Warning: There are some spoilers ahead for "Beauty and the Beast."
When Disney's live-action "Beauty and the Beast" comes to theaters it has a lot of expectations to live up to, and rightfully so.
The story of Belle, an outsider from a small French town who becomes prisoner to an arrogant prince-turned-Beast in an enchanted castle, is one of the most beloved Disney classics.
While Disney has had success with its live-animated features ("Cinderella," "The Jungle Book"), "Beauty" is by far the most adored of those released, meaning it's bound to be the most scrutinized by critics and fans who grew up loving the tale as old as time.
So, is it good? Does it live up to everything fans wanted and more? Yes and no.
There is a lot to love about the live-action adaptation.
The performance from Emma Watson as Belle is great, but it's Josh Gad's lovable LeFou who is an easy standout. He makes the character his own and it makes him memorable as more than Gaston's fool of a sidekick. Both he and Luke Evans' Gaston are enjoyable enough to warrant their own short miniseries. Sir Ian McKellen is downright humorous as the enchanted clock Cogsworth.
Then there are the big musical sequences. "Be Our Guest" was a favorite at our New York screening. Belle's opening number and Gaston's fight song late in the movie had me grinning. It's evident a lot of care was taken to ensure the big numbers were delivered just right. Big Disney fans will appreciate additions made to Gaston's bar song. Filmmakers added some never-before-used original lyrics written by Howard Ashman, who died during the production of the animated film due to complications from AIDS, into the live-action version.
While it's difficult to compare with the vocal talents of the original star Paige O'Hara, Watson does a lovely job taking the reins in the opening number "Little Town" and later in "Something There." A lot of smiles will be elicited as fans are transported back to their childhoods to experience the multitude of beloved classics in a new way.
But "Beauty and the Beast" will probably divide fans who love the animated classic. Diehard fans who have watched the classic over and over again growing up will take issue with some of the most classic shots, moments, and even dialogue from the original not making it into the film.
Some of these make sense. It's difficult to replicate some things from animation into live action. For instance, I don't resent the film for not having Gaston juggle and swallow a bunch of hardboiled eggs during his big musical number or LeFou not jumping from the head of one man from another.
Other changes are eyebrow raising. We see Belle do her big "The Sound of Music" hilltop run, but you never see her letting a dandelion dance off into the wind while lying in a field. The Beast's big library reveal to Belle is completely different and slightly less satisfying. And, sorry, there are no sheep. I understand not wanting to remake a beloved film shot for shot but it feels like the "Beauty" is glaringly missing something when some of its most popular shots don't make it into the live-action version.
For those wondering how the plot would differ from the animated tale, there are a lot of big changes to the film's story.
Some are simple. The way Maurice winds up at the castle pays homage to the original fairytale "La Belle et la Bete," in which Belle's father becomes imprisoned for stealing a rose from the Beast's garden. The title of the story can be seen above the Disney title when the credits begin to roll.
The most welcome additions are those which expand on the story, revealing more about the Beast's and Belle's families. Have you ever wondered what happened to Belle's mom? Now you'll know!
Others changes are more subtle. The movie provides answers to a lot of open-ended mysteries the animated tale has left fans pondering for years. Why don't the villagers know anything about this prince or his castle so close to their home? Does Chip have tens of siblings who were stowed away in a cupboard with him? How does Gaston manage to get to the Beast's castle so easily later in the film?
The biggest improvement the live-action film makes is in correcting the time that elapses when Belle is held captive by the Beast. No one seems to have a definitive answer. A rewatch of the animated tale will suggest the movie takes place over the course of a few short days; an awfully short time to fall in love with one's captor. A pretty big story change was made to correct this in the live-action version. Upon first glance, purists may be up in arms over some significant plot changes, but it appears it's all to make the timeline of Belle at Beast's castle appear more believable.
Fans will also notice Disney introduced not one, not two, but three new original songs from original score composer Alan Menken, "How Does a Moment Last Forever," "Days in the Sun," and "Evermore." Unfortunately, none hold a candle to the original music. You won't leave the theater humming any of these. If you've ever seen the extended animated version of "Beauty and the Beast," "Days in the Sun" feels like a revamped version of "Human Again," a song the Beast's servants sing. There's a reason the number didn't make its way into the animated tale. Not only was it too long, but it detracted from the heart of the story. This successor is shorter and less distracting, but equally unnecessary. The only good thing "Human Again" introduced was a sweet scene of Belle reading to the Beast as he listened adoringly, something which makes its way into the live-action film.
Another song, from the Beast, "Evermore," feels awkwardly jammed into the film, which is unfortunate because its placing in the film makes perfect sense, but the song's delivery takes away from what should be a rather somber moment after Belle leaves the Beast's castle late in the film. Instead, it's a more empowering song that alters the mood of the film so suddenly when the character should be downright heartbroken and depressed about the possibility of remaining a beast forever. That's not saying Dan Stevens' performance of the song isn't sweet. It feels clunky in the final film. Josh Groban's performance of the song is much better executed.
And that's one place where "Beauty" seems to have some missteps. Sometimes the pacing of the film just feels a bit off. This is most noticeable in the delivery of some iconic lines which resulted in them not having the same impact as originally intended. I don't want to give them all away, but it was disappointing to not hear Beast really belt out the line, "Then go ahead and starve," when Belle refuses to eat dinner with him. It was almost more of an afterthought.
It wasn't just that moment with the Beast. There was a lot of watering down of the character (perhaps to make him less scary for kids). He wasn't the only one affected. Gaston is presented as a much more likeable guy. It's off-putting at first because he's supposed to be a symbol of sexism and misogyny and the live-action version makes him seem like a halfway decent guy. There has to be some reason this guy's so beloved in town, right? But the film makes him so likeable at the start — bringing Belle a bouquet of flowers, having an interest in the book she's reading instead of tossing it carelessly into a pile of mud — that you may actually question why Belle would turn down his marriage proposals at first. She points out that he's not too bright and, though it probably wasn't the intent, it comes off as pretty mean-spirited and shallow of our heroine, especially in a story that is supposed to be focusing on inner beauty.
That's where the live-action film ends up losing some of the magic that made the original so beloved. The adaptation becomes extremely focused on making sure to present Belle as the best possible role model for young girls. Here, Belle's an inventor and she wears practical dresses and shoes and is very headstrong.
That's great, but Belle already was such a progressive princess for her time when created. No one needs further convincing. As Paige O'Hara told my colleague Kim Renfro back in September, Belle was the first Disney princess who was intellectual and had a love for reading.
"She was quirky and kind of odd. She wasn't looking for a prince — she wanted to experience the adventures and all the places she reads about," O'Hara told INSIDER.
By updating the film to heavily center around an "empowered" Belle, some once-iconic moments in the movie lose their appeal. The scene where Belle asks the Beast to "step into the light" so she can get a good view of him when they first meet is supposed to be about the unveiling of the Beast. It's the first time the audience really sees him. But before he can do that, Belle interrupts and approaches him instead. It becomes about Belle being fearless, something which still comes across in the animated movie when she stands toe-to-toe with him, head held high after first being surprised by his appearance. Later, she interjects again in the midst of Gaston's big fight with the Beast earlier than in the animated tale and takes away a bit from their big scene as well.
It's like Disney felt the need to oversell us on Belle's 21st century update, and it wasn't necessary.
A few other things that stuck out while watching:
- Stanley Tucci is mostly wasted here as a speaking harpsichord. The film certainly didn't need another character in an already pretty crowded movie. His presence didn't add anything except for an over-the-top relationship between his character and Audra McDonalds', who gets transformed into the animated tale's wardrobe.
- For some reason, Belle has to make a perilous journey to get to her bedroom in the East wing of the Beast's castle which involves her going outside on a narrow pathway. Did Disney run out of money to create a corridor similar to the one in the animated film in which she traversed?
- There's a moment near the end that may catch you off guard that was unexpectedly and overwhelmingly emotional.
- There's a magic book that can send Belle and the Beast anywhere and anytime they want. This is like something straight out of one of the film's straight-to-video sequels. Really.
There will be those who get swept up in the nostalgia and will love the film regardless and maybe even moreso for its changes and then there will be the purists who will pick apart and debate every difference between the two.
One thing's certain. The 1991 animated classic won two Oscars and earned another four nods, including one for best picture. This isn't getting a best picture nod. Neither will this new interpretation take the place of the original. Some of the sequences are memorable — Belle's opening song, "Be Our Guest," and the titular dance in the Beast's ballroom — but others truly fall flat. If you had to pick between this and the animated version, no one's going to want to rewatch this over and over again instead.
The shortcomings of "Beauty" may make Disney want to rethink any changes it makes in adapting some of its nearly two dozen upcoming live-action adaptations.
Regardless, the live-action adaptation will make a lot of money. The question is just how much?
3.5 out of five rose emojis. 🌹🌹🌹🥀
"Beauty and the Beast" is in theaters March, 17. Check out a trailer below:
