Beauty and the Beast (2017): A Review

 

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (2017)

I imagine that the people behind the remake of the animated film version of Beauty and the Beast really did, in their heart of hearts, have the best of intentions. Yes, the Disney Corporation has been raiding their fabled Disney Vault and remaking their animated catalog into live-action versions because, reasons. There has been something predatory about how Disney remakes old films, many already established and beloved classics, and throws them at audiences willing to watch the same thing because people are in them. While Beauty and the Beast is at times pretty to look at, there is a hollowness, a sadness to it all. 

In Ancient Regime France, an enchantress has cursed a vain prince and his servants to be a beast and inanimate objects respectively. Many years later, a bookish girl named Belle (Emma Watson) yearns for a life far from the provincial world she lives in. She also longs to stay far but very far away from self-proclaimed hunk Gaston (Luke Evans). Gaston has got it into his thick head that Belle is the ideal wife, even if he is oblivious to the googly eyes of his faithful Sancho Panza, LeFou (Josh Gad).

Belle's father Maurice (Kevin Kline) goes on business but ends up at the now-forgotten Beast's palace. He eventually flees after seeing a talking teacup, but when attempting to take a rose for Belle, he is captured by the Beast (Dan Stevens). Belle, alarmed by Maurice's horse arriving alone, goes and takes her father's place. Maurice cannot get anyone to believe his wild story, though Gaston sees it as a way to get Maurice to agree to a marriage.

As Belle and the Beast attempt to negotiate their lives, both begin to soften towards the other. The palace servants, such as the uptight clock Cogsworth (Ian McKellen), the suave candelabra Lumiere (Ewan McGregor), the kindly teapot Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson) and wardrobe Madame de Garderobe (Audra McDonald) all conspire to help the blossoming romance. Granted, they have ulterior motives: only when the Beast can love and be loved in return can the spell be broken. However, it is now a race to create this magic moment, for the Beast has until when the last rose petal the enchantress gave the Beast falls. Will Belle and the Beast see something that was not there before? Will Gaston get his way?

We've had live-action remakes of Cinderella, 101 Dalmatians, The Jungle Book, Pete's Dragon, Dumbo, this one, The Lion King, Aladdin, Pinocchio and the upcoming The Little Mermaid and Snow White. That is also not counting such films as Maleficent and its sequel Maleficent: Mistress of Evil plus Cruella, which are not strictly remakes but revolve around Disney villains. Still no word on whom they will cast as Basil of Baker Street for the inevitable The Great Mouse Detective live-action remake. 

Most of the Disney live-action remakes (which have grown so plentiful they might as well be their own genre) follow a surprisingly similar route: stay very close to the original and only tweaking bits here and there. Beauty and the Beast follows this familiar route, but with continuing diminishing returns. The film aims to be distinct but in copying so much from the animated version, it is simply impossible. However, if it wants to be an almost shot-for-shot remake, why then bother? 

Beauty and the Beast has what I call "forced frivolity", where we are told how happy everything is but it does come through on the screen. Instead, we get some scenes that are almost sad to watch. A good example is the Be Our Guest number. It was here that I first recognized Ewan McGregor's voice, and while he is capable of singing, there was no true joie de vivre coming from the number. Instead, if felt sluggish, almost creepy.

I think it comes from the fact that screenwriters Stephen Chbosky and Evan Spiliotopoulos were given very little leeway to find something new and original. They had to have the servants be objects just like in the animated version. However, the end results fail spectacularly. The clock and candelabra look off-putting and unnatural. Worse was Mrs. Potts, who looked like a face had literally been drawn onto a teapot. There was no warmth or sweetness communicated from the objects, because they were limited to being "real".

The few things the writers did change from the 1991 version were nonsensical and pointless. We got a Mr. Potts, who thanks to the spell forgot he had a wife and child. The enchantress essentially swept in after the last petal fell to bring the beauty behind the Beast to life. Even the "LeFou is gay!" bit was vague. For most of the film, LeFou was more fey than gay, with only the mildest hint at the end when a man cuts in to dance with him.

While Beauty and the Beast kept to most of the 1991 songs, the three new songs by Alan Menkin and Tim Rice are bland and forgettable. Two of them center around the Beast, with Evermore being a ballad sung by the Beast. The other Beast-centric number, Days in the Sun, appears to want to soften the Beast's character and make him sympathetic due to an unhappy childhood, a strange decision given he is meant to soften over time. I also got the sense that new lyrics were added to the songs, but if so I don't think it was an improvement.

For example, Gaston seems to be longer and with a strange section where LeFou cannot spell out "Gaston" because as he sing-talks, he is illiterate. I cannot remember for certain if that was part of the 1991 version, but I don't think it added anything either.

As if that was already not bad enough, the cast seems wildly out-of-place. Emma Watson looks more angry and hard as Belle, never displaying anything close to warmth. Moreover, her singing voice is frankly awful and harsh. Stevens too was not very good when singing, and not much better when in Beast mode. 

McGregor and McKellen seem ill-suited for the Lumiere/Cogsworth double-act. They seem almost complete strangers in the film, making the idea of longtime association laughable. I thought that Cogsworth looked like Tik Tok from Return to Oz, but having seen Tik Tok, he looks worse. Emma Thompson, I think, did her best as Mrs. Potts, but couldn't quite get the sweet and motherly nature there.

Kevin Kline did do well as Maurice, a mix of eccentric and caring coming through. Luke Evans was hamming it up to the Nth degree as Gaston, and his voice was much stronger than Watson or just about anyone else save Audra McDonald. He went all-in on the himbo Gaston, so I give him credit for that.

Beauty and the Beast has some pretty-looking moments and nice costumes, but so much of it is uninteresting I genuinely wonder why anyone would prefer it over the original. To my mind, Beauty and the Beast was like seeing someone propping up a corpse. 

DECISION: D-

Beauty and the Beast (1991): A Review

 

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (1991)

I remember Beauty and the Beast when it first came out.   It was at a critical time in animation, and in the fortunes of the Walt Disney Studios.  The vaunted Disney Renaissance was a hit-and-miss affair at this point.  The Little Mermaid was an unqualified success artistically and commercially, but the follow-up, The Rescuers Down Under, wasn't.  Beauty and the Beast would be make-or-break: would Disney really have a rebirth in its fortunes or was The Little Mermaid just a lucky break? 

The tales of the death of Disney as an animation force to be reckoned with were greatly exaggerated.  Beauty and the Beast is one of the highlights of animation, a beautiful and tender story that still has the power to move the viewer emotionally, with a brilliant score and songs that not only hold up after over two decades but still have extraordinary elegance, charm, humor, wit, and grace.

A long time ago, a vain and selfish Prince was cursed by an enchantress who asked for shelter at his castle disguised as an old woman, offering a rose for payment.  Her curse extended throughout the castle affecting both the Prince and the servants.  The enchantress gives the now-Beast two items: a magic mirror which allows him to see anything in the world, and the rose, which is enchanted.  He has ten years to find someone to love and who will love him before the last petal falls, otherwise everyone will be cursed forever.  The Beast, convinced no one will love him due to his hideous form, locks himself away within his castle, shutting himself off from the world.

Many years later, a father and daughter take root in a village.  Belle (Page O'Hara), daughter to inventor Maurice (Rex Everhart), loves her father, but she is different from all the other girls.  Bookish and intellectual, she longs for adventure and knowledge.  She wants to find her own Prince Charming, but she is content to be with her father and her beloved books. 

Belle certainly has no interest in the village hunk, the vain and brutish Gaston (Richard White), a master huntsman whom all the women love.  Gaston, for his part, has decided Belle will be his bride (her opinion on the matter being irrelevant).  Belle does her best to put Gaston off, but Gaston is determined to get at her.  Maurice goes off to another village to present his latest invention, a woodchopping machine, but gets lost in the forest.  He takes refuge at the Beast's castle, unaware of its history.  He is attended by the castle's staff: Lumiere (Jerry Orbach), a candelabra who has a bon vivant personality, Cogsworth (David Odgen Stiers), a stuffy clock, and Miss Potts (Angela Lansbury), a cheerful teapot.  However, an enraged Beast (Robbie Benson) locks Maurice.

When Philippe, Maurice's horse, returns in a panic to their home, Belle is alarmed.  Belle goes to the castle, and offers herself in exchange for her father.  The Beast's one condition: she must stay there forever, and Belle reluctantly agrees.  Maurice attempts to get the village to help mount a rescue, but no one believes.  However, Maurice's ramblings give Gaston something he rarely has: an idea.  If he gets Maurice locked up in an asylum, he will use his influence to release him...if Belle agrees to marry him.

Belle is heartbroken at this turn of events, but the servants know she could be the one to break the spell.  However, things are difficult given how Beast behaves: brutish, uncouth, and unpleasant.  However, with some coaxing and coaching from the servants, Beast's more gentle side emerges.  The real change occurs when Belle flees in terror after going to the West Wing, the one area of the castle forbidden to her.  An enraged Beast terrorizes her when she sees the mirror and dying rose, but he then rescues her from wolves. 

In time, they soon start seeing the other as good, even friends.  Beast shows himself to be a kind being, but after an enchanted night together Belle confesses she misses her father.  In an act of self-sacrifice, Beast allows her leave to go, giving her the magic mirror.  While he is sad to see her go, her happiness comes first in his mind.  She is happy to see her father again, explaining that Beast is different than how he and everyone might see him.  Belle is also surprised to see Chip (Bradley Michael Pierce), Mrs. Potts' son who is a teacup, who snuck into her bag.  However, something wicked this way comes in the form of Gaston and the head of the insane asylum.  She still refuses Gaston's marriage offer and presents the mirror to show Beast as a good being.  Gaston, enraged that Belle would prefer Beast over him, gets a mob to storm the castle.  The castle staff mounts a furious defense and defeat the mob, but Beast, too heartbroken to care, offers no defense when Gaston the hunter comes to hunt him down.  Beast rallies though, when he sees Belle has come back of her own free will to help him.  Gaston fatally injures Beast, but Gaston in turn falls into a deep abyss (presumably dying).  A heartbroken Belle tells Beast she loves him just as the final petal falls.  In a stunning turn of events, Beast is transformed to a human again, as are all the servants.

Both of them, seeing that true beauty lies within, marry and live happily ever after.

I freely admit that at the end of Beauty and the Beast, I shed a couple of tears.  I was intensely moved by the story (which itself moved rather quickly without being rushed). 

A gigantic part of Beauty and the Beast's success comes in Alan Menken's music and Howard Ashman's lyrics.  The musical score is brilliant: dark or light when necessary.  Almost all the songs are excellent and do what good musicals should do: either move the plot or explore character.  We have the big opening number, Belle, which describes how Belle is so unusual in her world because unlike the other villagers (particularly women), she loves books and the world of knowledge.  Another number, Gaston, sung in a joint first and third-person, shows the arrogant, narcissistic side to our figure, a vain, prideful man for whom intellect is an aberration rather than an accomplishment.

The big three numbers most remembered though are the ones nominated for Best Original Song.  There's the aforementioned Belle, and there the big showstopping number Be Our Guest, where Lumiere gives Belle a grand banquet.  Be Our Guest (which Disney still uses to promote its theme parks, particularly its hotels and restaurants), is as lavish a musical number as Disney has had in an animated feature, freely, openly, and nakedly drawing from the big Busby Berkeley musicals of the 1930s.  It builds and builds until it becomes this massive visual spectacle, one so grand even the stuffy Cogsworth gets caught up in its extravagance. 

As a side note, I'm nut sure Belle actually ate much if anything at this feast, but I can't argue with Be Our Guest's grand spectacle.  It's Disney by way of Ziegfeld.

As big and splashy as Be Our Guest is (and it certainly is unapologetically that), it is the third Oscar-nominated song (and eventual winner) that is the deepest and most beautiful of Beauty and the Beast's songs.  The title song is pure in its simplicity.

If you listen to Beauty and the Beast, you'll notice that it is a five-note melody, with the lyrics always fitting that five-note theme.  Even in the bridge, you have five notes, with the lyrics having five syllables.  Only in the beginning and end of the song do you have a sixth note, which is a downward note from the others.  However, the song's melody, soft and lush, evokes a tenderness, that of Belle and the Beast falling in love.

The fact that lyricist Howard Ashman was dying of AIDS as he wrote this beautiful love songs lends Beauty and the Beast an added poignancy and longing.  Ashman died before the film was released, and Beauty and the Beast is dedicated to his memory.  While Ashman was able to write songs for Aladdin, released later, Beauty and the Beast to my mind really is one of the most beautiful songs in the Disney songbook.

The only song that I think fell flat was Human Again, a song I did not remember, and with good reason.  It was not in the original film, but added in the Special Edition.  It was an OK song, but not one I thought was necessary or on the level of all the others.  I can see why it was cut from the original release and frankly it didn't add anything to the Special Edition.

In terms of performances Disney was wise to not cast 'big names' as either Belle or the Beast, as it allowed Page O'Hara and Robbie Benson to create characters that were believable and relatable.  There are names in the film, though Jerry Orbach is probably best known for Law & Order.  Still, his Maurice Chevalier-like Lumiere was delightful (especially when paired with the stuffy Stiers' Cogsworth).  Lansbury was wonderful as Mrs. Potts, a most understanding teapot of kindness.

Visually, the film is beautiful, a lush artwork to be appreciated time and time again.

Beauty and the Beast did something no other animated film had done: gotten even the stuffy Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences' attention.  It was the first animated film to be nominated for Best Picture and remains the only traditional animated film to be so honored (both Up and Toy Story 3 being computer-animated).  Instead of giving it a special prize, the Academy recognized this to be a very special film.  Oh, the Oscars have made mistakes (Eddie Redmayne comes quickly to mind), but here, they were spot-on.

In short, Beauty and the Beast is a film that is a landmark achievement.  It is a 'tale as old as time', with songs 'as old as rhyme', which in this case mean they will live on forever.

DECISION: A+