4.5 Stars

 

Disney has done it again.  We all know the story.  It's a "tale as old as time".  We all know the formula by now.  Disney is taking their classic movies and re-making, re-imagining, recreating them (whatever you want to call it) as live-action movies.  In 2010, Tim Burton and Disney brought the live-action version of Alice in Wonderland with Johnny Depp to the big screen.  Maleficent followed in 2014 starring Angelina Jolie re-telling the story of Sleeping Beauty.  Next was Cinderella in 2015 and 2016 gave us Pete's Dragon and The Jungle Book.  Now, Emma Watson reprises the role of Belle in Beauty and the Beast.  Disney's original groundbreaking animated masterpiece was released in November 1991.  It was nominated for Best Picture of the Year, the first of only 3 animated movies to ever be nominated for Best Picture.  

For any of you who don't know, here's the story: A selfish Prince is turned into a hideous beast and his staff are all made into furniture and kitchen utensils.  The curse will be broken if the Beast (Dan Stevens) can find true love before the last petal of a magic rose falls.  Meanwhile, in a quaint village nearby,  Belle (Emma Watson) does not fit in with the rest of the bubbly bimbos who are fawning over the town hunk, Gaston (Luke Evans).  Instead, she immerses herself in books and imagination, traits she gets from her inventor father Maurice (Kevin Kline). Lost in the woods, Maurice stumbles into the Beast's castle and is taken prisoner.  Belle finds him and offers herself up for his release.  The Beast agrees and their courtship begins.  Meanwhile, Maurice returns to the town to enlist Gaston's help in rescuing Belle.  When Maurice can't find the Beast's castle again, Gaston has him committed for insanity (and also out of rage since Maurice will not give Belle's hand in marriage).  Belle sees her father in trouble through a magic mirror and Beast allows her to return to him, an act of selfless love.  She demands her father's release and offers proof that Maurice is not crazy by showing the villagers images of the Beast through the magic mirror.  Further infuriated, Gaston incites a riot and the villagers launch an assault on the castle for the final standoff.

The preview for Beauty and the Beast looked breathtakingly beautiful.  There is so much to show in so little time, so they don't really waste any of it trying to summarize the plot like they do in most previews, assuming you already know the story.  Instead, you are given little gems.  A glimpse of the Beast that looks like Disney's original animation come to life.  Brief shots of our favorite characters: Chip, Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson), Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) and Lumiere (Ewan McGregor).  Emma Watson as Belle, who may not be the obvious choice, but looked in the preview to pull off the role quite well, and she does a fantastic job.  The CGI that looked like it would hold its own against Disney's latest reinvention of The Jungle Book that just won an Oscar for Best Visual Effects.  And some of the familiar music that made the first so special.  

I had extremely high expectations for Beauty and the Beast, but there were a few things that I felt would have to be nailed for this to be perfect.  Belle.  As I just said, Watson doesn't immediately stand out as the obvious choice for the role.  She looked great in the preview, but I wondered if she could hold it with the intelligence, grace, bravery, strength and singing required to match her predecessor's performance.  She did.  In fact, after seeing her performance and hearing her voice mastering so many iconic songs, I don't know that I could imagine anyone else in the role.

I also felt that the animation needed to be flawless.  This film had two previous movies to live up to: the original animated version from 1991 that was nominated for Best Picture and the 2016 Jungle Book.  Many of the critiques I've read about Beauty and the Beast criticized the CGI, specifically the Beast.  They say his eyes are off and the characters are flat.  I disagree and wonder if they didn't understand the difference in story-telling between Jungle Book and Beauty and the Beast.  Jungle Book was supposed to be much more realistic, aside from talking animals.  It wasn't a fantasy world, it wasn't a dream, it was a man-child in the jungle with real animals.  Beauty and the Beast is fantasy, a place of Belle's dreams and others' nightmares.  A Prince turned into a hideous beast.  Servants turned into a candlestick, a clock, a dresser, a teapot and cup.  Of course the animation is going to look different.  Now, that being said, there were a couple moments with Beast walking that were slightly less perfect than his animation for the rest of the movie.  However, the human characters' interactions with the animated ones were seamless.

The music.  Jungle Book didn't hold back with their musical numbers and I hoped that Beast wouldn't either.  They didn't.  In fact, we were introduced to a few new songs written just for this live-action version of the classic.  We get to see the history of the Prince and why he became such a selfish man.  We also got to see what happened to Belle's mother and what drove her father from Paris when she was just a baby.  Though they didn't have the same catchy lyrics that will have kids and adults singing for 16 years to come, they fit right in with the story and were welcomed additions to the film.

And finally, the ballroom scene.  The sweeping shot of the chandelier in the grand ballroom with Belle in her yellow dress and Beast in his blue suit was nothing short of iconic and groundbreaking in the original animation.  It's a lot to live up to.  They went a slightly different route with the ballroom scene.  Instead of one central chandelier, they had several in the room and the sweeping shot around the room revealed instruments on the wall helping to orchestrate their dance.  My only criticism of that scene was that the original shone so bright and golden and this version, although beautiful, was a little muted.

There were two other elements that could be challenged for their decisions.  The first is the reveal of the grand library to Belle.  In the animated version, it is a gift from Beast to Belle and the camera pans around to what seems like an endless offering of literature that makes her nearly cry with joy.  In the live action version, Beast simply takes her there to show off just how many books he has.  There's no build-up to the entrance to the room.  However, instead, they have a little playful banter that reveals the Beasts' softer side and also gives a hint that Belle is warming up to him.  It was sweet and tender.

The other element was LeFou (Josh Gad) and the way he portrayed his loyalties for Gaston.  In the animated version, LeFou is an impish, goofy, loyal, encouraging sidekick.  In this version, Gad plays LeFou as more than just a sidekick, but someone enamored with Gaston, not just for his size and strength and looks out of admiration, but from a deeper sentiment.  I realize this is 2017, but the affection was awkward and forced and detracted from their scenes together.

Beauty and the Beast had a lot to live up to, and the preview made it look like they were up to the task.  So I gave it a very enthusiastic and hopeful 4.5 Star Prediction. After watching the movie, I believe they were very successful in paying tribute to the original while making decisions to set their live action version apart and modern-ish for 2017.  I enjoyed it completely and thought it nearly perfect except for my few minor criticisms.  So I'm sticking with my 4.5 Star rating.  So, what movie will be on my mind next?  We shall see.