Currently, the new live-action Beauty and the Beast is not sweeping headlines with glowing reviews of its return to glory. Scheduled for release on March 17, Disney’s reimagining of the beloved 1991 original is likely to reign in loads of cash no matter what, but reading through some of the reviews reveal a few flaws.
For instance, Dan Callahan of The Wrap is not impressed with the casting:
“Watson’s gentle and patient presence does not suggest a rebellious and aspirational outsider who longs for more than the ’provincial life’ of the town she is living in. And Luke Evans is not at all suited to the role of the villainous, sexy, and menacing Gaston, which requires a boisterous, preening actor who can get some hammy laughs out of being vain.”
Worried yet?
Nicholas Barber of the BBC wonders why the live-action version was made at all:
“But while the new film isn’t terrible, it’s difficult to see what the point of it is as long as the cartoon exists. Beauty and the Beast is simply a cover version of a chart-topping song, played with such anonymous competence that Condon’s motto must have been, ‘It ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’”
Harsh words. At the same time, it is refreshing to see media outlets give honest reviews, especially considering the original Beauty and the Beast was one of the most popular movies of all time. It is easy to imagine other writers who were fans getting caught up in the nostalgia, nor would most readers blame them as the original was fantastic.
With that said, for various legitimate reasons, some professional writers believe the new version is better.
Brian Truitt of USA Today sounded rather enthusiastic about it:
“Here’s some Disney magic for you: The new Beauty and the Beast actually improves upon the animated classic.”
“Embracing its musical theater nature and adding depth to a familiar narrative, the live-action remake … is a real Beauty. The film directed by Bill Condon (Dreamgirls) skews long — a full 45 minutes longer than the 1991 cartoon — but uses that time to unleash fresh new songs, personalize its supporting players and provide reasons for a provincial girl to fall in love with a ferociously grumpy beast.”
Meanwhile, Kate Muir of The Times gave full support with 5 out of 5 stars:
“The production pays almost scene-for-scene tribute to the much-loved 1991 animation, but adds more zing and subtlety to every encounter.”
A more critical reader might be concerned with the “scene-for-scene” aspect, but as stated earlier, many fans are unlikely to care. People want to see live-action Disney movies.
With Harry Potter star Emma Watson as the lead actress and a “timeless” story behind the script, Beauty and the Beast is on track to smash box office records.
from Nerd Reactor
0 comments: