Beauty and the Beast (Live-Action)

[JeanGreyForever]

Like tsom, at least I can feel good that Cinderella got way better reviews than Alice or Maleficent. I don't know if the reviews for it were better or a little less or around the same as The Jungle Book. The film was well made. I'll just have to see if Beauty and the Beast is, because unlike Disney, I don't care about the money - I care if the film is good.

Cinderella was way better received than Alice and Maleficent. A major reason it didn't make as much money as them was because it lacked a huge star in the lead. Alice had Johnny Depp (notice how they promoted him way more than Alice herself) while Maleficent had Angelina Jolie.

[Disney Duster]

Another good point! Thank you JeanGreyForever! Although Cinderella did have Cate Blanchett.

And Divinity, as for those critics who hailed Cinderella as a masterpiece sounding hollow, that would have to be almost every critic, because almost every critic praised Cinderella.

And this film doesn't have more interest than Cinderella did, and the cast was also not lesser than this one. Maybe Emma Watson is better than Lily James, but I'm not sure, especially when she thought of quitting acting back druing her Harry Potter days. But many, many people were interested in Cinderella. The only difference here is the original animated Beauty and the Beast has more fans.

[DisneyFan09]

So Belle will have her traditional blue dress, huh?

To be honest, I like it when the live action adaptations bear resemblance to their original counterparts. Because it feels as an homage to them and not a detraction from them. They don't have to be replica's of their animated versions, but a certain homage/resemblance is nice.

[Disney's Divinity]

A major reason it didn't make as much money as them was because it lacked a huge star in the lead. Alice had Johnny Depp (notice how they promoted him way more than Alice herself) while Maleficent had Angelina Jolie.

I don't think that's true. Cinderella had Cate Blanchett and Johnny Depp wasn swinging down in popularity around the time Alice was released. I imagine it was mostly that people just didn't care about seeing the umpteenth version of Cinderella.

And Divinity, as for those critics who hailed Cinderella as a masterpiece sounding hollow, that would have to be almost every critic, because almost every critic praised Cinderella.

Well, isn't that nice. But it has nothing to do with what I said--which is that any criticisms of B&tB from the same people who would make over something as tepid as Cinderella (2015) would sound hollow and ridiculous to me.

And this film doesn't have more interest than Cinderella did, and the cast was also not lesser than this one. Maybe Emma Watson is better than Lily James, but I'm not sure, especially when she thought of quitting acting back druing her Harry Potter days. But many, many people were interested in Cinderella. The only difference here is the original animated Beauty and the Beast has more fans.

I am sorry, but you're just flat-out wrong there. Naturally there would be more interest for this film if there are more fans and vice versa. As for the cast, I'll agree that is subjective, and it is my opinion that the cast of this film is far and away superior to that of Cinderella. Not even Blanchett was a highlight there, but I don't really blame her; I think she gave the best performance possible considering how confused the character was.

[Disney Duster]

A major reason it didn't make as much money as them was because it lacked a huge star in the lead. Alice had Johnny Depp (notice how they promoted him way more than Alice herself) while Maleficent had Angelina Jolie.

I don't think that's true. Cinderella had Cate Blanchett and Johnny Depp wasn swinging down in popularity around the time Alice was released. I imagine it was mostly that people just didn't care about seeing the umpteenth version of Cinderella.

Did you mean Johnny Depp was swinging down in popularity? I don't get that at all. I feel he was around his peak there. I think the other reasons Alice did so well was because of Tim Burton and because there are more fans of anything Alice in Wonderland/Through The Looking Glass related. I will admit though, Cinderella probably didn't do as well because there have been so many versions of it before. But there's also been many Alice's. Just not as many Cinderella's.

And Divinity, as for those critics who hailed Cinderella as a masterpiece sounding hollow, that would have to be almost every critic, because almost every critic praised Cinderella.

Well, isn't that nice. But it has nothing to do with what I said--which is that any criticisms of B&tB from the same people who would make over something as tepid as Cinderella (2015) would sound hollow and ridiculous to me.

What did you mean by make over? I don't get what you're saying here that isn't what I said.

I am sorry, but you're just flat-out wrong there. Naturally there would be more interest for this film if there are more fans and vice versa. As for the cast, I'll agree that is subjective, and it is my opinion that the cast of this film is far and away superior to that of Cinderella. Not even Blanchett was a highlight there, but I don't really blame her; I think she gave the best performance possible considering how confused the character was.

More fans may mean more interest in the sense of there being more people with interest, but it doesn't mean those that are interested have more interest in it. But I'll admit, I don't know a way to find out if more people are interested in this than there were people interested in Cinderella, and I will admit there are probably more people who are interested for Beauty and the Beast. As for Cate Blanchett, I thought she and Lily James were about equal. But I will also have to admit, if I had to pick one who was more boring, it would be Lily James. But I still thought she did great and I don't agree Lady Tremaine's character was confused.

[Disney's Divinity]

More fans may mean more interest in the sense of there being more people with interest, but it doesn't mean those that are interested have more interest in it. But I'll admit, I don't know a way to find out if more people are interested in this than there were people interested in Cinderella,

The fact that the teaser broke record views is a pretty tangible way to know that.

[JeanGreyForever]

A major reason it didn't make as much money as them was because it lacked a huge star in the lead. Alice had Johnny Depp (notice how they promoted him way more than Alice herself) while Maleficent had Angelina Jolie.

I don't think that's true. Cinderella had Cate Blanchett and Johnny Depp wasn swinging down in popularity around the time Alice was released. I imagine it was mostly that people just didn't care about seeing the umpteenth version of Cinderella.

Blanchett has gained in popularity over the past few years but she isn't a household name like Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie who are both at the very top of Hollywood. There's a reason their faces are always highlighted the most at the Oscars and why every Tom, Dick, and Harry of almost any foreign country can recognize them by face and name. Also Depp was still incredibly popular then. This was after Pirates of the Caribbean and Willy Wonka but before Lone Ranger and Dark Shadows.

And this film doesn't have more interest than Cinderella did, and the cast was also not lesser than this one. Maybe Emma Watson is better than Lily James, but I'm not sure, especially when she thought of quitting acting back druing her Harry Potter days. But many, many people were interested in Cinderella. The only difference here is the original animated Beauty and the Beast has more fans.

I am sorry, but you're just flat-out wrong there. Naturally there would be more interest for this film if there are more fans and vice versa.[/quote]
Definitely agree that this film has way more hype than Cinderella. Beauty and the Beast was from Disney's peak during the 90s and that generation is the movie-going audience right now while the younger generation is probably most familiar with those early Renaissance films after the current Revival ones. Cinderella might be the more iconic story but Beauty and the Beast is the more popular Disney film.

[Disney's Divinity]

Blanchett has gained in popularity over the past few years but she isn't a household name like Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie who are both at the very top of Hollywood. There's a reason their faces are always highlighted the most at the Oscars and why every Tom, Dick, and Harry of almost any foreign country can recognize them by face and name. Also Depp was still incredibly popular then. This was after Pirates of the Caribbean and Willy Wonka but before Lone Ranger and Dark Shadows.

Gonna have to disagree with you there. Most people who would know who Jolie and Depp are would know who Blanchett is (see The Lord of the Rings, Elizabeth, The Aviator, Robin Hood, Blue Jasmine, Indiana Jones & tKotCS, etc.). She is not a hidden gem and this is the first I've ever heard her be described as one. The film also featured HBC and Richard Madden, who aren't at the top of the heap but both well-known (to varying degrees--HBC being much farther up the scale). And Lily James had just come off Downton Abbey. Combined with Blanchett, the film didn't exactly have some kind of indie cast.

[JeanGreyForever]

Blanchett has gained in popularity over the past few years but she isn't a household name like Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie who are both at the very top of Hollywood. There's a reason their faces are always highlighted the most at the Oscars and why every Tom, Dick, and Harry of almost any foreign country can recognize them by face and name. Also Depp was still incredibly popular then. This was after Pirates of the Caribbean and Willy Wonka but before Lone Ranger and Dark Shadows.

Gonna have to disagree with you there. Most people who would know who Jolie and Depp are would know who Blanchett is (see The Lord of the Rings, Elizabeth, The Aviator, Robin Hood, Blue Jasmine, Indiana Jones & tKotCS, etc.). She is not a hidden gem and this is the first I've ever heard her be described as one. The film also featured HBC and Richard Madden, who aren't at the top of the heap but both well-known (to varying degrees--HBC being much farther up the scale). And Lily James had just come off Downton Abbey. Combined with Blanchett, the film didn't exactly have some kind of indie cast.

I'm sorry but I disagree. I'm talking about an international audience and not one that watches movies. There's a reason that whenever Angelina Jolie goes off to obscure villages in Africa, India, Vietnam, etc. that she is recognized. There's a reason Brangelina is the it celebrity couple. There was a study conducted in a Texas school a few months back and students were asked questions about who the first president was, who fought in the Civil War, etc. and they couldn't answer them. But they knew Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston, etc. Angelina and Johnny Depp are hugely iconic pillars of cinema. At Madame Tussauds, they are both two of most popular wax figures, while Cate Blanchett only just recently got one. There's a reason that when Depp and Jolie had a film that flopped a few years back, the Oscars still nominated it because it was the only way to get both stars to come to the Oscars as they are both huge ratings boosts. General audiences are more likely to not flip the channel on the Oscars when they are seeing faces of people as iconic as Depp and Jolie (I'm talking about the Average American btw here, not movie buffs who would be watching the Oscars anyway). People know Depp and Jolie by first name and while Cate Blanchett is popular, she's not a universal figure like they are. In all of those franchise films you listed that Blanchett has starred in, she won't jump to people's minds first the way people will likely think of Jolie for the Maleficent film or Depp for the Alice film. Both of those actors had their faces plastered everywhere for those respective films. If Blanchett was as big as you claim her to be, then Cinderella posters would have her right next to Ella if not replacing her, but that wasn't the case at all. I'm honestly not sure why you think Blanchett is anywhere near that level, because few actors are.

I don't think Beauty and the Beast has any actors to that same level as Depp and Jolie either. Emma Watson is closest and that's mostly for the young crowd where she does indeed rank near the very top. Beyond that though, most people haven't heard of the actors for the Beast, Gaston, etc. Emma Thompson and Ian McKellan are known by more mature audiences typically or fans of franchises (Nanny McPhee, X-Men, Lord of the Rings, etc.) Ewan McGregor has Star Wars to his name, but people will identify him more as Obi-Wan Kenobi than by his real name (once more, talking about the average person on the street here).

[Disney's Divinity]

Okay, even if we did agree that Cate Blanchett is not at the same level as those two, she is--what?--one step down from there? How can anyone honestly use that as an argument for a 200-500 million dollar difference in box office.

[Disney Duster]

More fans may mean more interest in the sense of there being more people with interest, but it doesn't mean those that are interested have more interest in it. But I'll admit, I don't know a way to find out if more people are interested in this than there were people interested in Cinderella,

The fact that the teaser broke record views is a pretty tangible way to know that.

Oh I didn't know that! But I wonder what records it broke in comparison to Cinderella, because Cinderella's trailer was the highest viewed Disney trailer that wasn't of a Marvel property when it came out.

I forgot to add, for Maleficent, both that character and Walt's Sleeping Beauty are more popular than Walt's Cinderella I think. I do not know for sure though.

JeanGreyForever, I think Cate Blanchett is almost as well known as Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie. But I agree, not quote as much.

Side note: Disney's Divinity, who is the second to last character in your Once Upon a Time banner (which is cool along with the avatar)?

[JeanGreyForever]

Okay, even if we did agree that Cate Blanchett is not at the same level as those two, she is--what?--one step down from there? How can anyone honestly use that as an argument for a 200-500 million dollar difference in box office.

I suppose that would work but I still think Jolie and Depp bring in the masses in a way other actors don't (although Depp's influence is fading). I have a cousin who would never watch anything Disney but he saw Maleficent because he just knew it as an Angelina Jolie movie, not a Disney one. Maleficent made a lot of money and I think we can all agree that it wasn't because of the quality of the movie. At the end of the day, the huge moneymaker was Angelina Jolie.

The fact that the teaser broke record views is a pretty tangible way to know that.

Oh I didn't know that! But I wonder what records it broke in comparison to Cinderella, because Cinderella's trailer was the highest viewed Disney trailer that wasn't of a Marvel property when it came out.

I forgot to add, for Maleficent, both that character and Walt's Sleeping Beauty are more popular than Walt's Cinderella I think. I do not know for sure though.

JeanGreyForever, I think Cate Blanchett is almost as well known as Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie. But I agree, not quote as much.

Side note: Disney's Divinity, who is the second to last character in your Once Upon a Time banner (which is cool along with the avatar)?

Maleficent may be more popular than Cinderella, because villains are generally always liked better, and especially now that public perception paints her as a flawed heroine rather than a full-fledged villain. It's really weird to see people consider her a Disney Princess for example. But I think in terms of movies, Cinderella is way more popular than Sleeping Beauty any day. It's way more iconic in general. I think the highest VHS sales for Disney movies had all the princess films but Sleeping Beauty which was replaced with The Lion King. And I think I read something where they calculated which facebook pages for Disney movies had the most fans, and Cinderella was in the top ten but Sleeping Beauty wasn't (all the other main princess films were on there btw).

[Disney's Divinity]

I suppose that would work but I still think Jolie and Depp bring in the masses in a way other actors don't (although Depp's influence is fading). I have a cousin who would never watch anything Disney but he saw Maleficent because he just knew it as an Angelina Jolie movie, not a Disney one. Maleficent made a lot of money and I think we can all agree that it wasn't because of the quality of the movie. At the end of the day, the huge moneymaker was Angelina Jolie.

No. It was a combination of Jolie, the fact that Maleficent is a very popular character, and the appeal of the film's advertisements and the implied story. Cinderella was nowhere near as appealing to consumers for whatever reason (the cast, the trailers, the story itself, who knows) and did much less. I'll be honest that the only reason I even wanted to see Cinderella was because of Cate Blanchett which is why I can't agree with the perception of her casting being unable to drive people to see the film as much as Jolie/Depp.

And, btw, you're overlooking The Jungle Book's huge success. What megawatt star advantage did it have over Cinderella to justify such a huge difference in their box office totals?

@Duster: It's Anastasia (the Red Queen / Ugly Stepsister).

[thedisneyspirit]

This movie will do money. BATB is already Disney's most beloved film and i'm sure they'll promote it like crazy, add to that the Potterheads who'll run into the theaters to see Emma, like $$$$ guaranteed.

[JeanGreyForever]

I suppose that would work but I still think Jolie and Depp bring in the masses in a way other actors don't (although Depp's influence is fading). I have a cousin who would never watch anything Disney but he saw Maleficent because he just knew it as an Angelina Jolie movie, not a Disney one. Maleficent made a lot of money and I think we can all agree that it wasn't because of the quality of the movie. At the end of the day, the huge moneymaker was Angelina Jolie.

No. It was a combination of Jolie, the fact that Maleficent is a very popular character, and the appeal of the film's advertisements and the implied story. Cinderella was nowhere near as appealing to consumers for whatever reason (the cast, the trailers, the story itself, who knows) and did much less. I'll be honest that the only reason I even wanted to see Cinderella was because of Cate Blanchett which is why I can't agree with the perception of her casting being unable to drive people to see the film as much as Jolie/Depp.

And, btw, you're overlooking The Jungle Book's huge success. What megawatt star advantage did it have over Cinderella to justify such a huge difference in their box office totals?

You're right it was a combo of Jolie and Maleficent but I'm not convinced that the advertising of it as the true story was a major ticket seller, but I'm a tad bit partial on that. I still don't see Blanchett on that level, even though I really like her. To me, that's like saying that The Jungle Book was a huge hit because Scarlet Johansson was playing Kaa or Anne Hathaway was playing the White Queen in Alice.

Jungle Book didn't have one major star but it did have an all star cast and you'll notice that the WB Jungle Book movie is following this pattern by casting big names in each role. Jungle Book also had a huge leap in numbers because it was such a hit in India which makes since considering the story takes place there.

[Disney Duster]

JeanGreyForever, well, actually I think Cinderella and Maleficen as characters are about equal. Ariel or Cinderella I think are the first or second most popular heroines, but Maleficent I believe is always, always the most popular villain. I never knew Cinderella and the other princess films were more popular than Sleeping Beauty. Your info opens my eyes.

Disney's Divinity, thanks, I was wondering if it was her actually even though I didn't see OUATiW. I wish I did.

[Disney's Divinity]

Jungle Book didn't have one major star but it did have an all star cast

I give up. None of these excuses (that don't work) change anything I've said. Cinderella was less successful than the other live-action films by a huge amount and will very likely be less successful than B&tB by a huge amount.

[ce1ticmoon]

Trying to decide if I should get the teaser poster from DMR. I love the poster, but I don't really have anywhere to hang it. lol

[JeanGreyForever]

Jungle Book didn't have one major star but it did have an all star cast

I give up. None of these excuses (that don't work) change anything I've said. Cinderella was less successful than the other live-action films by a huge amount and will very likely be less successful than B&tB by a huge amount.

I never even said that Cinderella was less successful than the other live-action movies, because that's true. Cinderella made less than Alice, Maleficent, etc. But critically it blew those two out of the water and is considered on par with The Jungle Book. And I still believe that Cinderella made less money/Alice and Maleficent made more money b/c of the high profile actors. Look how much media attention Depp has been getting from his abusive relationship with Amber Heard and now how the Angelina-Brad divorce is all over the news. I can't fathom how anyone would think those stars aren't the epitome of Hollywood.

[Disney's Divinity]

But critically it blew those two out of the water and is considered on par with The Jungle Book.

That wasn't what we were arguing

I can't fathom how anyone would think those stars aren't the epitome of Hollywood.

And that wasn't what we were arguing either.

We were arguing that those two actors somehow were the reason for a 250-500 million dollar difference between Cinderella and Alice/Maleficent, which I find ridiculous. Which still doesn't explain why TJB did so much better than Cinderella. And, no, TJB didn't have "more star power" than Cinderella (which features Blanchett, HBC, James, Madden, etc.). Cinderella just drew less interest because it was a less interesting movie.