So back when the live action Beauty and the Beast came out I wrote this up but never really did anything with it. So I decided to dump it somewhere instead of just letting it sit in my documents folder:
 I recently watched the live action adaptation of the Disney classic: Beauty and the Beast. Now a lot of people I know have been extremely skeptical about this film or just straight up hated even the fact that it was being made. But personally, I tried to remain cautiously optimistic.
 On music/ audio
Beauty and the Beast is undoubtedly revered for it’s incredible soundtrack, including timeless songs such as Be Our Guest, Belle, and of course the title song Beauty and the Beast. I know for some of us, it’s often strange to listen to a song you’ve heard hundreds of times sung by someone different; honestly my biggest concern for this film was hearing someone other than Angela Lansbury sing the title song, Beauty and the Beast. But overall, I felt like everyone’s singing was pretty good. Which then begs the question: is “pretty good” good enough for a Disney film?
In the animated Beauty and the Beast you’ve got voices of Broadway stars like Paige O’Hara and Angela Lansbury, and it’s not just Beauty and the Beast; Disney animated films typically have an extremely high standard of vocals in their music. But when I listen to Emma Watson singing in this film it just doesn’t quite live up to my typical Disney standards. (For the record, I am not trying to bash on Emma Watson. She is beautiful and perfect and, Emma if you want to go on a date sometime, hit a girl up.) And frankly, I’m not even sure it’s her fault; every time she sang, the audio had this artificial quality to it which may be a result of editing.
 On character design
I’m certainly not the first person to claim that the character designs in this film are a bit lacking in terms of creativity and charm. I mean, Lumiere is just a tiny guy with candles attached to him, and Mrs. Potts is a teapot with a face painted on the side. Most of the “objects” in the castle suffer from this same sort of lack of inspiration in their designs.
The biggest exception to this, in my opinion, however, is Cogsworth. I actually really liked his complex gear design and how it plays into all of his facial movements. Plus, I’ve always really liked Cogsworth so, I may be a bit biased.
Arguably the most important person to mention in terms of character design is Adam, (Oh wait, are we still just calling him “Beast”? you added 30 minutes to this film and still couldn’t find time for the man to say his name once?) Anyway, the Beast’s design is a little odd for someone who’s supposed to be a “hideous monstrous beast” I mean, just look at him, he’s objectively handsome. I mean, look at those cheekbones. Even his body has that typical “super-hero” shape you see in justice league cartoons. Hell, I think it’s fair to say that the beast is more handsome than the prince. And this isn’t just me, Belle even addresses this at the end of the film asking him if he’d be open to growing a beard. She’s into it.
  Just to be clear, I actually enjoyed this film. And while I was watching it I found myself wondering why I was having so much fun with it. But I realized in the middle of the film that this was the same feeling I get when I watch film adaptations of Broadway musicals. It didn’t really feel like a film to me as much as a play which I think is why having the new cast didn’t bother me all that much, since almost every time you watch a play it has a different cast.
It kind of felt like I was watching a film adaptation of the Broadway adaptation of the original animated film, except instead of using the songs from the actual Broadway adaptation they wrote other new ones and changed some minor plot points.
I think this is a big part of why I enjoyed it so much. I really enjoy seeing things I already love done in different ways and in different styles, or with different perspectives. Like giving more depth to Lefou and Maurice, characters who can be pretty forgettable in the original film. Or the Beast and Belle visiting where she grew up, which directly shows the audience the two of them sharing an emotional moment. Or the Beast’s song after Belle leaves about him accepting his loneliness, tormented by the memory of Belle. Or the attempt to explain why none of the people in Belle’s village know about the castle literally a few miles away.
I also think I had fun watching this movie because I didn’t go in with any real expectations. Prior to actually watching the movie I hadn’t seen any trailers or looked into any of the films progress during production.
 It’s very easy to sit here and compare this film to the 1991 animated version, but let’s just take a moment to be clear on what it is, and what it isn’t.
What this film is is an easy cash grab for Disney, a pretty good retelling of a fantastic story, and a way for Disney to introduce a new generation to their content.
It is not the 1991 animated film (and it was never going to be, I’m not sure what you all were expecting), and it is not perfect
I can be objective enough to recognize the difference between a good movie and a movie I like; I like plenty of bad movies. This movie was somewhere in between on both accounts: did I have fun while watching it? Yes. Would I pay to watch it again? No. Am I going to buy the Blu-Ray when it comes out? Nope. Am I going to listen to the original songs when they get stuck in my head? Absolutely.
Overall, the Beauty and the Beast live action remake is an okay movie that I personally enjoy. In a lot of ways this film lacks the heart of the original film, but in a lot of ways it’s extremely difficult to capture the same spirit and magic of the original within the limitations of a live action film. So does that mean that Disney should stop making these live action adaptations, knowing that they will never live up to the quality of their animated predecessors? Should they instead focus their time on making more original content like Moana and Zootopia? Well either way, they’re going to keep doing it because they are making a shit ton of money. Â
