Movie Review: Beauty and the Beast (2017)

DISCLAIMER: All images used in this review are property of their respective owners.

Once upon a time, there was a girl named Belle who lived in a poor, provincial French town. Fed up with the towns ignorant inhabitants, especially the handsome but boorish Gaston, Belle longs for adventure. She gets just that when her father goes missing and she is led to a mysterious enchanted castle and meets its monstrous, beastly master...
 

I've talked numerous times about Disney's animated films and how much I love them. So, with the release of this live-action retelling of Beauty and the Beast (1991), I can briefly talk about Disney's live-action adaptations of the animated films as a whole.

For the most part, I'm not a fan. I personally don't see the appeal of re-imagining perfectly fine animated movies that could easily be seen again today, whether by DVD, TV screenings, digital download, or heck even movie piracy. Then again, I admit this is just purely my own hangup. I take it for granted that there are a lot of people who either haven't seen or are unable to see the original animated ones, and perhaps there are those who want the novelty of seeing their beloved animated characters come to life. I won't be dishonest about my feelings towards them though, so here's a very brief thoughts on the live-action re-imaginings we've seen so far:

101 Dalmatians: OK
Maleficent: Eh
Alice in Wonderland: Bad
Cinderella: Eh
The Jungle Book: Excellent

I suppose another reason I'm miffed is because these remakes for the most part are based off very successful outings as it is. I really wish they can give their less-successful or least-known movies another chance instead of having the successes hog even more glory. Therefore, what draws me to these re-tellings is what good new material they bring to the table that justifies the time and effort put into making them while staying true to the original. I'm both wary and curious to see how the upcoming re-tellings of Dumbo, Aladdin, The Lion King, and Mulan will do.

So that brings us to Beauty and the Beast. Before I fully begin, here are my brief, non-spoiler thoughts. All in all I'm mixed on this. On one hand, I felt that they might have adapted a little too much of the original, making it feel less like an updated re-imagining and more like a derivative rehash. There were also some issues with the casting and vocals that also were disappointing. However, what saves it for me is that there's just as much new ideas and elements, aspects that improved and/or re-told them from a different perspective. With things I equally did and didn't like, I feel this movie to be an above-average outing for Disney's live action re-tellings, below The Jungle Book and above 101 Dalmatians.

Let me start off with what I didn't like or am iffy on. First, the overall general presentation. As said previously, I believe they might have gone a little overboard with adapting the original. Not only do they reuse the same songs, they also reuse certain dialog. It was so brazen in its re-telling that I expected them at certain points to reuse the same camera angles and shots. Even certain key points reuse the same instrumental scores. On top of that, there were some changes to songs, story points, lines, or moments that I felt either didn't need to be changed or were changed for the worse. One example is the segment "Something There". What makes it work in the animated one is how the lyrics and singing were internalized, only by voice overs of Belle and the Beast that represented their thoughts and feelings in their hearts. In this one, they sing the lyrics out loud to each other, really weakening the impact and symbolism of the scene.

And speaking of Belle...<sigh>

I have nothing but the utmost respect for Emma Watson. She is a strong advocate for human rights, is certainly attractive, and did great in Harry Potter and other movies, but her performance in Beauty and the Beast was lacking. It's not god-awful or anything and she had her moments to shine. It was just really flat, not really conveying the full range of emotions. On top of that...her singing. It was apparent that she couldn't reach those high notes, and that consequently led to some of those aforementioned changes for the worst in the songs, changing the octave, key, or whatever. It's all too clear in the opening number, "Belle", where Emma's performance really brought the majesty and importance of that sequence down.

Also wasn't too fond of Luke Evans as Gaston. His performance didn't give the impression that Gaston was a larger-than-life paragon of manliness and power, someone with strengths that are offset by their negative qualities. He's just some guy. One of the strengths of the original Beauty and the Beast was its strong protagonist and antagonist, so when you have this one where Belle and Gaston aren't portrayed well, the movie really suffers. All of these bad elements collide into each other that the movie may have very well crashed and burned...

...if not for the what this movie did really well. Dan Stevens as the Beast wasn't amazing, but I think he did a fine job with the role. You still get a sense of the human inside of him, and I think the makeup was pretty good. Another definite plus for this movie is the ensemble cast with so many recognizable names. I will admit to being excited to watch when I heard that the likes of Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci, Josh Gad, and Kevin Kline were attached. Even Emma Watson, despite her performance, still had name recognition. The objects being voiced by this star-studded cast really made them, for lack of a better term, more alive.

Other changes for the better are the alterations of Maurice and Le Fou. Maurice is less of a wack and kook, and more like an actual, real caring father. As a result, this allows him to play a larger role in the film, helping Belle in her time of need when the situations were dire. Le Fou's change also allows him more involvement and a bit of character development. Even though I didn't like Luke Evans as Gaston, he did fantastically when he was paired up with Josh Gad as Le Fou. It's less of a man/servant role in the original, and more like brothers-in-arms with Le Fou acting as Gaston's voice of reason and keeping his darker tendencies in check.

I also give major props to the brand new songs added to this movie. Alan Menken, one of the original lyricists of the animated one, returned to make the new songs alongside Tim Rice. Rice is responsible for a lot of Disney's song output during the 90's, and they both make new songs that build upon the work of the late Howard Ashman, the original genius behind Beauty and the Beast's fantastic songs. One specific mention goes to "Evermore" the song given to the Beast, FINALLY giving him a full song that was never in the original movie and its Broadway adaptations. It encapsulates and brings finality to the Beast's character at that point in the movie.

Finally, I would like to give mad praise to the original stuff they added to the story, filling in some of the plot holes that the original movie glossed over or finally outright explained. We know how and why the townsfolk never acknowledged the prince or his castle. We also see family members of the castle staff making an appearance like Mrs. Potts' wife, we know backstory of Belle's family and her mother, the added horror of the objects slowly becoming more inanimate as time runs out on the curse, and further additions and expansion of certain characters, like the harpsichord played by Stanley Tuuci and his wife being Belle's non-existent wardrobe in the original one.

FINAL THOUGHTS:
All in all, Beauty and the Beast is flawed. Its massive recycling of the original is just perplexing and redundant that you're left wondering why they even bothered, and the performances of the primary heroine and villain makes it a bit of a drag. However I feel it to be balanced out by the stuff it did right. When the movie would do something new and different, it was exciting. But when the movie was held back by the trappings of the original, it's like its going through the motions instead of redoing it with any real excitement. As a movie on its own, free of the baggage of the animated one, it's perfectly find and serviceable. But as a live-action re-imaging, it plays it too safe and leeches off the original instead of creating its own identity with what its got.

It goes without saying that the animated one is far superior. However, as far as Disney's misguided attempts at redoing their animated classics goes, I feel it to be one of the better ones because the new elements are so strong and memorable. I'm definitely glad I saw it, but I'm not in a rush to see it again any time soon. The near balance of the strengths and weaknesses of the movie means that I will grant Beauty and the Beast a final score of 2.5/5. Not a bad movie by any means, but how much you will really like it will depend on your attachment to the 1991 movie. And as the 1991 movie is my favorite Disney animated flick of all time, I feel the 2017 to be just be caught in the shadow of its progenitor's success.

But regardless of how me and you, dear readers, feel about this, the 2017 movie is still better than Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas and Belle's Magical World.

Movie Review: The LEGO Batman Movie

DISCLAIMER: All images and videos used in this review are property of their respective owners.

Bruce Wayne: The Vengeance...The Night...The Caped Crusader...The World's Greatest Detective...The Dark Knight...The Batman. In this world of LEGO Gotham City, Batman is its masked, vigilante protector against all manner of psychos, including The Joker. When his latest plan is foiled and he is not acknowledged by Batman as his greatest nemesis, he sets into motion a diabolical scheme to destroy Gotham once and for all in order to show Batman he is not to be trifled with. Amidst all of this, Batman will learn to confront his greatest fear with the help of a family he may not want...

Before I talk about this movie, I feel the need to briefly talk about its 2014 predecessor, The LEGO Movie, which was my very first movie review when I started hitting up the blog scene on my original blog From The Couch To The Cinema:

http://couchci.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-lego-movie.html

Initially I had given that movie a score of 4/5. Since February 2014 I have watched the movie multiple times and felt that it was even better than I first thought. Three years since then and it's still one of the benchmarks for family movies that emphasizes the combination of good characters, animation, story, and a smarter, more sophisticated writing method of turning the mundane into high concepts. I feel the need to bump that movie's score up to 4.5/5 because of its relation to today's movie review and its followup: The LEGO Batman Movie.

Now I'm not going to insult you, dear readers, by explaining who Batman is, because EVERYONE knows who Batman is. He's one of the greatest superheroes of all time, DC Comics' biggest cash-cow, and has transcended pop culture to become a staple of one of our greatest fictional modern myths. In the 78 years of his fictional existence, Batman has appeared in every form of media and merchandise out there with many different interpretations of the character. Whether he is the camp crime fighter played by Adam West, the aloof but kind-hearted man played by Michael Keaton, or the tortured and morose soul played by Christian Bale, everyone has been exposed to Batman at one time or another, and is one of the first characters that comes to mind when it comes to superheroes.

Batman's appearance and portrayal in the original The LEGO Movie as a self-centered, self-aware, self-hyping gigantic manchild  had gone over so well that it's not really a surprise he would get his own spinoff movie centered around his immediate family of characters. I admit I was disappointed that we weren't getting a followup to The LEGO Movie right away, but that's fine, we'll see that next year. At any rate, The LEGO Batman Movie is a quirky, fun, hilarious and visual spectacle that uses its animation and trappings as a LEGO movie to its fullest. Gag after gag hits the audience at full speed, and yet what doesn't make it just a bunch of noise is its story. It's not to the same level as The LEGO Movie, but on its own it's still effective, and at the end of the day, it serves as a celebration and tribute to why Batman is indeed one of the greatest superheroes. But I'll expound on that late. Click the video down below and let's get started! TO THE REVIEW!

Our story is pretty simplistic at its core. Batman stops Joker, Joker hatches a scheme, Joker's plan, succeeds, Joker returns, Batman and his plucky gang stops Joker, the end. To paraphrase the LEGO Dark Knight in the movie, he "learns some life lessons along the way" by learning what it means to accept others into his life, trust others, and find some happiness beyond his self-awesomeness in his mission to stop crime. Now that that in of itself isn't a bad story, and it's one of the key focal points of Batman's character. However, the slight problem here is that coming off of The LEGO Movie, it doesn't even come close to what that movie did. The story of The LEGO Movie is extremely layered and complex for a movie about toys. It goes against our preconceived expectations about stories revolving around prophecies & chosen ones, and shows us how every one of us can be creative and imaginative in our ways. It uses LEGO as, for lack of a better term, building blocks for its message.

The LEGO Batman Movie's story has some heart, but it almost seems like an afterthought. Again, it's not a bad story by any means. It's effective and has its own heartwarming moments, but at the same time it's a bit of a shame to see it stumble after their massive success with The LEGO Movie. As such, I feel the story of this movie to be its greatest weakness, and it doesn't use the iconography of LEGO or Batman too effectively. Honestly,  you could remove the LEGO aspect of it and just tell the movie as a regular Batman in order to get the point across. It's a good thing then the rest of the movie has so much going for it. I don't mind the weak story too much because it almost seems like they intentionally made it that way to make way for humor and high past-paced animation. And for that, I can forgive the movie's story shortcomings for everything else.

Firstly, a look at our "hero". Batman (Will Arnett), much like in The LEGO Movie, is portrayed as a gigantic manchild that believes in his self-importance and awesomeness. He knows how skilled and rich he is, and he soaks the glory of it all in. It's practically self-parody in a way at the character's popularity with us, how such a man can train himself to go beyond human limits, learn all he can, pick up so many skills, and become a caped crusader of justice to ensure his tragedy will never happen to anyone else. Batman is an epitome and ideal to look up at what a human can do, so it's hilarious to see him in this way. And yet like any good portrayal of Batman, it delves into his human side. Batman is really a loner and afraid  to let other people get into his life because of his tragic past. Multiple incarnations of the character across mediums explored this in great detail, sometimes in a triumphant fashion, other times ending in tragedy. It's part of the pillar of the character of Batman, that for all that he is and all he can do, he is still, well, a man. He may be called Batman, but he is not just a monstrous weird figure of the night with a scary image, he is a human, with all the flaws, tragedies, and insecurities that all of us can have.

Every other character is effective as a foil or support to Batman, but as expected to exaggerated levels. Robin/Dick Grayson (Michael Cera) is Batman's adopted ward, initially brought in just to be a tool of Batman, and learning to be loved. His youthfulness and energy is exaggerated to turn him into a Batman fanboy and wanting to be like him in all the wrong ways to add to Batman's character growth in the film. Batgirl/Barbara Gordon (Rosario Dawson) is shown to be a competent person and fighter in her own right, and offers the olive branch to Batman to work together for the greater good of the city. She is exaggerated to be so good at what she does that Batman thinks she's hot. Then there's the ever-loyal Alfred (Ralph Fiennes), Batman's surrogate father who's always there to support him but not afraid to step in if things go too far. If Batman's childishness is exaggerated, then Alfred's parental figure status is likewise the same, almost to the point of being an impatient parent to a bratty child. All three supporting characters together add layers to Batman's character, and they help the Dark Knight accept others back into his life and be a new family.

Our villain is, naturally, The Joker (Zach Galifianakis). He has also been subject to numerous portrayals over the decades, whether a clownish dandy played by Cesar Romero, the psycho with a sense of a humor played by Jack Nicholson, the eternal nemesis played by Mark Hamill, or the murderous nightmarish figure played by Heath Ledger. In this kid-friendly movie, he's a little more on the clownish side for humor as it plays against the Joker's popularity as Batman's foil. Hilariously, Batman's and Joker's dynamic in this movie is played out like Joker is a scorned lover, and the entire plot is just for the Joker to make his nemesis acknowledge and say three words: I hate you. It’s simultaneously sad and hilarious because of its interpretation as a “frenemy” relationship, and a comic take on the actual Batman/Joker across mediums. The Joker is the most famous of Batman’s villains because he’s the one baddie Bats can’t take down no matter how hard he tries. Many portrayals of Batman/Joke have shown that in some weird twisted way, they need each other. They’re the Yin and Yang with both hero and villain as the positive and negative. So in that regard, the Joker is a great and effective villain here, posing enough of a threat despite us knowing that Batman will beat him anyway. It all adds to the film’s humor

And that brings us to the movie’s greatest strength: The animation and the humor.  Though it’s shown like in the first movie, it’s implied that The LEGO Batman Movie is played out by a child having a grand old time with his LEGO. As such, the movie doesn’t lose its trappings as a LEGO movie. The animation shows this, with the LEGO people moving as if they were stop-motion, from water and lava and fire being stylistic LEGO bits, to laser bullets also being LEGO pieces. This adds to the humor, where you have LEGO Batman taking his surroundings and building new vehicles or the laser sound effects actually being “pew pew!” sounds called out by the characters. It shows that it’s a movie that doesn’t need to be taken seriously at all, and is just a fun ride from start to finish. Add some quick and witty dialogue, references for the hardcore Bat-fans, and some surprising characters appearances, and you’ve got the recipe for an audience to have a fun time with.

CONCLUSION

All in all, The LEGO Batman Movie is a great, enjoyable, thrilling romp. While the story isn’t anything too special and doesn’t even measure up to the first LEGO Movie, it is effective both as an animated film and a Batman film. It gives us a humorous take and semi-examination of The Dark Knight by emphasizing the more jokey aspects of the character, while reminding us what makes Batman truly one of the greatest superheroes of all time. The fast-paced animation that takes advantage of its toy-based roots is a spectacle to the eye as you’re trying to pay attention to everything happening, and yet its slow and heartwarming moments draw you in to allow you to catch your breath and see the story unfold. You don’t need to be a Batman fan to get all of the humor, and there are enough jokes to satisfy kids and adults alike.

My final score for The LEGO Batman Movie is 3.5/5. It’s not to the same level as The LEGO Movie, and I'd be more comfortable to give it a higher score if the story wasn't so sedate and not taking full advantage of its medium, but it’s still worth watching if you love LEGO and/or Batman. And for those who are Bat-fans, think of this movie as a celebration to what makes Batman so great and enduring after 78 years. I eagerly await The LEGO Movie 2, can’t wait to see what other properties that’ll be given the LEGO twist, and I salute Batman for nearly 80 years of entertainment.