The New Beauty And The Beast Should Satisfy Most Fans (Uproxx)
The New Beauty and the Beast Is a Lifeless Re-creation of the Original (Vulture)
Theres certainly nothing that new about this version of Beauty and the Beast (well, except it isnt a cartoon anymore), but its a good recreation of a classic animated film that should leave most die-hards satisfied. In other words: When you imagine what a live action Beauty and the Beast movie would be like, the final product is probably a lot like what you think it would be like.
Beauty and the Beast Review: Too Much of a Good Thing (Collider)
Unfortunately, its over two hours long, and is padded out by a hugely unnecessary number of nonAshman-Rice musical numbers and a pointless detour where Belle finds out what happened to her missing mother. At every turn, the film seems to ask itself if what the original film did was enough, and answers with a definitive no. But hey, at least that clock looked real.
'Beauty and the Beast': Film Review (THR)
That being said, this isnt a matter of not living up to a classic original as much as theres a lack of consideration for making sure that everything works. Theres no reason Beasts CGI makeup should look so awful when youve got Disney footing the bill. Theres no reason the new songs shouldnt be outstanding when youve got Alan Menken back to do the music. Theres no reason to add new things if those things dont make the movie better overall. Condon didnt have to stay slavishly devoted to the 1991 film, but most of alterations and changes dont make his version feel fresh. They feel like theyre grasping for relevancy.
Review: Beauty and the Beast Revels in Joy and Enchantment (NY Times)
Disneys latest iteration of the fairy tale Beauty and the Beast is more than just eye candy. Its a Michelin-triple-starred master class in patisserie skills that transforms the cinematic equivalent of a sugar rush into a kind of crystal meth-like narcotic high that lasts about two hours. Only once viewers have come down and digested it all might they feel like the whole experience was actually a little bland, lacking in depth and so effervescent as to be almost instantly forgettable.
Review: Disney's 'Beauty and the Beast' (Newsweek)
But this live-action/digital hybrid, directed by Bill Condon and starring Emma Watson and Dan Stevens in the title roles, is more than a flesh-and-blood (and prosthetic fur-and-horns) revival of the 26-year-old cartoon, and more than a dutiful trip back to the pop-culture fairy-tale well. Its classicism feels unforced and fresh. Its romance neither winks nor panders. It looks good, moves gracefully and leaves a clean and invigorating aftertaste. I almost didnt recognize the flavor: I think the name for it is joy.
Review: Rousing new 'Beauty and the Beast' is even better than the original (USA Today)
Condons Beauty and the Beast is visually as sumptuous as Branaghs Cinderella, paying close attention to ornate castle decorations and beautiful costumes. The CGI is also well-handled; the Beast looks realistic and the special effects used in the musical numbers will mesmerize young moviegoers.
A tale as old as time; yes. But Disney and Condon have found a way to breathe some new life into it.
The Live-Action Beauty and the Beast (Salon)
Embracing its musical theater nature and adding depth to a familiar narrative, the live-action remake (*** out of four; rated PG; in theaters March 17) is a real Beauty.
Unlike last years The Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast marries visual spectacle and sumptuous design work with a better story than its original, casting a spell on old fans and newcomers alike.
And so as an exercise in finding something there that wasnt there before, while serving up pleasant familiarity for young and old alike, the movie falls in line with the surprisingly entertaining Cinderella remake. Youll probably walk away longing to revisit the original for the ump-hundredth time. But isnt that the point?