Disney's Beauty and the Beast (2017)

[Tobias]

So the general cosensus rolling about for this is it's pretty...but out of all the live action remakes it's the most pointless one so far. When a good amount of people compare this to Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho, that is not a good thing.

While the film tries to add little things here and there, all of it is nothing but filler which adds nothing to the story. An' whenever they introduce concepts which might have been interesting (A abusive father backstory for the Beast, a magical book which can take you -anywhere-), they're immediately forgotten right after they're introduced. The film is really too focused on trying to emulate the original which quite frankly you're not going to top, let alone match.

Though what I find irksome is this is the live action remake that's gonna' make all the money, which'll easily scream to the bigwigs that this is what people want from the upcoming ones.

 

[Mad Dog]

Our Pittsburgh main paper, The Pittsburgh Post Gazette, gave it a very luck luster review, only two stars. But it sure as heck slammed the box office yesterday. So, regardless of critics, it's going to do a ton of money.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

I saw it yesterday. The movie is pretty mediocre.

 

[Andysol]

It's "ok".
Cinderella is still the best so far- thought that was brilliantly done and a beautiful film.
Jungle book was good too, and petes dragon was great.

As for the gay scene- blink and you'll miss it. Or maybe I did. Literally, outside of him dancing with a guy for not even half a second it was absolutely nothing. Not "in your face to make a statement"- nothing. Overblown as usual to drum up interest on a complete non-issue.

In other news- Shrek has had a tranvestite or transgender character for a decade now but everyone somehow forgets about that. As well as whatever tinker bell is. Lol.

 

[Evan]

How am I the only one who found Cinderella lacklustre and this movie spectacular?!

 

[Nick]

How am I the only one who found Cinderella lacklustre and this movie spectacular?!

I always heard Cinderella ways basically a straight copy of the animated version, never found myself interested enough to actually watch it. Even though the same things could be said about BatB, I enjoyed it. Not a home run, but enjoyable.

For me though, last year's Jungle Book remains the best live-action remake i've seen from Disney.

 

[Evan]

I always heard Cinderella ways basically a straight copy of the animated version, never found myself interested enough to actually watch it. Even though the same things could be said about BatB, I enjoyed it. Not a home run, but enjoyable.

For me though, last year's Jungle Book remains the best live-action remake i've seen from Disney.

Oh god the Cinderella remake is just plain boring.. pretty to look at it, but with none of the heart.

Say what you will, but this film is full of heart. I think Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast... that's how you remake these classic. With nostalgia, heart, and a little something new thrown in.

 

[Miketheboss]

I can't be the only one who hated Jungle Book.

 

[Brian G.]

I can't be the only one who hated Jungle Book.

You might be.

 

[Tobias]

You might be.

No, Mike is not alone. I know a couple people who really didn't care for it.
When it comes to the live-action remakes, they've been fairly hit or miss on them. For me...

Cinderella - I personally didn't like this one, while they made the Prince a actual character compared to his bland animated counterpart...however the attempts to make Cinderella "stronger" had the exact opposite effect on me. It not only created issues with the story, but I swear you could convince the live action Cinderella to jump off a cliff, no questions asked. The animated Cinderella ultimately knew when she had to get out of the situation she's in, she got her friends to throw the cat out the window when needed. (Compared to the live action one who gave up at the end).

Malecifent - I feel this is a "your mileage may vary" kind of film, some love it, some hate it. Myself I thought it was alright. *shrugs*

*Can't say anything personally about the Jungle Book since I've yet to see it. Honestly I've never had a intrest in seeing it.*

Pete's Dragon - I liked this one, and so far out of the recent live action remakes/reboots this is a honest to god reboot. The only real similarity it has to the original is there's a boy named Pete, and there's a dragon. That's about it, and considering the original wasn't exactly remarkable they took the right approach of going in a different direction.

Now weather I liked them or not, I will give those films credit for attempting to change things so it's not a straight-up copy of their animated films. With B&tB however, that one is trying it's darndest to be a copy of the original. But unlike all the other films, the original has such a big legacy it's firmly in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" catagory. An' doing a copy just screams nothing but a blantant cash grab on nostalgia.

 

[Disneyhead]

What Disney is doing now is an extension of what they have always done. Back in the day Disney would have theatrical rereleases of their animated classics every 7 years. This practice became pointless after the spread of VCRs. So, to keep the IPs current they are doing these live-action remakes.

 

[Nick]

What Disney is doing now is an extension of what they have always done. Back in the day Disney would have theatrical rereleases of their animated classics every 7 years. This practice became pointless after the spread of VCRs. So, to keep the IPs current they are doing these live-action remakes.

And these movies are popular as all get out so there's really nothing deterring them from continuing to do the same thing every year.

I will say, as stupid as the concept sounds for the "Live-Action" Lion King movie, it has me interested because if there is actually any live action sequences (not just CGI animated version of LK), it will mean that it's a rather unique take on the story.

 

[yankees13]

I liked it. It was what I expected. I guess they wanted to tie some loose ends with the extra scenes they added. I liked Emma as Belle too. I wasn't sold when she was announced because I couldn't picture her as Belle. I liked her singing voice.

In terms of movie quality I'd probably have it below The Jungle Book.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Pete's Dragon is their best remake and it isn't even close. I wasn't hot on The Jungle Book, but after watching BATB, I might have been a bit harsh on it. TJB is a lot better than BATB.

 

[SkiBum]

No, Mike is not alone. I know a couple people who really didn't care for it.
When it comes to the live-action remakes, they've been fairly hit or miss on them. For me...

Cinderella - I personally didn't like this one, while they made the Prince a actual character compared to his bland animated counterpart...however the attempts to make Cinderella "stronger" had the exact opposite effect on me. It not only created issues with the story, but I swear you could convince the live action Cinderella to jump off a cliff, no questions asked. The animated Cinderella ultimately knew when she had to get out of the situation she's in, she got her friends to throw the cat out the window when needed. (Compared to the live action one who gave up at the end).

Malecifent - I feel this is a "your mileage may vary" kind of film, some love it, some hate it. Myself I thought it was alright. *shrugs*

*Can't say anything personally about the Jungle Book since I've yet to see it. Honestly I've never had a intrest in seeing it.*

Pete's Dragon - I liked this one, and so far out of the recent live action remakes/reboots this is a honest to god reboot. The only real similarity it has to the original is there's a boy named Pete, and there's a dragon. That's about it, and considering the original wasn't exactly remarkable they took the right approach of going in a different direction.

Now weather I liked them or not, I will give those films credit for attempting to change things so it's not a straight-up copy of their animated films. With B&tB however, that one is trying it's darndest to be a copy of the original. But unlike all the other films, the original has such a big legacy it's firmly in the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" catagory. An' doing a copy just screams nothing but a blantant cash grab on nostalgia.

Or, from the original BaTB animated movie, "If it isn't baroque, why fix it?"

Actually, you pretty much described how I've viewed these movies. Maleficent wasn't a retelling and was enjoyable. The other's pretty much were retell's and BaTB seems like a dead-on copy. What does that gain or why remake a movie that was great the first time around? I get the money grab and people will flock because it's Disney. Oh well.

 

[UNIrd]

When a good amount of people compare this to Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho, that is not a good thing.

That's the comparison I've made since the beginning. People have wondered how I'm not excited to see this as a Disney fan, but.. since the previews started to ramp up, it really started to look almost a shot-for-shot remake. The word pointless comes to mind but I'll still check it out.

And I actually did enjoy that version of Psycho.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Or, from the original BaTB animated movie, "If it isn't baroque, why fix it?"

Actually, you pretty much described how I've viewed these movies. Maleficent wasn't a retelling and was enjoyable. The other's pretty much were retell's and BaTB seems like a dead-on copy. What does that gain or why remake a movie that was great the first time around? I get the money grab and people will flock because it's Disney. Oh well.

BATB isn't a shot for shot remake, but most of the added stuff was boring and unnecessary.

 

[Evan]

I guess I'm alone in enjoying them lovingly recreating the animated film but as a non animated version (obviously there's still animation involved...) that's what I wanted from this film, a few changes here and there, but the original brought to life, and that's what I got (and the general public clearly wants it also... it's going to be HUGE in how much it makes)

 

[belloq87]

What Disney is doing now is an extension of what they have always done. Back in the day Disney would have theatrical rereleases of their animated classics every 7 years. This practice became pointless after the spread of VCRs. So, to keep the IPs current they are doing these live-action remakes.

There is a little bit of a difference. Outside of marketing and distribution, it cost Disney nothing to rerelease its classics theatrically. They could, therefore, continue to allocate all their production resources to new, original films.

With this current remake craze, Disney has basically decided to sacrifice original live action content in favor of these remakes. Sure, we'll get a few exceptions (which are mostly small, QUEEN OF KATWE-type efforts), but with Disney's yearly theatrical slates already packed with Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, and Disney animation titles, there's not much room - or budget space - for original live action stories.

That's my biggest issue (aside from being creatively lazy, but that's another discussion) with them using up those few available spots with these remakes.

 

[AlexanderMBush]

Before saying my thoughts; I believe that going into any particular film with no expectations, when you walk into the theater is key to your enjoyment or dis-enjoyment for the film.

Beauty and The Beast, is with no question; a classic animated masterpiece. But, there were issues with the film that caused it to not be, the be all. And when it came to the Live-action films; I believe for me, to go in with no expectations will help me out in forming opinions. And I'll say this,

If I had to place this on the list..it is behind Jungle Book in terms of the best of the Live-Action reboots. And right behind that, is Cinderella.

Beauty and The Beast, recaptures the old magic that the original film did; with some of the best performances in any of the retelling's so-far. Visually, it is enthralling; with some of the best design features for environments and even characters. And on the casting side, Luke Evans; Josh Gad; and Emma Thompson steal the show. And in terms of the music, besides Emma (which I believe they did..slightly miscast); all of the vocal talent along with Menken's music is amazing.

There are a lot of great homages to not only the original film, but even the Broadway production of the classic. And to me, Disney brings enough to this film that does set this apart from the animated classic.