Beauty and the Beast (PG.)
Directed by Bill Condon.
Starring Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Josh Gad, Kevin Kline and Emma Thompson. 129 mins.
Just as we've come to accept that it is entirely reasonable to buy a new phone or laptop every two to three years, Disney has decided that it is no longer acceptable to expect contemporary enfants to suffer through hand drawn animation and are giving all their classic old animations and fairy tales live action upgrades. After Sleeping Beauty (Maleficent), Cinderella and The Jungle Book got the treatment they have turned on the 1991 animation, which along with The Little Mermaid, really kickstarted the rebuilding and recovery of Disney's reputation. It is precious to them, and this new take is under instructions to leave things just where they found them, as far as possible.
So this new version features the original score. Which means that there is singing and lots of it: less than Les Mis, but more than La La Land. It took me back to my childhood when every trip to the cinema seemed to be to see an overlong musical, where the songs were there to be endured. Most aspects of the film seem old fashioned and traditional, from the staging of the musical numbers to the run-of-the-mill opulence of Beast's Gothic palace, the designs for which looks like they might've been found in an old Tim Burton desk.
The early scenes in the French village are particularly leaden and the double act of Luke Evans, as the villainous Gaston, and Gad as his devoted, camp sidekick, is pantomime stuff. After this shaky start the film picks up and once it is ensconced in the Beast's castle it is solid enough entertainment, though without any moments of inspiration. I'm struggling to think of anything extra this live action version brings to the story over the animation, other than an extra 35 minutes, and Emma Watson.
Isn't it a little ironic to see her in a film about people trapped in an unnatural state by a curse? Perhaps one day we'll have a popular story about three young kids who get cast in a series of films about magic and wizardry, and then never grow up. Radcliffe's, Watson and Grint's combined abilities to largely brush aside the effects of puberty is downright creepy. (Maybe the Bros Warner had some kind of doping system, or it was an inspired piece of work by the Potter casting director.) Watson had to turn down La La Land to do this, and such a wait-for-ages-and-then-two-buses-come-at-once scenario must have been infuriating for her because prior to that she was getting films that nobody wanted to see. She retains though the fascination of the global public which is why she can waltz into this major starring role despite her recent lack of success. She's not bad in the role, and if that is her singing she has a decent voice, but surely in a role that demands Beauty, all she can offer is pretty.
Opposite her as The Beast, Downton Abbey Stevens sounds like a demonically possessed Hugh Lawrie, a growly Dr House. Filmed at Shepperton studio the film is filled with British screen greats and up and comers, most of whom are playing the furniture. The Beast's house is so up market that it has Emma Thompson serving the tea and a knight of the realm (Sir Ian McKellen) telling the time.
B&B pushes its liberal agenda pretty hard. The A Long Time Ago French village is remarkably multicultural and Gad's character is clearly gay. Gaston, the traditional male hero figure, is a vain villain and the Beauty is somewhat tomboyish (though not as much as Kristen Stewart’s Snow White.) All this is a little odd coming from an organisation bearing the name of a supposed Nazi sympathiser and friendly HUAC witness. I'm not up with the exact lettering of that contentious Russian law, but if it does prohibit gay propaganda aimed at children then I can't see how this doesn't qualify. Though it is fun to wind up the bigots and the narrow-minded this Triumph of the Lib stridency is exactly the kind of thing that has middle Americans (and middle other places) rallying to the alt-right cause. You can cheer Disney for its social progressiveness but I'd say enjoy it while you can because the guiding principle of the Disney Corporation is money and the accumulation there of, and I can't see it being prepared to stick its neck out again if it threatens their investment. As long as you have the edge when it comes to disposable incomes it will tell you what you want to hear; if the market continues to swing rightward you may not like what the Mouse House has to say in the future.
Directed by Bill Condon.
Starring Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Josh Gad, Kevin Kline and Emma Thompson. 129 mins.
Just as we've come to accept that it is entirely reasonable to buy a new phone or laptop every two to three years, Disney has decided that it is no longer acceptable to expect contemporary enfants to suffer through hand drawn animation and are giving all their classic old animations and fairy tales live action upgrades. After Sleeping Beauty (Maleficent), Cinderella and The Jungle Book got the treatment they have turned on the 1991 animation, which along with The Little Mermaid, really kickstarted the rebuilding and recovery of Disney's reputation. It is precious to them, and this new take is under instructions to leave things just where they found them, as far as possible.
So this new version features the original score. Which means that there is singing and lots of it: less than Les Mis, but more than La La Land. It took me back to my childhood when every trip to the cinema seemed to be to see an overlong musical, where the songs were there to be endured. Most aspects of the film seem old fashioned and traditional, from the staging of the musical numbers to the run-of-the-mill opulence of Beast's Gothic palace, the designs for which looks like they might've been found in an old Tim Burton desk.
The early scenes in the French village are particularly leaden and the double act of Luke Evans, as the villainous Gaston, and Gad as his devoted, camp sidekick, is pantomime stuff. After this shaky start the film picks up and once it is ensconced in the Beast's castle it is solid enough entertainment, though without any moments of inspiration. I'm struggling to think of anything extra this live action version brings to the story over the animation, other than an extra 35 minutes, and Emma Watson.
Isn't it a little ironic to see her in a film about people trapped in an unnatural state by a curse? Perhaps one day we'll have a popular story about three young kids who get cast in a series of films about magic and wizardry, and then never grow up. Radcliffe's, Watson and Grint's combined abilities to largely brush aside the effects of puberty is downright creepy. (Maybe the Bros Warner had some kind of doping system, or it was an inspired piece of work by the Potter casting director.) Watson had to turn down La La Land to do this, and such a wait-for-ages-and-then-two-buses-come-at-once scenario must have been infuriating for her because prior to that she was getting films that nobody wanted to see. She retains though the fascination of the global public which is why she can waltz into this major starring role despite her recent lack of success. She's not bad in the role, and if that is her singing she has a decent voice, but surely in a role that demands Beauty, all she can offer is pretty.
Opposite her as The Beast, Downton Abbey Stevens sounds like a demonically possessed Hugh Lawrie, a growly Dr House. Filmed at Shepperton studio the film is filled with British screen greats and up and comers, most of whom are playing the furniture. The Beast's house is so up market that it has Emma Thompson serving the tea and a knight of the realm (Sir Ian McKellen) telling the time.
B&B pushes its liberal agenda pretty hard. The A Long Time Ago French village is remarkably multicultural and Gad's character is clearly gay. Gaston, the traditional male hero figure, is a vain villain and the Beauty is somewhat tomboyish (though not as much as Kristen Stewart’s Snow White.) All this is a little odd coming from an organisation bearing the name of a supposed Nazi sympathiser and friendly HUAC witness. I'm not up with the exact lettering of that contentious Russian law, but if it does prohibit gay propaganda aimed at children then I can't see how this doesn't qualify. Though it is fun to wind up the bigots and the narrow-minded this Triumph of the Lib stridency is exactly the kind of thing that has middle Americans (and middle other places) rallying to the alt-right cause. You can cheer Disney for its social progressiveness but I'd say enjoy it while you can because the guiding principle of the Disney Corporation is money and the accumulation there of, and I can't see it being prepared to stick its neck out again if it threatens their investment. As long as you have the edge when it comes to disposable incomes it will tell you what you want to hear; if the market continues to swing rightward you may not like what the Mouse House has to say in the future.
