Who hasn’t seen Les Mis? Well, apparently both my boyfriend and his brother, who was visiting all week. Seeing as the show is closed in New York, and they wouldn’t have the opportunity to see it again (not counting tours and regional productions), I forced them to go. They were pleased, as was I. The show remains a classic piece of theatre. And as it focuses mostly on pain and misery, I am not surprised to see it still selling out performances here in London.

I was mostly amazed at how fresh it still felt. I don’t know how long each of these actors have been with the cast, but no one seemed burnt out or tired, which is always a possibilty with long-running shows. Particularly, Valjean and Fantine were extraordinarily good. Best rendition of “Bring him Home” I’ve heard. Considering that Les Mis has closed in NY, the actors that regularly find work in this show, have found their work options to be fewer; and therefore, the casting people have a larger pool of Valjeans to choose from and therefore can get the best people. Perhaps which is why the cast was so good; they are the last English-speaking cast of Les Miserables.

I had issues with Gavroche. I know, he’s young, but I literally couldn’t understand a word out of his mouth. This kid needs a diction coach. I loved Eponine. The role tends to be done teeny-bopper style, with a very nasal, whiny belt. This girl was tough, yet feminine. She brought a maturity to the role that made it all the more tragic. Javert’s acting was better than his singing, but he’s a fabulously watchable actor. I also had issues with Thenardier - again, I couldn’t understand anything he said! And it’s not the cockney accent, it’s the diction. What I found bizzare about him was that he chose to speak so much of his text, rather than sing it. So you would think he’s a character actor who doesn’t sing well. But then, every once in a while, he would actually sing his role, and he has a fantastic singing voice. Very odd choice, not to use it.

A technical problem I noticed has to be mentioned. I was sitting in the balcony, 4th row. Quite high up, but the balcony goes back another 20 rows or so. Where I was sitting, I was able to see Enjrolas readjusting himself into his famous, dramatic, death pose on the other side of the baricade, after he was supposed to be already dead. Kind of killed the moment, and everyone sitting above me had to have seen it too!

Regardless of minor glitches, I have the utmost respect for this show, especially now after all these years. The show doesn’t have a flying nanny, or a landing helicopter, or anything particularly flashy. The baricade itself is pretty cool but not anything particularly special. What makes this show endure is the beauty of its score and the humanity of its characters. A heartbreaking story told through equally heartbreaking music. No flashy dance numbers or silly costumes. It’s pure and honest and deserves it’s success.

I was interested in seeing this show after reading an article in Time Out, which ran the week before its opening. However, the slightly inconvenient location (Islington) and high ticket prices were off-putting. Closing weekend, I decided I couldn’t afford to miss it. Happily, I found it worth both the money and any inconvenience. Edward Scissorhands is a ballet based on the Tim Burton film of the early nineties, starring Johnny Depp and Winona Ryder. This movie has always been a favorite of mine, and I was anxious to see what a staged representation would look like.

Matthew Bourne (choreographer/director) is known for his unorthodox dance/theatre creations. When I found out this show was a ballet, I was disappointed. I find most “traditional” ballet to be far more focused on the grace and athleticism of the dance itself, rather than the story being presented. This show is nothing like traditional ballet. I would describe it as a story told through movement. The “dancers” appeared more like actors with brilliant control of their bodies, and a wonderful ability to portray their characters through movement alone. Multitudes of information could be understood with simple gesture, posture, walk, etc. Of course, costume plays a large role too, but their movement does most of the story-telling.

The dancer/actors are aided by one of the most ambitious creative teams I’ve seen in a while. They did a fantastic job of recreating a Burtonesque world for the stage. The whole stage is awash in greens and purples for the flashback scenes, giving Edward’s world a gothic haze. The suburban landscape is effective, with it’s tacky pastels and green topiary hedges. Visually, it’s gorgeously surreal - and far more breathtaking live than could be ever captured on camera. Of course, it’s complete with ice sculpture-chip snowfall. The whole theatre is turned into a magical winter wonderland.

I also liked that we got more of Edward’s back-story in this version. We see more into his past than we do in the film, which further humanizes him. Also, there are far more characters in this version. In the film, where we have only housewives, this version explores entire familes, with clearly defined characters in each.

Terry Davies has adapted Danny Elfman’s famous score for the film, and has rounded it out into a full two hours of music. He’s attempted an Elfman-style for his additions, but I wouldn’t quite mistake the music for Elfman. Davies has his own style altogether, making the score sound a bit choppy at times.

My only complaint about the show, really, is the fact that it doesn’t have the same impact as the film. The film still moves me to this day, while the show didn’t have the same emotional effect. There are some emotions that movement just can’t quite express, the same way as words or a close-up camera shot. But overall the show is really an impressive production. The word “fantastical” comes to mind.