Beauty and the Beast (2017) – Sibling Rivalry

Oh yeah. Time to tick people off. Let’s bring on the hate train! Doug and Rob saw the latest Disney remake and it was not magical. The Walker brothers review 2017’s Beauty and the Beast.

About Doug Walker

Creator of 5 Second Movies, Nostalgia Critic, Bum Reviews and more.


  1. Just going to say before even watching that I just came back from watching this and I loved it! Not going to see if I think it’s as good as the original, but it was magical enough for me and I’m especially glad I saw it in IMAX. I could go into all the things that worked for me and a few that didn’t, BUT this isn’t my place to review and I’m not interested in hearing anyone else break my good mood just yet.

    So yeeeeah, judging from the log lines I’m going to have to save this for later.

    • Okey my curiosity got the better of me (even it was just the opening and ending) and I have to make a few personal observations.

      I wasn’t expecting to either love or hate this movie. So I’m clearly not in the crowd who thinks the mouse can do no wrong. I only thought Cinderella, The Jungle Book, and even Pete’s Dragon were decent. I wasn’t hoping for this to be anything more than decent. Soooo, can me a sucker is you want, but again I loved it. I was actually blown away by how much I enjoyed it!

      There were things that were a little lacking compared to the original (some of the voice acting and facial expectations of the castles residence I found off putting), but I completely disagree with this “cynical rehash” and “cash grab” bull.

      There was clearly a lot of heart and effect put on into every aspect. The sets, the musical arrangements, the acting, the staging, and the backstories. It is NOT by any means shot-for-shot. Right from the opening scene there are very clear differences in narrative and in staging. I guaranty playing even the most similar scenes side-beside scenes you’ll find a clear differences. I actually think Belle came off as even more of a badass than in the animated one (which I’m not knocking at all BTW). Just one reason was BECAUSE she didn’t bother to put something warm over the dress and just rushed out in the snow to reach her father ASAP. That takes some guts!

      I could go on and maybe later I well, but for not let just say that I don’t usual get that emotional at romantic. Even as a kid death of family scenes effected me more than the near death ending of whirlwind romances. I didn’t even got all that emotional at 1946 Beauty and Beast the was actually made in the original french. I got a little misty-eyed at this one. For me that’s clearly a sigh they did something right.

      • What you said. The animated original is my favorite Disney and one of my favorite films, but that love doesn’t at all detract from the new one. Let them be separate things.

        • That’s the problem; The whole raison d’etre for these live action re-makes is too play off of nostalgia: You can’t separate the 2.

          As the guys pointed out, Pete’s Dragon 2000 only had the name and bare premise in common with its original; The studio was not trying to push the nostalgia button as hard because Pete’s Dragon is one of Disney’s lesser films: You can’t compare the films.

          Beauty and the Beast ’91 was a HUGE movie so BATB 2017 slams its fist on that button but gives itself electro shock for doing that because it runs around trying to “fix problems” (from a nominated for Best Picture film!!!!!!!!!!!) while reminding you that the original exists.

          The problem is that 1991 saw an award-winning, award-deserving, film while 2017 saw the hacked-up, Frankenstein’s monster, version of that film: You can’t help but compare the 2 and see how the newer one fails.

          The new BATB doesn’t stink because it is different ( Look at Once Upon A Time’s alternate universe exploration); It stinks because it stinks.

          • I couldn’t disagree more. I think this film was very much it’s own thing. I could thing of a ton of changes and while some of them didn’t work for me, most of them did. There was really only one point I was ever feeling “your actor is not my memory of this character from the story I remember.” Namely when the Mrs. Potts singing came into “Be Our Guest.” The rest of the time, well I was having moments of nostalgia but mostly just enjoying everything on it’s terms.

      • Okay I’ve FINALLY gotten around to watching this and frankly…I’m more bored than offend. I already know I wasn’t going to agree when you said you could count the goods one hand, but most of the bad points are just delivered in tiresome matter for me. Sorry if you didn’t like the singing or the acting from anyone in particular. I have sensitive hearing, but I guess I’m not fit to judge classical music. Because they were all fine for me. The rest of the points left me indifferent.

        I finally had to give up after all the ranting about THE BOOK. Because I can easily explain away this supposed plot hole. It’s visionary! There not really traveling to another place they could get lost in! He meant the spell won’t let him LEAVE THE CASTLE. Only travelers could do that. He could see or interact with THINGS but not with other people.

        Any that’s my theory. Sorry that’s was such a bad experience for you guys. I had a wonderful time and would gladly see it again to reconsider me opinion of it’s worth. But done defending it here.

  2. I rewatched the original version before watching this one, and I think people lets themselves get pulled by the nostalgia WAY too much.
    I mean, have you seen how Belle and the Beast interacted in the original, to say that in this one have no chemistry?
    I’m just gonna say it, no matter how many people may hate me.

    The only things in favor of the original were its visuals, and its music! That’s it.

    Oh, and Gaston. How to forget Gaston.

  3. thatchickwithlonghair

    Da faq?
    There’s nothing “GAY” in The Great Mouse Detective and the Harry Potter kids’ acting is just fine. =_=

    • The Mysterious M

      Shipping and fanfic my dear thatchickwithlonghair. Even antagonistic relationships have chemistry (chemistry having a pretty broad definition). And the cat and mouse game between Basil and Rattigan could be perceived as homosexual. And if it isn’t…then fanfic writers will find a way to make it.

      (PS, this is not a dig at fanfic writers)

  4. I liked all of the live action movies, except Maleficient. That movie can go screw itself. I may or may not see this one. I’m not really attached to the original Beauty and the Beast even though it is a masterpiece. Also, more Mamma Mia and Once Upon A Time bashing. ? But still, to each his own.

  5. Yeah, unfortunately, Emma Watson most likely has not been trained well enough for singing roles.

    I’m not liking these Disney live action remakes tbh. It feels like a cash grab, especially regarding the fact that the Renaissance era films are still relatively fresh on the mind.

    Redoing aged films like Jungle Book? Fine.
    Redoing still relatively recent films from 20 years ago? Leave them alone.

  6. I enjoyed this film personally, but then I don’t remember the original all that well aside from a few scenes. It was part of my childhood, but it’s not a film I’ve revisited since, and I don’t regard it in such a way that it feels like Disney dumped on my childhood or anything. Heck, I don’t even remember Gaston having a friend in the original, and don’t recall much of Gaston himself aside from the beginning and the end of the film.

    I do remember the CG ballroom scene and recall finding it impressive for its time, whereas I knew a practical shot in the live action version wouldn’t have that wow factor, so I gave it a pass there. I recall the rose being in some kind of study, I think, and it was an enclosed room so it wouldn’t have been as big a deal if the glass was removed as howling winds weren’t threatening to hasten the dropping of the petals.

    There is one scene I remember that I didn’t think was as well done here, and that’s the scene where Belle is first shown the library. In the original, it’s a huge massive room and I just felt the wonder of it, whereas here, it’s just a big library, albeit not nearly as big, though I guess that’s to be expected. I think the wonder of the original scene may have partially encouraged me to be an avid reader in my childhood.

    Alas, it’s been ages since I’ve done any recreational reading that’s not MLP related and/or presented in some kind of graphic novel or manga, but I guess a combination of school sucking the joy out of reading and being either too busy or spending most of what little time to myself I have gaming or on the internet, kind of led me away from recreational reading. Part of me kind of wants to get back into that though, and seeing the remake of Beauty and the Beast just reminded me of the scene in the original movie that inspired me to take up recreational reading many years ago. I’m sure I will at least casually give it a try sometime soon, but for now I guess I’ll finish Trixie and the Razzle Dazzle Ruse.

  7. With this movie and a lot of the other remakes, I feel they’re using memory of the old animated films to fill in their lack of exposition and feeling. IE, making the viewer do the work. I have no doubt that come a few years later they’ll have their backlash or just be forgotten in comparison.

  8. Die in a fire Doug and Rob! You don’t have the right to review movies or hold an opinion on the industry if you don’t LOVE this property!

    Did I do it right? Apparently this is the response they were expecting for sharing a 100% personal opinion about a movie they just saw and haven’t been able to fully absorb with time.

    Can we just STOP with fearing/embracing internet backlash?
    You saw a movie, share your opinion. Simple. You don’t need to constantly take things cautiously just because you don’t share the perceived popular opinion of a property. This comment doesn’t apply much to Beauty and the Beast 2017 as much as it does films like the new Ghostbusters, real thoughts on Twister, or just any property in general.

    Note: I haven’t seen Beauty and the beast so i have no strong opinion on their views of this film. The previews do suggest that both Belle in particular was horribly miscast which seems to line up with Doug and Rob’s thoughts. Its a musical, hiring a talented singer should have been top priority.

  9. Personally, I liked it better than the original in many ways. I actually believed the chemistry between Belle and the Beast in this one, and it patched up a number of the more infamous plot holes of the original animated film. Sure, it didn’t have Paige O’Hara and Angela Lansberry, but I thought Emma Watson and Emma Thompson still sounded just fine in their singing roles. I only had three real beefs: (1) they could have left the one or two modern colloquialisms out of the film–I hate it when people do that; (2) thinking back to Doug’s rant about PG ratings…a dog takes a leak so we can bump this film up to a PG :/; and (3) either Emma Watson or the director deserves some fault for parts of the film where she had to respond to a CGI character. She only had that odd smirk on her face for all of the “Be Our Guest” number while she wasn’t even looking at Lumiere a lot of the time, and her facial reaction for the big scene where the Beast lets her go seemed way off for the scene.

    Do I necessary think it’s as good as the animated film? No…but that doesn’t mean I don’t think this movie isn’t good on its own. Animation is its own medium. It has its own way of storytelling that live action simply is incapable of reproducing. But I think that the filmmakers honestly did everything they could to try and recapture it with live action. If they failed, then that’s more of an argument in favor of animation as a film medium rather than an argument against this movie, in my opinion.

    I personally rank it up there with “The Jungle Book” in terms of Disney live-action adaptations I liked. (I know Doug didn’t care for that one either…but that’s fine. We’re all “that guy” about something. [I personally think Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon is incredibly overrated and Ace deserved to die in “One Piece” :P].)

  10. No hate train here. Mostly everybody’s saying it’s mediocre and pointless. Just go watch Cocteau’s film.

  11. Naw, no hate mail here. I just saw it today. Meh. If I hadn’t see the original, I probably would have liked it pretty well. The problem is the original is so perfect that any changes make it less so. We didn’t need the backstory for the dead moms; we didn’t need Gaston’s backstory. (Though it would have been funny if both Belle’s and the Beast’s mothers were named Martha. 🙂

    You covered the singing problems pretty well. Audra McDonald’s goofy aria was probably a shoutout to Jo Anne Worley, who was the voice of the wardrobe in the original, and had that as a trademark gag.

    Another problem is the dancing. It’s not very good, and they’re trying to cover it up with choppy editing and doubles. Note when Gaston and LeFou do a tap routine in the pub. You have a closeup on their feet doing a fancy number, then a wide shot where you can’t see their feet. In a movie with this big of a budget, they couldn’t send Evens and Gad out for a few tap lessons.

    During the signature dance with Belle and the Beast, the pans were awful. Rather than smooth, sweeping shots to match the dance (as the original did), they’re awkwardly ratcheted. Instead of a smooth pan, you get nudge, nudge, nudge, nudge, nudge. Argh. And there’s the aforementioned choppy editing, rather than long shots with the camera circling the dancers.

    And as they noted, the original is staged more as a complete date night with them having dinner first, Belle seeing the strolling violinist, and dragging the reluctant Beast onto the dance floor. That was incredibly charming, and is badly missing here.

    • Oh, and to contrast… Susan Egan (yep, Steven Universe’s mom). She played Belle in the Broadway play and pulled off the singing and dancing perfectly. It’s not that it can’t be done, they just didn’t try.

      (BTW, I hope you can get back to the Steven Universe vlogs soon — there’s a lot to cover!)

  12. Christ on a cracker, Doug… that opening fucking sucked. I’m not even going to bother watching the review, because you summed up your position so well in the first 30 seconds. Your position being “I have no idea what I’m talking about”.

  13. I just watched it absolutely agree with you bros on many levels on the chess piece pacing and the not natural story of the 1991 animated masterpiece flow point A to point B to point C. Characters go here or there, sing here or there do things and make choices because the script says so and the musical numbers are so loud and overly bombastic (with sounded like a 150 or nearly 200 piece classical orchestra in the IMAX but still 2D presentation and really close-up creepy over the top CGI characters and certain effects up to eleventh levels because live-action and CGI doing unlimited things traditional hand-drawn with some CG animation can’t do with good reason.

  14. I agree with you Walker bros on a lot of things except for Emma Watson’s so-called “singing talent” or absolute lack of vocal and acting talent as you put it to me she’s decent classically trained singer for a young British actress who’s exactly my age being born in 1990. She’s not a bad singer here but let me explain: 1. Emma Watson”s Belle didn’t have to sing her songs as operatically as possible because I have inkling in most American or British or Western musical theater/comic opera/ operetta but US American and British (New York City’s Broadway Theater District and London’s West End I think) especially more modern musical theater produced is not at all like classical Italian, Russian, French, or German Opera developed over some few hundred years in “Old White Europe” as I call the continent from around the mid 17th century to the early 20th century calls for distinct exaggerated high note musical voices (Soprano, Mezzo-Soprano, Contralto for Female voices and Tenor, Baritone, or Bass voices, very rarely castrated Alto voices that was commonplace in early 18th century European operas or religious Christian oratorios) My point is Emma Watson was not singing in the stylized operatic vocals like for example old woman Julie Andrews would have sang in the 1960’s (although she had a fairly light Soprano), she doesn’t even had to sound operatic, mostly just smile and look pretty and act okay oh and get angry or outraged sometimes in her acting which I thought was good acting. To me she’s a good enough young actress to sing in her natural little voice maybe autotuned when she has to hit high notes, Emmy Rossum as Christine Daae sang nearly the same way in The Phantom of the Opera in 2004, maybe a little better, but it was still not exactly operatic as the woman everybody hated as part of the story, you know Minnie Driver’s La Carlotta Guidicelli as she might have sounded flat falsetto in some areas but she still acting and singing in the legitimate classical operatic voice. And Emma Watson’s not Paige O’Hara or Susan Egan obviously, why they cast her? because the British folks overly dominate Hollywood, near up to between 80% and 85% in my book. Since when are you two bros musical vocal experts, I am although not famous in the least, but yeah the movie overall was just too much, too hyperactive and creepy energy if you will. Check out my own channel Misha’s Classic Operatic Music Videos on YouTube if you someday soon want to.

  15. The ballroom scene in the original hasn’t aged well? Are you kidding me? I still get chills every time I watch the shot coming down from the chandelier – The colors, the stellar animation (hand-drawn in a complicated camera move, wow) and paired with the apex of the beautiful song – That scene is what got the movie its oscar nom.

    As far as the 90’s CG goes, it’s just as sophisticated as it needs to be for the background of a 2D animated film and looks fine. What exactly is it lacking?

  16. I thought it was decent. I admit the gay thing was disappointing. I never even noticed the book thing. I was just confused by that scene. Well, you make valid points. It was nice to hear a different opinion.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.