Post by debutante on Dec 27, 2017 14:06:58 GMT -5
I don't go to the movies anymore. Since I tore up my knee the sloping design of theaters is rather difficult for me to navigate. So I usually wait until things appear on DVD/BLUE-RAY before I see them.
So far, I haven't had a problem with Disney's recent tendency to turn their animated classics into live action films. But a copy of their live action "Beauty and the Beast" found itself into my home on Christmas and it was a real disappointment.
I should mention here that I consider Disney's animated version of "Beauty and The Beast" the pinnacle of their achievement in animation. In my opinion, it should have won the Oscar for Best Picture that year -- I suspect it didn't because the academy couldn't bear to give it to animated figures over real people. "The Silence of the Lambs" doesn't have the timeless quality of the animated film for reasons I'll go into later...
But to get back to the live action version of B&TB: WARNING: SPOILERS FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM.
Where do I begin to say what's wrong with the film? In two words, Emma Watson. Being so used to seeing her as Hermione Graingr in the Harry Potter franchise -- I hadn't realized until I saw her in this movie that this woman can not act. They should have named the film "Hermione and The Beast" because what she did was simply play the role as if she was still Hermione. None of the sweet femininity (which characterizes Belle in the animated version is present in Watson's depiction of Belle). The animated version sacrifices herself to save her father out of love (and vows to keep a promise to remain forever in exchange) Watson's version does it out of defiance (and swears to escape). Somehow -- this burned out women's lib version of Belle didn't seem to have what it took to "tame" the Beast -- so the whole plot went to pot from the get go.
Not to mention that this is more a less a musical --- and as the saying goes, Watson is one of those actresses that can't carry a tune in a basket. My daughter could have sung rings around her by the time she was twelve. I don't care how big a star someone is -- if they can't sing -- don't cast them in a musical. If you do, then DUB THEM. Don't subject the audience to such a travesty. Particularly when they remember Paige O'Hara in the animated version.
It's even more jarring when every background character in the chorus sings better than the lead female character.
I didn't have too much trouble with the costumes (barring the lackluster ball gown that didn't look a thing like the animated version). That wouldn't be a problem if they had done "better". That was simply "blah". Let's just say that had that been the animated ball gown -- I wouldn't have bothered making it for my daughter as a Halloween costume the year the film came out. That's one ugly dress. (And I wasn't overly impressed with the one in the final sequence either -- although I thought the Prince looked well turned out).
The worst part --- the rose meant nothing. The last petal falls before Belle says "I love you" -- so the sorceress (who for some reason known only to the script writers happens to wander in to the castle at the right time) is on hand to reverse the spell and save the day.
If the rose means nothing as a plot device -- then why bother? VERY BAD WRITING....
Most of all...
I have seen the animated version of "Beauty and the Beast" countless times. Each and every time from the moment Gaston stabs the beast in the back, through his transformation, that incredible animated kiss that sets off fireworks transforming the castle and it's inhabitants back to their original form --- to the final sequence where Belle dances with the Prince -- I always cry.
Seriously. I cry. And I am not the only person who does. I can't tell you how many women I know who have told me they cry during that same part. Which is why this should have won picture of the year. I guarantee you NOBODY cries over "The Silence of The Lambs" twenty six years after it was made!
And NOBODY is going to shed a tear over the live action version of "Beauty and The Beast". I didn't. It didn't have the magic. I watched the animated version again afterwards and sure enough -- I cried like a baby.
GREAT FILM. But there's not the same emotional investment in the live action characters because there's just no magic in the film. And there's no chemistry between the leads either.
It only goes to show that sometimes things are perfect just as they are and don't need to be "remade". Give me the voice talent of the animated cast over the live action version any day of the week.
--Debutante
(a romantic at heart)
So far, I haven't had a problem with Disney's recent tendency to turn their animated classics into live action films. But a copy of their live action "Beauty and the Beast" found itself into my home on Christmas and it was a real disappointment.
I should mention here that I consider Disney's animated version of "Beauty and The Beast" the pinnacle of their achievement in animation. In my opinion, it should have won the Oscar for Best Picture that year -- I suspect it didn't because the academy couldn't bear to give it to animated figures over real people. "The Silence of the Lambs" doesn't have the timeless quality of the animated film for reasons I'll go into later...
But to get back to the live action version of B&TB: WARNING: SPOILERS FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T SEEN THE FILM.
Where do I begin to say what's wrong with the film? In two words, Emma Watson. Being so used to seeing her as Hermione Graingr in the Harry Potter franchise -- I hadn't realized until I saw her in this movie that this woman can not act. They should have named the film "Hermione and The Beast" because what she did was simply play the role as if she was still Hermione. None of the sweet femininity (which characterizes Belle in the animated version is present in Watson's depiction of Belle). The animated version sacrifices herself to save her father out of love (and vows to keep a promise to remain forever in exchange) Watson's version does it out of defiance (and swears to escape). Somehow -- this burned out women's lib version of Belle didn't seem to have what it took to "tame" the Beast -- so the whole plot went to pot from the get go.
Not to mention that this is more a less a musical --- and as the saying goes, Watson is one of those actresses that can't carry a tune in a basket. My daughter could have sung rings around her by the time she was twelve. I don't care how big a star someone is -- if they can't sing -- don't cast them in a musical. If you do, then DUB THEM. Don't subject the audience to such a travesty. Particularly when they remember Paige O'Hara in the animated version.
It's even more jarring when every background character in the chorus sings better than the lead female character.
I didn't have too much trouble with the costumes (barring the lackluster ball gown that didn't look a thing like the animated version). That wouldn't be a problem if they had done "better". That was simply "blah". Let's just say that had that been the animated ball gown -- I wouldn't have bothered making it for my daughter as a Halloween costume the year the film came out. That's one ugly dress. (And I wasn't overly impressed with the one in the final sequence either -- although I thought the Prince looked well turned out).
The worst part --- the rose meant nothing. The last petal falls before Belle says "I love you" -- so the sorceress (who for some reason known only to the script writers happens to wander in to the castle at the right time) is on hand to reverse the spell and save the day.
If the rose means nothing as a plot device -- then why bother? VERY BAD WRITING....
Most of all...
I have seen the animated version of "Beauty and the Beast" countless times. Each and every time from the moment Gaston stabs the beast in the back, through his transformation, that incredible animated kiss that sets off fireworks transforming the castle and it's inhabitants back to their original form --- to the final sequence where Belle dances with the Prince -- I always cry.
Seriously. I cry. And I am not the only person who does. I can't tell you how many women I know who have told me they cry during that same part. Which is why this should have won picture of the year. I guarantee you NOBODY cries over "The Silence of The Lambs" twenty six years after it was made!
And NOBODY is going to shed a tear over the live action version of "Beauty and The Beast". I didn't. It didn't have the magic. I watched the animated version again afterwards and sure enough -- I cried like a baby.
GREAT FILM. But there's not the same emotional investment in the live action characters because there's just no magic in the film. And there's no chemistry between the leads either.
It only goes to show that sometimes things are perfect just as they are and don't need to be "remade". Give me the voice talent of the animated cast over the live action version any day of the week.
--Debutante
(a romantic at heart)
