Ahem!
I’m getting ahead of myself.
I recently went to see Disney’s latest adaptation of the
fairy tale “Beauty and the Beast” starring Emma Watson and Dan Stevens and
directed by Bill Condon. And as the
centerpiece of Beauty and the Beast
Month, I present my reaction/review of it.
Beware, for there may be SPOILERS
ahead.
Before I go any further let’s acknowledge something about
this movie: it does not reinvent the story of Beauty and the Beast. This movie follows the same basic plot as the
1991 animated movie. If you’re looking
for a “twist” on the story, this isn’t that movie and it’s not trying to be.
When it comes to adaptations of well-known stories like
this, the more important thing is the details and how they’re handled. And if you want my opinion, this film handles
those details very well.
This version of Beauty and the Beast even makes a point of fixing some of the holes in the original film like why the Prince’s servants are cursed too, how old the Prince was when he was cursed and how people managed to just forget about a member of the royalty after he was cursed. And all these things are woven into the story in a way that doesn’t halt the story or take anything away from it. In addition, we learn more about our main characters. The reason for the Beast’s heartlessness when he was human comes forward. We learn more about what happened to Belle’s mother. Overall, the entire movie just offers a deeper look at what the animated movie set forth.
Heck, even some of the most unexpected side characters get
some depth. Take LeFou, for instance.
Yes, LeFou. The guy
who’s had this whole controversy surrounding him because the movie depicts him
as gay (for the record, I don’t care).
In the animated film, LeFou was a tiny comical toady who followed Gaston
around and did his bidding. He was the
human equivalent of an animal sidekick in a movie where most of the sidekicks
are housewares. His crowning
accomplishment in the animated film is that he sang the song “Gaston”. In the live action film, he starts as
Gaston’s sidekick but is quickly shown to be a man with a conscience but a weak
will. He even finds the nerve to change
sides later on. LeFou is one of the
characters that had the most growth in the move from animation to live
action. And his sexuality ,or the tiny hint there is of it, really kind of
pales in comparison to the fact that he actually feels like a character now.
Gaston himself shows his malicious side a lot sooner in the
live action film. Whether you like that
or not is likely going to come down to personal taste.
There are other things I like. For example, the Beast and Belle actually
bond over Shakespeare in the live action film.
And it’s not just “I love that book too”. They actually disagree about it. Score a point for intelligent conversation.
The production design is gorgeous. They really seemed to go all-in for the
French Baroque opulence on the Beast’s castle.
The designs for the enchanted objects are all entertaining and interesting. I especially like the birdlike design of the
Plumette the feather duster. There’s
even a nod to the Cocteau film with two lamps held up by arms outside the
entrance to the castle. Though, I think that detail may have been in the animated film too.
The film has all the songs from the animated film except the
reprise of “Gaston”. There are also
three new songs. “How Does a Moment Last
Forever” is the new end credits song and both Maurice and Belle get to sing a
bit of it. “Days in the Sun” is a song
primarily sung by the enchanted servants about their hope to be
unenchanted. And “Evermore” is a torch
song for the Beast. And these are all
really new songs. I checked to see if
they were ported over from the Broadway production and they weren’t. The new songs are all pretty good. One little issue about the music,
though. You can tell that some of the
actors aren’t really singers. They’re
not terrible, but you can tell that they’re not really vocalists by
profession. They still commit themselves
admirably to the task. It didn’t bother
me, but it might bother other people. It
certainly didn’t stop me from buying the soundtrack.
There are other flaws.
The reasoning for the Beast’s cruelty when he was human is introduced
and moves by very quickly. That moment
probably could have been given some more exploration and time to breathe. Also, while it was great to learn more about
Belle’s mother and Belle’s desire to know more about her does connect to one
very important scene, that importance is maybe a little too understated . Also, Ewan MacGregor’s French accent as
Lumiere is pretty bad. But these are
minor things, really. Even with these
flaws, it’s hardly Disney’s worst Beauty and the Beast production.
Well, I guess that really is it and I . . . oh wait, I
forgot about the rose scene.
Now, this is a part of the film that doesn’t necessarily
make it a better movie, but makes it a slightly better fairy tale adaptation in
my book (after all, I’m not a professional film critic so take my assessments
with a grain of salt). But one of my
biggest pet peeves about the 1991 animated film is that they dropped the part
about Belle asking her father for a rose.
In the fairy tale, when Belle’s father is going on a business trip he
asks his children what he should bring them back. Belle’s sisters ask for jewels and finery but
Belle asks for a rose. Belle’s father
then gets lost and gets treated to some mysterious hospitality at the Beast’s
castle. But on the way out he picks a
rose for Belle. This angers the Beast
who accuses him of stealing and that kicks off the main action of the
story. Now, the animated film cut that
part out. Probably because they also cut
out Belle’s sisters and that negated the point of her asking for a humble gift. The rose was repurposed as a symbol of the
Beast’s imprisonment and the story’s proverbial ticking clock. But it’s still an awful shame to cut that
part. It’s one of the most iconic parts
of the story. The live action film
reintroduces the rose request, but how do they do it without Belle’s sisters
being put back into the mix? They make
it a symbolic connection to Belle’s long lost mother. I don’t know about anyone else, but I think
it works.
Overall, I think this is a highly entertaining film. It’s beautiful, adds depth to some
established characters, has some entertaining songs and tugs on the heart
strings. It’s maybe not going to please
everyone (for example: if you still see the whole story as an ode to Stockholm
Syndrome, this film is not going to change that. Sorry).
But I think if you like Disney’s previous reimaginings of its classic
properties then I think you’ll like this.
Haven't seen it yet - it begins in Australia tomorrow. I have seen the animated version and the stage show - good to know there are more songs.
ReplyDeleteAs long as an actor can sing in tune,I don't mind. I once saw Pal Joey with Sian Phillips, an actress who was best known for I, Claudius. She managed "Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered" because it didn't require her to go too high or low. Glynis Johns couldn't sing too high or low either and she was, I believe, the first to sing "Send In The Clowns"; she managed.
Agree, agree, agree, and agree. And YES!! on putting the rose back in!
ReplyDeleteI have now seen the film, on Thursday night, and thoroughly enjoyed it. I agree that the reason for the Beast's cruelty went by too fast - and the flashback to the Beast's childhood never actually reinforced it.
ReplyDeleteSomething else has occurred to me: we never do find out his name. Everyone else, yes, including the fairy, but even as a pretty blonde yourg man, he is still the Beast. Pity.
Maybe he's the Prince De Villeneuve? That was a cheeky name to give the village, after the woman who wrote a version of the story!
Will you be doing a review of the 2014 Disney film of Into the Woods?
ReplyDeleteI already did, right after it came out!: http://www.fairytalefandom.com/2014/12/fairy-tale-media-fix-into-woods_28.html
Delete