BEAUTY AND THE BEAST
(**)
"There isn’t a single thing here that’s better than it was in the original animated film"

If it isn't Baroque, don't fix it

(032517) Disney has done very well for themselves with their recent corporate decision to make live-action versions of their animated classics, putting a new coat of paint on old stories and familiar characters, with passable interest in restoring elements of source material. “Alice in Wonderland” and “The Jungle Book” both made a billion dollars at the box office, while “Cinderella” made half as much but won the war of quality. Now the suits have turned their attention to “Beauty and the Beast,” which, is considered one of the finest Disney animated efforts of all time. And what better way to celebrate such an important chapter in the studio’s history than to mount a live-action take that’s largely without heart, soul, musical achievement, visual appeal, and judicious editing. Perhaps maybe, just maybe, we should all confront the reality that Bill Condon isn’t a very effective director.

Living in a small village with her widowed father, Maurice (Kevin Kline, 1998's A Fish Called Wanda), Belle (Emma Watson, of the Harry Potter series) dreams of a free life filled with books to read and personal achievement without the aid of a husband, making her a target for derision by her small-minded community. Hoping to win her hand in marriage is vain brute Gaston (Luke Evans, 2014's The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies), who’s joined by pal Le Fou (Josh Gad, 2013's Frozen), using his blunt presence to coax Belle into submission. When Maurice gets lost in the woods while a special delivery, he ends up in the castle of The Beast (Dan Stevens, cureently on tv's Legion) and his enchanted staff, including Lumiere (Ewan McGregor, 2005's Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith), Cogsworth (Ian McKellen, 2015's Mr. Holmes), Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson, 2013's Saving Mr. Banks), and her son, Chip (Nathan Mack). Imprisoned by the angry creature (and former Prince Adam), Maurice is soon freed by Belle, who takes his place, trying to reason with her captor. However, a curse on the Beast and his staff is about to expire, inspiring them to make Belle comfortable, helping the Beast to win her hand, allowing true love to set them free.

To keep things fresh-ish, “Beauty and the Beast” has been fattened with new material to keep direct comparisons to its animated predecessor minimal. However, the production isn’t shy about replicating the 1991 Oscar-winning movie, with large portions of the effort simply recycling the sights and sounds of the earlier take on the original 1740 fairy tale by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve. The feature opens with a prologue explaining how the Beast came to be, cursed by an enchantress, keeping Alan Menken’s wonderful score front and center to best lubricate expectations as screenwriters Stephen Chbosky and Evan Spiliotopoulos introduce a few new characters to the mix, detailing a party sequence that showcases Prince Adam’s cruelty and the extent of his hired help, including Cadenza (Stanley Tucci), a harpsichord player with terrible teeth. It’s a widening of scope that’s not necessary, but not unappealing, offering a look at life with Adam before his transformation into the Beast. It also permits Condon (who previously helmed two “Twilight” pictures, and “Dreamgirls,” ) a chance to set the musical mood early, with co-star Audra McDonald receiving the first opportunity to belt out a new tune.

Watson is also an impressive hire, looking just like the animated Belle, also making her a tougher, more dignified character who dares to showcase her intelligence to a judgmental world. However, when Watson sings, the illusion is snapped, finding the actress unable to muster much power in the vocal department. The auto-tune is pronounced during Watson’s numbers, making one long for a professional singer in the role, to spin soundtrack gold. Once Belle’s introduction is made with an eponymous tune, it becomes clear that something is off about this “Beauty and the Beast,” with vocal limitations joining the feature’s rather gloomy atmosphere, making the romantic adventure feel suffocating, not tender and wise.

There are a host of problems in “Beauty and the Beast,” including the casting of tiresome ham Gad as Le Fou, and while Evans has the pipes to portray Gaston, he doesn’t have the bulk, making the character look easily defeated. CGI takes care of the rest of the cast, with the enchanted staff missing their cartoon features, looking far more nightmarish as living, breathing clocks, candelabras, and tea sets. And the Beast is a needless motion-capture performance, burying Stevens under digital layers that never looking convincing. There’s no reason for the creature to be a completely computerized effect, with extensive make-up more in step with the human needs of the material. It’s hard to root for Belle and the Beast to get together as a couple when Condon has trouble arranging basic lip movements for the horned co-star, while dead-eyes and stiff movement always break the illusion. The CGI just isn’t there. This movie is crying out for fake fur.

Still, for every up, there’s a down, with “Beauty and the Beast” lingering on suffering, including an extended ending where the enchanted staff prepares to die after their hopes for a lifted cursed are shattered. And there’s a newfound concentration on explanation, adding length to the picture with flashbacks, as Beast has been gifted a teleportation device of sorts to visit anywhere around the globe, inspiring Belle to return to the place where her mother died. Cheeriness is not important to Condon, who enjoys the darkness, rehashing threats from wolves and Gaston, who’s not the pompous goon from the 1991 effort, but a newly obsessive monster.

Superfans will recognize many things in the new “Beauty and the Beast,” which, at times, is a shot-for-shot remake of the animated film. The production attempts to establish its own personality through diverse casting choices and a weird fixation on personal sexuality, but Condon comes up short most of the time, only succeeding at bloating the picture past the two hour mark. The 1991 feature is precious Disney cargo, and it deserves a finer live-action representation than Condon’s “Beauty and the Beast,” which always feels more cacophonous than endearing, with its digital wizardry cold to the touch and vocal stylings disappointingly augmented.

While watching the film, I found myself thinking about Gus Van Sants' 1998 slavish remake of Psycho. The Beauty and the Beast remake at times even reaches the shot-by-shot fidelity of Van Sant’s film, to the point that you wonder if the filmmakers were watching the old film on set and trying to match the shots up perfectly. Thus, what was considered insane and absurd in 1998 is now accepted Disney policy. On the whole, though, this is corporate strategy in place of a movie. The original is so charming that you’ll still smile from time to time, the way you might smile when you watch little kids re-enact one of your favorite scenes from a beloved classic. Actually, wasn’t there already a movie about this?

That is the primary sensation of watching Beauty and the Beast. A bunch of people re-enacting a classic—not remaking, not rebooting, but just re-enacting it, like it’s a Civil War battlefield. There isn’t a single thing here that’s better than it was in the original animated film, and the original is very available. So, dust off the DVD of the 1991 original - or go long and dial up Jean Cocteau's 1949 "Beauty and the Beast," still the greatest movie version of this tale as old as time.

Directed by:  Bill Condon
Written by: Screenplay by Stephen Chbosky and Evan Spiliotopoulos. Based on the tale by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont
Starring:   Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans
Released:  031717
Length: 129 minutes
Rating:   Rated PG for some action violence, peril and frightening images

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST  ©  2017 Walt Disney Pictures

Review © 2017 Alternate Reality, Inc.