Am I the only one who was grossly offended by elements in this movie? Though connected to the point of the movie, the episode of Fantine’s prostitution was deeply disturbing, and the accompaniment of the raucous satirical chorus ( a la Marat-Sade) of prostitutes and low-lifes only made it worse.  Certainly nothing I would consider appropriate for children or teens. But it pales in contrast with the simply revolting Master of the House number, an almost endless series of disgusting and obscene images, to which we are subjected for nothing.  For the sake of entertainment and a smear of religion, are we supposed to ignore glaring moral issues? I f not, how can we pass over the murder and pillage which the noble and of course, A&F good-looking revolutionaries commit on their way to the revolutionary paradise so bizarrely depicted in the final scene. And is Jean Valjean’s killing of one of the soldiers supposed to be a return to his life of crime, or a sign or his redemption, or doesn’t it matter? Judging from the gushes one hears in Catholic media, the process of brain-softening is far advanced.  And what are we to say of the music: trite, sentimental tunes, constantly repeated, occasionally rendered moving by the appealing voices of Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Banks, but rendered excruciating by the non-starter singing of Russell Crowe and the even worse Hugh Jackman, who reminded me of the dying rabbits in Watership Down. “Most Catholic Movie of the Year? ” God help us!

I loved “Les Miserables” and have seen it twice.  It is a beautiful movie.

We agree with Dan Grimm.  We were led to seeing Les Mis because we had seen stage productions and an earlier film, but mostly because of Raymond Aroyo’s interview of Hugh Jackman on EWTN.  Raymond, had you seen the film before that highly positive interview?  Very doubtful, given your usual stances respecting movies.  The earlier productions were far superior.  Also disappointed in Steve Greydanus’ limited comments.