Beauty and the Beast
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures | Release Date: March 17, 2017
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 759 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
469
Mixed:
173
Negative:
117
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
4
TrevorsViewMar 17, 2017
It’s been a tale as old as time, a song as old as rhyme… Beauty and the Beast. It was one of the animated instant classics to trigger the Disney Renaissance of the 1990s, defined an entire generation of Disney fans, set off some of the mostIt’s been a tale as old as time, a song as old as rhyme… Beauty and the Beast. It was one of the animated instant classics to trigger the Disney Renaissance of the 1990s, defined an entire generation of Disney fans, set off some of the most iconic songs ever to grace the screen, was honored in several lists by the American Film Institute, was preserved in the National Film Registry the second year it was eligible (which is a huge deal), and was the first animated film in history to receive an Academy Award nomination for Best Picture.
​
So no pressure or anything in remaking it, right?

Many of us were worried that this remake would just be a line-for-line remake of the original, but thankfully it’s not. Several updates to the story are actually a strong improvement to fill in the problems with the original. The whole village’s memory of the castle is erased by the enchantress, a contrast made much more blaring by a cursed eternal winter in the castle’s borders even while summer goes on in the village.

Belle’s father Maurice also has a more complex subplot that actively engages both Gaston and LeFou, and he is motivated by his collection of homemade paintings and inventions used to memorialize his family legacy. This includes a backstory on Belle’s mother, even if it adds virtually nothing to the plot.

Other minor details are added to motivate Belle further, such as teaching a younger village girl to read, only to be condemned by others in the village. The parents will also enjoy this little detail: Gaston is a former war hero, which gives his musical number a whole new flavor. They also would find this new take on the Beast somewhat compelling: he doesn’t even try to treat Belle decently as she first comes into the castle. He just keeps her in the prison, only to be moved into an appropriate bedroom without his consent or knowledge.

There are plenty of other small plot holes from the original that are explained here, as the characters make it blatantly clear. What I mean is, it is done like this: one character asks a question we all asked about the original, then another character simply answers the question. Then the plot moves on as if nothing happened. So no high-class writing to be found here.

Although when taking the whole sum of the product into consideration, the elements that remain the same compared to the original fall way, way short. The director of this live action adaptation, Bill Condon, who directed Dreamgirls and wrote the screenplay for Chicago, would presumably know all about how to do a musical properly. Although his skill is screaming to get out this time around, as nothing commands our sorrow for his reimagining of the beloved characters. With the exception of “Be Our Guest,” none of the musical numbers or recreated scenes match the energy or creativity of its animated counterpart. I’m not just referring to the fact that most to everyone’s singing voices are hard on the ears, but mainly to the fact that everything is rushed, especially the scene in the West Wing.

If you think that you would feel charmed and nostalgic while watching this, sorry—not happening. Maybe it works as a plot expansion of a previously established story, but as a standalone you couldn’t help but see the flaws. Belle even looks at the Beast more like she’s scowling than like she’s captivated by him. Then with Gaston, he doesn’t feel like a jerk at all, as in his first meeting with Belle, he doesn’t chuck her book into the mud- but actually hands her flowers! Flowers! From the guy we’re supposed to hate! It’s little details like this that will halt any true joy or tears. But what else would you expect when a remake is produced by a studio that cares more about social correctness than casting actual French actors for a film set in France?

Speaking of which, you may all be wondering at this point, “what about the exclusively gay moment with LeFou? Should I worry about it harming my kids?” Well, I can tell you this: You have absolutely nothing to worry about. It’s a two second moment at the very end that is just as subtle as it is super easy to toss onto the cutting room floor. In fact, Josh Gad puts in just the right dose of humor and charm in his interpretation of LeFou, and he actually can sing pretty darn well! So you’ll end up loving his character by the end, whether or not you agree with the homosexual lifestyle.

Although if you ask me, this remake was never needed to be made. Yes, it did satisfy many of the problems that people have complained about for twenty-five years about the beloved animated classic, but it’s not like this predictable fantasy is doing anything new or risky. If anything, it’s just going to remind us of how much more moving and charming the original is, and we can sleep easy at night now knowing that some plot holes were filled without the animated film having to explain it for us.… Expand
18 of 40 users found this helpful1822
All this user's reviews
5
RobBob99Apr 2, 2017
This is a tough film for me to judge. There isn't anything downright bad about the film. It's beautiful to look at and the cast members are all solid in their roles. However, I never found myself thinking that this film needed to be made andThis is a tough film for me to judge. There isn't anything downright bad about the film. It's beautiful to look at and the cast members are all solid in their roles. However, I never found myself thinking that this film needed to be made and nothing about it really built on the existing mythology that enhanced it. Take the 2015 Cinderella, while it was a recreation of the original, the filmmakers made the characters stronger and built on the story to make it a more solid movie. That really isn't done here that's impactful to the story and in the end, it did just feel like a recreation of a great movie.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
4
nutterjrDec 23, 2017
For those that singing tea pots and tea cups are their thing, this may well be a treat.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
Rebecca31Mar 24, 2017
A tale as old as time, honestly I wished it had stayed that way. There’s no question that the animated version is better than this remake, but sure we all knew that already didn’t we? From her opening song Emma Watson seemed horribly miscast,A tale as old as time, honestly I wished it had stayed that way. There’s no question that the animated version is better than this remake, but sure we all knew that already didn’t we? From her opening song Emma Watson seemed horribly miscast, her voice auto tuned to within an inch of its life was very disappointing, however as the story progressed she did manage to win me over. Her relationship with the Beast felt genuine and there was strong chemistry between Watson and Dan Stevens. Luke Evans was a definite show stealer, perfectly channelling the essence of Gaston and perhaps the best thing in the entire movie. The only character that didn’t seem to live up to the standard was Ewan McGregor and his horrendous attempt at a French accent and if you thought listening to a bad French accent was annoying you should hear him sing with it. Cringe.
But why oh why Disney did you feel the need to add mediocre songs to an otherwise perfect set list? There is one additional song in particular and if you’ve seen the movie then you know what I’m talking about. It was unbelievably out of place and upset the pace of the movie. So unfortunately for me this disrupting the pace of the story happened too often and I was left sitting there thinking the animated version is a far superior movie and the only reason for this remake is the money which is has certainly made in buckets.
We all know the story and what should have been a dramatic and emotional last act was simply bland. There was no emotion so although I did enjoy a lot of this movie it’s just not as good as it should have been. For all the diehard Disney fans there’s no recommendation because no doubt you’ve already seen this but for everyone else maybe watch the animated version instead.… Expand
5 of 12 users found this helpful57
All this user's reviews
5
NerdConsultantMar 24, 2017
So, where do I stand with Beauty and the Beast, because this is one of the more complicated films of the year for me. Well, on the one hand I like the fact that it’s a nice re-creation of the original film, which I enjoyed. The downside isSo, where do I stand with Beauty and the Beast, because this is one of the more complicated films of the year for me. Well, on the one hand I like the fact that it’s a nice re-creation of the original film, which I enjoyed. The downside is that that is also its biggest weakness. It doesn’t really feel like a new film, it just feels like a repeat, which would be fine for a stage show, but not an entire movie. Especially considering that Jungle Book and Cinderella did a much better job updating their stories. I get a sense that Beauty and the Beast has not been around long enough to really warrant an update since the original one still holds up, there are not that many issues with it and it narratively is still as relevant now as it was upon its release in the 1990’s and it’s so evident here, every moment you are seeing something that is in the original film, you are getting a sense that it was done much better there and it really makes you feel that the minor changes and additions feel like they detract from the film more than they add. Again, it’s not to say it’s bad. The actors do a decent job, the effects are pretty good and the set design is fantastic, I expect to be seeing this film nominated in several of the technical categories at next year’s Oscars. However, to me, it just feels rather ‘been there, done that, and it was much better the first time’. I don’t hate this movie, in fact, I kind of like it on a few levels and I wouldn’t object to seeing it again as I suspect this is probably going to become a mainstay of British TV at Christmas. However, I can’t fully recommend Beauty and the Best, especially if you enjoyed the first film. It’s worth it for curiosity and you will get a good film for the price value, but you are not getting a great film… Expand
4 of 10 users found this helpful46
All this user's reviews
6
DirigiblePulpApr 22, 2017
A perfectly alright, manufactured piece of money-making nostalgia product. If that seems harsh, that's because it is and deservedly so. If the best this movie has to offer is a few fixes to an animated film's flimsy plot, and a complimentaryA perfectly alright, manufactured piece of money-making nostalgia product. If that seems harsh, that's because it is and deservedly so. If the best this movie has to offer is a few fixes to an animated film's flimsy plot, and a complimentary "gay" scene, what's the point? The music is intact, though we already had that. The beast, set-pieces, and overall production design are believable but not enough that the animated film, with its whimsy and charm, will be forgotten any time soon.

Emma Watson is a perfect Belle, but ultimately it doesn't matter. This film is what it is. It's not a bad movie in most respects, there is plenty of good craftsmanship on display, but it isn't art and it doesn't aspire to be. It's what a cheeseburger would taste like in purgatory.… Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
6
Ashwin36905Jun 4, 2017
It doesn't differentiate itself from the original animation, but for reasons beyond me, there's a certain amount of magic to this film. Emma Watson is great as the lead, and so is Dan Stevens who has multiple great scenes Watson, ultimatelyIt doesn't differentiate itself from the original animation, but for reasons beyond me, there's a certain amount of magic to this film. Emma Watson is great as the lead, and so is Dan Stevens who has multiple great scenes Watson, ultimately it's Luke Evans as Gaston who steals the show. Good entertainment for the whole family. 6.8/10… Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
4
Nkond39Mar 29, 2017
Ok. Live-action version of "Beauty and the Beast". What works in a cartoon, does NOT work in live-action.
You all know the story, we got this Prince dude. He's like all shallow and superficial and only likes pretty girls. And the supposedOk. Live-action version of "Beauty and the Beast". What works in a cartoon, does NOT work in live-action.
You all know the story, we got this Prince dude. He's like all shallow and superficial and only likes pretty girls. And the supposed message of the movie is that true beauty lies inside. Which is actually crap in and of itself, but let's not delve into that right now. How this movie goes about delivering that message about inner beauty? First, Beautiful Enchantress. Has to be beautiful. Cause if it was ugly enchantress that turned Prince into Beast, that's just cruel. But if she's beautiful then she must be kind and it all must be some kinda lesson. Next. The Beast. Oh come on! You call THAT "The Beast"?! Its a goddamn big fluffy anthropomorphic lion with cute horns. An animated Beast was scarier! There is no real challenge in falling in love with him once he stops being a total dickwad. Enchantress should've turned him into a friggin Alien monster! See if Belle could drop a kiss on that mucus dripping mug! And anyway. Are we teaching Belle about importance of inner beauty? The Belle. Ok. So the main reason for Enchantress to put a spell on The Beast was to teach him a lesson that a pretty face is not all that important and all that "don't judge the book by its cover" crap. Enter Emma Watson. Come on! I would read through any book with that kinda cover! Even if it was full with boring "data reconfiguration and statistical analysis" reports! What kind of a lesson is The Beast learning? That if you are:
1. Big and powerful
2. Own a castle
3. Not a total jerk (this is why its a fairy tale, in real life if you got the fist two covered, you can be a jerk)
Then you still get the pretty girl, even if you got a "setback" of looking like a big cute lion with curly horns. Anyway, you still turn into pretty boy after she plops a smoochie on your hairy face.
What is the lesson learned here? Come on, really? To really get the message across, Belle should've been the fugliest girl in the village, and The Beast should've stayed in beastly form, no matter how many kisses.
That stuff should've remained animated! Was way easier to suspend disbelief.… Expand
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
6
EpicLadySpongeMar 17, 2017
This Beauty and the Beast is a great take on Disney's 1991 film of the same name. The offer is given directly right away to people that loves to see Disney's live action adaptions of their classic animated originals and it shows Disney canThis Beauty and the Beast is a great take on Disney's 1991 film of the same name. The offer is given directly right away to people that loves to see Disney's live action adaptions of their classic animated originals and it shows Disney can shoot for the moon in a game of hearts. However, when you take all the great elements from the film away, all of what's left remains a stale, ludicrous attempt to outshine Disney's own 1991 film. Shows that even Disney, king of filmmaking, can sometimes make mistakes and a huge one at it too.… Expand
7 of 19 users found this helpful712
All this user's reviews
6
MrMovieBuffMar 18, 2017
When I heard that Disney would be remaking 'Beauty and the Beast' (1991), my favorite ever Disney animated film, into live-action, especially with this cast of actors... it's hard not to get excited. 'Beauty and the Beast' (1991) is without aWhen I heard that Disney would be remaking 'Beauty and the Beast' (1991), my favorite ever Disney animated film, into live-action, especially with this cast of actors... it's hard not to get excited. 'Beauty and the Beast' (1991) is without a doubt, as close to a perfect Disney animated film as you could get... so perfect that it became the first animated feature to be nominated for the "Best Picture" Academy Award. Not to mention that with 'Cinderella' (2015) and 'The Jungle Book' (2016) turning out to be surprisingly good, there were more reasons to get excited. Now I'm not sure if it was my expectations that did this to me, but I found Disney's live-action, and arguably more modern, take on this "Tale as old as time" to be mostly okay! I'm not going to waste my time summarizing the plot as I'm sure everybody should have seen the original film by now, so I'm just going to explain what I liked and what didn't work out so well for me. What I liked was the choice of actors and their roles; Emma Watson, best known for playing the bookworm and intelligent Hermione Granger in the "Harry Potter" franchise, fits the role of Belle since these two characters are not that different, so it seems. Her singing, admittedly, does sound auto-tuned - especially when she hits the high notes - but it's not bad. She did her best, and that's admirable. Dan Stevens ('Downton Abbey') plays the Beast very well too, with enough anger and arrogance to make him almost no different to his animated counterpart. Luke Evans and Josh Gad share terrific chemistry as Gaston and LeFou, and Gad's version of the "Gaston" song sounds eerily similar to the original version from 1991... clearly Gad thrives in playing Disney sidekicks (many of you may remember him as Olaf the snowman in 'Frozen'). Ewan McGregor ('Trainspotting' and 'Star Wars') surprised me as Lumiere, a role I didn't think he would play well, but, his version of "Be Our Guest" is something I wouldn't mind listening to again. He shares funny chemistry with Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, not to mention Emma Thompson is fantastic as Mrs. Potts, and her version of the enchanting "Beauty and the Beast" number is also something worth downloading. The production design of this film cannot be faulted as well, much like 'Cinderella' (2015) two years ago, it's very lavish and great to look at. Now for the not-so-good things. The movie spends a lot of time trying to be too much like its animated counterpart, shot-by-shot some scenes look similar, the dialogue is also very much the same, yet the execution of these lines don't sound as natural as they should have. If just the musical numbers, the lyrics, remained similar to the original, that's fine... but 80% of the dialogue in this movie, maybe more, was just from the original. And they don't have the same beat...

The lead characters, played by Emma Watson and Dan Stevens, two gifted young actors, unfortunately for me, lacked a bit of chemistry. I didn't feel as if there were any spark or emotional intensity like their animated versions. This isn't a problem with their acting, I think it has to do with the script and the editing execution. What I did like was the near ending, the way they executed the last petal falling from the rose, and how the characters react to that I thought was emotionally heavy. I'll give director Bill Condon credit for trying to be as respectful to the original movie as possible, but focus on the like-able characters, don't worry too much about making look aesthetically similar to the original by using the same camera-work. The reasons why 'Cinderella' (2015) and 'The Jungle Book' (2016) worked so well was because they didn't concentrate too much on being similar to the original, they still made it about character, and why these stories were so important. Those remakes were able to stand on their own without the need to watch their original versions. 'Beauty and the Beast' however, it seems wants to be compared to the original, so much so that it tries to be similar in both camera-work and dialogue. But the characters come second nature... This isn't an insulting remake like Tim Burton's 'Alice in Wonderland' (2010) or a dull and excruciatingly ludicrous one like 'Maleficent' (2014) (a movie I found difficult to sit through), this is something fans should see. See it for the music, the production design, and just the overall nostalgia. But don't expect a "Best Picture"-level movie... leave that to the original 1991 animated classic.… Expand
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
6
SpangleMar 21, 2017
Having never seen the original animated film, or at least not remembering having seen it, my expectations were not too high for Beauty and the Beast. Do not get me wrong, I never thought it would be bad. But, I was never comparing it to someHaving never seen the original animated film, or at least not remembering having seen it, my expectations were not too high for Beauty and the Beast. Do not get me wrong, I never thought it would be bad. But, I was never comparing it to some childhood classic that filled me with nostalgia every time I thought of watching the film. Instead, I saw this film in a vacuum. Unfortunately, it is still a mixed bag. At times, you can feel that fairy tale magic that is promised. Other moments provide sensory overload or are complete filler and wholly unnecessary. The end result is a potion that both enchants and befuddles in near equal measure.

From its very first frame, Beauty and the Beast shows its tedious footing between grating and magical. Its opening sequence of the Beast/Prince Charming (Dan Stevens) getting cursed by an enchantress has both incredible special effects and preposterous make-up. It is well applied, but it seems too exuberant and practically flamboyant with how much make-up the Prince is wearing to his party. That said, the scene still imbues the sense of mystery and magic necessary for the film and its immediate follow-up, the performance of the song "Belle", really hits the mark. Emma Watson's singing is lovely as Belle as she goes through her small French village and the various villagers express their reservations about Belle and her quirky bookworm behavior. It is a real charmer and is a song that gets the proceedings off to a terrific musical beginning, quickly displaying why this film's music is beloved by so many.

Unfortunately, the film then takes some poor turns. In its performance of "Gaston", a loud and incredibly well-choreographed musical number mostly performed by LeFou (Josh Gad), Gaston's (Luke Evans) closest companion, the film hits a real sour note. The song is simply too much. Compared to the more restrained staging of "Belle", "Gaston" is over-the-top and further maligned by an awful joke about the spelling of his name and LeFou's illiteracy. At this point, I was wondering if it was a mistake and the film would not be nearly as good as hoped. These fears were realized when we reach the Prince's castle. While the banter between Lumiere (Ewan McGregor) and Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) was immediately appealing, the arrival at the castle is marked by a few bad moments. One, when Belle is shown her room and the camera does a whip pan. Early in the film, during the performance of "Belle", I noticed some quick camera movements that immediately bothered my eyes. However, I had ignored them because I figured that I was simply a bit tired. Sadly, this eye shattering whip only served to make my strained eyes scream out in anguish. My eyes were not treated kindly in the follow-up to this either with the performance of "Be Our Guest". While the song is fine, the glowing sensory overload that ensues on the dinner table is just far too much. It had bright lights and excitement to try and attract kids to the joy on screen, but it felt far too hollow and bombastic to actually work in any effective way.

Fortunately, the film picks up considerably at this point as it begins to focus on the romance between the Beast and Belle. This is a romance that would charm warmth in the coldest and blackest of hearts. Via songs such as "Something There", "Beauty and the Beast", and "Evermore", the film strikes a heart warmingly romantic tone that rewards viewers with the magic of a fairy tale, terrific songs, and an awe-inducing romance. Together, Watson and Stevens have terrific chemistry in these forms and work incredibly well with one another. Small moments of them simply walking into a library or over a bridge are moving, poetic, and achingly romantic. The film has so much heart, it nearly swells and boils over. Now, these sequences do have their flaws. Though the visual effects of the film are impeccable, especially with Belle's dress - a real highlight of these live-action remakes have been the dresses, as the realization of Cinderella's ball gown with the accompanying visual effects is still stunning to me - and the beast is also incredibly well-realized. That said, there are still issues with the effects. On the bridge, while romantic, it is clear it is occurring in front of a green screen. There are other moments scattered throughout that are unfortunately stricken by shaky visual effects. Fortunately, the whole romance of them falling in love is so well-written and realized, it is hard to deny the film's magic. Accented by charming turns by Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, and Emma Thompson as some of the Beast's cursed helpers, the film strikes a good balance between the more romantic elements and the comedic elements.… Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
6
kristen58Jun 7, 2017
I was expecting to like Emma Watson as Belle, but in the first minute of the movie, she starts to sing, and you can hear the auto tune they had to use on her voice to make it sound ok. It was THAT obvious. This trend of casting big nameI was expecting to like Emma Watson as Belle, but in the first minute of the movie, she starts to sing, and you can hear the auto tune they had to use on her voice to make it sound ok. It was THAT obvious. This trend of casting big name actors in musicals just for the billing disgusts me. There's a thousand broadway actresses who could have done that part a million times better. I would much rather have watched the movie with some no-name actress with a fantastic singing voice. However, Luke Evans as Gaston was fantastic and Josh Gad as Le Fou was funny, too. They kinda saved the movie. I did also like that they added in a few more songs. I would watch it again, but fast forward through every scene where Emma Watson is singing.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
5
SchroederRockJun 1, 2017
Disney's classic Beauty and the Beast is timeless. Everything from the score to the voice actors to the writing is so close to perfect it's hard to imagine Disney would ever try to mess with it. But here we are, and they did. The modern takeDisney's classic Beauty and the Beast is timeless. Everything from the score to the voice actors to the writing is so close to perfect it's hard to imagine Disney would ever try to mess with it. But here we are, and they did. The modern take of Beauty and the Beast places few real actors in a live-action style setting in rural France. The film does much to borrow from its source material - the music, the lines all are either exactly or in the ballpark of that of the original film. Why change any of it? The original score is easily one of the most recognizable and timeless of all Disney films. No fault there. However, the film fails to hold itself together in other areas. The 100% digital world of the castle, the rolling hills... all of it is fake and it's incredibly obvious. That made me think "why didn't they shoot more of it in a real location?" Honestly, it looks cool but only if the characters are fake too. Because of real actors, it looks fake. For me, that's the case and I was unable to shake the feeling that it was all too unbelievable for even a work of fiction. Few times does B&tB take much artistic license to be unique from the original. When it does, some of it works rather well. Why couldn't Disney write something and produce something for real actors? If Star Wars can appear to be so real perhaps they could have conquered the same feat here - this movie was guaranteed to be a box office hit. Lastly, the casting is all wrong. Emma Watson does an okay job as Belle, yet she fails to capture the audience with the genuine sweetness and warmth that the cartooned Belle does with only voice acting. This could have worked but it really didn't. For 2017's Beauty and the Beast, its lack of originality and artistic endeavor makes it fall flat. And the casting... I couldn't figure out where anyone looked at this cast and thought "that person makes sense for that role". If I am to watch Beauty and the Beast again, it will only be the original - not this very weak remake.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
gzayas91Jul 21, 2018
There's no reason to reboot Disney BATB, the original was more adult than this version that was trying to be more adult and still trying be like a Disney movie.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
anmolrawatJul 8, 2017
Beauty and the Beast is a huge mess. None of the characters looked convincing enough. CGI of the Beast was poor and not for a single second he appeared to be promising; all thanks to the CGI and voice over. The songs were dull and I felt theBeauty and the Beast is a huge mess. None of the characters looked convincing enough. CGI of the Beast was poor and not for a single second he appeared to be promising; all thanks to the CGI and voice over. The songs were dull and I felt the urge to skip them, which I did, a couple of times. There was no chemistry between Belle and the Beast. The acts were over the top and not at all convincing. Bill Condon has managed to create another below average piece, which is not a surprise if you have seen Twilight!… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
RoyGolanMay 13, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. When a movie is completely based on an older movie, especially a great one, a comparison must be made when reviewing it.

Positive
+ Emma Watson is great.
+ The voice of the beast was very good. (Reminded me a bit of Worf from Star Trek or a Kilrathi from the Wing Commander games).
+ CGI was very good.
+ The new songs that were not in the first movie are ok.

Negative
- The songs of the first movie are not as good in this live action version. In this type of movie you come preparing to hear the familiar songs that you love from the first movie, but then you find out that they changed the flow of all the songs (which made the original songs great) as well as some of the iconic lines from the songs for no good reason (like the lines by LeFou at the end of the Gaston song).
- Camera movement is very fast. When we are introduced to Belle's room in the castle the camera moves too fast and we can't see anything to feel in awe that was intended. When we see characters the camera don't stay on their faces long enough for us to familiar ourselves with their facial features to be able to relate to them and like them. We can barely make out Lumiere's face as he is moving all the time on the screen and there is hardly any close-up on his face. Also the dresser has no pupils in her eyes. This makes it really hard to relate to any of the characters and in a movie that is based on these characters it's a major problem.
- The "Be Our Guest" song/scene is one of the most memorable from the first movie as it was unexpected at the time due to it's choreography and grandeur. In this movie it's was underwhelming as it was hard to see what was going on on the screen and it suffered from the same camera movement and flow of the song issues.
- The relationship between Belle and the Beast is not developed enough, although this is true in the original movie as well.
- The introduction of a new character, the Enchantress was not needed at all.
- The ending of the movie was changed as well from loosing to winning by the magic of the Enchantress. This was made just to show how it would look if all the characters became permanently their object form. This took away from the good ending of the first movie and the suspense of the time limit by the falling rose petal. This made the entire concept of the falling rose petal meaningless!
- Gaston's death is changed not to include his struggle with the beast. This should have been the climax of the movie, but failed.
- Belle's mother explained, throwing interesting theories about her origin outside the window. Is her origin canon now?
- Pushing liberal agendas such as homosexuality and interracial relationship into the movie where they don't belong. Although I 100% support these agendas in life, I'm not keen of them being pushed on the viewer in a movie that is based on a previous work.
- The prince retained his "grrrr" beasty voice for a laugh (which wasn't funny). This is inconsistent with the transformation he already took reverting to the prince.
- Not funny. Bits that were intended to be funny were not funny at all and were just embarrassing.

Overall an ok movie that is not as good as the first one and does not contribute anything worthwhile over the first one, raising the question why it was made in the first place. There are also too many problems with it. A disappointment.

3 Stars… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
ohnomrbillMay 1, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i very much enjoyed this movie in the beginning. as it came to the end it started to fall apart for me. the towns people were charging the beast and castle right after they sent the girls father to the asylum yet had no remorse. the songs, in the beginning were very good but kept to being traditional and in the end were too many. it was like a very nice bowl of soup that had too many crackers added. wait for the movie to come on dvd.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
FuturedirectorApr 21, 2017
Beauty and the Beast exaggerate with its notable and sometimes degrading attempt at being 0 kilometers away from its predecessors. But anyway, it's well-chosen cast and it's surprisingly entertaining storytelling live up again the Disney'sBeauty and the Beast exaggerate with its notable and sometimes degrading attempt at being 0 kilometers away from its predecessors. But anyway, it's well-chosen cast and it's surprisingly entertaining storytelling live up again the Disney's unforgettable classic.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
The3AcademySinsOct 25, 2017
Beauty and The Beast mostly tries it's best to stay faithful to the original while adding some new elements, but this live action remake had some odd directorial choices that left me scratching my head. I wanted to LOVE this movie, but it'sBeauty and The Beast mostly tries it's best to stay faithful to the original while adding some new elements, but this live action remake had some odd directorial choices that left me scratching my head. I wanted to LOVE this movie, but it's only kind of all right. Evermore is a great new song, Luke Evans is a great Gaston, and Emma Watson is a great choice for Belle. Some moments were milked way too much and others weren't given ample time to develop. There are some moments of tonal confusion, but there are worse ways to spend two hours.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
5
SassyQuatchApr 12, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie provides some mildly entertaining sequences (particularly memorable being the as-to-be-expected joyful "Be Our Guest") and makes the Beauty and the Beast story feel more complete by its addition of an exposition. Beyond these slight things however, which the movie never seemed to be able to capitalize upon, the movie was truly what you could imagine in your mind to be if you were to think of a live-action remake of the Disney film. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. The movie doesn't destroy the charm of the original animated film. But it doesn't really add anything either. The film is as empty of well-constructed meaning as its predecessor without the excuse of being a kid's movie. It wears its live-action clothing awkwardly, its happy ever after ending not suiting the cinematic grit of an imperfect reality. Another gripe I had with the identity problem of the film was its portrayals of the villains. As is to be expected of most Disney villains, what is truly villainous in a person is reduced to a simple character trait or singular action, the consequences of which never seem to flesh out in the story itself. LeFou suddenly becomes a good guy after he abetted a would-be murderer (LeFou suddenly becoming a good guy likely due to his altered sexuality, his newfound goodness allowing the writers to show LeFou dancing with another man at the end of the movie).

In short, this movie fails to a.) amend the naiveté of its source material, b.) carve out for itself a consistent and distinct identity, and c.) coherently tell a convincing and worthwhile story. It succeeds only in providing momentarily entertaining sequences. I'm quite sure no one will remember this movie come two years.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
5
HirdannenApr 16, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Beeauty and the Beast is not a bad movie, but if you have already seen the Disney classic, you won't find anything new. For someone like me who watched the source material more than 20 times, I knew by heart the content of the movie. The movie's respect to the source material was actually what made it very boring to me. Same songs, nearly same actions.. The only differences were, in my opinion, bad ideas.

A little surprise for me was seeing black actors in the movie which was meant to take place in France (maybe 15th century ?). From a history viewpoint, that just could not be the case (in the form shown here), but well I understand the idea of modernizing movies to the morals of the day (which is a good thing actually). However, In that case I was also expecting asian, latino or arabic actors (which were actually closer to France at that time).. I might have missed something, but I only saw white and black people. It felt weird. I've seen other reviews mentionning an openly gay character, I might have missed him. I don't think there was any censorship in France about that so I might not have been sufficiently attentive.

A big problem for me was Gaston's portrayal. In the source material, he was really an *****. Self-absorbed brutish guy who likes being the center of attention. He's not evil by definition, but it's clearly shown in the classic movie how dangerous some character traits can be. When Belle rejects him, he gets over it eventually and fights the Beast only because it reveals a challenge worthy of him (I mean, he's a hunter). But he doesn't threaten Belle's father for her hand, doesn't let him be devoured by the wolves or doesn't lose his calm. The live action movie portrays Gaston as... a madman. Maybe a guy which was profoundly traumatized by the war ? He likes attention but acts in a very insulting manner toward other girls (I saw no point in the scene where his horse launches dirt on the ladies). He loses his temper like a madman (Luke Evans acting might not have helped). Also a very strange scene is when he comes back to see Maurice seated at the table in the bar and everyone asking Gaston if he tried to have Maurice eaten by Wolves. The last scene at the bar was a celebration of Gaston's image in the town and showing Maurice as an old fool, how is it possible all of a sudden that everyone doubts Gaston ? How can he even needs to justify himself in front of everyone which adores him ? In the end, I think the live-action Gaston is just a typical EVIL character with far less substance than the original Gaston.

Also I hate the fact that everything has been done to remove any blame from the Beast. In the movie they explain that the reason he's a selfish brute is because of his father and because his servants did nothing. It tries everything to portray the Beast as a victim. Coupled with Gaston's portrayal, it makes things far less interesting than they were in the source material. We have a clear bad guy (Gaston) which is EVIL, and a good guy (the Beast) which is GOOD because he's a victim. Really Disney ? Really ?

Graphical effects are amazing, but there is so much happening that I can't really focus on them.

Emma Watson as Belle... Humm.. There was something that didn't quite fit. Maybe I just can't see Emma Watson as anyone else than Hermione ? Maybe her acting wasn't good ? I can't quite decide yet.

I will finish by the stories about Belle's mother and the Beast's mother. Was that really necessary ? If they used this as a common ground for developping their relation (for example by sharing things about how it feels to lose one's mother), I would have understood. Also the Enchantress/Agatha acting was just... frightening. Keeping your eyes wide open like being on some sort of trance is not really acting in my opinion..… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
sissi_stessSep 2, 2017
This film was unnecessary! Really nobody needed that. But if you gonna make the remarke regardless you should at least have a good casting. The acting was painful to watch. Emma Watson wasn't the right choice for Belle...zero emotions.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
4
Gorbax15Dec 1, 2017
Beauty And The Beast butchers the classic songs of the original and fails to utilize a good cast, rarely hitting it's mark and being a shallow and visually unpleasant film.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
6
stsieteMar 18, 2017
La mayor parte de lo que meten nuevo sobra, y algunos cambios(ejem GASTON ejem) son una cagada, a los objetos con CGI abusivo les falta carisma, con todo y con esto me gusta bastante como desarrollan la relación entre bella y bestia. PuesLa mayor parte de lo que meten nuevo sobra, y algunos cambios(ejem GASTON ejem) son una cagada, a los objetos con CGI abusivo les falta carisma, con todo y con esto me gusta bastante como desarrollan la relación entre bella y bestia. Pues eso, otro remake.… Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
6
MattBrady99Mar 28, 2017
"Forever can spare a minute."

The best way to describe 2017 "Beauty and the Beast" is the same thing I said about Cinderella (2015). If you seen the 1991 version then you've seen the new one already. To be fair, I liked this movie way more"Forever can spare a minute."

The best way to describe 2017 "Beauty and the Beast" is the same thing I said about Cinderella (2015). If you seen the 1991 version then you've seen the new one already.

To be fair, I liked this movie way more than Cinderella. Just the musical numbers and the stellar voice acting was one of the highlights of the film. Sir Ian McKellen and Ewan McGregor both steal the show.

Oh and if Josh Gad isn't the worst or annoying part of your movie, then you done something right. He's was pretty damn in this. Same thing with Luke Evens as the cartoon villain which fitted nicely in this type of universe.

While I still prefer the idea of the Beast being more practical rather than CGI, but Dan Stevens still gave a solid performance as the character.

Beside the obvious set designs and noticeable autotune, it's visually stunning and had an old fairly tale vibe to it. This is the closest thing we got that almost re-captures the magic of the 1991 film.

I had a lot of fun with this live adaptation. What's not so fun is the next live adaptations lined up. Like, seriously Disney? Well it's gonna make money anyway.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
6
JyroJyroSep 27, 2017
The songs aren't great and Beast has the appearance of a second grade Chewbacca, but I left with a half smile on my face. This was mostly due to the brilliant casting of Emma Watson, but also the screenplay being so hauntingly spellbinding inThe songs aren't great and Beast has the appearance of a second grade Chewbacca, but I left with a half smile on my face. This was mostly due to the brilliant casting of Emma Watson, but also the screenplay being so hauntingly spellbinding in particular scenes. Unfortunately, I feel it's just being a little too lazy in its attempt to copy the original so closely.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
thecriticbananaAug 11, 2017
Podría decir que esta película sería más para niños. Hablando ya en ver la película para personas adultas, la bella y la bestia es una mi*rda completamente. El hecho es que los efectos especiales y la animación en su mayoría es pésima, noPodría decir que esta película sería más para niños. Hablando ya en ver la película para personas adultas, la bella y la bestia es una mi*rda completamente. El hecho es que los efectos especiales y la animación en su mayoría es pésima, no pude evitar reírme al ver como la bestia se mira tan falsa. Lo único, pero no del todo salvable es la actuación de Emma Watson. Una película de mucha expectativa pero que no llena ni la mitad.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
MLPNASCARFan18Oct 16, 2017
While it's not as grand as the Animated version, The Live Action Version stays true to the story but as for the cast...well not so much. Emma Watson (who is spectacular in the Harry Potter films) doesn't quite really fit this role as BelleWhile it's not as grand as the Animated version, The Live Action Version stays true to the story but as for the cast...well not so much. Emma Watson (who is spectacular in the Harry Potter films) doesn't quite really fit this role as Belle and it's due to the fact that her singing really wasn't in tune like everyone else. It's a good film but the 1992 version is way better… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
ElthorJun 20, 2019
I had put off watching this film for a couple years out of love for the original film. Having now watched it, I give it a solid 'meh'.

In fairness, it may be the best of Disney's animated to live-action film remakes, but that's a very lowI had put off watching this film for a couple years out of love for the original film. Having now watched it, I give it a solid 'meh'.

In fairness, it may be the best of Disney's animated to live-action film remakes, but that's a very low bar.

The movie is at its best when it is a mirror image of the animated classic and at it's worst when it shoehorns in political ideology that takes you out of the film. Not an issue for you? Don't worry, there's a lot of other problems in between.

First and foremost, Emma Watson CAN NOT SING. She needs the help of computer software. It's not always awful, but her singing is usually emotionless and occasionally edges towards T-Pain levels of processing.

Also disappointing is the Beast's CG work. I like old sci-fi and can handle rubber masks and shaky sets. More is expected from a 2017 flagship film. Some times passable, but occasionally the Beast looks like he has no weight or is in a 10 year old videogame cut-scene.

Songs, scenes and additionally story has been added, and yet there is a strange moment when your realize that Belle's ailing father must have walked through the snow, wolves and forest to get home. Their horse, Philippe, is still at the castle, so it is either that or we are supposed to remember how he got back in the animated film in order to fill this plot hole.

As far as the political messaging, I leave that to the reader to determine their level of annoyance by it. Identity politics abound. LeFou is ridiculously gay now, making his frequent touching of Gaston both creepy and inappropriate. Finally, Gaston has a gun now instead of his original bow and arrow and knife. It's one of those fully automatic flintlock pistols judging by the way he can reload it in 10 seconds just by putting a hand in his pocket. Because guns are bad, right?

In a vacuum, this would be a pretty good film, but the original animated feature DOES exists, as does the hit Broadway musical. That makes this pointless and a poor copy... as are pretty much all of Disney's current live-action cash grabs.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
DoniJrNov 9, 2018
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's soulless on a lot of scenes, but on my second watch I enjoyed it more than the first time and actually let me be led by my nostalgia and love for the original animation. I like the new music and the moment Belle returns to Paris to discover about what happened to her mother, it's a very touching moment. The 'Evermore' scene it's also really good, specilly for being a really good song addition. The cast is good and the set designs is the strongest quality from the movie.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
Kirollos-NoahNov 29, 2018
I liked the original version of Beauty and The Beast, and the live-action version was fine too, but the original version is way better than this remake!
It doesn't men that this movie is bad, no, it's good though, with some memorableI liked the original version of Beauty and The Beast, and the live-action version was fine too, but the original version is way better than this remake!
It doesn't men that this movie is bad, no, it's good though, with some memorable moments.

Beauty and The Beast delivers every good and bad in the original version, and I didn't like, and yeah, I didn't love the original version, I only liked it! And I had hope to see them fixing these problems, but unfortunately, they made the same mistakes, with bad performances!

Let's start with the performances:
Emma Watson was nice, Dan Stevens as The Beast's voice was great and Luke Evans was fine... The others were totally fake-acting!

The Beast's Form was not good, but the CGI was excellent!
Actually, the CGI of the entire movie was great!

I found the story sometimes boring, and the romance was bad just like the original version, the storytelling took sometime to become thrilling, and I didn't like that at all, as I didn't like that in the original version!

The songs were unnecessary and not really good! And once more the remake did the same mistake of the original version.

The final fight was short, but breathtaking though!

As a result, Beauty and The Beast presents a great remake -literally remake!- that every fan of the original version is seeking to see, but I'm not a fan of it, and I expected something bigger than just a "remake", but still, it's worth watching, and for me it's a one-watch movie!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
Ahmedrizwan11Jul 10, 2019
The movie was alright. however i did not like emma watson in the movie. She was not acting like belle at all. Most characters were annoying to watch,such as belles dad. They dont do anything different in this movie
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
RK800mk1Oct 28, 2020
As live-action Disney remakes go, not the worst. But still, overly gaudy. I did enjoy how the ending had a bit more weight than the original, but other than that, not very memorable. The CG is so "perfect" looking that it looks like theAs live-action Disney remakes go, not the worst. But still, overly gaudy. I did enjoy how the ending had a bit more weight than the original, but other than that, not very memorable. The CG is so "perfect" looking that it looks like the characters are standing in front of a giant painting in certain scenes. I just wish Disney would have spent more time developing new stories instead of rehashing old ones.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
FreedomFightersMar 30, 2018
Normally, I'm not one to disagree with the critics if they like a film. I may occasionally disagree with critics that gave the film lower scores, and I've definitely given more than a few good scores to films that have gotten low scores fromNormally, I'm not one to disagree with the critics if they like a film. I may occasionally disagree with critics that gave the film lower scores, and I've definitely given more than a few good scores to films that have gotten low scores from critics. However, I've rarely given lower scores to films that got good marks, because usually I can kind of gauge why critics enjoyed a film and apply that myself. This, however, is an exception. The live-action recreation of "Beauty and the Beast" is most certainly well-crafted and well-intentioned, the visual design is wondrous, the music is nice, the acting is good, and the film as a whole is faithful to the original, classic animated film. That, however, is also the film's biggest downfall, because unfortunately, there IS a such thing as being "too faithful," and it honestly felt like I was watching a tit-for-tat, shot-for-shot retelling of the original animated film, without many attempts at taking unique angles to the "Tale As Old As Time." If you found some enjoyment in it, fine by me, I'm glad you liked it, but me personally, I just couldn't get into this like I did with the original animated film. And it's really hard for me to judge it on its own merit when it honestly makes me want to fall asleep. I'm sorry, I wanted to love this live-action redux of "Beauty and the Beast," but it was just too hard to fall in love with.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
PericowskyOct 1, 2017
Nothing new, just copied the previous book, reversing it to live action, can not be that not a single variant have dared to handle, only being little subversive about the gay character. I must point out good costumes (as Disney alwaysNothing new, just copied the previous book, reversing it to live action, can not be that not a single variant have dared to handle, only being little subversive about the gay character. I must point out good costumes (as Disney always surprised with that item) and majestic art direction.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
OnaskDec 1, 2018
Me esperaba algo pocho y coincide con lo que me he encontrado.

Este remake live-action basado en la obra animada original pierde el 95% del encanto de la genial película de 1991 que marcó la infancia de tantísima gente. Aquí, laMe esperaba algo pocho y coincide con lo que me he encontrado.

Este remake live-action basado en la obra animada original pierde el 95% del encanto de la genial película de 1991 que marcó la infancia de tantísima gente.

Aquí, la personalidad y el carisma de los personajes se pierde por completo, salvando en algún momento a Bella y como mucho a Potts y a Chip. No entiendo muy bien que es lo que pasa con el CGI de Bestia pero sus movimientos y animaciones se ven tremendamente amateurs, y es algo que no consigo explicarme con el ingente presupuesto que han destinado a esta cinta. Voy a salvar el decorado y vestuario que están realmente bien (aunque qué demonios, solo tenían que adaptar lo ya establecido años atrás por cosas que funcionen en la realidad, pero bueno), y voy a suponer que hoy en día los peques pueden disfrutar algo de esto y les puede parecer bonito y entretenido.

Si alguien consigue darme un punto a favor de por qué debería ver esta película y no la original que dé un paso al frente, pero de verdad, no veo por ningún lado la razón de ver esta versión salvo "por ver como serían los personajes en la vida real".

Mirad la versión animada original y olvidad esta a ser posible.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
DerekReideApr 9, 2019
It's okay. It really falls short on the singing talent. Musically, Emma Watson just isn't the best casting choice. But she was a good Belle with the singing aside. Everything else was fair.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
hello_worldMar 9, 2019
The film is a competent remake of the classic animation, but it offers very little else to the viewing experience. Emma Watson's lack of singing ability does mean that her songs lose some of its impact. The film added a few scenes and songs,The film is a competent remake of the classic animation, but it offers very little else to the viewing experience. Emma Watson's lack of singing ability does mean that her songs lose some of its impact. The film added a few scenes and songs, but they contribute little to the characters and overall plot and feels like they were mostly added because they wanted to add more stuff into the film. The film does do one clever thing by foreshadowing up how the villain is defeated in the end where in the original, it kind of happened out of nowhere. overall the movie's not good but not bad.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Sosmooth1982Dec 10, 2022
Very disappointed in this movie. I was expecting it to be as good as the cartoon one, but it wasn't. It was actually kind of boring. I also didn't buy in to thier chemistry at all. It looked really cool though.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
More From This Movie

65 Critic Reviews

6.6 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL