Les Misérables,The Movie: Love It or Leave It?

One of the reasons I chose to read Les Misérables this past December was because I wanted to read it before I saw the movie.  To be fair, I generally end up liking a book more than I do the movie version, mainly because a book can give you detail that a movie just cannot.  That is not to say that there aren’t some movie adaptations that I have very much enjoyed (Pride & Prejudice, The Count of Monte Cristo, and The Lord of the Rings).  However, when it comes to Les Misérables, I can honestly say that this was one of the worst adaptations I have seen in several different ways.  This probably comes as a shock because, if my Facebook news feed is any indicator, most people who saw this movie absolutely loved it.  But, before you stop reading and write me off as a literary snob who only likes the original book, hear me out.

First, there were a lot of things I liked about the movie.  I thought the movie did an excellent job of illustrating the grace/justice theme of the book.  Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe portrayed Jean Valjean and Javert, respectively, as they are in the book (despite what you may think of Russell Crowe’s singing).  Also, many of the supporting characters like Fantine, Eponine, Gavroche, Marius, and Cosette, were also true to the essence of what Hugo intended. 

The part where the movie first lost me was its treatment of sin.  When Fantine is shown selling her hair, her teeth, and eventually her body to provide for her daughter, the movie gets very strange and carnival-like.  The whole scene I felt like I was watching a half-comical Tim Burton scene.  The songs were lilty and the costumes and makeup exaggerated.  It is not until we see Fantine giving up her body to prostitution and she begins, “I Dreamed a Dream” does it all start to seem really miserable. 

Even more disappointing was the depiction of the Thénardiers.  In the book, these are wicked, evil people.  When Hugo introduces Monsieur Thénardier in the book, he is literally stealing valuables off the dead at the battle of Waterloo.  They sell two of their children because they are unwanted, and treat Cosette as if she is a dog – giving her scraps and forcing her to sleep under a table.  At the end of the book, they travel to America to become slave traders.  These are evil, evil, people.  Yet, in the movie, they are portrayed as low-level scam artists who run a brothel where most people have a pretty decent time.  Their whole musical number is upbeat and jovial.  Sure, what is going on there is unsavory and they seem to be “not very good people”, but, again, not nearly as evil as they actually are in the book.

You may be wondering what the big deal is.  You may say, “Well, they still portray the downfall of sin.”  The big deal is that they really don’t portray the downfalls of sin and who is ultimately responsible.  Yes, Jean Valjean was sentenced to prison for too long.  Yes, Fantine was pushed into prostitution because the Thénardiers were essentially blackmailing her.  However, who stole the loaf of bread?  Who had a child out of wedlock?  What the movie misses is that we  are ultimately responsible for the consequences of our own sins.  Granted, Hugo makes it clear that society’s lack of grace pushed them into further destitution, but the movie sends the message, “If you are wronged by society, you are one of The Miserables”.  This can clearly be seen in the end, when Valjean dies and is led away by Fantine to a barricade of all who have been wronged (Eponine, Gavroche, Marius’ friends, the common man, etc.) where they all sing the battle cry of a free and independent France with fists raised high. 

What?  This was the most confusing and bizarre ending to the story they could have possibly thought up.  I understand why they ended Les Misérables this way (it is adapted from the play and this musical number is a rousing way to bring back all your dead characters and keep the story from becoming too depressing), but the book ends with the only the bishop leading Jean Valjean into glory.  Why is this significant?  It is significant because they were the only two in the book that recognized the grace of God in their lives and ran the race well. 

Throughout the story, Valjean is constantly forced to choose between what is beneficial to him and what is right, and he consistently chooses the right option because he cannot help be convicted by the grace shown to him so long ago.  For the ending of the movie to be a statement about how everyone who suffers eventually overcoming and going to heaven, is, frankly, silly.   You may think I am being overly critical, but remember that Hollywood is sending you a message – “Society has wronged you.  It doesn’t matter if you sinned.  You have suffered enough in this life, so, one day, we’ll all be free in heaven, raging against ‘the man’ together and suffering no more.”

At this point you may be thinking, “Ok, I get it.  Liberal Hollywood ruined the moral of another perfectly good book.  I should still go see it because of the great music and acting, right?”  Here’s where I’m really going to ruffle some feathers. 

Believe it or not, my biggest objection to this movie was the sexuality.  A lot of you reading out there are going to think of me as a prude.  Let me start by saying that I am now speaking about my own conscience in regards to this subject.  I understand everyone doesn’t share the same opinion on this particular part of the movie, but I wanted to give you something to seriously consider.

There were some graphic depictions of sexuality in this movie.  For those of you who have not seen the movie, I will not go into detail.  Was there nudity?  No.  Was it as bad as some other movies out there?  No.  However, there was enough explicit depiction of sexual acts that, to me, should cause us to reconsider recommending this movie to others.  A common argument as to why a little bit is okay, as long as it is not the majority is this: “It is okay because it is crucial to the story”.   In this case, it is definitely not.  This is another lovely Hollywood addition.  I can hear you say, “Wait – doesn’t Fantine become a prostitute to support Cosette?”  Yes, she does, but here is how it is presented in the book:

“The poor creature became a woman of the night.” (p. 119)

Not so salacious, huh?  Why?  Because the sex is not the point.  Our world loves to make sex the point.  As for the Thénardiers – they never ran a brothel.  An inn, yes. A brothel, no.  They were swindlers and thieves, but not brothel managers. 

You may also argue that these scenes shouldn’t be enough to ruin the entire movie.  In this case, I think that they do.  We need stop and seriously think about recommending things to others that really are not edifying.  The overall message might be wonderful, but what do you have to sit through to get to that message?  Is it really worth seeing something that is dishonoring to the Lord, and, in this case, treated in such a lighthearted and silly manner?  I understand this is a fine line – we live in sinful world and there are few movies out there today that aren’t ruined by sex, violence, language, etc., but why do we try so hard to justify putting things before our eyes that dishonor the Lord and then recommend that other people do the same?  I will be the first to admit that I am growing constantly in this area.  I shouldn’t have gone to see this movie in the first place because I never checked out its content.  Had I used more discernment, I would have never seen what I saw. 

Let me be clear – am I judging everyone who saw this movie with a “holier than thou” attitude?  Absolutely not.  That would make me a hypocrite because I saw it too!  My goal is to make those of you reading think twice before recommending Les Misérables, the movie, to someone else.  You have friends and family who struggle with feeling entitled to “what they are due” because they feel that society has grossly wronged them.  There are other people you know who struggle with sexuality and pornography, and this movie may cause them to stumble.  My point is, think very carefully before you give your unbridled seal of approval to any movie, book, or article, and send someone on their way.  If they ask you, “Should I see this movie?” give them an honest and biblical response because, we should be watching and reading through a biblical lens in the first place.

Bottom line – In my opinion, I would skip Les Misérables, the movie.  For all the good in this movie, there is too much added junk that ruins it.  Read the book!  I know it seems cliché, but this time, it really is so much better!

Les Misérables

When Chris and I have a date night, it usually ends with a trip to Barnes & Noble so I can pick out a new book (I know, we are two crazy kids).  On one of these date nights, I chose Les Misérables by Victor Hugo.  I was a little intimidated by the length of the book, but after beginning the first page, I was hooked.  Les Misérables is, by far, is the best classic I have read.
 
For those unfamiliar with the story, Les Misérables is set in a post-Napoleonic France, where, once again, a king is reigning.  With no democratic representation, the people of France are either exceedingly rich or exceedingly poor.  With this backdrop, Hugo introduces the main character, Jean Valjean.  Poor like so many, he makes a choice to steal a loaf of bread for his sister and her seven children.  Caught, he is sentenced to five years in prison.  While in prison, he attempts to escape (unsuccessfully) several times and ends up serving nineteen years before he is finally released.  Once released, he is given papers he must show that state he is a convict.  Despite his best efforts, he cannot find work, food, or even lodging.  As Valjean ventures through one town after another, he is finally referred to a bishop at a local church, who shows him great hospitality, treats him with dignity and respect, and gives him a place to stay.

Despite the grace shown to him, Valjean wakes in the middle of the night and decides to steal the bishop’s only possession worth money – silver tableware.  As he absconds into the night, Valjean is once again caught and brought back to the bishop by the local police.  Just when it appears Valjean will be sent back to prison for life, the bishop informs the police that he gave Valjean the silver as a gift and that he forgot to take the candlesticks.  Sending the police away, the bishop turns to Valjean and exhorts him to be saved and live a life dedicated to God.

The bishop’s action and words will haunt Valjean as he leaves, changing the course of his life.  He settles in a small town, creates a new identity, becomes a successful businessman, and eventually becomes the mayor.  While governing this small town, he runs into a man named Javert.   Javert was a guard at the prison during Valjean’s time there, and is now, ironically, the head of police in Valjean’s small town.  Though Javert initially suspects that the mayor is actually Valjean, he is dissuaded when another man is arrested and accused of being the former convict.  Faced with the choice to let another man go to life in prison in his name or to reveal himself as the actual Jean Valjean, Valjean remembers the bishop and turns himself in.

The rest of Les Misérables tells of the life of Valjean.  He escapes to help another (Fantine), raises her poor, doomed child as his own (Cosette), and eventually saves the grown child’s love (Marius) at great cost.  All the while, he is hunted by Javert, who is convinced that God’s justice must be served on earth.

As a piece of literature, Les Misérables is truly a masterpiece.  The way Hugo effortlessly intertwines the characters is really beautiful.   There are too many characters in the book to recount here, and, as you are reading, you do not necessarily expect them all intertwine, but Hugo does an amazing job of doing just that without it feeling forced.  Hugo also gives the reader a real sense of what the socio-economic situation of France is during this time.  There was an enormous gap between those who were poor and rich, but we are not talking the kind of inequality of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement today.  The laws of the country made it almost impossible to start poor, work hard, save money, and live comfortably.  If you were poor, it was going to be for life, and you were going to live in squalor.  If you were convicted of a crime such as petty theft, you were branded a criminal for life, like Jean Valjean.  You were given papers stating that you were dangerous, and you can imagine how many people desired to hire or lodge those deemed by society to be criminals for life.  Any second offense, no matter how large or small, sent you back to prison for life.  Notice how many times I used “for life”?  There was no grace in France at this time.  They were all “the miserables”, unable, no matter how hard they tried, to redeem their situation in life.

This is one of Hugo’s main themes of the book.  An avid political activist, Hugo saw the major flaw in France’s judicial and social system.  He advocated for education and penalties that actually fit the crimes.  His preface to the book reads:

As long as civilisation shall permit law and custom to impose a social condemnation that creates artificial hells on earth, complicating our divine destiny with a fatality driven by humans; so long as the three problems of the age – man degraded by poverty, women demoralised by starvation, childhood stunted by physical and spiritual night – remain unsolved; as long as people may be suffocated, in certain regions, by society; in other words, taking a longer view, so long as ignorance and misery endure on earth, books such as this cannot but be useful.”

It is so important to understand the historical setting of Les Misérables (or any book you are reading).  Otherwise you will miss one of the main points.  Not that you will always agree, but you must read through the lens of the author to really understand what he is trying to communicate. 

One of my favorite parts of this book is the beginning, where Hugo devotes several books (Les Misérables is divided into parts, then books, then chapters) to the bishop, including his own conversion and detailing his ministry prior to meeting Jean Valjean.  If you have read many synopses or have seen the movie, this part is usually skipped over entirely due to time.  However, it is a poignant commentary on ministers (i.e. bishops) and what true Christ-centered ministry should entail.  The bishop was one who gave his life to serving God through ministering to others, day and night.  The locals even bestow upon him the name, “Monseigneur Bienvenue”, which means “Bishop Welcome” because of his generosity and selflessness.  Hugo writes:

“Widowed or orphan families had no need to send for him; he came by himself.  He would sit silent for long hours by the side of a man who had lost the wife whom he loved, or of a mother who had lost her child.  As he knew the time for silence, he knew also the time for speech.  Oh, admirable counselor!  He did not seek to drown grief in oblivion, but to exalt and dignify it by hope.” (p. 21)

Though the bishop is a fictional character, this entire section on the bishop is a beautiful picture of how a minister, even today, should shepherd those to whom God has entrusted.

Another major theme, and my favorite, is the relationship between justice and grace.  From outset, Valjean is condemned (rightly so) by justice.  Once he is shown God’s grace by the bishop, his life is transformed, and he seeks to honor God through his life (though not specifically mentioned in the book, this whole passage is really his conversion).  Throughout the book, Valjean life is now characterized by grace, and he is compelled by the grace shown to him so long ago to now show grace to all he encounters.  This is contrasted with Javert, who only believes in justice.  He cannot show mercy or grace, because he believes it to be a violation of God’s justice.  When his life is graciously spared by Valjean in the end, Javert cannot reconcile his lifelong quest for justice with the grace shown to him, and he takes his own life.

Les Misérables is not a direct allegory to the Bible, but you cannot help but think of Romans as you read it.  Javert is the law – he must hold Jean Valjean accountable, and the law must be satisfied.  The law condemns Valjean, and he can never be justified through it alone:

“Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.  For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19 – 20

Yet, in Jean Valjean, we see the wonderful work of grace through Christ:

“But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:  for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.” Romans 3:21 – 26

You cannot read Les Misérables and not enjoy this beautiful commentary on the nature of justice and grace.  Though Hugo himself had a lot of bad theology (believing that everyone, including Satan, will be shown grace in the end and will be saved), there are a lot of great spiritual truths that permeate the book.  He never addresses the gospel directly, but alludes to it throughout the book.  It is definitely not an allegory, but there are definitely Christian parallels: We are all sinners, “the miserables”, who have made the choice to sin.  According to the law, we deserve justice and should be punished accordingly.  Yet, because of the grace of God, we have been shown grace through Christ and are redeemed, not because we deserved it, but because Christ paid the penalty we deserved and God’s justice was satisfied.  Therefore, as ones who have been shown great grace, we should, in turn, show grace to others.

Overall, this has been my favorite classic to read.  If you can get over the fear of its length, I would highly recommend Les Misérables as something you should invest the time in – you won’t be disappointed.  For those of you wondering if the recent movie stacks up to the book, my next post will address that very topic.  Happy reading!

_________________________________________________________

* As per my usual, I purchased the Barnes & Noble Classics edition of Les Misérables for $9.95.  This version is abridged, but I have read the passages it omits and I think that this version is very well edited (the sections that are omitted are mostly stories about Valjean or another character that are more examples of a point Hugo is trying to make about a particular topic – they take nothing away from the storyline itself).  Also, I usually have appreciated the footnotes of the editor, but in this particular edition, the editor is a bit critical of spiritual themes.  Anytime Hugo references Christ or another biblical theme, he calls Hugo “melodramatic” or makes another similar comment.  If you can ignore the editor’s bias against religion and his comments that ensue, then you can still glean some helpful footnotes from this edition.  As always, the Kindle edition is FREE!