I've already reviewed this film on TVTropes. This review is an expanded version of that one. In essentials, nothing has changed.
Not even the title-card is as beautiful as in the cartoon.
Some genius in Disney decided to reinvent the wheel and make live-action films of their cartoons. For years now a parade of sub-par, soulless "adaptations" have made their way onto our screens. Some of them are watchable -- The Jungle Book (2016) stands out. Others are complete rubbish that lack everything that made the originals good -- Maleficent is one of the worst offenders.
This film is the worst of a bad lot. And to add insult to injury, it makes a mockery of Disney's best animated film.
It has a long list of familiar faces, which makes it more proof that not even a (mostly) good cast can make a film good.
Emma Watson (Hermione in Harry Potter) as Belle (!)
Dan Stevens (Matthew Crawley in Downton Abbey) as the Beast (!!)
Emma Thompson (Elinor in Sense and Sensibility 1995) as Mrs. Potts
Ian McKellan (Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings) as Cogsworth (What.)
Luke Evans (Bard in The Hobbit) as Gaston (Double "what.")
Ewan McGregor (Christian in Moulin Rouge! 2001) as Lumière
Audra McDonald (the Mother Abbess in The Sound of Music Live! 2013) as Madame de Garderobe (the wardrobe, for fans of the cartoon wondering who the heck that is.)
Kevin Kline (voice of Phoebus in The Hunchback of Notre Dame 1996) as Maurice
Josh Gad (voice of Olaf in Frozen 2013) as LeFou
Stanley Tucci (Abraham Erskine in Captain America 2011) as Cadenza (a character invented for this film)
Hattie Morahan (Elinor in Sense and Sensibility 2008) as the Enchantress
And that's just a few of them. The director deserves some sort of medal. He cast so many good -- well, famous, which isn't always the same thing -- actors, and managed to give all of them roles they were utterly unsuited to. Remember the Joe Wright curse I mentioned in the Pride and Prejudice (2005) review? This film is a perfect example of it.
But then, Bill Condon, the director, also directed at least one Twilight film. That should tell you all you need to know about his, ahem, "qualifications".
From the second scene, the greatest problem with this film becomes apparent. When you make a musical, you want actors who can sing, right? And if for some reason you cast an actor who can't sing, you can consult Singin' in the Rain on what to do in that situation. Namely, dub them! But this fine director decided he didn't care if half the actors couldn't carry a note in a bucket.
The result is painful to your ears, and leaves you close to tears. Yes, that was a My Fair Lady reference. I'm not a fan of Rex Harrison's recitative, but at least he didn't try to actually sing. They should have done the same thing here if they didn't want to dub anyone.
Anyway, back to the film. It opens in much the same way as the original: with a prologue describing the Beast's curse, and the townspeople singing "Belle". But dear god, compared to the original this looks like the preview of The Dueling Cavalier.
Belle's wooden acting is the only thing worse than her off-key singing. Emma Watson seems to have spent this film in a state of constant boredom. Can't say I blame her. I felt much the same when watching it.
We're introduced to Maurice, one of the few characters who can actually sing without making my ears bleed, but who for some inexplicable reason isn't an inventor in this version. Instead, Belle is the inventor. What.
Maurice goes off to a convention, gets lost, and ends up at the Beast's castle. Then the filmmakers decide to take a leaf from the original fairy-tale's book, and he picks a rose to bring back to Belle. This angers the Beast so much that he immediately throws Maurice in the dungeon.
Back in the village, Gaston proposes to Belle. This scene lacks all the humour of the original, not least because this Gaston is utterly unconvincing. The whole thing happens in private, without the village watching, yet the filmmakers kept his complaint about being publicly humiliated. Another "what".
Belle sets off to rescue her father, ends up at the castle, and meets the Beast. We viewers get our first good look at the Beast in this scene. That noise you just heard was me roaring with laughter. Remember how the Beast looks like a chimera out of someone's nightmares in the cartoon? (Until character development sets in.) Well, this Beast looks like an overgrown goat. It's not just the Beast, either. All the enchanted characters' appearances have been changed. And not for the better, either.
This film's motto is "things get worse". We're treated to a sub-par rendition of Be Our Guest (one of my favourite songs in the original, and dull as dishwater here). Then Belle sees the rose and has a confrontation with a remarkably calm Beast... that ends with her screaming and running away like in the original, even though he didn't lose his temper here.
In addition to directing rubbish films, the director has no grasp of biology. So allow me to enlighten him. WOLVES DON'T ROAR! Lions, tigers, bears, and angry audience members roar. Wolves howl. There's a difference.
As if this fiasco didn't drag on long enough, someone decided to add new songs to the film. Now, there's a stage version of BATB that already added several original songs. "Home" and "If I Can't Love Her" are the most impressive IMHO. So surely, if Disney decided to add more songs, they would turn to the stage version.
Nope. They went and gave us the sort of soppy drivel I'd expect to find in an amateur poet's first works. "Days in the Sun" is... reasonably bearable (oh, how it pains me to admit it). "Evermore" is best summed up with a Phantom of the Opera quote.
They changed half the lyrics in "Gaston", and in the process lost everything that makes that song so funny. But I mustn't overlook the way they butchered "Beauty and the Beast". The song, as well as the film. It's sad but true that Emma Thompson cannot sing this song. "Tale as old as toime, song as old as roime..." And Belle's dress looks nothing like a ballgown and more like an amateur dressmaker's first attempt.
An awful lot about this film is amateurish, actually. Except the budget. They certainly knew how to spend that. What a pity it doesn't show in the finished product.
Anyway, Belle runs off (in her underwear!) to save Maurice, Gaston and co. storm the castle, the Beast apparently dies. It was heart-wrenching in the original. Here, my only thought was "When will this end?"
Then the director makes the truly mind-boggling decision to bring back the enchantress and have her personally lift the curse. What. And the film ends (*cheers*) with a ball and a sub-par reprise of "Beauty and the Beast" (*boos*).
I can sum up this film in one word: "Ugh". It makes a mockery of the actors, the songs, and the story. Don't waste your time watching it. The original is better in every way, and much more enjoyable.
Is it available online?: To quote my P+P 2005 review, "Who cares?"
Rating: 1/10.
No comments:
Post a Comment