• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Beauty and the Beast (2017) reviews are here

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sulik2

Member
Well its not a shot for shot remake at least, but it sounds like everything they added is bad. The animated movie is a near perfect film, just go watch it again.
 
A

adj_noun

Member
Sulik2 said:
just go watch it again.
Click to expand...

That's the plan a day or two before I go see it.

GodOnlyNose said:
This is one of those movies were reviews mean absolutely nothing. It's going to make major bread.
Click to expand...

My layman's perspective on the point of the remakes is Disney is manufacturing a Mars capable rocketship, but the rocketship only uses cash for fuel, so they will need all the cash to make planetfall.
 
D

Demoncarnotaur

Member
I don't expect it to be as masterful as the animated classic, but I do hope I'll enjoy it.

Mid 70's seems like where this one will land.. I won't lie though, I expected higher after The Jungle Book.
 
C

Creaking

He touched the black heart of a mod
Yeah, even if it stays positive, it's going to have a low average. I think they got the wrong people for this project, especially behind the camera.
 
J

JB1981

Member
Demoncarnotaur said:
I don't expect it to be as masterful as the animated classic, but I do hope I'll enjoy it.

Mid 70's seems like where this one will land.. I won't lie though, I expected higher after The Jungle Book.
Click to expand...

The movie has never looked particularity good in trailers.
 
Y

y2dvd

Member
Can't say I'm surprised by the mediocrity. The trailers did nothing for me. I will always have my animated classic!
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
kswiston said:
Live action just means real sets and scenery + "realistic" looking cgi things these days.
Click to expand...

I know, I'm just poking at how that makes its meaning meaningless. It's some weird Orwell shit.

"Oh, Live action basically just means none of the things it was ever intended to mean, is all. The only "live" aspect is the set, which just sits there and doesn't do anything. Everything else is fully animated in a computer. You know - live action."
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
So the added stuff is shit? Smh. Thought the movie seemed pretty redundant but was hoping at least menken would give us some good new musical sequences here
 
S

starmud

Member
It'll be a fun watch and will make mad bank, people will say they love it... and it'll end up forgotten and the classic will take its rightful place again.

Cycle with all these Disney remakes... they've all been pretty mediocre if you want to sit back and judge the film on its own merits
 
H

HStallion

Now what's the next step in your master plan?
I think movies like this might be review proof in a sense. Its going to do gang busters even if its terrible.
 
A

AndersK

Member
KillGore said:
It's currently at 74%. Why all the doom and gloom? Or am I missing something here
Click to expand...

That's 2,9 BvS'es. I had this pegged at AT LEAST 3,7 BvS'es.

I will patiently wait for the Ultimate LeFou cut.

I expected this to be higher, but 70ish is still very decent. The real meltdowns happen if Lion King ends hereabouts
 
shira

shira

Member
The New Beauty and the Beast Is a Lifeless Re-creation of the Original (Vulture)

Unfortunately, it's over two hours long, and is padded out by a hugely unnecessary number of non–Ashman-Rice musical numbers and a pointless detour where Belle finds out what happened to her missing mother. At every turn, the film seems to ask itself if what the original film did was enough, and answers with a definitive ”no." But hey, at least that clock looked real.
Click to expand...

Ayyyy.
 
G

George Oscar Bluth II

Banned
Unfortunately, it’s over two hours long, and is padded out by a hugely unnecessary number of non–Ashman-Rice musical numbers and a pointless detour where Belle finds out what happened to her missing mother.
Click to expand...
The new songs are no good?
giphy.gif
 
P

Parahan

Member
I thought from the trailers the film set looked a bit on the cheaper side and now Bad CGI?! How is that even possible for a Disney movie? Looks like they didn't have much faith in the twilight director?


Oersted said:
Shame what happened to Grint, had the most talent out of the 3 HP leads.
Click to expand...


Wait, what happened to grint? I always thought the cast of HP were some of the most well-adjusted child actors
 
M

MoonsaultSlayer

Member
I saw that they had a Christopher Gans/Vincent Cassel version in stores. Was that any good?

I bought because I like their pairing in Brotherhood of the Wolf and even liked Gans' visual flair with Silent Hill.
 
G

GabeTheGrouch76

Member
Not too surprised by the "it's okay"/polarized reviews. This film always felt like it was lacking something to it IMO. Though I'm surprised the initial crop of reviews / RT score was mixed-negative.

That said, I'm even more surprised at the segment of GAF that considers The Jungle Book remake to be trash. It was easily one of the best films I saw last year. :/
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
74% pretty good. So as inoffensive as Marvel but not that heart warmer of Cinderella and Jungle Book
 
B

Burbeting

Banned
Emma Watson passed the starring role of La La Land for this movie. Hmmh..

The trailers didn't do much for me, so I've been skeptical.
 
M

milanbaros

Member?
Burbeting said:
Emma Watson passed the starring role of La La Land for this movie. Hmmh..

The trailers didn't do much for me, so I've been skeptical.
Click to expand...

Well, would La La Land have been as successful with Emma Watson instead of Emma Stone? I doubt it, both in box office and awards.

This is guaranteed to be a bigger film than La La Land as well.

I don't think it is necessarily a bad move.
 
O

Oersted

Member
milanbaros said:
Well, would La La Land have been as successful with Emma Watson instead of Emma Stone? I doubt it, both in box office and awards.

This is guaranteed to be a bigger film than La La Land as well.

I don't think it is necessarily a bad move.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that La La Land with Emma Watson wouldn't have been as commercially successful and critically acclaimed as with Emma Stone?
 
T

TarpitCarnivore

Member
Unfortunately, it’s over two hours long, and is padded out by a hugely unnecessary number of non–Ashman-Rice musical numbers and a pointless detour where Belle finds out what happened to her missing mother. At every turn, the film seems to ask itself if what the original film did was enough, and answers with a definitive “no.” But hey, at least that clock looked real.
Click to expand...

Damn, had a feeling this would happen. Hollywood seems incapable of keeping movies under two hours now and when an original is 84 minutes thats a lot of padding.
 
Crazyorloco

Crazyorloco

Member
Damn. Well we knew things were off from the trailers. As soon as I heard theme song "Belle" and saw she wasn't even enthusiastic about reading or carrying a book...I felt they didn't care. Still I had hopes. Oh well. This is disappointing.

And two hours long? The original does more with less.

rrc1594 said:
Man I'm so scared for Lion King
Click to expand...

Yeah man. The original is my favorite movie of all time. They're going to mess it up...
 
M

milanbaros

Member?
Oersted said:
Are you trying to say that La La Land with Emma Watson wouldn't have been as commercially successful and critically acclaimed as with Emma Stone?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's exactly what my first paragraph is saying.

Emma Stone was highly praised for her performance and I think it contributed to its success.
 
M

MarveI

Member
milanbaros said:
Yes, that's exactly what my first paragraph is saying.

Emma Stone was highly praised for her performance and I think it contributed to its success.
Click to expand...

Was she ? I thought she and Ryan were both miscast. Would've much preferred an actor, actress with a more stage, musical background like Anne and Hugh.
 
K

kswiston

Member
MarveI said:
Was she ? I thought she and Ryan were both miscast.
Click to expand...

She just won the oscar for best leading actress for her role in La La land, as well as the equivalent award in every major awards ceremony. Personal opinions are always fine, but acting as though you aren't sure if she was acclaimed in the role after that is just being obtuse.
 
M

MarveI

Member
kswiston said:
Dhe just won the oscar for best leading actress for her role in La La land, as well as the equivalent award in every major awards ceremony. Personal opinions are always fine, but acting as though you aren't sure if she was acclaimed in the role after that is just being obtuse.
Click to expand...

Halle Berry won an oscar. Oscars mean nothing to me.

Every time I post. It's my personal opinion. I thought that much was given.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tales of Kenzera: Zau - Reviews Thread
30
1K
kyoji replied
Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons Remake | Review Thread
Analysis Review
10
1K
Magic Carpet replied
Botany Manor | Review Thread
Analysis Review
3
567
Punished Miku replied
[IGN Preview] Hellblade 2 Prioritizes Narratives and Story over Gameplay
Opinion 2 3 4
185
8K
TerribleAtThisGame replied
The Little Mermaid Live Action (no politics)
3 4 5 6 7
334
22K
GymWolf replied
Top Bottom