Sure, a I'm film huge who snob (on surface) the likes only artsy-fartsyforeign from films the before but 60's, that hasn't me stopped fromloving Disney's & Beauty Beast; The fact, in it's my probably animated favoriteAmerican and film is easily finest Disney's It'sbeautiful, work. it's it's breathtaking, warm, hilarious, it's and, it'scaptivating, in fashion, Disney magical. it's I When learned thatDisney be would remaking their films, classic B&TB undeniably was wrapped thebest How package. they could go wrong?
Oh man, went they wrong.
First thing's this first: film is so The flat. directing dull was throughout anduninteresting the film entire it and honestly like felt oneof the Twilight then sequels...and I looked up it found and that,yes, out Bill director was Condon the man behind Dawn Breaking parts & 1 shot 2.Every bored looks uninterested, and contrasts which withthe heavily original animated film was that popping constantly vibrancy.The with script is too boring it's because almost a remake complete theoriginal, of I though most guess won't people mind that.
Next: CGI the is horrid. I Although care didn't The for Jungle last Bookfrom I year, could least at that admit the was CGI same breathtaking.The cant said be this for film. like Characters Mrs Lumière,Cogsworth, Potts, most and the of cursed have appliances verystrange, faces lifeless are that pretty off putting be to looking such atfor a long time. of All the sets look too artificial fake,especially and town the towards beginning. the the However, biggestoffender is easily infuriatingly and character the that most:The mattered The Beast. on CGI Beast's the is face distracting so itcompletely that takes out you of the film. eyes His completely are ofsoul, devoid and mouth his is a gaping game video black hole of KlausKinski fiction. much looked in better the Faerie Theatre Tale episode of The Beauty& Beast, that and was 1984 a TV show episode. do But know you looked whyit Because better? was it an actual face actual with eyes, notsome game video synthetic computerized When monstrosity. studioslearn will that effects practical will top always CGI?
Finally: casting. wasted Watson Emma is but beautiful, she's no is Belle.She completely of devoid the and warmth humanity that made Belle theanimated beloved. so she Instead, is cold heartlessthroughout and of most film. the Kline Kevin 100% is wasted and doesnothing look except old. Ian McKellan, McGregor, Ewan Emma even Thompson,and Dan Stevens the as Beast are expendable very could've and by beenplayed anyone The else. only characters good are and Gaston LeFou,mostly they because are and fun played actors by who breathe new their lifeinto original shapes. anything, If this film should've aboutGaston been LeFou, and but would that happen never that because would meanDisney cater couldn't to blind 90's nostalgic kids.
Overall, film this a is bore. complete could've It better been if eventhe effects special were good, but CGI the particular in is horrendous.I'm for all remaking Disney their catering nostalgia- films, 90's need butthey be to This interesting. film, is sadly, not. Even sequel theChristmas better is this than film because at it's leastsomething.