Very disappointed :(

Too much of everything

Amateur movie with Big budget

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

There have been dozens of film adaptations of Victor Hugo's classic story, starting from the silent era. I've seen a few, and each version seems to have their own strengths and weaknesses. In the 1952 version, the strengths are the two leads playing Jean Valjean and Inspector Javert: Michael Rennie and Robert Newton. Michael puts his whole heart into this movie and tries as hard as he can to make it better, and of course, Bobbie is always a wonderfully menacing villain.The weaknesses, I'm sorry to say, are quite large. Sylvia Sidney isn't bad as Fantine, but unfortunately, she has a very small part. The larger female lead is the role of Cosette. Debra Paget, who should never have been cast in a drama, let alone a period piece, plays Cosette. She could easily be the worst one in the movie, but her romantic scenes are paired with Cameron Mitchell as Marius. The character of Marius is supposed to be rather innocent, handsome, strong, hopeful, and above all, easy to root for. Cameron Mitchell is none of those things! I would have laughed at the idea that he was supposed to be trustworthy and sincere, but I was too busy cringing.Everyone likes to put his own spin on things, so as you might expect, there are some slight differences to the plot in this one. As hard as Michael and Bobbie try to make their performances the only ones the audiences will remember, Cameron and Debra are overwhelmingly contemporary and miscast. This one isn't my favorite, but I've yet to see a perfect version. With so many characters, there are bound to be actors in every adaptation who threaten to ruin the rest of the movie.

This may not be the best version of LES MISERABLES, but it certainly can be recommended on the basis of a strong performance from Michael Rennie who easily gives the most interesting and sympathetic performance in the film. A considerably restrained Robert Newton is the hated Javert hunting him down. Newton, usually a superb villain, fails to make the sort of villainous impact Charles Laughton made in an earlier version of the story.Unconvincing and simply there as window dressing is Debra Paget as Cosette. Likewise, Cameron Mitchell is stiff and lifeless as the young man who falls in love with her, which surprised me because he is a talented actor who made much better impressions in other films. He seems badly miscast here.Much of the story has been altered in this version, but whenever the concentration is on the story of the haunted central character the film is lifted to another dimension. Rennie as the convict in the early sequences is especially good at conveying all the pain and humiliation his character feels.Too bad that subplots take away from some of the story's strength, especially the one involving Sylvia Sydney's character which is probably among the weakest roles of her career. Her reunion scene with daughter Cosette is almost laughable.A deeper, more penetrating exploration of Valjean and Javert would have given the film a stronger feel. Production-wise, Fox has given the film all the technical values it needed with some fine B&W photography and settings, but it all comes across as a superficial version of the original story.

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

As a movie standing on its own I'd say its watchable but beyond that I am not able to muster any positive feelings.As a great fan of the book (and the musical that came years after this movie version) I am horrified by the major changes that were made to the story. To completely cut out the characters of Eponine and Enjorlas, and a little less so, the Thenardiers alone is something horrible.Also, it seemed to focus more on Marius and Cosette's relationship than Valjean.Overall, I would not recommend it to anyone who is a fan of the book or the Les Miserables fandom in general. If you really want to watch a movie version I would suggest the 1934 one.However if you have no previous experience with Les Mis then you may enjoy it more than I did.