Beauty and the Beast opens to record weekend

[skier_pete]

We were one of those millions of people that saw B&tB yesterday. Our local cineplex was showing it on 7 (out of 12) screens, and still at a 4:50 PM showing it was probably 75% full (non-3D). Overall I liked it, it was pretty much to be expected. I most enjoyed those rare moments when they would deviate from the animated movie to actually feel just a little bit of surprised as to feel like I wasn't watching something I've already seen 100 times. Only particular part I didn't like was the obvious level of autotune that they used for Emma Watson's singing voice. (At times it veered into electronic sounding.) That and the fact that I didn't think the CGI on the beast was all that great.

DD13 at the end said "I couldn't get past that it was Hermione! When she picked up that stick I though 'She's finally got her wand! She's going to start casting spells!'" I then pointed out during the credits "Did it bother you that that guy was Olaf? Or that guy was Obi-Wan? Or that he was Gandalf? Or Professor Trelawney?" She said "I didn't notice any of that." I do have to say that though Emma was good in the role, some of her acting quirks leftover from Hermione were still very present.

Anyways, I suppose it's unsurprising that if you liked the original you will probably like this version as well. In fact "Unsurprising" is a perfect one word review. I would still say the animated version is better though - unlike the Jungle Book which took the best parts of the Animated movie and made it better.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/weekend-box-office-beauty-beast-roars-163m-thursday-986898

 

[jade1]

Well as of right now it's 70% for the critics on Rotten Tomatoes with 98% of the audience wanting to see it.

For anyone who is wondering this is what Rotten Tomatoes has for the Critics Consensus:
View attachment 225150

I'd say that's a pretty positive consensus.

Up to 93% now.

HAHA the old one sorry

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/beauty_and_the_beast_1991/

This one is still 86% and 71%

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/beauty_and_the_beast_2017

 

[jade1]

We were one of those millions of people that saw B&tB yesterday. Our local cineplex was showing it on 7 (out of 12) screens, and still at a 4:50 PM showing it was probably 75% full (non-3D). Overall I liked it, it was pretty much to be expected. I most enjoyed those rare moments when they would deviate from the animated movie to actually feel just a little bit of surprised as to feel like I wasn't watching something I've already seen 100 times. Only particular part I didn't like was the obvious level of autotune that they used for Emma Watson's singing voice. (At times it veered into electronic sounding.) That and the fact that I didn't think the CGI on the beast was all that great.

DD13 at the end said "I couldn't get past that it was Hermione! When she picked up that stick I though 'She's finally got her wand! She's going to start casting spells!'" I then pointed out during the credits "Did it bother you that that guy was Olaf? Or that guy was Obi-Wan? Or that he was Gandalf? Or Professor Trelawney?" She said "I didn't notice any of that." I do have to say that though Emma was good in the role, some of her acting quirks leftover from Hermione were still very present.

Anyways, I suppose it's unsurprising that if you liked the original you will probably like this version as well. In fact "Unsurprising" is a perfect one word review. I would still say the animated version is better though - unlike the Jungle Book which took the best parts of the Animated movie and made it better.

Pretty much agree. The extras even minimal were great at filling holes. DD sounds hilarious.

To be honest we will only be watching this version going forward I presume, even as good as the animated is. Just way more depth.

Wonder how the reaction is to people that have never seen the original. Like a lot of things, the songs do grow on you.

 

[Sweettears]

Pretty much agree. The extras even minimal were great at filling holes. DD sounds hilarious.

To be honest we will only be watching this version going forward I presume, even as good as the animated is. Just way more depth.

Wonder how the reaction is to people that have never seen the original. Like a lot of things, the songs do grow on you.

Is there anyone that hasn't seen the original?

 

[MochaDrinker]

Is there anyone that hasn't seen the original?

My brother in law has never seen it.

 

[Sweettears]

My brother in law has never seen it.

Yea. There is a few of those out there.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Well as of right now it's 70% for the critics on Rotten Tomatoes with 98% of the audience wanting to see it.

For anyone who is wondering this is what Rotten Tomatoes has for the Critics Consensus:
View attachment 225150

I'd say that's a pretty positive consensus.

Well, if you want to see a negative review can you read the one Craig just posted on the DIS

We just saw it this morning and thought, while it had some technical flaws, it was overall enjoyable enough

I agree with @skier_pete that the CGI on the beast (particularly the full body shots) wasn't the best. Also, the pacing wasn't the best - but I thought it was pretty visually stunning and I enjoyed some of the added back story

Oh, and about it being Hermione playing Belle compared to other famous actors - probably a bit different when you basically watch an actor grow up as part of a role. I actually thought it was going to be worse for me but I thought she embodied the role ok

 

[OhioStateBuckeye]

I'm about to go see it so I'll come back and let everyone know if it ruined my childhood.

Would have seen it earlier but had better things to do this weekend like watch Game of Thrones in concert and meet Jack Hanna.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I'm about to go see it so I'll come back and let everyone know if it ruined my childhood.

Would have seen it earlier but had better things to do this weekend like watch Game of Thrones in concert and meet Jack Hanna.

I really hope those things were together and you met Jack Hanna AT the Game of Thrones in conert

 

[OhioStateBuckeye]

I really hope those things were together and you met Jack Hanna AT the Game of Thrones in conert

Hahaha that would have been epic. Unfortunately, no. Game of Thrones in concert was Thursday (such an amazing show!! btw) and just yesterday Jack Hanna was doing animal shows at Sea World San Antonio and we bought a dinner package to meet him. We also got to have our picture taken with some baby cheetahs and to pet a baby kangaroo.

 

[writerguyfl]

Is there anyone that hasn't seen the original?

I've never seen the original "Beauty and the Beast". Although, I have seen the touring Broadway version.

When I worked at Disney World, I got a lot of scorn from fellow Cast Members because there are many Disney films I've never seen. (Movies just aren't my thing.)

 

[skier_pete]

Oh, and about it being Hermione playing Belle compared to other famous actors - probably a bit different when you basically watch an actor grow up as part of a role. I actually thought it was going to be worse for me but I thought she embodied the role ok

Yeah - it didn't really bother me at all, it was DD...though at the end when the beast transformed I did lean over and say to DD and DW "Oooh, your much better looking than Ron!"

To be honest we will only be watching this version going forward I presume, even as good as the animated is. Just way more depth.

I sort of feel the opposite. I'm a big animation fan, so I'm much more likely to watch the original.

I DID like the new songs. For those in the know, were there any songs in their from the Broadway musical? I only saw it once, but I didn't recognize any of them.

 

[twocat]

Is there anyone that hasn't seen the original?

Me.

As much as I'm a park fanatic, I've never seem many of the movies. I've just started seeing Disney movies in theaters.

 

[OhioStateBuckeye]

Well I'm back from Beauty and the Beast. I think my review can be summed up by a 'meh'.

There were some things it did better, like giving a backstory and more character to the beast. In the cartoon I feel like he falls in love with Belle because she is a girl and there. At least in the movie he starts out disliking her since she is a commoner, then they find things in common and actually talk to each other.

I also appreciate that Maurice was not just the bumbling idiot that he was in the cartoon. He had much more to him in this movie.

I liked the CGI on the Beast a lot more than I thought I would. I'm a die hard make up and practical effects fan, but I was ok with the Beast. I even thought he had some real good facial expressions during his sad song near the end.

For me, the best parts of the movie was the comedy of Lumiere and Lefou. I think Cogsworth really got the shaft in this movie, he didn't have too much screen time and was pretty much there just to be a coward.

I'm not really into the whole Marie Antoinette powdered wigs and delicate gold leaf styling, so I wasn't too impressed by the beginning or end.

I'm still not really sure what I think about the 'Be Our Guest' song. I think it was good...maybe. Trying to think back on it now I just keep thinking about the original.

Emma Watson's singing was just awful. Took me out of the first song. Pretty jarring to hear her robotic singing interspersed with people's voices who can actually sing.

I dunno, in the end it's just a remake. I guess there was a bit of artistry in the new designs for Lumiere, Cogsworth etc. Most of the songs were the same and most of the musical score was the same. Like I said before, there were a few welcome additions but in the end you gotta compare the 2 and there isn't even a competition in my mind. Cartoon wins hands down. Wasn't a bad movie, but if I want to watch Beauty and the Beast again I'll just watch the original.

 

[Madteaparty001]

I would argue that being good in a role really isn't an accomplishment, being great means you forget your watching an actor, you only see the character. I was equally as harsh on Tom Hanks when he played Walt Disney. He just moved in a way that wasn't Walt, every time he did an open hands on hips stance I was taken out the movie and I thought, that's Forest Gump.

Same thing happens when I watch the Beauty and the Beast previews and hear 'Belle' speak, the very hard o's take me out of the movie and I am reminded of Hermione Granger. Couldn't they have given her speech training for her accent? Or did Disney want the PR so everyone would go see the movie because the actress that was in Harry Potter is in the lead role?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I would argue that being good in a role really isn't an accomplishment, being great means you forget your watching an actor, you only see the character. I was equally as harsh on Tom Hanks when he played Walt Disney. He just moved in a way that wasn't Walt, every time he did an open hands on hips stance I was taken out the movie and I thought, that's Forest Gump.

Same thing happens when I watch the Beauty and the Beast previews and hear 'Belle' speak, the very hard o's take me out of the movie and I am reminded of Hermione Granger. Couldn't they have given her speech training for her accent? Or did Disney want the PR so everyone would go see the movie because the actress that was in Harry Potter is in the lead role?

Honestly though it's hard for a lot of actors/actresses to get over the typecast of playing that one role. Everyone still associates Daniel Radcliffe as Harry even though he's gone off to do other things. Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart will forever be Edward and Bella despite both having played roles before Twilight series and having played roles after Twilight.

As for speech training just as an example...he's an amazing actor but Sean Connery doesn't change his normal way of speaking for any role (at least it seems)..just coming up with a person off the top of my head but I know he's not the only one.

You'll also have actors/actresses who usually play a specific type of role and so when they play a different role it can be jarring that's for sure.

 

[Rivergirl2005]

Yeah - it didn't really bother me at all, it was DD...though at the end when the beast transformed I did lean over and say to DD and DW "Oooh, your much better looking than Ron!"



I sort of feel the opposite. I'm a big animation fan, so I'm much more likely to watch the original.

I DID like the new songs. For those in the know, were there any songs in their from the Broadway musical? I only saw it once, but I didn't recognize any of them.

I heard many elements of the musical through the score...for example I heard home, human again, and elements of if I can't love her...I loved that and the new songs!!!

 

[Fantasia79]

Oh, seeing movies in theaters. Just bought Mona and watched with my daughter. She loved it.

 

[Madteaparty001]

Honestly though it's hard for a lot of actors/actresses to get over the typecast of playing that one role. Everyone still associates Daniel Radcliffe as Harry even though he's gone off to do other things. Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart will forever be Edward and Bella despite both having played roles before Twilight series and having played roles after Twilight.

As for speech training just as an example...he's an amazing actor but Sean Connery doesn't change his normal way of speaking for any role (at least it seems)..just coming up with a person off the top of my head but I know he's not the only one.

You'll also have actors/actresses who usually play a specific type of role and so when they play a different role it can be jarring that's for sure.

In Lady in Black and Horns I don't recall every thinking Harry Potter instead of Daniel Radcliffe, though to be fair it could be the lack of glasses. Never saw twilight so I can't comment there. I would use Brad Pitt as an example of an actor who has been great in rolls, Fight Club, Inglorious B*stards, Meet Joe Black, World War Z...I could keep going.

There's quite a few other actors I could name as well. I just think for such an iconic roll in a very set place and time Emma Watson's rendition of Belle doesn't fit. But this is all opinion and I should probably stop harping on the subject so we can get back to the news.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

So...I thought malificent was good...because it was a different story idea.

Cinderella was a yawn

Jungle book was the typical Hollywood cgi fest...not notable.

Now the reviews of this are "average"...fair?


Here's where ima going...they have NINETEEN of these slated?!?

How is this anything but a bad plan at cheap bucks and cheapening the brand?
How?

This is cheapquels part 2...is it not?
Help me out here?