By Madison McCann, Editor-in-Chief
Recently, Disney has been remaking many of its classic animations. It started with the remake of “Alice in Wonderland” in 2010. Then came “Cinderella” (2015) and “The Jungle Book” (2016). This year, it’s a live-action remake of “Beauty and the Beast,” directed by Bill Condon.
My usual philosophy regarding animated movies is that they’re always better than their live-action counterparts. Animated movies have better special effects without ruining the suspension of disbelief, and never have bad actors, because actors are cartoons.
Nonetheless, I was excited to see the remake of “Beauty and the Beast.”
The story of “Beauty and the Beast” begins when a prince is cursed by a witch and becomes a beast. The spell also makes his servants become moving, speaking household objects. The only way he can break the spell is to fall in love and have someone fall in love with him.
Belle is a young woman living with her father in a small French town, who has a love of reading and longs for adventure, which she finds when her father is captured by the Beast for trying to take a rose. Belle exchanges herself for her father and moves into the Beast’s castle.
Meanwhile, local village stud Gaston, who wishes to marry Belle, schemes to win her affections.
The original story of “Beauty and the Beast” always seemed ethically dubious to me, specifically because Belle’s relationship with the beast seems to romanticize Stockholm Syndrome (a condition in which a prisoner develops a strong emotional tie to their captor). I looked forward to seeing how the more modern movie would change the story to make Belle more autonomous, especially with notable feminist Emma Watson playing the role.
Emma Watson’s acting turned Belle from an all-too-typical damsel-in-distress to a strong female lead who is willing to stand up for both herself and her family.
For example, during one scene of the movie, the Beast (Dan Stevens) demands that Belle join him for dinner, to which she fiercely responds that she would rather starve than eat with the person who just imprisoned her.
The live-action movie adds much more depth to Belle’s character, explaining the loss of her mother and her fascination with roses, such as the one her father attempted to take from the Beast’s castle (causing him to be captured).
It was also satisfying to have some real, clear character development for Belle in the movie. This occurs in the scene where she willingly rescues the Beast from the wolves and returns to his castle with him instead of returning to her home. It shows how Belle recognizes that the Beast is neither all good nor all bad, and that there may be more to the story than meets the eye.
The new movie also provides a sensible background to Belle’s relationship with the Beast, removing any element of Stockholm Syndrome. While the animated movie shows Belle falling in love with the Beast simply because he became less of an awful person, the new movie shows them connecting through a love of reading and adventure, which they share together to create an actual, feasible bond.
In fact, there are quite a few scenes that helped me empathize with the Beast. The movie tries to clear up some of the Beast’s backstory, revealing why the staff is so loyal to him that they sacrifice their lives, and why he is so angry all the time.
However, I found much of his backstory to be frustratingly vague. One short scene includes a line about how the servants did nothing as the Beast’s father abused his son, followed by a clip of the Beast as a young boy being taken away from his dying mother by his father. I found this flashback to be completely unrelated to the line before it and irrelevant to the movie as a whole, as it shows very little emotion on the part of either family member.
One improvement from the animated version is the depth of character given to Gaston’s (Luke Evans) henchman, LeFou (Josh Gad). Rather than a bumbling idiot with a mysterious attachment to Gaston, LeFou portrays a powerful character who stays with Gaston out of admiration and friendship. Throughout the movie, LeFou seems to have an undercurrent of romantic feelings for Gaston, which gives his character more depth — as well as increasing the movie’s inclusivity.
One of my favorite lines from the movie came during LeFou’s song “I want a guy like Gaston,” as he attempts to spell Gaston’s name:
“And his name’s G-A-S-T … I believe there’s another T… It just occurred to me that I’m illiterate and I’ve never actually had to spell it out loud before …”
LeFou serves as the comic relief throughout the movie. He represents the voice of reason, humanizing Gaston’s beastly actions and giving the audience a reason to care about the darker side of the movie that deals with mob mentality and the judgement of a small community.
Unfortunately, the movie has its shortcomings. For starters, some of the songs are awful, specifically those performed by Emma Watson. Her song “Little Town” sounds auto-tuned and mechanical, which fits poorly with the time period of the movie (the early 1800s). This kills several scenes that had the potential to be iconic, and makes the audience cringe.
There also seems to be some inconsistency in the animation of the Beast’s servants. Lumiere (Ewan McGregor) looks like a metallic person, while Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson) looks like a teapot on which somebody drew a face. The contrast is so stark, it’s as if Lumiere was designed by a professional animator, while Mrs. Potts was created by a five-year-old.
Despite these disappointments, I found Disney’s live-action version of “Beauty and the Beast” to be entertaining and enjoyable. I would definitely see it again — although not until it comes to Netflix.
Four out of five stars.