'Beauty and The Beast' 2017 Movie Review

First things first, I enjoyed the movie. I'm not saying it's worth an Oscar but it's not a terrible movie despite it being a remake. Compared to The Jungle Book and Cinderella Disney Remakes, I'd say it's worth an Oscar, hands down.

There are may things wrong with this movie, however, such as the use of CGI, especially on the beast, and the fact that Emma Watson was cast as Belle. The CGI was done well in terms of the furniture looking realistic and looking like something people would keep in their homes. However, what strikes me as off-putting is the live action characters interacting with the CGI furniture. To put it simply, it looks like they're holding air such as when Belle drinks tea from Chip, the teacup, and holds him by the saucer, not his handle, when taking a sip. Who drinks tea from the saucer?

My next main problem was the design of the beast. In the original, animated classic, you can so easily see the progression of the beast becoming more human the longer he spends time with Belle. He growled and snarled, he walked on all fours and wore little clothing other than a pair of pants and a red cloak. The longer he is with Belle, the more human he becomes by transitioning from wearing red to purple, talking like a person would normally, and learning manners and how to read. By the end of the movie, he wears blue like Belle and acted like he was never a beast in the first place.

In the remake, however, all they did was give him a tail you never see, horns, more hair and fangs. He may as well be a regular human with some medical conditions.

Now, casting Emma Watson as Belle, I think, was a very bad idea. For starters, she's only going to be seen as Hermione Granger, but she's not helping herself by acting just like Hermione in a blue dress. She's still the stuck up, smart-ass we all know in Harry Potter—not to mention the obvious autotune when she sings. Belle is supposed to be more open-minded and less up her own ass.

Another thing I wanted to address was the book that teleports you. I have no idea why they felt the need to keep this scene in. It's not like the audience cared what happened to Belle's mother. Shocker, it was the plague which, during the time in history the story is set, is a pretty obvious explanation. I guess it's something to add some bonding time between the Belle and the beast but other than that, it's not needed.

Also, the moment when Belle needs to get to her father as quickly as possible and instead gets there via her horse; if only they had a device that could teleport her to any location with no time to lose. They only decided on this to show her going further and further into the distance while the beast sings his number. Which, by the way, is a beautiful song so I can't fault this scene that much.

All that being said, the movie isn't a disaster. If anything, it's the best Disney remake so far. The mise en scene is beautiful. The attention to detail is practically perfect and it's obvious to see they put a lot of thought and effort in to planning and execution. The voice acting was so realistic and they adapted into their characters brilliantly. I really liked how they made the furniture characters become more inanimate with every fall of the flower petal, further increasing the stakes of the worst outcome. It also tugged at my heart strings at the end.

Also, unlike the other remakes, what you're getting is Beauty and the Beast, not a glorified Mary Sue as a Cinderella and not a little kid with no acting talent.