He's ok with "Surry with a fringe on top" but should be shot for attempting "Les Miserables".
It seems to be a very unpopular position to take, but I agree. Although I think he is a very talented actor, gorgeous man who seems to be genuine and nice also, his voice is functional only in my humble opinion. He hits the notes, but there is no depth, style and a sometimes unpleasant quality to it.
Maybe he thinks you can't sing.
Anyway he's a star and you're posting with a bunch of AIDS boys on a website that charges.
r2, die please.
I love The Boy From Oz cast recording, but he does have this way of 'cheating' when he sings -- it's sort of a mix of sing speaking and singing out of the side of his mouth. There's no power to it, compared to Paulo Szot in South Pacific for example.
Great in Les Miz, but I don't want him to become the go to person for musicals in Hollywood.
No core and no support
Jackman has a serviceable voice. He's a good interpreter, so he's effective on stage in films. But I'd not want to listen to an album of Jackman singing.
I saw him in his one man show on Broadway last year and he was fabulous. He's charming, entertaining, obbviously loves interacting with the audience. He's one of my favorites. However, sitting through 2.5 hours of bad singing really got to me last night. His acting was wonderful but as emotional as that play was, I was virtually unmoved by the movie. I do attribute that to the fact that the most of the characters couldn't sing, especially Hugh. Since the singing is the integral part of this character, I have to give the Oscar to Daniel Day-Lewis.
Forgot to sign off as OP
I think the OP missed the point about how and why the vocals were done.
He could be good with some training, but he really really sings poorly. Of course, there is no reason for people to sing well. Plenty become stars because they are exceptionally attractive. People like r8 miss the point that the vocals are bad not because they are live, but because we require stars.
Thank you, OP! I'm mystified by all the praise and accolades Jackman has received. His voice was really unpleasant to listen to in the movie. He started out fine. I was quite impressed by him during the prolog, especially during "What Have I Done?" despite the vibrato, but after that he didn't rise to the occasion, which hurts the film 'cause as the sole protagonist he needed to carry the entire movie. For me, it was like going to a child's piano recital and wincing each time they hit the wrong key. As much as I wanted to love him, his bad singing got in the way of his performance. The last straw was his butchering of "Bring Him Home." I was expecting (well, hoping by this point in the movie) to be blown away, as I have been by several stage Valjeans, but it was such a letdown. I agree the role was vocally out of his range, and I further concur with the OP that, since the role is mainly sung, he doesn't deserve to win the Oscar. He didn't even deserve the nominations, but we all know he only got it 'cause LES MIZ wasn't a complete failure as some feared (or hoped) and in fact is doing quite well. But had the movie bombed a la NINE, no way would he've been one of the 5 candidates.
Hugh jackman can sing he is very amazing in les miserables he is a amazing company leader
Agree- wonderful entertainer, presence on stage, gorgeous- but his voice is just servicable. Saw him in Carosel sp? years back and he was wonderful as the character, but whenever he broke into song I longed for Gordon McCrae. He has one of those wobbly vibratos and goes flat as soon as it begins- just like Liza (in her prime as well.) Can work in person to a degree, but he will never be a recording artist. He is no Josh Groben.
Totally agree. His "Bring Him Home" was cringeworthy. I couldn't believe anyone connected with the film would release it that way.
You're cute R15. Cute but WRONG.
What are you, R14? Psychic?
I KNEW you were gonna post that.
I saw Les Mis on stage in London and the singing was moving. I watched Jackman in the movie version last night and it reminded me of the only time I went to the Siberian Orchestra to see what it was all about. I could hardly contain my disgust when they had 4 vocalists attempt to sing Carmina Burana. They didn't just destroy the music, they obliterated it. It's like listening to the richest, most beautiful music you've ever heard piped through a 1960's 2 resistor radio on a 2 inch paper speaker. I don't care who it is, an actor who has not gone through the work of many years to learn to really sign, rarely compares to someone who has. I found Russell Crow's voice better than Jackmans. The movie was ill conceived and I can only hope such a venture will not be attempted and marketed again.
He's not bad, you're just people who can't judge singing.
R17 "Russell's [...] voice better than Jackman's"
Just No. No. And No. Not Crow, not Nipsey, and certainly not Rosalind. Jackman's voice was not great, but never worse than Russell's.
Jackman can sing within a certain range, but much of Valjean's music lies too high for Jackman so he strains. Though honestly, even he sounded better than Crowe. But it doesn't matter in the end as LES MIZ was a commercially successful film.
The problem is that there are just not many movie stars with good enough voices to handle these large-scale quasi-operatic scores (remember Gerard Butler doing PHANTOM?).
He's no Howard Keel, that's for sure.
Jackman can't sing and can't really dance. He just passes.
He has a lot of pep and personality and the audience wants to suck his dick and fuck him, so it doesn't matter.