Beauty and the Beast (2017)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 4794
Joined: January 2012
If this movie is longer than the animated version but tells the story in the same way as the animated version why would I want to watch this version? If you can't tell the story in 90-95 minutes then it's not worth it. I would rather watch the animated Disney version or the Jean Cocteau 1946 version tbh.

User avatar
Posts: 9849
Joined: October 2011
Location: Foot of Mt. Belzoni
Batfan175 wrote:If this movie is longer than the animated version but tells the story in the same way as the animated version why would I want to watch this version? If you can't tell the story in 90-95 minutes then it's not worth it. I would rather watch the animated Disney version or the Jean Cocteau 1946 version tbh.
And yet you just alluded to De Palma's Scarface being a "classic"...?

Posts: 4794
Joined: January 2012
ArmandFancypants wrote:
Batfan175 wrote:If this movie is longer than the animated version but tells the story in the same way as the animated version why would I want to watch this version? If you can't tell the story in 90-95 minutes then it's not worth it. I would rather watch the animated Disney version or the Jean Cocteau 1946 version tbh.
And yet you just alluded to De Palma's Scarface being a "classic"...?
I am actually quite open to the idea that Scarface is not a classic if you present compelling arguments as to why you think that's the case. I'm more interested in the discussion than actually "being right" about something. It's been a while since I've seen the film.

I think, in general, remaking good films like the Disney animated Beauty and the Beast is pointless because to many people there is no way that the remake can surpass the original in terms of quality and I respect 2D animation as an art form that is quite beautiful. I'd rather they remade bad films with a good idea at the centre because that'd actually be trying to make something work that for some reason or another did not work the first time around. I like 'The Black Cauldron' for instance but I won't try to say that it's some flawless masterpiece so there is actually room for improvement and reinterpretation there. But the only reason why this remake here seems to exist is because Disney would rather remake all their good films in live action in the hopes that they'll make more money that way rather than because they have compelling story to tell. The compelling story has been told in the original 2D animated film and unless they radically change how the story goes in this version, I don't see the point to do a remake other than to cash in on something that has a built-in audience. This is about risk aversion, as Disney hates to take risks, even though they can afford to take them.

User avatar
Posts: 9849
Joined: October 2011
Location: Foot of Mt. Belzoni
Batfan175 wrote:
ArmandFancypants wrote:
Batfan175 wrote:If this movie is longer than the animated version but tells the story in the same way as the animated version why would I want to watch this version? If you can't tell the story in 90-95 minutes then it's not worth it. I would rather watch the animated Disney version or the Jean Cocteau 1946 version tbh.
And yet you just alluded to De Palma's Scarface being a "classic"...?
I am actually quite open to the idea that Scarface is not a classic if you present compelling arguments as to why you think that's the case. I'm more interested in the discussion than actually "being right" about something. It's been a while since I've seen the film.
The point is that De Palma's film is itself a remake that greatly extrapolates the runtime to little/no added value.

User avatar
Posts: 13506
Joined: February 2011




Meh, give me the Celine Dion and Josh Groban songs already.£

User avatar
Posts: 671
Joined: May 2014


So beautiful. Chills.

User avatar
Posts: 16716
Joined: March 2012


Wow, Gad is a PERFECT LeFou.

User avatar
Posts: 19209
Joined: June 2012
Location: stuck in 2020
Looks to be nailing it, good

User avatar
Posts: 16716
Joined: March 2012
Actually now that I think about it...when (mild spoilers)
one of the producers said there would be gay characters in the movie I assumed it was Cogsorth and Lumiere but now that I think of it it could very easily mean LeFou

User avatar
Posts: 13506
Joined: February 2011
This is getting mostly positive reviews.£

Post Reply