CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Breakinger A Brilliant Conflict

Wyatt There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

disdressed12 i liked this version of Victor Hugo's classic novel,Starring Michael Rennie as Jean Valjean and Robert Newton as Javert.however i prefer the 1935 version starring Frederic March as Valjean and Charles Laughton as Javert.this may just be personal preference but i think March and Laughton were more suited for their roles than Rennie and Newton were.i found this version a bit slower,and not quite as compelling,though it still has its moments.the theme of redemption is of course front and centre,but it is not as well developed or explored here,and has less of an impact.the ending though similar to the 1935 version is not as powerful.still,a very good film.for me,Les miserables (1952)is an 8/10

Michael_Elliott Les miserables (1952) *** (out of 4) Slick production of Victor Hugo's classic novel has Michael Rennie in the role of Jean Valjean and Robert Newton as the Inspector hounding him for decades. This is only the second version of the novel that I've seen (the 1935 being the first) so it's hard for me to compare various versions but it's interesting some of the changes made here. Of course we get small changes like the amount of money owed Valjean after he's released from jail but the final chase through the sewers is changed a bit and some of the overall attitudes towards the two leads are also changed. I think these type of changes always make for an interesting viewing experience when it comes to often filmed stories like this one, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and various others. While there's a lot to enjoy here I think the biggest issue is the performance of Rennie. He has proved that he could be great in certain roles but I found here pretty bland here and not the least bit interesting. His performance here will remind plenty of his one in THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL but where that laid back approach worked for that classic, it really hurts this film. I never really bought him in the role and instead of seeing and feeling the character it felt more like I was watching an actor struggle with a part. Newton on the other hand is one I really enjoyed. He played the part with a nice coldness that comes through quite well but he also adds a stern, father-like touch that make the character stand out. Debra Paget, Cameron Mitchell and Elsa Lanchester round out the cast. The music score is an effective one and the cinematography is top-notch. Milestone handles the material quite well and he really makes a beautiful looking film with plenty of style and some really good looking shots. I think it would be fair to say that this is a handsome production but it's missing some of the heart and soul of the earlier version.

jcbernardo In reaction to the reviewer qualifying this the best version he has seen I feel obliged to point that Victor Hugo is not respected here ; Cosette had a peaceful childhood and appears with Hollywood pretty dresses, and Gavroche,the kid from the miserables (people in misery starving) which becomes an emblem dying during the revolutionary barricades against the oppressive crush from fortunate class and bourgeoisie, is reduced here to deliver a letter ! Try reach the director Raymond Bernard trilogy, with Harry Baur as Jean Valjean. You will discover reality, not "let's not hurt audience" casting or look. Another more faithful version is the one with Jean Gabin, but with so clean miserables ! No, the trilogy by Raymond Bernard, shown from decades on French TV, recently restored by Cinematheque Francaise, seems to be the Victor Hugo book alive. No concession, misery is there, corrupted houses, characters alive rather than actors on parade. This trilogy is beyond art, it is life, as Victor Hugo described it.

-628 This was the first version of Les Miserables that I saw. I have seen 3 versions since, including the excellent French version with Gerard Depardieu and John Malkovich, but none has the same sheer storytelling power of the 1952 version. Michael Rennie and Robert Newton are superb in their contrasting roles, and the support cast is excellent.