Remakes both intrigue and annoy me. I enjoy seeing another person’s vision when they reinterpret the material originally presented however I often find myself cringing at some of the things they changed as well as some of the things they choose to keep. It’s a precarious balance and few filmmakers ever get it quite right.
“Beauty and the Beast” is a perfect case in point. The original animated version from 1991 still ranks as one of my favorite films. I was excited the see that Disney had chosen to remake the movie as a live action extravaganza featuring none other than Hermione Granger as leading lady Belle.
But then I reconsidered my thought about it when I reminded myself that you can rarely improve on perfection. The original is a great movie, designed for all ages and contains almost nothing profane or improper for kids or adults. The original is, of course, rated G.
Conversely, the newer version is rated PG and contains some scenes that absolutely made me cringe. It makes me glad I don’t have kids because I would be hard pressed to permit them to see this version.
First off, let me say that the new version follows the original storyline quite closely. Several scenes have been expanded, including the opening montage that outlines how the self-centered prince became the hideous beast and some new music has been added as well.
That’s all for the positive. So, too, is the marvelous acting and singing by the largely A-list cast assembled to bring this version to life.
Emma Watson is going to have a banner spring, what with the obvious commercial success that will be garnered by this movie and followed by her upcoming science fiction foray with Tom Hanks in “The Circle,” coming out in April.
Here, though, her vocal talents prove that she is no Paige O’Hara, but she can still hold her own amidst the rest of the scenery. She’s absolutely lovely in Belle’s yellow gown during the classic waltz scene as Emma Thompson lullabies us with the movie’s signature title theme song.
Dan Stevens is ideally suited to play the beast, but even he is no Robby Benson. And somehow, I can’t picture him ending up with Belle even as the ultimate conclusion draws near and we visually see the beast’s transformation.
And the supporting cast is just okay. The original featured Lennie Briscoe, Major Charles Winchester III and Jessica Fletcher. The new version features young Obi-Wan Kenobi, Gandalf and … and … okay, has Emma Thompson EVER played anything extraordinarily memorable in her acting career?
Give me the first triumvirate any day.
As Lumiere and Cogsworth, Jerry Orbach and David Ogden Stiers created a nice comic balance that played well to offset the more serious nature of the burgeoning relationship between Belle and the beast. In the newer version, Ewan MacGregor and Sir Ian McKellan don’t quite have the same rapport and the relationship seems more mean-spirited than it is a camaraderie. Likewise, Emma Thompson doesn’t convey the motherly spirit that was clearly inflected by her predecessor Angela Lansbury.
And then there’s Disney omnipresent penchant to deliver some inappropriate political message of late in many of their films aimed at kids. Why they need to send messages in films aimed at children leaves me to wonder about the company’s moral compass. These types of overt efforts to indoctrinate the mainstream are best left to other mediums or better yet, to parents who can best decide what their kids should or should not be exposed to in their upbringings.
“Beauty and the Beast” isn’t a bad remake, but it isn’t great either and that’s what is most disappointing. I enjoyed the story as much as ever, but I found myself wishing that they had left well enough alone. The original is a classic and classics deserve to remain that way so they will always hold that special place in our hearts.
The 1991 version was great. The 2017 remake is nothing but a pale comparison of the time when the Disney company made films that were truly magical. I give the 2017 version three out of five stars.
