Don't let the long length deter you, the story is such a big one that is very rich in detail and does need over 2 hours at least to tell it. This film is not just very faithful to it, the most faithful out of all the adaptations, but tells it absolutely thrillingly and with great emotion too. You are drawn into Hugo's world and in the time of the Revolution and along with the 1978 adaptation this is the version with the best characterisation(Valjean has never been this well-realised on film). While Javert is not as prominent as other adaptations his scenes do have tension and there is the feeling of he and Valjean being polar opposites as well as mirror images of one another, the sewer chase is thrilling, Valjean and Cosette's father-daughter relationship has never been more charming, the Revolution scenes have a real emotional intensity and immediacy that has been unparalleled on film and the romance is not shallow nor does it feature too much. In fact all the character relationships are explored beautifully and don't out-balance one another, one will argue that the rest of the characters pale next to Valjean here, I don't agree I think they are all convincing and it's mainly because Harry Baur's performance is so good that there may be that feeling. But it's not just how well it scores adaptation-wise that makes Les Miserables(1934) the best version of the book and one of the best of its decade but how it works so well as a film. There are more lavish and authentic adaptations of the book(1935, 1998) but that says very little because the costumes and sets are still beautifully rendered here and the Expressionistic style the photography and lighting adopt are equally striking. Arthur Honnegar's music score adds much to the atmosphere too, it is sweeping and grand yet emotional and subtly haunting too. The film is brilliantly written and treats the story and Hugo's prose like it knows that it's a classic(and Les Miserables is). The story doesn't run out of steam, allows time for things to develop and never feels too rushed or too structurally thin. And as said early on in the review what is so powerful in the book is translated every bit as powerfully here, and you can tell that everybody connected with their roles and what they're going through, kind of like it's affecting them in a personal way. Of the performances, the best by far is Harry Baur, that he is the only actor as Valjean to properly fit the role physically(Gerard Depardieu in the 2000 mini-series comes close but not close enough) is one part of the allure but every better is that he gives a towering and in this viewer's mind definitive performance in the role, noble, emotive, tragic, charismatic, initially immoral and later redemptive. Charles Vanel is a very icy and ruthless Javert, one person you wouldn't want to cross paths with and there is a tense dynamic between the two and that Javert is very strongly principled. The only thing that has been done slightly better in other adaptations is Javert having a more vulnerable side. All the performances are fine, Fantine is deeply affecting and Cosette and Marius are the least bland their characters have often been since, the only reservation is Eponine being too old(and we're not talking a bit here) but she still is written and portrayed very convincingly so it isn't too much of a hindrance. And of course Raymond Bernard's direction is superb. Overall, a magnificent film, both as an adaptation- the best film adaptation of Les Miserables by a mile- and as a film in general. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Several of us spent most of one weekend centered around watching five different versions of Les Miserables, and the general consensus was that the earliest, this by Raymond Bernard, was the masterpiece, the most accurate reflection of the massive Hugo novel, the only one in which the relationship between Valjean and the infant Cosette is captured with understanding and charm, and the only one that doesn't count on a fiendish Javert to advance the plot. Inspector Javert, after all, is only a tool for an antiquated justice system, only one coil in a larger serpent that threatens human justice.Each of the other versions naturally has separate strengths and weaknesses, the best conventional overview version still being the 1935 Hollywood version with Fredric March and Charles Laughton, and one of the weaker entries featuring Tony Perkins as Javert (channeling Norman Bates).Bernard's version is a lasting experience! Count on an entire day to watch this, as it is separated as three different films, each with it's own visual rhythm, but all connected to the redemption of it's hero. This epic had never been released as a complete film in the United States, and thanks to Criterion, we now have the opportunity to engage with a dazzling, if sombre masterpiece.

If they made any more versions of this famous Victor Hugo tale I think I'd go mad and rush around the streets spouting French gibberish and tearing everything apart in a frantic search for cider apples or a loaf of bread. It's all reminiscent of Charles Dickens in that it's a sketch -- a long sketch -- of what can happen to you when you don't have enough money for fundamental things.Well, briefly, Jean Valjean (Baur) is a convict released after 19 years in prison for stealing bread and trying to escape. He's a real slob. When a friendly bishop invites him to a meal and puts him up for the night, he steals off with the silverware.But he reforms, after violating his parole. He works in a glass factory, discovers a new means of producing cheap glass, prospers, and becomes a good man who is finally elected mayor. The problem is that the local chief of police, Inspector Javert (Vanel), thinks he recognizes the new mayor and job-creator-in-chief as the escaped prisoner, Jean Valjean. The inspector used to be a corrections officer at Valjean's prison and he is, of course, right, though he can't prove it.In the end, Valjean gives up his real identity and loses his status in order to save an innocent man who has been mistakenly identified as Valjean. After exposing himself in court, Valjean escapes with a little orphan girl he has more or less adopted and takes off for the city.What follows is almost an entirely different story, connected to the first part by the thread of Inspector Javert's obsessive pursuit of Valjean and his little girl, Cosette. Towards the end there is a revolution and some exciting action, including a scenic tour of the city's cloaca maxima. If Vienna in 1948 had had such a filthy sewer, not even Harry Lime would have used it as an escape route. And there is a heart-tugging scene in which Valjean stands out on the street, listening to the music, as the aristos, now including his beloved daughter Cosette, dance the cachelot or the cucaracha or whatever it is.I haven't seen all the other versions of "Les Miserables." Compared to the two I remember best -- the versions with Frederic March and Liam Neeson -- this evidently sticks closest to the original novel. The makes it quite a longie, almost four hours.As much as I hate to use the word in any assessment of a film, especially a French film, this one is pretty "arty" for its time, 1934. The sets are very well done. The direction is as good as can be expected. The movie moves at a good pace. At dramatic moments the camera is delicately tilted from the horizontal. Baur is good as Jean Valjean. As the dying girl Fantine, Florel is almost unbearably extravagant in every move and utterance. Vanel's Javert is icier than most or, one might argue, wooden. I preferred Geoffrey Rush in the Liam Neeson version. Rush was deliciously neurotic.You know, though, that though I've made some fun of this movie, it was light years ahead of most of the features being ground out in Hollywood.

This film is, beyond any comparison, the most perfect version of Victor Hugo's timeless classic - BAR NONE! I've only seen this version once at a UCLA French film retrospective, but I was absolutely floored. If you ever get a chance to see this movie, do not miss it! Harry Baur's performance as Jean Valjean is magnificent. I'd love to see this one again. I wish it was available in any form DVD, VHS ... anything.