Saying that remakes annoy me is an understatement because they're just another confirmation that we’re growing old. Everything seems to be going great in your life and you remember taking your kids to the cinema for their first Disney movie, “Beauty and the Beast.” Then out of left field you get the news that it is making a comeback with a new cast and, fingers crossed, a new storyline. It truly feels like getting slapped and often makes me question my sanity, especially when I think back to when I watched it for the first time in its glorious outdoor setting.Do I believe remakes should be banned in every possible way? Absolutely not. John Carpenter’s “The Thing,” which is one of my favorite films of all time, happens to be a remake, along with David Cronenberg's “The Fly”. The latest return to “The Planet of the Apes” is actually the hairy heroes’ third outing, and those are some damn fine movies as well. If all you plan to do is rehash something I’ve enjoyed for over 20 years and ruin it, then keep me out of it. But if you plan to reflect the essence of the original and embark on doing it in an exciting new way, then count me in. I’m ready to set sail anywhere you want to take me.
We return to Disney's animated classic, "Beauty and the Beast", which has recently been remade into a live-action film directed by Bill Condon. I pity anyone who hasn't heard of "Beauty and the Beast" at least once, because that means they've been living rather in a rock or Mount freakin' Everest.
To summarize: A girl encounters a beast, the girl despises the beast, both the girl and the beast turn out to be curmudgeons, eventually daughter starts to develop sentiments for the beast, and the beast starts experiencing emotions, leads to romance and snowball paradise where love conquers all, except maybe for the foolish villain who gets sent out to the dumpster of love. The end. You don't really expect any Shyamalan-style plot twists with these types of tales.
Is this yet another of those uniquely crafted remakes designed to mesmerize both fresh and seasoned viewers alike, or is it an attempt to cash in and elevate the loot in Scrooge McDuck’s Money Bin somewhere down in the Magic Kingdom? The good news, everyone... This does not become a disaster in any possible way. In fact, it is a very, very nice movie. It is nicely filmed and has a few emotional swells here and there. Notionally, the word nice, even alongside a couple of verys, may seem underwhelming to the audience. I, much like you, was utterly captivated by the trailer and still captures that surfaced online. Right? You can't blame me! The well-known, haunting tune plays in the background while the camera captures the rose and Hermoine Granger staring out at the screen. Now, they have me saying I'm all in, but hold on a second, Hoss. Things aren’t exactly as cheerful as they seem. This was a pun not entirely intended, but I am willing to let that stand.
The movie does have some merit, but the comparisons that come with the first edition will always make it fall short of reaching true greatness. With the exception of padding a few side characters and adding some backstory, new songs, and scenes, this movie was identical to the original in costumes and structure. That is where the movie falters. The theater’s rendition of Belle holding her book in the iconic opening scene was stunning, but instead of getting lost in the music, sights, and sounds, I was reminded of theater experiences and small screen viewings that I had years ago. I suffered from cinematic deja-vu over and over, and even though everything was beautiful, I started to get hit from every angle as Belle turned. The entirety of the movie is riddled with problems like this. Each time I was almost settled in, I was instantly pulled out time and time again, and it became highly frustrating.
Moreover, some of the humor, and my personal favorite, the banter and wit, was already spoiled for me. I expected it way ahead of time — so much that I was frequently lip-syncing along with the cast. The same goes for ‘I've been burnt by you before’ from Babette the feather duster to Lumiere the candlestick. It does not hit the walls the same way as it did back in ’91, does it? Man, has it been this long?
For an undertaking as monumental as replicating an infamous scene, which includes every single camera movement, it better outperform the original or, at the least, match it. And yes, you can guess what becomes of such scenarios. Remember when the camera soared down from the ceiling past the chandelier to zoom into the ballroom during the dance scene? That was quite an amazing moment, don’t you agree? You are correct, unfortunately this time the moment lacks the same energy. Not even close to achieving that. And it stands out, mark my words.
Take a step back and breathe. This review is becoming overly negative. You claim it is a very nice movie. Why doesn’t it sound like it then? There must be more to the story, I hope.
Unfortunately, no. Prepare yourself because this one is a bit oversized. Ahem. I don’t think Emma Watson performed especially well as Belle.
Now, now, she didn’t do terribly. My favorite parts of her performance are when she is getting angry or is showing some strong emotion, which is the case in a lot of the scenes. Sadly, most of the movie, I felt she looked somewhat blank. There was a kind of emptiness to her performance. A lack of depth. It’s a little strange to put it like that, really. There was just something off about the energy that she brought to the character, which, I think everyone agrees, is not the best version of Belle. I suppose you will notice it once watching the movie.
The same can be said about a lot of the characters in the village too. They were most of the time…just…there. Even with two people, who I think are really trying to stand out, Josh Gad as Lefou and Luke Evans as Gaston, they seem to be having the most fun out of everyone. Between the two, I would say Lefou is the better choice. There has been a lot of negative talk about adding homosexuality to his character, but this is actually a brilliant idea. It gave a new fun angle to Gaston’s plump sidekick and gave the film something fresh that was entirely its own. Lefou is bound to be a fan favorite. And I did admire Evans as Gaston even though he isn’t my favorite for giving him a PTSD back story, for some reason, in an attempt to justify his dickness. Ab saa. Gaston is not someone who needs sympathy for anything. Sometimes, a dick needs to be a dick; pure, unadulterated, unprovoked dickness, because simple dickness is the best.
But you know what? Something quite amusing happened to me in the beginning portions of the film. The portion of the film I was enjoying most was the nostalgic aspect, and out of nowhere I got completely blindsided. It was completely out of the blue. You all remember when Belle is running from a pack of wolves because she makes a complete stop? If you have seen the original, you know for a fact I'm talking about it and it goes down precisely the same way. If by some chance you haven't seen the original, uh spoiler alert…Wolves! Regardless, remember that altercation between Beast and those wolves? After that skirmish, came the moment where the Beast, beaten and tired, casts a look back towards Belle. Boom, bloody hell, ya got me. That horrendous look on the poor creature's face cut into me and at the same time saved the movie.
At the end of King Kong (both the original and the remake), we hear the famous line, “It was beauty killed the beast.” Well, in this, it was Beast that saved the Beauty. This tale is a prime example of a film that owes a debt to Dan Stevens and all his crafters for exposing the furry face of the The King cursed prince. Despite it being nigh impossible to disregard the remnants of the past and the CGI had a pinch too much but when the Beast was on screen, which was rather often, I was fixed. Just his eyes alone told so much, the way each single limb of his body, every pull of his mouth was a need to gaze at. That is what an “affect” is. Unfortnately, things would go pretty slow again the moment he left, which he did, but being back was not far away, incy wincy behind the curtain waiting to pounce. Literally and figuratively.
It is the animated characters which show the most life in this. Each time Lumiere (Ewan McGregor), Cogsworth (Ian McKellan), Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson), Nathan Mack (Chip), and everyone else in the cast are shown,ied (furniture) their master, is with them, they look. Again, as more advanced robots than the stage actors) performers and performers are always enacting the same scenarios we have seen in one form or the other, but the performers and programmers evoke a reaction that allows them to rise above the nostalgia and the memories and once again create this sense of magic.
Watch More Movies on Hurawatch
There are a few new scenes and songs in this movie and not to overstate it, but with all the new stuff in the movies, their importance will never reach the same height as their older counterparts, but they were most welcome with open arms. Condon accompanies the film with a hand that is controlled, though not devoid of inspiration; with a steady is a polite with all due resoect and without a hint of a blast. But this is my problem: instead of injecting life into around my favourite of his I ‘Gods and Monsters’ and “Mr. Holmes” take the direction and primary, my mark was not put there by... reasoning that is without a doubt, bring his imprint anywhere, it is to remove and replace what was done. And so on and so forth.
The production design is nothing short of a marvel. If their goal was to turn the animated world we are so familiar with into reality, they certainly accomplished it. The castle and grounds of the Beast’s castle were, in their own right, stunning. Additionally, the lofty towers where the final drama unfolds served as the perfect dramatic backdrop for the “Battle for Belle.” A world like this truly deserves to be enjoyed on the big screen.
For anyone going into this version without having seen the original, I genuinely envy you. In my opinion, you will enjoy it far more than I did given that everything will feel entirely new to you. For this reason, I don’t want to hold back scoring this film too low. It is, at the end of the day, a decent movie. Unfortunately, it does suffer from what appears to be a gigantic gap in context behind its predecessor.
This new “Beauty and the Beast” will never surpass the original, nor will it take any of the original’s charm away. Though it is undeniably riddled with story holes, I would not go so far as to deem it a bad film. For viewers who have no prior experience with the original, I reckon this film could earn the title of classic in its own right, and, personally, I hope it does.