals some silver from a kind Priest. When he is about to be arrested, the Priest comes to his aid and says, "Valjean! You forgot these pricey candlesticks I gave you, along with the other silver!" This dude lies for Valjean, hoping earnestly that Valjean will make a change in his life for good. It is an entire story on its own, and a good one to boot, however, the musical treats it as merely part of the introduction to Valjean, leaving out the rising and falling action. It just sweeps from one event to another.
Basically, by the end of the first Act, you've been treated to 90 minutes of introduction. All of the characters have been introduced (some killed, before we even had a chance to care about them.) and it looks like things are about to steady out into a story. Then maybe after an hour, we'll get a sweet climax, and then another 20 minutes to tidy things up and leave everyone with a tear in their eye.
Nope.
When the curtain raises, the revolution has begun and is over-with in 30 minutes. Several people die (again, nobody cares because we can hardly remember their names) and then it just coasts for the last hour. There is no middle. The beginning blends right into the end. More specifically, the beginning goes until the intermission, then the end starts. Where is the rising action? Where is the building tension caused by a central conflict? By abridging the story and trying to make Jean Valjean the main focus, you end up with the entire story, and only 3 hours to tell it. Pick any incident from the novel, and you have a complete story. Pick the ENTIRE NOVEL, and you have too many stories to tell to make a coherent identifiable plot.
So that is my major gripe with Les Mis. I'm not saying it is bad, I'm not saying that the production I saw was in any way less than great. I'm just saying that the adaptation is fundamentally flawed at its very core.
A few minor gripes:
Singing the entire thing was a poor choice because no one can interpret lyrics perfectly the first time they are heard (Those that are classically trained to listen for vowel sounds and such do it better, still, no one is perfect). Everyone misses a line here and there. So when they try to condense so much plot into 3 hours, EVERY SINGLE LINE IS IMPORTANT TO THE STORY! And we only catch about 75% of what is sung, therefore, we miss a good portion of what is going on. This would not happen if some of it was spoken. This is not a problem if you buy the CD and listen to it 20 times. However, if you paid 20 bucks to see it live having never really heard the music, you really miss out.
Some songs are completely masturbatory. That is, they only exist to make the actors/writers feel better about themselves. Master of the House contributes to the plot in no way. Just prior to the song, we are introduced to the Thenardiers, some scum-bag tavern-owners that treat Cosette like a slave girl. Hearing them sing about ripping off customers and doing whatnot with the local prostitutes is time better spent informing the audience just what Eponine sees in Marius since WE ALREADY KNOW THEY ARE SCUM BAG TAVERN OWNERS!
Many of the songs put a grinding halt to the plot. Master of the House is a particular offender, but a good portion of the other songs are just there to describe something that could be furthering character development.
Valjean's character arc is over in the first 30 minutes, culminating as a result of his choices and experiences with himself becoming a successful businessman and Mayor, a true success story... Oh wait, now he's going to raise a daughter, now he's going to be in the military... now he's going to run from Javert... where is this going? Oh yeah! He dies. For a story about him, you'd think his character development would be spaced out a bit, eh? (Note: May be a flaw in the source material. I don't know. I never read the entire book.)
As far as things I liked, Valjean having super powers was a cool plot-twist. No one lived past 30 in early 19th century France, yet Valjean lives to nearly 60? Suspicious. And this crate thing (Wagon I guess in the original story) that he lifts off of a man in the street? Heavy verification. Though, whenever I direct Les Mis, that is, reimagine it, he will lift a water-tower off the dude, breathe life into him from 6 feet away and fly off into the sunset.
Les Miserables is a great story. However, it is my opinion that its current adaption to musical theater is flawed as a form of conveying the story. The music is just fine, and if you like that aspect, awesome, I like the music too. Just don't call it a masterpiece in terms of storytelling.
2 comments:
"Though, whenever I direct Les Mis, that is, reimagine it, he will lift a water-tower off the dude, breathe life into him from 6 feet away and fly off into the sunset."
I'd totally love to see your re-write of the story in big_boss fashion. I would be laughing for hours as I usually do. Sprinkle a few Steven Lynchesque songs around purely for masterbatory effects and I think you will have discovered a hidden talent.
I will definitely see your production of Les Mis. I can tell that you have some issues with the musical, but I still suggest seeing it at the Tuacahn Amphitheater in St. George someday. I gather that you have family here, so if you end up here for some crazy reason and want to see a play that you take issue with (for some reason?) you should check it out.
Post a Comment