Bill Condon's next live-action picture, Belle et la Bête, is based on the 1991 Disney animated picture rather than Jean Cocteau's 1964 work. The 1991 movie and Condon's picture both relate the musically driven tale of a young woman from a small French village who is kidnapped by a beast and held hostage in his magical castle. One significant change from the animated version is present. Like in the 1946 movie, Belle asks her father to return from his travels with a rose. The Beast accuses the father of stealing, which is how the father is taken prisoner by the beast. The only reference to Cocteau's film that I could find was that.
The movie Beauty and the Beast is enjoyable. Most of the time, the casting is good. As Belle's father, Maurice, Kevin Kline is very endearing, and he and Emma Watson's Belle have a lovely rapport. Characters that are lifeless in the animated version come to life in this one. For instance, a lot of attention has been paid to the suggestion that Josh Gad's character LeFou, Gaston's sidekick, is gay. But more than that, an internal moral struggle gives LeFou additional depth. Some of the enchanted castle servants are given spouses, and Maurice is given a history and a deceased wife. All in all, the movie does a fantastic job at developing the plot and characters.
Belle's small extra pizazz was one of the nicest additions. The makers appear to have made an effort to address the critiques of the '91 movie that were attributed to Stockholm Syndrome, which they were undoubtedly aware of. Belle is a little more spunky and less defenseless, and she actively attempts to flee. Additionally, additional time is spent on helping Belle and Beast develop a natural bond.
The negative is about to happen. For me, Emma Watson's voice is the most overtly annoying aspect of the movie because it is so plainly auto-tuned. Fortunately, that doesn't affect any of the other characters, but it still highlights how lacking she is. Why this was even an issue is a little beyond me. Stars' singing voices were dubbed over in some of the greatest vintage musicals. I would rather that than what we hear in Beauty and the Beast, even though the practice may be considered offensive or out of style these days.
Sadly, Watson's voice isn't the only thing that is deficient. She's not alone; her performance is also lacking. Beast is rather unimpressive despite his stunning appearance and voice. Given the number of excellent actors in the movie and the CGI skill we've seen from Disney in the past, it's surprising that many of the characters—both live action and CGI—lack energy and expression overall. Therefore, even if the film appears stunning [despite the fact that some of the pictures are too close up or move too quickly to see much], it seems a little boring.
And lastly, the movie is excessively long, something about which I've grown more and more grumpy. The live-action movie is 45 minutes longer than the animated one, and a lot of the extra material is tedious in addition to being pointless. I believe the intention was to add some depth, but it falls flat when it comes to Belle's journey back to Paris with Beast to investigate her past, anything involving the enchantress, whose role is greatly expanded, and Gaston's more menacing and violent actions. Alan Menken, who wrote the songs for the animated version, has contributed four new songs as well. Sadly, Menken seems to have lost his touch, since the new songs are just as uninteresting as the majority of the other material that has been added.
While Beauty and the Beast is certainly not a terrible film overall, I had hoped for a little bit more. With how far filmmaking has come, I believe there was an opportunity to accomplish something exciting, but that is not what transpired. Though it has more filler, this movie is quite close to the animated version in terms of charm. Even nonetheless, I suggest watching it, particularly if you enjoyed the animated version. But perhaps try not to have as high of hopes as I had.
