The 1991 version of Beauty And The Beast, to put it simply,
is fucking perfect. Yet another
classic film that took a modern reimagining for me to check out in the first
place, I can scarcely recall a supposed ‘classic’ that made me fall
head-over-heels in love as quickly as that film did. The animation, the music,
the sharp characterisation, the voice acting, the morals; it’s rare that I’ll
ever define a film as being beyond improvement but, quite frankly, that’s how
hard I fell in love with this thing. Yeah, I’m late to the party but I’m sure
as hell not leaving in a hurry.
Now, I would ordinarily get a bit anxious in
the face of this because, well, remaking this film seems like a bad idea on the
surface. However, given the quality standards of the recent string of Disney
live-action remakes, I have at least some faith that this film will at least be
entertaining. I’ve been making it a habit of talking about how most if not all
of my expectations for this year’s releases have been proven categorically wrong…
and now, it’s time to see the absolute nadir of that effect.
The plot: A tale as old as time, this story has been
repeated so many times that
recounting the narrative is almost pointless. Belle (Emma Watson), after her
father (Kevin Kline) is imprisoned by the reclusive Beast (Dan Stevens), takes
his place as the Beast’s captive. However, as the two grow closer, it seems
that the curse that made the Beast what he is may finally be broken, much to
the relief of his servants-turned-household-appliances. Unfortunately, jealous
suitor Gaston (Luke Evans) is determined to have Belle as his wife at any cost.
Given the rather operatic and well-defined voice work of the
1991 version, I think it’d be a little unfair to directly compare this cast to
that one. Not that I really need to, as most of the cast is perfectly capable
of standing (or falling) on their own. Watson does adequately as the titular
Beauty and, considering this is her first singing role on-screen, manages to do
her musical numbers some justice. Stevens, on the other hand, doesn’t come out
so well; it’s rather unsettling to think that his role as a sociopathic
murderer in The Guest was more suave and charming than he is here. Kline is
just okay as Belle’s father, Evans is a decent fit for the mascot of toxic
masculinity that is Gaston and seems to be having fun in the process, and Josh
Gad as LeFou is probably the most consistently entertaining cast member here.
Ignoring the LGBT undertones of his character this time around, because it’s
honestly not that noteworthy, his interjections during the songs and even
Gaston’s faux-grandiose musings make for some truly funny moments.
As for the
voice acting of the servants, Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen are pretty fun as
Lumiere and Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts is probably the closest any
of these actors get to besting their predecessors and Gugu Mbatha-Raw as
Lumiere’s love interest Plumette has some lovely chemistry with McGregor. I’d
argue that this is more of a negative than a positive, but more on that later.
The recent string of Disney live-action remakes of their
seminal classics have largely done away with the musical aspects of their
respective originals. More often than not, the few familiar songs that spring
up in these films is usually done as a means of lip service to the source
material. This is markedly different however, as this is indeed a full-blown
musical in much the same way the original film was. Honestly, there’s plenty of
good and plenty of average in how that turns out on screen. Alongside the
Menken/Ashman classics returning, we also have some new songs by Menken and
Disney premier lyricist Tim Rice.
Now, the new songs range from being just okay
to pretty damn forgettable, but the new renditions are also pretty
middle-of-the-road. The singing chops of the cast are mostly pretty good, even
if they tend to lean more towards the acting side of musical performance which
makes the singing a little off at points, and the numbers themselves are still
good. Hell, Be Our Guest as sung by Ewan McGregor does that ideal film trick of
fully transporting the viewer into the film’s world, and LeFou’s interjections
during Gaston made for some of the funniest moments of the film.
Judging by the uproar concerning LeFou’s sexual subtext,
it’s a safe bet to say that this is meant to be somewhat of a different take on
the original story. Or, at least, this is attempting
to be a different take. Aside from a slightly more multicultural cast this time
around and a few bits of further characterization for both Gaston and LeFou,
the most obvious enhancement here is how the Beast’s subjects have been
written. Through an addition to the plot-commencing curse, the living castle
now has grander stakes when it comes to breaking the curse: If they fail, they
will not only remain objects forever but they will also lose their sentience.
They are also given more connections to the outside world through relationships
between the subjects inside the castle and the villagers nearby. As a result,
the servants are now noticeably more proactive in making sure the main
courtship works out and playing match-makers.
This is honestly a pretty cool
idea, a means of giving more agency to characters that are almost literally
just part of the scenery. Unfortunately, how this ultimately manifests in the
story is less than ideal, up to and including trying to lock Belle inside the
castle when she tries to leave. They fail, of course, but that act on its own
shows that this film’s attempts to potentially stave off the usual Stockholm
Syndrome BS that the original unfairly keeps garnering doesn’t work nearly as
well as the filmmakers think.
But even more so than that, what really makes this attempt
to flesh out the supporting cast outright fail is because it’s being done at
the expense of the titular Beauty and the Beast. Admittedly, Belle doesn’t
really have much of an arc outside of the usual Disney Princess “I want more”
credo but the Beast? More than anything else, the original was his story, his arc, his growth as a
character. The original Beast was basically a secluded loner who,
understandably given his circumstances, initially struggles to communicate with
Belle without being aggressive but eventually wins her over with genuine heart
and care. As a likewise mostly-secluded loner, I rather easily sympathise with
this.
In this film, however, he is reduced to being a brute that the love
interest has to “fix”. There’s even a bit of throwaway narration at the start
about how the prince taxed the villagers to make his castle as beautiful as
possible, as if a remake of The Emperor’s New Clothes got mixed into the
script. As such, what was before a story about redemption, love and the
societal ill that is prejudice is now watered-down to the point where the main
couple is now far less engaging than the relationship between Lumiere and
Plumette.
With an extra half-hour in the running time, they should have been
able to accommodate both the old story and
the new additions without losing anything, but apparently not. And as if this
couldn’t get any more misguided, due to how the plot elements have been
shuffled around (resulting in some weird disconnects during the musical
numbers), the Beast here is actually more
akin to a captor who makes a girl fall in love with him through imprisonment
than the original ever was. Coming from two writers whose most popular works
include the film version of Rent and The Huntsman: Winter’s War, it may not be
surprising that they screwed up this badly but that doesn’t make it hurt any
less.
All in all, more so than any other remake/reimagining/etc
that I’ve covered on this blog, the following oft-repeated statement applies:
Don’t fix what isn’t broken. Through an attempt to improve on perceived
failings in the 1991 classic, we are presented with a film that weakens its own
core romance to the point of validating certain uncomfortable and usually
erroneous claims about the toxicity of the original. It’s not enough that it
doesn’t measure up to the original by any stretch; it also really doesn’t work
in its own right.
No comments:
Post a Comment