DVDizzy Forum

So excited to FINALLY see it today! I did not saw any trailers besides the first teaser and avoided photos like the plague. Will see it dubbed first, though, as I'm very anxious to hear the versions as many theatre actors I adore are dubbing the movie.

disneyprincess11 wrote:

tsom wrote: The death scene was sad, but what happens immediately afterwards (or what was happening in tandem to the death scene) was even sadder and I definitely almost cried the first time I watched it, and I NEVER cry at movies.

I'm going to guess: Lumiere, Cogsworth etc. turn into objects?

If I remember correctly, that also happened in the Broadway musical, right?

Sicoe Vlad wrote:If I remember correctly, that also happened in the Broadway musical, right?

Nope.

tsom wrote:

disneyprincess11 wrote: Yep!!

So glad they're doing that. Even as a toddler, I was always wondering why the objects are still alive. I had a feeling that something would happen to them.

A friend of mine saw it yesterday evening. He told me he thought it was better than the animated version. I cannot imagine that. For me, the animated movie is perfect.

It's not big news at all, but you can enter to win an Orlando vacation:
Dole Products to Feature “Beauty and the Beast” Characters as Part of Healthy Eating Campaign
http://www.laughingplace.com/w/news/201 ... -campaign/

*edit*
James Corden's Crosswalk the Musical: Beauty and the Beast (with Luke Evans, Dan Stevens, and Josh Gad!!!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu4Pzsolyhg

*edit*
Josh Gad's Beauty and the Beast Horse Almost Ran Over Hermione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhE65f-ed04

Josh Gad's Kids Are Terrified of His Face in Beauty and the Beast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPxh3v5CviI

Disney's Divinity wrote:

Disney Duster wrote: Yup. Interest.

That was a point towards your derision of ticket sales as only measuring interest “before” viewers have seen the finished product. Album and home media sales would largely show interest in consumers after having seen the film.

Yes. For interest in the film before or after, yes.

Disney's Divinity wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:What really matters is if we all think the movie's good!

Are average people's reviews included in RottenTomatoes scores? They don't at all represent what I, you, or "we all" may think.

I meant all of the people here, or anywhere, who like the movie is what matters. I think critical acclaim matters, and it does show success, but I was saying what mostly matters is if people enjoy the film, critic or not. But the critical acclaim thing just means Cinderella was more successful in that area. Beauty and the Beast will probably be more successful in money and amount of people interested, but not critical acclaim. I was just saying Cinderella is more successful in one way, and what to me is the most important way besides all of us enjoying the film.

Sicoe Vlad wrote:A friend of mine saw it yesterday evening. He told me he thought it was better than the animated version. I cannot imagine that. For me, the animated movie is perfect.

Yea, I agree with you. I can't see this being better than the original masterpiece. I guess I'll find out tonight though!

I'm seeing this movie tonight! And again Friday hopefully in IMAX 3D!

I saw the movie today!

No doubt that this movie will have one of the biggest openings of all time. I went to the most deserted theater in my area, where usually only a handful of people go to any showing... and the showings for Beauty and the Beast were completely SOLD OUT! Man.. it was a full house!

As for the movie itself, the magic of disney makes it a pure joy to behold, but unfortunately, for every step it takes forward, it takes two steps back.

I have to say that songs were the biggest disappointment. In particular Beauty and the Beast. Who'd have thought that Emma Thompson would be the worst singer in the movie.. She ruined every line she sang.

But the movie itself isn't harmful. It's overstuffed, but the magic is there. On a side note, the castle's design took so much attention away from the scenes, especially Be Our Guest.

I hate how people are giving it bad reviews because it stuck too close to the animated movie... It's kind of what everyone wanted... How would they have reacted if they changed it a lot?

taei wrote:I have to say that songs were the biggest disappointment. In particular Beauty and the Beast. Who'd have thought that Emma Thompson would be the worst singer in the movie.. She ruined every line she sang.

I haven’t seen the film yet (will next week), but I remember not being excited about Thompson singing the title song. I was hoping they would just have Audra sing it during the ballroom scene, too.

Damn, this movie is good. SO GOOD. I'm in love. Will see it again saturday in English.

New clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK316sb2LEI

New TV spot:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTwk9G6QCac

And a featurette about the music:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8G1RBu2Zcg

Just watched it and I loved the movie! I had a lot of reservations but the movie was too amazing for me to care. I actually didn't find the songs to be that bad but I have heard them a lot over the past few days so I might have become used to these versions. Be Our Guest was an amazing spectacle to see and so was Gaston. For the ballroom dance, Belle's dancing was fine while it seemed like the Beast mostly just stood in place, but I suppose he isn't supposed to be an adept dancer. The cinematography of the scene was decent but not as as magical as in Cinderella with the ballroom dancing. I also wish they had kept to some of the more iconic shots that Belle has during the opening song and its reprise (mainly when she sings "there must be more than this provincial life" and her picking a dandelion).

Evermore gave me the chills and I loved seeing it on the big screen just as I've loved hearing it. How Does a Moment Last Forever has grown on me, but I don't really count it as a song as much as a recurring tune. Days in the Sun definitely makes more sense in context of the film...I wasn't expecting that it would begin right after Belle tends to the Beast's wounds so the flashback definitely makes more sense. I'm still not a fan of the attempt to give him a tragic background with a dead mother and cruel father but it's just referred to once. I didn't care initially for the attempt to give Belle a backstory but it worked for this film. I guess I'm too used to the 90s Disney movies where mothers are glossed over, but in real life, it makes sense that these characters would feel more incomplete from a dead parent. I was shaky on the scene where Beast takes Belle to her home in Paris at first, but now I think it was an acceptable addition because it helps the audience understand why Belle might fall in love with Beast by tying together a deeper emotional connection. My main issue with it (besides what I considered to be needlessly exploring Belle's backstory) was that I didn't see the point for the Beast to have a magical book that can take him anywhere in the world but the Beast comments himself on how it was cruel for the enchantress to give him something he could never really use himself. On a sidenote, I loved seeing Notre Dame in the background and I still hope Disney will do a live-action Hunchback film.

Emma Watson's acting was decent but sometimes it seemed she was trying too hard. A lot of people (including myself) have commented that in the opening song, she seems dull and uninspired but I just realized that she is supposed to be bored from village life so that makes sense. I've been watching Dan Stevens on Legion and the Beast has a lot of the acting quirks that Stevens' character has on Legion. Gaston's voice is definitely not as low as in the original movie, but he was so well cast and sang so wonderfully, that I got over that quickly. LeFou was a hootand as was predicted, he did indeed reform after a quick chat with Mrs. Potts in the finale that actually syncs well with the battle scene and doesn't seem too out of place as I was afraid of. The objects were all fun and I liked how Plumette got a slightly larger role in this version. Chip's different voice didn't bother me as much as I thought it would although I still think he sounded cuter in the original film. I liked although he sounded older in this version, he was still just as affectionate with his mother as in the original film. I'm not sure how I feel about him being a brunette now instead of blonde though. That bothered me when I first saw a brunette child in the prologue and realized it must be Chip.

I love how they kept the original fairytale scene of Maurice picking a rose for Belle. It also made sense why the Beast would punish Maurice so drastically for a rose considering a rose is what led to his damnation in this film, something that never made quite as much sense in the original fairytale. I wish they had kept the original score from the scene where Belle explores the West Wing and it also is more fast-paced in this version. I did notice that they kept the score for the scene where Belle is pondering whether or not to save the Beast after he rescues her from the wolves, something I wasn't expecting so I was glad about that.

I remember reading earlier that Mr. Potts would appear but I forgot about it until the finale scene when Mrs. Potts recognizes him...I'm glad he was one of the more sympathetic villagers (the one Belle talks to first in the opening song). I wasn't expecting that Cogsworth had a wife/lover as well and I'm guessing she is the Clothilde character in the casting. She's absolutely horrid in the movie so I can see why he was so upset that she was back.

The ending was as heartbreaking as others have posted it to be. The Beast dying was one thing but seeing all the objects turn into objects permanently was really something else. I thought it was interesting how in this version, the last petal falls before Belle says "I love you." I guess that's why they needed to keep Agathe for the ending so she could break the curse herself.

OMG this movie was EXCELLENT. I don’t know why its Rotten Tomatoes rating isn’t much higher!

I will read everyone else’s reviews later, but for now my quick two cents: Emma Watson’s acting is great. I was more endeared to Lily James’ Cinderella, but Emma was truly very good and I liked her a lot. Dan Stevens was mainly very, very good. And yes, Josh Gad was. Gaston was pretty good but I thought he felt a little too cartoony or fake sometimes. Emma Thompson’s acting was also pretty great to me but also especially Ian McKellen's. I liked the extra stuff they did and some of the changes including Belle being an inventor! It’s just that I wish Maurice was still an inventor so it wasn’t like they just stole his thing and gave it to Belle. Her washing machine was genius. I liked the attempts at fixing the time and age problems. They worked. I didn’t think the enchantress (who had a name while the Beast still didn’t have one!!!) was beautiful enough, and they could have just made her look haggard and ugly with messy, not well-kept hair and face and such, or you know, just transform like she did in the prologue, but I really liked what she did in the end. I loved her magic effect in the prologue, but don’t remember it being put on the prince turning into the Beast, which I wish they did. The magic effect for the Beast turning into the prince, however, was excellent. The only thing is they should have shown his whole body transform from his foot to his head as his head turns away from the camera like they did in the original, or otherwise some other well-done thing aside from the not-well-done thing of going to a shot of the transformation being completed while we look from outside the tower, so we don’t really get to see it. *sigh* Finally, I feel the Beast in this version should have seemed to have that kindness in his soul from the beginning like in the original film. In this film it seems to happen later like it wasn’t there until he gives Belle the library and it almost seemed, to me, like the love between him and Belle didn’t grow as naturally and truly EDIT: maybe I mean potently, since you do feel the love, as in the original film. Also, in the original film, the love and characters just, I think, had more soul. I would say this wasn’t quite as good as the live-action Cinderella, and a big part of it is I feel like the two leads in that and their love were more…I dunno, just had more feeling. But hey, that’s my opinion.

So yea, an excellent film. A great film. A beautiful film. To me, it wasn't as great as the original, but how could it be?

Thank you, Duster for that insightful review.

I'm going to see it tomorrow, with my sister, in IMAX 3D (wanna see it in the best way possible).

I was 100% sure that it couldn't be better than the original animated film (no Disney live action remake so far managed to surpass its animated predecessor).

I'll be sure to write my own opinions here after I see it.

For those who've seen it....what exactly happens in the gay scene that's causing so much controversy that a petition for its removal was started????????????

carolinakid wrote:What exactly happens in the gay scene that's causing so much controversy that a petition for its removal was started????????????

LeFou dances with a guy for a second in the end. That's it.

Wrote my review immediately after seeing it last night, and posted it around 3:30 in the morning (Eastern Time). Don Hahn shared it on his Facebook a few hours later, so... I guess he liked what I said?

https://albyseeingyou.wordpress.com/201 ... east-2017/

Albert

I want to make a change in my review. I said the love between Belle and the Beast didn't seem to grow truly. I think that should be potently, becuase you do still do feel their love, just not as much as in the animated film, to me.

Will read the other reviews later!

I am still reeling from last night! How magnificent!

Emma Watson was the PERFECT Belle. Still wishing they got someone like Laura Osnes, but she was still great. As soon as she walked in, I literally bursted into tears. Her Belle was very loving and compassionate, but still very intelligent and headstrong. Her voice isn't that bad, but yeah they should had dubbing. Dan Stevens was the perfect Beast. Once he breaks out of his shell, his Beast is very sweet and also intelligent (loved the background of his reading). Ewan and Ian were great as Luimere and Cogsworth. The charm of the characters are gone, but they're still very enjoyable to watch and had some good laughs. Emma was perfect as Mrs. Potts. Very loving and very cool-headed. I loved that when Belle was released, she was pretty cool about staying as a teapot because all that mattered to her was that the Beast has changed. The scene where she meets Belle also made me cry because it was so compassionate and warm. Audra pretty much did nothing, but it was still great having her around.

The stars for me were Kevin, Ian, and Josh. I was worried about Kevin because of the B-Rolls, his acting sounded very dry. I also thought I wouldn't like the new Maurice, but Kevin was excellent. He was so warm and touching. And man, did Kevin work it with the scenes when he told Gaston that he wouldn't give Belle to him and when Maurice accused him of murder. Luke OWNED Gaston. He just brought Gaston out SO SO much. I loved to hate Gaston. Gaston/Luke literally made me boil with anger like clutching my hands and mouthing curse words. Like holy crap, he would have literally done anything to marry Belle even if it means trying to kill an innocent old man and having the village to hate Maurice and try to send him to the asylum. I hope to God that Josh Gad gets nominated for an Oscar. He was the real stand-out here. To give Lefou a conscience and to have him struggle between the right thing and his love for Gaston made him so human. I loved his solo in "Mob Song" about how Gaston is the real monster. I was so happy when he got his happy ending And yes, Lefou is very clearly gay and in fact, Gaston takes advantage of it when Gaston was having the village turn against Maurice after Gaston tries to kill Maurice and that did it for me!, but it's overblown by the media. I LOVED the line where Mrs. Potts says, "You're too good for Gaston!"

I loved the numbers and the sets. I love how the opening was directed with the makeup, sets, dancing, and lighting with the characters being hidden, especially with Cogsworth I didn't know how they would pull of Be Our Guest and my god, they did. "Evermore" is so uplifting and touching. For the castle, they took advantage of the spacing like when Belle walked on the walkways outside. I also love how the village clearly hates Belle. The part where the whole village breaks her laundry invention over the fact that she was teaching the girl how to read killed me. How old-fashion! I also adored that it was true to the fairytale with addition of the "Give me the rose" and how Maurice entered the castle with the fire and the feast and the garden. LOVED his reaction to Chip talking . It reminded me of the musicals for Hunchback and Anastasia (which I saw in Hartford and AGAIN next month ): True to the source materials, but the characters are different. This version could actually be adapted to Broadway, like how R&H's Cinderella got a new book for Broadway. It was that different!

But, my main problems are the relationship between Belle/Beast and Belle/Gaston. I don't like how it's the servants who give Belle the bedroom and the tour of the castle. The only interactions the two literally had until the wolf scene was the prison and the "join me for dinner scenes." So, the fact that the Beast became kind to her really came out of nowhere, but the chemistry is still there and it's legitally sweet. It was slow, then too quick. And also, Gaston literally has four (after Belle), the house scene when it WASN'T a proposal. Just a think about getting married, which loses the legit hatred from Belle and THEN the Mob scene where he does NOT propose to her and then the Battle scene where he finally goes YOU WILL MARRY ME! In fact, he isn't even ignorant to her at the village after the Belle number. He's a gentleman. Like you don't see why she hates Gaston at first. I love that they do take the BELLE WILL MARRY ME stuff to Maurice, with Maurice's HECK NO and the attempt murder/sending to the asulym. But, he doesn't do the asylum with Belle in mind. Like "if she hears what happens to Maurice, she will marry me. He just does to get Maurice out of the way. So, the main problem is lost and disconnected. But, those are small gripe.

For the ending:

BAD POINTS:

-I thought the twist of Agatha being the Enchantress was too obvious. In fact, this confuses me. Gaston did the SAME things to her as the Beast did. Gaston deserved SO SO SO much more than dying. He was TERRIBLE! Why didn't they do the French movie and had theEnchantress turn Gaston into a beast and had the village kill him, thinking he was the monster? That would had been so deserving
-Also "that" scene. I loved the idea. Despite it being great, the execution was HORRIBLE. I HATED it! I thought the objects would die at the same time. But, oh my god. To see them saying goodbye one at a time was PAINFUL. VERY, VERY PAINFUL. I thought it was honestly really cruel to have the audience go through that. I was weeping in a bad way and had to take an extra minute after the movie ended to let all of that in. B/c I was honestly very shocked and really upset. Like they couldn't have Mrs. Potts be with Chip, instead of her crying out WHERE'S MY BABY?. To me, it was very uncomfortable and brutal.

GOOD POINTS:

-LOVED the addition of the servants being reunited with loved ones. Like Mr. Potts! OMG! But, the questions: How did Mr. Potts and Cogsworth Henry's husband/hated girlfriend ( ) get separated at the first place? Were they aged rapidly? Like is Mr. Potts now 20 year older than his wife?
-LOVED the Prince being quiet. So effective!

So despite the flaws and "that" scene, i loved it so much! Better than the movie? Of course not! The original will never be touched. But, it was very beautiful and well-done and I can't wait to see it many, many times again

Tsom, I loved your review! However I disagree that Emma Watson wasn’t as good as you say she was. I feel she was pretty good and not forced. However, I do see what you mean about her being herself more than Belle. I also thought Dan Stevens as the unkind prince was good and I didn’t find any fault with it. I disagree about the film being too-face-paced or too CGI. I think Maurice had a good enough song. I did like Belle’s version better, though. And I quite agreed with a lot of the rest of what you said!

tsom wrote:I actually wish the movie would've explained why the Prince is a prince and not a king since his parents are dead. Also, they did not explain if he was a reigning monarch. The townspeople don't have a sovereign.

Yea I wish that, too. But the narrator (who is the enchantress?) says the prince "taxed" the village to fill his castle with the most beautiful objects and people. So...does that confirm he's a reigning monarch?

Estefan, I quite agree that IMAX is the way to see this movie! I noticed more details when I saw it in IMAX. The production values were indeed incredible. The changes did indeed work. Gaston did indeed do a nice transition into revealing the jerk he really was. In a way, it’s like how the Beast reveals how good is inside. Now that I noticed that, that’s probably exactly what the filmmakers of the original film intended Gaston and the Beast to do. LeFou’s change was indeed good and well-performed. I also like what they did with the town forgetting the prince and castle. After seeing it twice, and watching Doug Walker’s “Beauty and the Beast – Sibling Rivalry”, I now see the whole parental backstories for Belle and the Beast are pretty unnecessary, as well as, I think, what they did with Gaston, LeFou, and Maurice in the woods.

Taei, I loved what you said! I agree with it all except I don't think the castle distracted from the scenes, especially not in "Be Our Guest" because the castle goes dark while all the light is all on the dancing magical objects.

JeanGreyForever, I loved your review! I’m glad you loved the movie! “Be Our Guest” really was amazing. The ballroom dance from Cinderella definitely trumps the one from this film, in how the magic of the dance was done and the emotions of the characters. I suppose Belle and the Beast’s parental backstories were unneeded. And what is it with bad characters are bad because someone else made them that way…? That’s a lazy way to do it instead of like in Cinderella when it is what happens to the stepmother and her choices that make her bad. And yes, the magic book actually doesn’t really do anything for the Beast and Belle except it shows the Beast being kind to Belle in yet another way. I don’t think Belle being bored of the village excuses her acting in the opening song, but she did have some moments where she did come alive in it. The white rose being stolen in this film did indeed make Maurice getting captured make more sense, as well as Belle taking his place because she asked for the rose. I don’t think it fully works, but it’s better. Plus, now I actually get why the Beast in the original fairy tale was so upset. He treated Belle’s father well, but then he stole from him. Even though a rose is a mere natural wonderful beauty one can find in many places, it was still stealing. I think it sucks Cogsworth (wait, why isn’t that his real name and instead it’s Henry?) has a terrible wife he doesn’t seem to love anymore and divorce doesn’t exist in France in the 1740’s. I, too, thought it was interesting the last petal fell before Belle declared “I love you.” One thing I always wondered in the original film was why she needed to say she loved the Beast for the spell to be broken when it was clear she loved him at least by the time he set her free or she explained he was gentle and kind to the villagers. I suppose her love for him couldn’t have fully developed until the Beast (almost) died, but it’s kind of nonsensical to me. Anyway, I’m glad that the last petal fell before she said it because it means the enchantress isn’t a total bitch and we saw her choose to lift the curse even though it wasn’t in time (or she knew Belle loved him as she came to the castle). I talk a little more about the enchantress below. I really liked her having a name and being someone who lived in the village, too. I liked that she was, well, a character. I didn’t feel they “needed” her to break the curse at the end though. I thought she was just there to do the removal, the same way I always wondered and wished she’d appear at the end of the original film to undo the spell once Belle loved the Beast. But you bring up a very good point that maybe, though she sensed Belle might love the Beast, she had to be there to break the spell because Belle didn’t do it in time. Interesting theory.

Escapay your review was all eloquent and touching, but you didn’t seem to point out what in the film was new and how the performances were other than lots of words that mean “good” or “the best”. Your review was like “this movie is so great like the old one but in new ways” without being specific about anything.

Disneyprincess11, glad you enjoyed the film so much! I found Cogsworth charming, actually. I, too, loved how Emma Thompson acted as Mrs. Potts, for all the reasons you stated, and the extra one that even though she knew Belle wanted to run away, she would be kind to Belle anyway and not alert the master or something (even though it could be seen as her manipulating Belle to stay, lol). I didn’t think Gaston used LeFou’s being gay against him to go kill the Beast, but maybe I didn’t notice…? I, too, wanted to kill the town for wrecking Belle’s washing machine. I thought in my head both times I saw the movie, “Those bastards!” And of course it was the men who destroyed her machine. Maurice’s reaction to Chip was one if the best, funniest parts! And yes, I found the Beast being kind to Belle out of nowhere too! It was so much better in the 1991 film! I feel Gaston being a gentleman to Belle was good and more realistic, and I still found him ignorant in the “he doesn’t have much intelligence” kind of way, and she can still hate him for him being totally wrong for her and being pushy in trying to be with her and saying things about her that aren’t true and that she hates like she’s simple and should just worry about kids with him. I also recall that he was using Maurice’s freedom to bait Belle into marrying him, but maybe that isn’t in there. As for the enchantress not turning Gaston into a Beast, you're right, I wondered that the second time I saw the film, as I say below. As for the end scene where the enchanted objects lose their life, it’s supposed to be sad and make you uncomfortable. Movies are supposed to make you feel all ranges of emotions. And I don’t think that any of the people in the castle were under the spell for very long. Because they all look the same as they did when they were transformed. So it must not have been that many years. Otherwise they never aged, while the townspeople did. You may have meant that was the case, though? As for Cogsworth and his wife (you meant wife, not husband, as you wrote, right?), and the other people, my guess is the people who served the prince and did nothing to stop the prince’s unkindness were cursed, but those who weren’t involved with the prince went back to the town. Or, even weirder, the servants had un-royal lovers in the village, though I don’t think that would make any sense.

After seeing this a second time, I must say that for the most part I love this movie, I just would have cut the parental backstories for Belle and the Beast, and the part with Gaston and LeFou and Maurice in the woods. I felt something the second time I saw this film. Why didn’t the enchantress turn Gaston into a Beast? This is even brought up by Doug Walker’s commentary in his “Beauty and the Beast – Sibling Rivalry” discussion. I don’t think it’s because she can tell the future that Gaston will get his just desserts. I suppose she could tell the future because of how she handles what happens in the end and of course where she is at certain points in the rest of the film, but I really wonder about it. And I guess she could have known Gaston would die. Oh, and I no longer think Gaston was too cartoony or fake. This time I saw his acting as very good all the way through except maybe the very start.

I like that Mrs. Potts does indeed look more like a mother than a grandmother to Chip, but it’s still kinda weird she’s older and I think she should be younger or Chip should be older.

I think I realized why the “Beauty and the Beast” ballroom dance was not as good as it could be and why the Rotten Tomatoes score for this film is lower than Cinderella’s. Okay, I had heard that when Dan Stevens did his facial acting for the ballroom dance (his facial acting had to be done separately from his body acting for the Beast CGI), that a little girl who watched it while they were filming it started crying. I was looking for that amazing acting…and I didn’t notice it, or they just failed. In the 2015 Cinderella, we see how Ella and Kit feel during their dance scene, and that they are falling in love. In the original 1991 Beauty and the Beast, we see Belle and Beast’s faces and emotions and excitement and even Belle putting her head in the Beast’s chest that all shows them falling in love. In this movie…we don’t seem to get that.

Does anyone know if there's a meaning behind Lumiere's dancing while wrapped inside a napkin? It was hilarious, but I'm wondering if there's something behind it haha.