Beauty & the Beast Review:
#BeOurGuest
BY IAN
TAN
From the director of Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Parts 1 &
2 comes the live-action retelling of
the Disney classic, Beauty & the
Beast… this can’t be good.
Nah, who am I kidding? It’s Disney.
Let’s start with the good stuff. Over
the past two years, Disney has been very successful (commercially and
critically) at adapting a number of their animated classics into live-action counterparts.
Cinderella, The Jungle Book and even Pete’s Dragon were solid live-action adaptations
of old Disney animations, and so is this year’s Beauty & the Beast.
The cast, for one, does a splendid job
at bringing the beloved characters to life. Emma Watson suits the role of Belle
nicely, channeling the right amount of charm, fearlessness and humanity to the
character. The same can be said for Dan Stevens, who plays the Beast. However,
the standouts were really Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson and Nathan
Mack as Lumiere, Cosworth, Mrs. Potts, and Chip respectively. Although mainly
providing the voices for these characters, these A-list actors bring a level of
charisma and emotion to these characters that wouldn’t be present had they been
voiced by anyone else. Another highlight was Luke Evans as Gaston and Josh Gad
as Lefou, both of whom seemed to really enjoy playing their roles, Evans
especially.
 |
| Can't touch this |
Beauty
& the Beast also benefits from stellar production design and
costumes, much like 2015’s Cinderella.
The interiors of the Beast’s castle and Belle’s little provincial town are beautifully
realized and gorgeous to look at. However, I did find some of the character
designs a little weird, especially being so used to their looks from the
animated film. For instance, I’m not a big fan of Lumiere’s live-action design;
it just didn’t feel very Lumiere-like to me. Ewan McGregor nailed the character’s
voice though. I also really liked the Beast’s look. I was curious as to how
much emotion could have been articulated with him looking the way he does, and
I was very pleased to see how effective the CGI work for the Beast was, and Dan
Stevens’ performance really brought out the character's humanity.
 |
| Cogsworth was the best |
As for flaws, the biggest one for me was
probably the predictability of the story, which follows the animated version almost
to a tee, save for some additional character backstories. Besides that, there
really isn’t anything new story-wise in this live-action retelling of the tale
as old as time. It’s a safe way to please fans of the classic, but I was hoping
for just a little more innovation in the story and characters, kind of like what
they did with The Jungle Book just
recently. Another thing that I felt the original did better was its emphasis on
the iconic rose, which in the cartoon felt like more of a ticking clock than
this movie made it out to be. As a
result, the stakes didn’t feel as high as they did in the animated film. Also, the relationship between Belle and the Beast didn't grow as organically in this new film as it did in the original, which was a wee bit disappointing to me since their relationship is the where the heart of the story is supposed to be.
 |
| Humbug |
Overall though, 2017’s Beauty & the Beast is still an
enjoyable, magically Disney time at the movies, even if it never really
surpasses the quality, heart and originality of the 1991 classic.
Score: 7.4 out of 10
No comments:
Post a Comment