Before entering theater, I knew Emma Watson looked the part. Belle means beauty, and she certainly is that. With a movie that's highly concerned with pageantry, her looks are especially important. More so than simply supplying the necessary beauty to play Belle, she has the right look. She conveys intelligence, genuine concern, and a longing for more. It comes from her eyes. They tell her story. She expresses her thoughts and feelings clearly in every moment without saying a word.
For the most part, I could take or leave the live action Disney revivals. This one felt like it had more promise to me, and a large part of that came from the apropos casting of Watson.
As it turns out, she delivered. She does far more than look that part, she acts and sings it too. For anyone wondering, it really is her singing. Unfortunately, she and the other actors pre-recorded their vocal performances, which were subsequently dubbed over the visual scenes. That makes for the song and dance displays ring just a bit false, compared to the sincerity of those in La La Land. Granted, I understand that complaining that a movie doesn't live up to the standard of another movie that won six Oscars, is beyond finicky.
If you were worried that the new voices wouldn't do justice to the originals, rest easy. Every singer delivers, especially Watson. What a voice she has. Who knew Hermione had golden pipes?
The film doesn't wait long to unveil the real-life Belle's talents. She flexes her performing muscles as she glides her way through the quaint village brought to life.
Everything seems great, just a little long. And that's the movie's glaring problem—it's too long. The filmmakers took the original's tight 1 hour 24-minute runtime and ballooned it to 2 hours and 9 minutes. Even Emma Watson's charm can only last for so long. I'm not saying the movie needs to trim some fat, but there's no way it would fit in Belle's dress. Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all article.
As much as I've raved about Watson—and I strongly believe she deserves all the praise—the rest of the movie doesn't quite make it. At times, the spectacle wore off and I just felt bored. There were a few too many songs, and a few too many verses in some. I don't remember how long the original songs were, but I know that I never felt bored listening to them.
For all the glamour and loveliness, something was conspicuously absent. The movie lacks magic. None of the songs bombed, but they didn't exactly floor me either.
Another issue arose from the added scenes. I understand the desire to show us Belle's mother and the Beast's parents. Many children's movies omit parents, with the implication that they died, and that's it. An illumination of why the Beast (a prince at the time) so rudely turned away the stranger worked fine. But was it really necessary? Personally, I never had any trouble believing the spoiled prince angle. The dastardly daddy reveal didn't add much.
Perhaps it was intended to give viewers more sympathy for the Beast. Meh. He earned my sympathy when he showed his kindness to Belle. I always thought that was the point. The enchantress cursed him for treating people poorly. That was his issue, not his dad's. The insertion of the dad story makes it seem like the Beast's reprehensible behavior wasn't his fault. I didn't like that implication.
I was disappointed to see a few missed opportunities with the minority characters. A word of advice: don't bother including a black person as the bookkeeper if he doesn't have a chance to do anything. He's used as a showpiece. Nothing more. That's not progressive casting; it's condescending.
Sadly, the movie's usage of gay characters felt even more insulting. Including a gay character is fine, even better than fine, if the character is represented appropriately. In this case, appropriate simply means not in an overtly theatrical and effeminate manner. The whole stereotypical portrayal was annoying.
I'll end on a high note. Credit must be given to the unimpeachable Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci, Kevin Kline, Ian McKellen, and Ewan McGregor. They performed admirably.
Future live action Disney films, should learn from Beauty. Casting is vital and so is keeping the runtime reasonable. Forever can spare a minute, but I don't have that much time.
For the most part, I could take or leave the live action Disney revivals. This one felt like it had more promise to me, and a large part of that came from the apropos casting of Watson.
As it turns out, she delivered. She does far more than look that part, she acts and sings it too. For anyone wondering, it really is her singing. Unfortunately, she and the other actors pre-recorded their vocal performances, which were subsequently dubbed over the visual scenes. That makes for the song and dance displays ring just a bit false, compared to the sincerity of those in La La Land. Granted, I understand that complaining that a movie doesn't live up to the standard of another movie that won six Oscars, is beyond finicky.
If you were worried that the new voices wouldn't do justice to the originals, rest easy. Every singer delivers, especially Watson. What a voice she has. Who knew Hermione had golden pipes?
The film doesn't wait long to unveil the real-life Belle's talents. She flexes her performing muscles as she glides her way through the quaint village brought to life.
Everything seems great, just a little long. And that's the movie's glaring problem—it's too long. The filmmakers took the original's tight 1 hour 24-minute runtime and ballooned it to 2 hours and 9 minutes. Even Emma Watson's charm can only last for so long. I'm not saying the movie needs to trim some fat, but there's no way it would fit in Belle's dress. Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all article.
As much as I've raved about Watson—and I strongly believe she deserves all the praise—the rest of the movie doesn't quite make it. At times, the spectacle wore off and I just felt bored. There were a few too many songs, and a few too many verses in some. I don't remember how long the original songs were, but I know that I never felt bored listening to them.
For all the glamour and loveliness, something was conspicuously absent. The movie lacks magic. None of the songs bombed, but they didn't exactly floor me either.
Another issue arose from the added scenes. I understand the desire to show us Belle's mother and the Beast's parents. Many children's movies omit parents, with the implication that they died, and that's it. An illumination of why the Beast (a prince at the time) so rudely turned away the stranger worked fine. But was it really necessary? Personally, I never had any trouble believing the spoiled prince angle. The dastardly daddy reveal didn't add much.
Perhaps it was intended to give viewers more sympathy for the Beast. Meh. He earned my sympathy when he showed his kindness to Belle. I always thought that was the point. The enchantress cursed him for treating people poorly. That was his issue, not his dad's. The insertion of the dad story makes it seem like the Beast's reprehensible behavior wasn't his fault. I didn't like that implication.
I was disappointed to see a few missed opportunities with the minority characters. A word of advice: don't bother including a black person as the bookkeeper if he doesn't have a chance to do anything. He's used as a showpiece. Nothing more. That's not progressive casting; it's condescending.
Sadly, the movie's usage of gay characters felt even more insulting. Including a gay character is fine, even better than fine, if the character is represented appropriately. In this case, appropriate simply means not in an overtly theatrical and effeminate manner. The whole stereotypical portrayal was annoying.
I'll end on a high note. Credit must be given to the unimpeachable Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci, Kevin Kline, Ian McKellen, and Ewan McGregor. They performed admirably.
Future live action Disney films, should learn from Beauty. Casting is vital and so is keeping the runtime reasonable. Forever can spare a minute, but I don't have that much time.