Emma Watson is so gorgeous!
I had reservations about this film because the animated version in 1991 was so good, but who can resist not watching this movie? It's Emma Watson as Belle for crying out loud! Belle and Hermione Granger have so much in common -- they are both bookworms and they are both independent women who are ahead of their time. And when I saw pictures of Emma Watson in that beautiful yellow dress, I was sold.
The movie started with narration, just as the animated film did. Initially this irked me, because I felt that narration wasn't necessary. However, this changed when I realised that the new version of Beauty and the Beast fixed many loopholes in the original version. According to the narrator and what you'd see on screen, the Beast loved throwing lavish parties. He had to tax the villagers to get what he wanted and he was already a fully-grown adult by then. This resolves the doubts people had, since many were saying things like, "How can the enchantress curse an eleven-year-old? Ever heard of stranger danger, lady?" The movie also explained that the spell caused the villagers to forget all about the prince and the people living in the castle, which meant that loved ones were separated and forgotten. Mr Potts couldn't even remember that he was married to Mrs Potts and that they had a son! In addition, the household objects or rather servants also point out that it was partially their fault for not teaching the prince how to behave, which is why they deserved to be cursed too.
The most cringe-worthy moment was when Emma Watson started to sing. I knew that she was going to sing all the songs that Belle was supposed to sing, but I had no idea whether or not she could pull it off. In my opinion, she couldn't at first. I'm sorry to say this because apart from that, she was perfect. I'm not exactly sure why but when she started singing the very first song, "Belle", I didn't take an immediate liking to it. It took me a while to get used to her singing. Yet, it is still extremely impressive that she sang her own songs and I still adore her.
Another thing I love about the movie was that it was an update from the animated version. It is a clear indication that Disney is keeping up with the times and it knows what audiences want. And thankfully, they had Emma Watson on their side too. Belle is definitely a feminist as she yearns for equally. I mean, the entire song, "Belle" is all about how people in her little town find her strange, and it's just because she loves to read! In the animated version, there is nothing quite wrong with that. The villagers just gawk at her but they don't really do anything mean. However, the live-action remake is more realistic because it features an all-boys school. When Belle gets her donkey to pull this barrel which spins around like a washing machine and does her laundry for her, she has more time to read. This is actually extremely smart of her. But when she tries to teach a little girl to read, the villagers actually throw her clothes on the floor.
The movie is also more inclusive because right from the beginning, there are inter-racial couples. The most obvious example is the maestro and the opera singer, who had been transformed into a harpsichord and a wardrobe respectively. And obviously, LeFou. Strangely enough, the film has been criticised for having a "gay scene/moment" in it. First of all, this is a non-issue. Most people wouldn't even realise that there was a "gay moment" if they hadn't made such a big fuss about it. Secondly, it is a movie and it is up to one's interpretation. In Mulan, Shang almost thought he was gay when he realised that he was falling for his recruit. Why was that not considered a "gay moment"? Even in the original animated version of Beauty and the Beast, there were people who interpreted LeFou as a gay character. And there was a scene in the original film when the wardrobe pulls in one of the villagers during the fight and makes him wear female clothes. He was literally coming out of the closet! (This was done in the 2017 version as well. Hilarious!) So why was it not a controversy back in 1991? The whole thing has been blown out of proportion.
Anyway, when LeFou first appeared, I could not help but smile. Josh Gad was wonderful as Olaf and terrific as LeFou as well. Right from the start, he points out that Gaston and Belle would be a horrible match because they have absolutely nothing in common. In his words, Belle is so "well read" while Gaston is "athletically inclined". (Love the choice of words and the way LeFou says this!) I felt like LeFou stole the show when he started singing praises about Gaston in the tavern. (They kept iconic lines like "I use antlers in all my decorating!" which is still funny till this day. They also added other lines and an extra bit to show that LeFou is illiterate) And LeFou is shown going around paying people to compliment Gaston, which explains why they were willing to do so in the first place, since Gaston isn't exactly likeable. LeFou also demonstrates how dedicated and loyal he is to Gaston when he refuses to admit that Gaston had tried to kill Maurice by tying him up and leaving him under a tree, hoping he'd get eaten by wolves. Ugh. Thankfully, LeFou switches sides after marching down to the castle with the other villagers. The "gay moment", I presume, was when LeFou was seen dancing at the end with another guy. Honestly, I didn't even notice this small detail. But come to think of it, isn't that just perfect? LeFou has finally realised that his love was unrequited and he's better off with someone else.
Everything on the set is beautiful. The scene that brought tears to my eyes was when the household objects, or rather servants, became actual household objects for a few seconds there. In the live-action film, when each petal falls, the people who had been turned into objects can actually feel that they are becoming less human. Their gears do not function as well as before, which means that they are losing their mobility. The wardrobe can barely stay awake and it hurts for the maestro to play as his teeth have been transformed into keys. The characters are so endearing that when they became pieces of furniture for a few seconds there, I felt devastated. Although I already knew that Agathe was the enchantress and she was about to reverse the spell, I still felt sorry for the characters.
Although it was beautiful to depict an old castle in the middle of winter, it did not make sense for the castle to be crumbling under the spell. I thought the spell was cast on the residents of the castle and not the castle itself. It seemed like the castle had to crumble in order to get Gaston to fall off and die. Personally, I love the part when Gaston dies in the animated film. The Beast did not exactly kill Gaston, but Gaston falls to his own death after he literally stabs Beast in the back. In the live-action movie, Gaston suddenly whips out a gun and shoots the Beast a couple of times (yet somehow he doesn't die, because magic saves him later) which was kind of weird. I think I didn't expect to see a gun because there weren't any in the original film. However, the icy lake and wintry trees were appropriate since the castle was a beautiful yet depressing place.
As for Belle's relationship with the Beast, I love how they were reading and quoting lines from Shakespeare. Beast had some pretty hilarious lines, like when he dissed Romeo and Juliet for being a sappy love story about pining away for someone, or when he asked Belle if she wanted to visit touristy places in Paris. Again, the movie was updated because it is no longer fair to criticise Belle for falling in love with Beast only after he gave her his library. They fell in love because they shared a love for literature (as Beast said, he had "an expensive education") and also because they share similar experiences. Both Belle and the Beast feel like outsiders, and the both of them had lost their mothers. In the remake, there is an explanation of what happened to Belle's mother. Apparently, she died of the plague and her father always drew his wife with a rose because they used to have a rattle in the shape of a rose. It reveals the reason as to why Belle is obsessed with roses and always requested one from her father whenever he travelled to the market.
I love the song "Be Our Guest" but I always feel that it's annoying to see Belle not getting to eat anything as it goes on! She has to sit through the performance while food is being paraded in front of her. And in the live-action film, this scene is made even longer for some reason. Why? She didn't even get to "try the grey stuff"! Also, I could not recognise Ewan McGregor as Lumiere! Obviously he was a candelabra most of the time, but he also had to put on a French accent and when he was finally turned back into a human, he was wearing fancy clothes and a wig. Couldn't tell that it was him at all.
Last of all, I do not understand why so many people on my Facebook wall are sharing this particular "article", which is not really an article because it's more like a slideshow. There are spelling mistakes in it and all it only focuses on the historical context of the story. Yes, to a history major, the historical context is definitely important. But the link that they are sharing promotes the idea that you should choose to be in a toxic relationship with an egotistical man in order to spare yourself some trouble. Did people learn anything at all from the movie? Sure, Gaston is muscular, but he's a jerk. As if it wasn't clear enough, the directors made Gaston step on some cabbage as he made his way to Belle's house in the live-action movie, while in the animated version he placed his muddy boots on her table. So what if Belle and the prince gets executed? I bet she would rather die than be in a relationship with Gaston. The link that so many are blindly sharing on Facebook clearly ignores Belle's agency and character development in the movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment