Skip to main content

New "Beauty and the Beast" Fails to Put New Spin on the Tale as Old as Time: Review

Film Review: Beauty and the Beast



The new live action version of Beauty and the Beast is not very good. The film's best moments come directly from the 1991 animated version, which I once named the best animated Disney film of all time. It seems so preoccupied with recapturing what made that movie so great that it forgets to make this one unique or different in any way. At every possible chance director Bill Condon has to establish an interesting visual look for the film, he defers to the animated film and copies its look. What is the point of making a live action version of an animated movie only to make it look like its animated? Beauty and the Beast never answers that question, and the result is an uninspired retread of a classic story.


I was initially skeptical of Emma Watson playing Belle, but she quickly won me over. She is beautiful enough to be the most beautiful girl in the village, and she looks smart enough that her 'bookishness' would make her an outcast among the villagers. That's a quality I am not even sure the animated Belle conveyed well enough. She does well with the songs, although it's obvious that she is not a singer. The rest of the cast is populated by well-known actors dutifully recreating their characters. Perhaps most impressive was Luke Evans as Gaston, who apparently has a great singing voice. It makes me wonder why Hollywood is so insistent on casting people who cannot sing as the leads in musicals while casting people who can sing in movies about vampires and hobbits and superheroes. 


Image result for beauty and the beast 2017
The script remains faithful to the animated movie, despite some added elements to the story, few of which come off as improvements. The role of the enchantress who curses the Beast is greatly expanded, which mostly entails her lurking in the background of scenes. There's also a sojourn to Paris that is bafflingly irrelevant to the plot.  I did enjoy the tiny backstory given to the harpsichord and the wardrobe (played by Stanley Tucci and Audra McDonald, two actors I never mind having show up in a movie). The three new songs written for this movie are all terrible. I appreciate the attempt to make it into a more full-fledged musical, but why didn't they just use the songs written for the Broadway musical? Not including those songs was a huge missed opportunity. 

Parts of the design elements of this movie seemed engineered to show up in the below-the-line categories at the Oscars, but I think every single of one them missed its mark. No way any of the dreadful new songs get nominated for Best Original Song. The CGI on the objects in the castle at times bordered on creepy, too realistic to believe they can sing and dance. The costumes were intended to look opulent, but instead look garish. Both the sets and the costumes in the village scenes look distractingly cheap, which is bizarre considering the movie cost $160 million dollars to make. 

The 2017 Beauty and the Beast is very much an animated film, replete with a cartoonish visual style and dumb sight gags to keep kids interested. I'm sure many, maybe even most, moviegoers will love it for the same reason I didn't. But this was always guaranteed to be huge at the box office, which is why it makes no sense that of all the recent live action remakes of animated films (Maleficent, Cinderella, The Jungle Book), this is the one that is most faithful to the original. The assurance that it would be a hit should have given Disney the confidence to take a risk and introduce a bold take on the story for the 21st century. Considering that Dinsey has 12 more live action remakes of animated films in development, I hope the takeaway from this isn't that strict adherence to the original is what fans want. Even if it is, it comes off as a more of a lazy cash grab than an actual movie. 

What did you think of Beauty and the Beast? Leave a comment! 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Death on the Nile" Hits Theaters in 2019: Here's my Dream Cast

Following the success of Kenneth Branagh's film of Murder on the Orient Express, it was announced that a follow-up would be released on December 20, 2019. This time Branagh will direct and star in an adaptation of Christie's 1937 novel Death on the Nile. I loved that novel when I read it many years ago, and although I'd prefer to see Branagh adapt a Poirot novel that has not already gotten the big-screen treatment (like Death in the Clouds or Cards on the Table), I am looking forward to seeing a new interpretation. It's about a murder that occurs on a luxury steamer that is traveling down the Nile River in Egypt. Naturally, all the passengers are suspects. Since no casting information aside from Branagh has been announced, I thought I'd share some of my dream casting choices. 

For the role of Simon Doyle - Dan Stevens The former Dowton Abbey star is no stranger to period pieces and would be perfect fit for Simon Doyle, the new husband of Linnet Ridgeway and ex-finace…

"A Simple Favor" is an Offbeat Little Thriller that Adeptly Wields the Talents of Anna Kendrick and Blake Lively: Review

Film Review: A Simple Favor There's a sub-genre that Hollywood has brought back in the aftermath of the massive success of David Fincher's adaptation of Gone Girl a few years back; the domestic thriller, usually based on a best-selling novel and usually starring a woman. Other entrants in the genre include The Girl on the Train, the upcoming The Woman in the Window, and Paul Feig's new movie A Simple Favor. I am a huge proponent of the domestic thriller, as I love twisty and often fun mysteries that also have room for some social satire. With a script by Jessica Sharzer adapted from the Darcey Bell novel, A Simple Favor offers up everything I love about the genre in exciting and unexpected new ways. 
The movie stars Blake Lively as a gorgeous, sophisticated, and deeply unhappy mother who befriends a put-together mommy vlogger (Anna Kendrick), who plays detective when Lively's character suddenly disappears.Although it shares many similarities with Gone Girl,A Simple Favo…

Oscars: My Response to the Newly Announced Academy Award Changes

The Oscars are losing relevance or so says the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, which announced Wednesday a batch of changes to its annual telecast. The changes, designed to reverse a ratings dip in recent years, are the kind of desperate attempt to stay relevant that threatens the integrity of the whole affair. 

The first change, consistent with the Academy's desire to create a three-hour telecast, is that some awards will be presented during commercial breaks, with edited (meaning condensed) versions of the acceptance speeches airing later in the broadcast. It has not been determined which categories will be bumped, but I'll tell you right now it ain't gonna be Best Actress. The categories where celebrities are nominated will be shown live, and the tech categories won't be. This move is flat-out disrespectful to the men and women nominated in the below-the-line categories who deserve recognition for their vital contributions to movies. The Tony Awards fo…