I know, I KNOW. I'm super early in getting this review up.
Okay, fine, I'm at least a week late, and to that, I say... A wizard is never late, nor is he early; he reviews Beauty and the Beast precisely when he means to.
As you all already know, Beauty and the Beast is the latest in Disney's string of live-action remakes of their classic animations and stars Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Ewan McGregor, and Luke Evans. It was directed by Bill Condon, who helmed, well, this...
Yeah.
It also is quite musical, very much in the true spirit and vein of the original.
If you'd been closely following my reviews last year, you'll know I really liked The Jungle Book, so I was interested in seeing what they would do to a story that's been adapted countless times. Upon seeing the movie, it really just is the same story we've seen in 1997, and numerous other times on stage. That being said, there still is a lot to like about this movie.
First off, the acting in this movie was great. I thought Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen owned their roles as Lumierre and Cogsworth, respectively. They were fun to watch and had excellent chemistry between the two of them. They were charming, hilarious, and very much how you remember them being.
Luke Evans was fantastic as Gaston, and, as far as owning his role went, I think he really sunk his teeth into this one deeper than Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen did. Not only did he pull off Gaston's more comedic quirks with so much style and flair, but brought a lot of depth to the more serious aspects of his personality. I really can only applaud Luke Evans because he really did make the most of this character. Literally anyone could've played Gaston, but it really takes a special kind of actor to get one to say, "THAT'S Gaston."
Kevin Kline and Josh Gad were amazing in their respective roles as Maurice and Lefou. Kline brought a lot of heart and had a nice layer of depth to his portrayal of Maurice that made him feel more grounded. Josh Gad, on the other hand, was kinda doing the complete opposite of what Kevin Kline was. His portrayal of Lefou was kinda like if you managed to combine Jack Black and Eric Stonestreet, and I thought it was fun to see.
I thought Dan Stevens was great as the Beast, despite his character being somewhat under-cooked. He worked very well with what he was given, and did manage to hit my emotions harder than I thought he should.
The singing - most of it, anyway - was great, as well. Almost everyone sounded amazing, and I thought they did justice to the pieces they were given, so props. Some of the new songs I thought were unnecessary, but they were good songs and actually fit the narrative well, so I'll give them a pass for that.
As far as individual voices and performances went, I thought Luke Evans and Kevin Kline's numbers were great and I thought the two contrasted each other very well. But, by far, my favorite song in the soundtrack actually was never in the original movie - it was Evermore. The way it was sung, the way the scene transitioned into the song number, it all just brought this emotion out of me. I related to it, in many ways, and I will admit that I teared up a bit.
Yeah.
But the best thing this movie has going for it is that it is a very faithful retelling of the original. However, at the same time, that also really is its biggest weakness.
I say that because it's true. I don't mean to compare this movie to last year's Jungle Book, but what made Jungle Book stand out was that it really did take every opportunity to try something new and spice things up a bit. For example, the general scope of Jungle Book felt more grand than the movie it was re-telling, and they did away with a lot of the sillier aspects in the original in favor of telling a more focused story. I'm not saying that Beauty and the Beast should've been turned into some kind of epic - which, really, it isn't - but they really did miss a lot of chances to try something new with the material. In the end, the only thing remotely "fresh" about the remake was the, what was it, two or three new songs they added.
In the end, it feels as if you're really just watching the same story that's been adapted to stage countless times over. It's safe, but it's hardly the most inventive thing ever.
I guess this tale really is... as old as time. (YEEEEAAAAAAHHHHH)
Also - I feel like I'm gonna be offending at least 95% of my friends that saw this movie - I just didn't think Emma Watson was all that great from both a singing and acting perspective. Acting-wise, she was functional, but really only had like two or three expressions throughout the movie. And, singing-wise? I feel like there are lots of other girls who would've done a much better job with her material.
She wasn't exactly a bad singer, but when every other singer in the movie sounds so natural and raw, she just sticks out like a sore thumb. Her voice sounded as if it had been edited again and again, and, in the end, came out as pretty processed. She reminded me of Russell Crowe in Les Miserables in the sense that her singing stood out for all the wrong reasons.
Haha. Ja-belle. Haha.
I felt as if she really could've been anyone - Emilia Clarke, Samantha Barks, Anna Kendrick, Daisy Ridley, anyone.
That doesn't change the fact that I did enjoy Beauty and the Beast. It was a very faithful (if not an exact) re-telling of the original story that hits all the beats you remember from before. It had a lot of really good acting and singing, and the production design was great, and I will say that, for my money, Beauty and the Beast deserves a Jar Jar thumbs-up.
I'm pretty everyone's seen Beauty and the Beast by this point, so, instead of asking you what you thought about it, I'm gonna ask who else you think would've been awesome as Belle - my personal pick is Samantha Barks. And, as usual, this has been Rafa. Stay classy.
No comments:
Post a Comment