Beauty and the Beast (2017)

[raven]

18 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And her tearing off to back to her father in that dress, and still wearing those fugly boots? And then, when she's coming back to save the Beast, all of a sudden, she's wearing her cloak--something that was left behind at the castle and which she wasn't wearing when she was heading back to the village!

Though I really enjoyed the movie and thought Emma did a good job, I was a little saddened to see the beautiful yellow dress dropped on the ground in the village.  I don't recall what she was wearing (the same cloak or different) when she heads back to the castle, but I remember being surprised that she originally left wearing the dress (though it fits the character, she's not going to change before going to save her father).  Then she obviously removes the yellow dress because I remember seeing it on the ground.  Maybe she put on her father's cloak over her shift or whatever it's called?  It was kind of rushed and confusing.

[Conotocarious]

Saw this yesterday and I loved it. I am a huge animated purist but this was really well done. I always wanted a longer "falling in love" story in the original and they really did that very well here (library scene was my favorite, like many others here). Plus, I really liked Dan Stevens as the Beast. With every word he said it was so easy to see the petulant, spoiled prince underneath and sometimes in the original, you really didn't see that. You only see a big scary screaming monster or a cuddly teddy bear.  

I liked Emma as Belle even though her voice was obviously auto-tuned rather heavily. I loved how she really looked like she was falling in love with the Beast especially during the ballroom scene. The way she looks at him...it was really well done. 

It's a bizarre conundrum for me. As much as I don't think it's necessary to do remakes of the animated classics, I'm enjoying them immensely. If Disney is going to  continue doing such a thoughtful job in their remakes, then bring on Lion King. 

Edited March 26, 2017 by Conotocarious

[Frost]

One change practically made me cheer out loud.  Belle borrows her books from the preacher's personal library,  instead of from an actual, you know, store that sells books!   That's bothered me from the first time I saw the animated movie.  Belle is pretty nonchalant about rummaging around an actual bookstore in order to decide on what book she's going to borrow.  That scene still irritates me every time I see it.

I'm of mixed mind about Agathe being the enchantress.  From the way the townspeople treat her, she's been living there for years.  Gaston even references she's a spinster who ended up on the street when her father died.  The enchantress can change memories, so maybe that's all that is but why hang around the town for years waiting to see if the Beast can manage to break the curse?  And why is she so willing to put up with the rude townspeople but not the prince?  The people are mean spirited about a girl who can read, to the extent of throwing her laundry in the dirty street.  The people aren't charitable enough to care for a homeless spinster, leaving her to beg in the street.  The people are willing to have Maurice thrown into a lunatic asylum.  And their spiritual leader, the preacher, does nothing more than bleat a couple of times not to do these things.  No moral authority at all.  I just find it curious that to the enchantress, bullying is OK but she'll condemn the arrogant prince and his servants for eternity.   If the enchantress had just moved on after the curse, to find new targets to test, the bad behavior in the village going unpunished makes more sense.

I love this movie, I just wish they had toned down the villagers behavior a little bit.

[Spartan Girl]

Good point. But like you said, we have no way of knowing that she really lived in the village during all that time. If her motivation for the spell was just a tough love way of giving the prince an opportunity to redeem himself, she might have used her powers to foresee if someone was capable of breaking the curse and found Belle that way. Then she would have inserted herself to the village as Agathe, fixing everyone's memories to remain incognito. She couldn't curse the villagers without breaking her cover.

It's yet another element that this version uses from the original fairy tale, because the enchantress in that version is very active in maneuvering things in getting the two together.

[Frost]

5 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

It's yet another element that this version uses from the original fairy tale, because the enchantress in that version is very active in maneuvering things in getting the two together.

I haven't read the original fairy tale, so I did not know the enchantress was more of an active participant.  I'm intrigued.

[angora]

2 hours ago, Conotocarious said:

Saw this yesterday and I loved it. I am a huge animated purist but this was really well done. I always wanted a longer "falling in love" story in the original and they really did that very well here (library scene was my favorite, like many others here). Plus, I really liked Dan Stevens as the Beast. With every word he said it was so easy to see the petulant, spoiled prince underneath and sometimes in the original, you really didn't see that. You only see a big scary screaming monster or a cuddly teddy bear.  

Same here.  I have my quibbles here and there, but the portrayal of the main characters and their love story really made it for me.  I loved Dan Stevens's Beast - he captured such a perfect mix of loneliness, indignation, petulance, shyness, and shame still trying to cling to pride.  You could see how much, despite everything, he still had a long way to go in really taking the idea of humility and caring to heart.  He'd rage and bluster to try and convince himself he was still in control of anything in his life, putting up this front of monstrosity to prove that he was so above what Belle thought of him.  Such a neat character, and his gradual transformation as he and Belle grew closer was wonderful to see.  Stevens was my favorite of the actors I hadn't heard sing before, too.  "Evermore" was absolutely gorgeous, and probably the highlight of the film for me.  (Side note:  I liked this interview with Stevens where he talks about how he developed the Beast's voice, thinking about how a vain, spoiled young man would speak if he fangs he was sort of trying to hide.)

With Belle, there were a lot of little moments I liked.  The details in her costuming were a nice touch - boots instead of slippers, pockets in her skirt - I loved the scene of her trying to teach the little girl to read, and I liked her interactions with both the Beast and Maurice in the scene where she took Maurice's place.  I agree that the film did a nice job showing her genuinely starting to fall for the Beast.  After the transformation, I liked that long moment she took looking into his eyes and how delighted she was when she was sure that it was really still him.  I wish her vocals were stronger, but she wasn't bad, and I liked the thoughtful, contemplative air she brought to her songs.

1 hour ago, Frost said:

One change practically made me cheer out loud.  Belle borrows her books from the preacher's personal library,  instead of from an actual, you know, store that sells books!   That's bothered me from the first time I saw the animated movie.  Belle is pretty nonchalant about rummaging around an actual bookstore in order to decide on what book she's going to borrow.  That scene still irritates me every time I see it.

Plus, I liked that the preacher's library was so small.  You got the sense that, while Belle was a voracious reader, her opportunities for reading were limited to what few books she was actually able to get her hands on.  I'm sure she read every one of those books multiple times, and whenever the preacher would get a new one, she'd probably pounce on it like a woman finally coming to water in the middle of the desert.  If many of US went weak in the knees seeing the Beast's library, imagine how much more incredible it must have been for Belle!

As for the numbers, after "Evermore," my favorites were "Gaston" and "The Mob Song."  I thought Luke Evans and Josh Gad both did a great job, and I really liked how those two songs were staged, lively and exciting without looking too busy or cluttered.  I also liked "Beauty and the Beast" (both Emma Thompson's version and Audra reprising it for the finale,) "Be Our Guest," and "Belle (Reprise.)"

[BitterApple]

Just a funny aside, I went to see the movie again yesterday morning. It was a sold-out show, and what I didn't realize was this particular viewing was "Sensory Friendly" for kids and adults with autism. Not much of a difference, just that there's no previews, the sound is a little lower and the theater doesn't go completely pitch black. Sitting opposite me on the aisle, was a young girl who was on the spectrum, and when "Belle" came on, she sang the entire song on-key at the top of her lungs and mimicked Emma Watson's accent perfectly. She also waltzed in the aisle during "Be Our Guest." It was so sweet and I was happy nobody turned around and gave her dirty looks. There's hope for humanity after all...

Edited March 26, 2017 by BitterApple

[Frost]

I just read the version of the tale in The Blue Fairy Book.  Interestingly, the outside world is in the middle of winter and the enchanted castle is in perpetual summer!  The enchantress isn't in the story at all, so no maneuvering to get Beauty and Beast together.  I also discovered the last name of the original author was Villeneuve, which is what Gaston calls their town in the movie!  Does that count as an Easter Egg? 

As an aside, I reread The Goose Girl which gave me nightmares as a child.  And it's just as awful.  That poor horse!  Although the princess in that story is such a ninny I can't believe I ever felt sorry for her.

[tennisgurl]

I LOVED the animated Beauty and the Beast, I grew up with it, so I had very high expectation here. While I had a few nitpicks, I really loved it, and will definitely be buying it on DVD as soon as it comes out. I think the stand out was Dan Stevens, who was a really engaging and sympathetic Beast. I also think his version of the character actually makes a little bit more sense than the animated version was, especially if you assume the Beast was at least a teenager when he was cursed. That Beast was very animalistic, which made sense for a Beast, but I liked that this version still had parts of a rich kid in him, and you could still see that even in his more animalistic moments. He gave him a really likable sense of humor, as well as being angry but with a soft side.

I thought Emma was a really solid Belle, even if her voice wasn't quite what I would have liked. She certainly filled in my mental image of what a live action Belle should be like, and I totally bought the romance she had with Beast. I liked them bonding over books. I think that's a really relatable way to get them together. It worked for me.

I also liked some of the changes they made that fixed some plot holes from the animated movie, like explaining why everyone in the village (and, I assume, the rest of France) just forgot that there was a giant ass castle within walking distance of their village, and no one remembered the prince and all his servants, and I liked that they actually had family and friends in the village. I liked the backstory for Belle and her father (mom and dad were bohemian Parisian artists until plague killed mom, and dad thought the village would be safer), and the backstory for The Beast, the change that Belle didn't get her books from a bookstore (why would this tiny village have a whole bookstore if they think reading is for freaks?) but from the small collection of the local preacher, and the expanded role of the Enchantress. Speaking of...

I liked what they did with the Enchantress here, and how they showed her being more of a "tough love" kind of magic user instead of just an asshole, and gave more of an explanation as to why she cursed everyone else along with the Prince. That being said, I was never that bothered by her doing this in any version of the story, mainly because I always thought of her as a sort of old school Fair Folk type, instead of just a passing magic using human. The Fair Folk, in old stories, were always pulling shit like this, and were HUGE into hospitality and being kind to passers by, and often cursed people or rewarded them for reasons that seem arbitrary or disproportionate to humans, but seem perfectly justified to them. They had their own morality code that humans didn't usually get. It seems like its the same case here, but with a more benevolent power, who seemed to be actually trying to teach a lesson and help things along, and seemed pleased that everything turned out alright. What she did was still pretty lousy by human standards (Chip probably wasn't even born when the Prince was being abused by asshole Dad, I assume the Italian opera singer and piano player were just there to perform and had nothing to do with how the Prince was raised, and she even cursed a freaking DOG!), but pretty standard for a fair Folk type. At least this one tried to actually help.

I also wish they had taken this opportunity to give the Prince an actually name. Yeah, his name is technically Adam, but no one ever says it, and that name never fit for me. The guy is a French Prince, shouldn't have a French name? Since he's a Prince. I would go ahead and call him Louis. Its usually Louis.

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, Frost said:

I just read the version of the tale in The Blue Fairy Book.  Interestingly, the outside world is in the middle of winter and the enchanted castle is in perpetual summer!  The enchantress isn't in the story at all, so no maneuvering to get Beauty and Beast together.  I also discovered the last name of the original author was Villeneuve, which is what Gaston calls their town in the movie!  Does that count as an Easter Egg? 

Yup, a big one.

The enchantress was in one of the earlier versions, I will have to check which one. But either way, I think adding Agathe and all those said Easter eggs from the original story was clever on Disney's part.

[Olivia Y]

On 3/24/2017 at 4:28 AM, Brn2bwild said:

Somewhat off topic, but with regard to the animated version of the movie, it struck me that Gaston may have been modeled after Michael Maguire's Enjolras in Les Miserables (see video starting around 2:20).  Anyone else see it?

There are heaps of Youtube comments on clips of Maguire's Enjolras that compare him to Gaston. I've watched a lot of 'making of' specials for the animated Beauty and the Beast but they never mention whether they drew any inspiration from that, so I'd say it was probably a coincidence. It's a pity the stage show came too late for him to realistically do that role. 

I'm planning to see the film, but mostly because I like the people involved. Emma Watson seemed like a very 'obvious' pick for Belle after her turn as Hermione, but I haven't been convinced by her singing at all. If I'm honest I think I would've preferred it if they dubbed her singing (it worked for Christopher Plummer in Sound of Music) but perhaps that would diminish her involvement too much?

[irisheyes]

Went and saw it again on Saturday. I so, so, so want "Evermore" to be nominated for an award so I can hear Dan Stevens sing it. I'm in love with this song. Thankfully, he's old enough so it's not creepy that I'm nursing a serious crush  :)

I cant wait for it to come out in video. 

[mtlchick]

Quote

LeFou was played much too modern for my taste.  I felt like he belonged in another movie set much later in time.  I thought he did a good job of showing disillusionment with Gaston over time though.

Finally saw the movie on Saturday and I think this stuck out the most; it was the equivalent of being a hipster of that era and it bugged. 

I enjoyed it for what it was: my friend was the one who really wanted to go and she was shocked to sees Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellan.   It didn't bowl me over but I have to give credit to Dan Stevens finding emotion in the CGI work.

Finally Emma Watson gazing at Audra McDonald singing reminded me of the The Sound of Music Live!  with Carrie Underwood: "I have to sing after THIS? I will need to take a seat."

[partofme]

I've never seen the animated version so this was really my first major exposure to the story.   The songs and imagery in the movie were beautiful.  However I couldn't get over what a creep the prince was and therefore didn't think the beast was good enough for Belle.

[choclatechip45]

I went in with low expectations. I really enjoyed. I thought imagery was beautiful. They did a great job with the costumes and sets.

[Jazzy24]

On 3/27/2017 at 11:23 AM, partofme said:

I've never seen the animated version so this was really my first major exposure to the story.   The songs and imagery in the movie were beautiful.  However I couldn't get over what a creep the prince was and therefore didn't think the beast was good enough for Belle.

You have never seen the animated version of Beauty and the Beast ~gasp!!!~ 

Fix that right now!!! 

[partofme]

2 hours ago, Jazzy24 said:

You have never seen the animated version of Beauty and the Beast ~gasp!!!~ 

Fix that right now!!! 

Aging myself here, but the animated came out the year I graduated high school and I've never had any interest in it.  Also my mom is a fan of an older book version of B&TB that I think has a different plot than the animated version.

Edited March 28, 2017 by partofme

[Lonesome Rhodes]

I was exceedingly pleased and happily surprised to see that the whole gay deal was fantastically overblown.  What I find amazing is that LeFou's lousy character and silliness was not widely derided by the LGBT community as a negative trope/cliche.  He's not a good person and he has no principle beyond self-preservation/aggrandizement.  He is not simply the "fool" or "joker."  

I was captivated by Watson's Belle.  She's no Marni Nixon (RIP), but then again, who is?

I loved, loved, loved the evil of the tyrannical crowd.  It's a lesson we could all use in our ever more scary and brave new world.  

The first part of the closing credits was absolutely phenomenal.   So beautiful visually, and musically.  

[Conotocarious]

19 hours ago, partofme said:

Aging myself here, but the animated came out the year I graduated high school and I've never had any interest in it.  Also my mom is a fan of an older book version of B&TB that I think has a different plot than the animated version.

The animated version came out my senior year of high school. I saw it in a theater but I remember that even in college all the girls would bring the VHS tape to watch whenever we had the movie room to ourselves. I want to be a Disney animator those days and I was really into the making of the movies, the animation process, the animators, everything. I saw the Lion King ten times in the theater alone.

[Crs97]

We loved it with a few nit picks and some general comments:

1.  It bugs my husband that the story is set in France, but only Lumiere has a French accent.

2.  How do you have Audra and not give her more to sing?  How?

3.  I wanted to see the priest be the one to unlock the wagon.

4.  I liked that Le Feu started to grow a little bit of a conscience.  The change to "Kill the Beast" when he mentions they are chasing the wrong monster was a good one.  And that was the outrageous moment that has all the right-wingers up in arms?!?  I doubt my kids even noticed.  I am still not sure I noticed.

5.  Emma was fine, but I never got over the fact that I was watching Emma.  Probably more my fault than hers.

6.  Loved that she never got to eat during "Be Our Guest."  Yes, their skills rusted.

7.  Loved "Evermore."  Just a gorgeous song well sung.  Was that Dan's voice?  It was lovely.

[Grace284]

On 3/22/2017 at 2:19 PM, Frost said:

Although I am very puzzled as to what Mrs Potts and the other household servants could have done to prevent that from happening.  

I was left wondering what the poor dog could have done. That's an example of one of the major issues I had with the film, the clumsy over-writing in an attempt to "fix" the plot holes. They either created whole new plot holes or disrupted the flow of the script. Like the nicely done prologue seems to be ending and then they rush in "AND EVERYONE FORGOT THE PRINCE THE END". 

I don't really know how to feel about Emma Watson. I don't think she's necessarily a terrible actress, but she gave a weirdly downplayed performance at times. She was worst when she was by herself, Dan Stevens and Kevin Kline in particular both lifted her a bit.

On 3/19/2017 at 4:44 PM, Brn2bwild said:

Was the "Human Again" number in the movie?  To me, that addition ruined the updated animated film, as it's such a fluff number.

In tribute, they replace it with an equally terrible song that also stops the movie cold. Both new songs were bad additions, though Evermore at least gave the Beast a moment and Dan Stevens performed it well. It's a shame it was so trite and dated.

[againstthewind]

So, I just saw this today. I'm mad at myself it took me two weeks - work travel and getting sick will do that to you.

The original animated version is very important to me. It was the first film I saw in theaters. I was Belle for Halloween. My family calls me Belle (real name rhymes). I have seen the original more times than I can count. If this was announced prior to Cinderella, I would've hated the idea, but I loved the LA Cinderella and actually was pretty excited.

The Good:

I loved the back stories added. The number one benefit for me is it sells the love story, whereas (although I hate to admit it) the original one can be borderline icky. Now I believe they have a genuine connection. Also, others have mentioned the plot holes it addressed (no one knew the fucking castle was there?). The plague scene made me cry (so did a lot more later in the movie).

I also loved the fleshing out of LeFou and the calming down of Maurice. TBH, Gaston was a hothead in the initial movie but he wasn't wrong about Maurice. In this case, they went total sociopath on Gaston and Luke Evans sold the hell out of it. Shallow, but it is a shame he is gay.

I actually liked how the rose petal fell and the Enchantress chose to revive them.

Dan Stevens. I loved him on Downton, and have really enjoyed his post-Downton work (google The Guest shower scene and thank me later). However, I wasn't sure how he'd tackle this role so my expectations were average. He exceeded them. He brought so much humanity to this role, and the way they did the beast voice was great - you could still hear so much of Dan. Loved how they did the eyes as well, and they definitely chose an actor with striking eyes. Also, he can sing!

I've mentioned Luke Evans and Dan Stevens, but also Josh Gad, Ian McKellan and Kevin Kline. Audra, as always, crushed the vocals.

The scenery was lovely.

The Meh

The new songs. Liked Evermore, was not as big of a fan on the others. And I hate the Legend/Grande duet. You can't improve on the Celine original.

Emma Thompson. I love that woman and thought I'd love her in this role, but part of me wondered if maybe Audra may have better suited for this role so she could've killed the song during the ballroom scene. Maybe I'm more partial to the Angela Lansbury vocal than I thought I was?

Ewan Macgregor. I had heard the Mexican thing, but his accent was fine to me. However, you just can't touch the Orbach performance to me, and I knew this going in.

The Not So Good

Emma Watson. Hated the casting then, don't like it better now. She can't sing very well, and she is missing the compassion (I think - it was SOMETHING) the original Belle oozed. She was monotone and honestly if Stevens wasn't so great it would've sunk the movie. Also, the I love you scene, did she mean it like she just realized it or what? I couldn't figure out her motivation. I'm just not impressed with her. They did have chemistry, so I'll give them that.

The dress and the way the ballroom scene was filmed. The transformation to the Prince was such a homage to the original and I wish the dance was more of one as well.

---

Despite my obvious distaste for the lead, I actually really, really liked it. I am super hormonal but I sobbed my eyes out the last ten minutes of the movie. Between the Beast dying and the servants transforming (the dog barking broke me, and so did Mrs Potts looking for Chip) I was a mess. It wasn't my finest moment. 

One of my friends wants to see it Sunday and I may go again.

Edited April 1, 2017 by againstthewind

[Brn2bwild]

Saw the movie last night and was surprised by how much I liked it.  I was expecting to think of it as a tired movie that did an injustice to one of my favorite films of all time.  Instead, I look at it the way I look at the A Song of Ice and Fire books compared to the Game of Thrones series: as two separate and distinct entities.  Emma Watson can't touch Paige O'Hara when it comes to singing (in fact, the aspects that were practically frame-for-frame like the animated version were my least favorite), and her Belle was not as innately sweet, but she still had an appealing spunkiness and intelligence.

I liked many of the additions to the movie, especially acknowledging the tragic element of the servants, who had lives and families of their own, turning into objects.  Though not in the original theatrical release, I always hated "Human Again" for treating the servants like goofy side characters whose fondest wishes were to look good while doing the same stuff they did as objects.  I also liked the decision to make the Prince a highly educated adult when he was transformed.  The stage play (and the extended animated version?) decision to make the Prince illiterate was among the most incomprehensible.  By the time he was 12, he might be illiterate in Latin, but he wouldn't be illiterate overall unless he had a learning disability, which there was never any sign of in any version of Beauty and the Beast.

Also, Dan Stevens was so pretty in this.  Wish I could have seen more of him.

[Hanahope]

I liked the movie overall, the backstories were good.  I chuckled over the "je ne sais quo" line (didn't hear anyone else do so, /sigh), and thought it a bit odd that Belle could wish her and Prince back to the place she was born, when, as an infant, she'd have absolutely no memory of it.  How could she 'recall it being bigger?".  And then the line at the end about asking the prince to grow a beard and his growl, just seemed a little icky to me.

But I thought everyone sang well enough, Luke Evans did a fine job I thought and I liked the growth of LeFou.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 4/3/2017 at 11:27 AM, Hanahope said:

How could she 'recall it being bigger?". 

She didn't; she said she imagined it bigger.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 3/24/2017 at 11:03 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not a fan that the villagers were also under some enchantment-that Mrs. Potts's husband was one of the men in the village, leading the charge to kill the beast and there was luvy dovey reunion. Why was he in the village when the curse happened?

Because he was the village potter, whereas his wife worked in the castle.

[Daisy]

That might be what bothered when i saw it (yesterday). the lack of Belle's inner sweetness and compassion. Even when she shot down Gaston (multiple times) it wasn't even this "ugh, please." until (in the animated movie) where he's like us, kids, etc, and she's like well, no. - and then she's angry - so it makes sense. Emma's Belle seemed relatively harsh. 

my brother was surprised that I didn't "j'adore" this movie. And I couldn't really put my thumb on why. I don't think I liked the opening scene (I think in my head, I was imagining more of this really dark/cold winter night and the prince was a colossal jerk and that the enchantress was ugly. Not that it's a party, and it's like. "poof.. enter the enchantress." 

There were other little bits and bobs that i liked, adored, and didn't like but I feel if i cite some it just feels like knit-picking. Like. do I need Belle really to be the inventor - and this is why she is considered odd? No.. not really. Did I think it was cute. sure.  I always got the idea that Belle was considered odd that all Belle did was read and was a dreamer - not the fact that she read. 

I loved Dan Stevens in Downton so i really liked him here (lol there were some Matthew moments i personally felt). like someone else stated, I didn't love "The Dress" but for the practical - what they were going for throughout the entire movie, it worked. 

Also loved how everytime the petal fell, you saw/heard a lot of real consequences of what it meant. the castle was being destroyed, the servants were becoming real. when Plumette turned into a real feather duster.. that got me. (actually got me more than other parts of the movie where i thought i was supposed to LOL). 

in a sense (for me) it seemed... rushed in some aspects, and not so fleshed out in others. I don't know how i feel about the new songs.

But I did .. like the movie. Like if someone gave me this movie as a present, I'd be very thankful, but I don't think i'd rush to purchase it. 

(I do think - I loved how the end credits were filmed. It would have been really something had the film had that aspect of it. and I finally figured out who Plumette was. Tish Jones from Doctor Who. that was killing me). 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Daisy

[Wiendish Fitch]

I realize I’m a month late posting this. I wasn’t sure anyone cared about my opinion, and I honestly feel a little foolish for anticipating this movie. But I had to get this off my chest. I plan to be long-winded, so read on at your peril.

Disclaimers: 

I’m in no mood to dredge up the “Belle has Stockholm Syndrome” debate. I’m so bored with this wheezy argument I could scream. 

 I adore the original film, but I’m not blind to its flaws. Honestly, there are plot and logic holes that will have you scratching your head until it bleeds if you think about them too long.

The “gay character” thing bothers me... but not for the reasons you think. Don’t worry, I’ll get to that.

One of the reasons I was hesitant to post was that a lot of people like this movie. I’m tired of hiding my opinion, but I also don’t want to be a contrarian monster. If you liked this movie, more power to you, this is just my opinion. I will try my best not to be too much of a jerk (but I can't promise anything).

Last but not least... SPOILERS!!!! The movie’s been out for a month now, so I’m not going to spoiler-mark anything. Again, read at your peril.

True confession time: For starters, Beauty and the Beast has long been in my top ten, if not five, favorite movies of all time. I always say my inner child loves the Disney version, and my outer adult loves the 1946 Cocteau version. Belle is not just my favorite Disney princess, she's one of my favorite movie characters of all time. Secondly, I was never against the idea of a live-action Beauty and the Beast. Nope, never. I love the animated version, I love the Broadway version, and you know what? This was the next logical step. I always wondered what a live action Beauty and the Beast would look like, so when this was first announced, I manically swung between “cautious” and “optimistic”. I knew-I knew!-going in that it would never top the original. Good sport that I am, I kept my expectations reasonable and leveled. I even played it safe and thought, "Y'know? Maybe it'll be like 2015’s Cinderella: not exactly a masterpiece, but with so much good stuff that it will more than stand on its own." So on March 16, the husband and I attended a late night show. Clad in my prized Beauty and the Beast hooded sweatshirt, I was high on Starbucks coffee and anticipation, but managed to keep my excitement under control. Then the Disney logo with the Prince’s castle appeared, and I settled in to Alan Menken's familiar opening chords...

All right, enough with the mincing preamble, I hated this. HATED. Good lord, 2017’s Beauty and the Beast is frequently criticized as "pointless", but that’s the least of its problems; pointless I can live with (hell, Cinderella and Maleficent were pointless, and I liked ‘em fine), but this? Misused actors, characterizations that are either dull or off-putting, aborted and/or superfluous character arcs, a plot-hole device that had me grinding my teeth in frustration, choreography that was dutiful but lifeless, a screenplay where every first draft or half-assed idea was used and never punched up, ZERO concept of tension, set-ups and payoffs, loads of telling, very little showing, I could go on and on. 

 

For the love of Walt, it’s Beauty and the Beast! How can you screw it up? Here are the biggest offenses to me...

 

Belle and the Beast have no chemistry. None, nada, zip-a-roony. They seem to make good study buddies, but a couple? I just didn’t see it at all. Even in the iconic ballroom sequence, they dance nicely, but there’s no arc, no emotion, they don’t even smile. Mind you, Astaire and Rogers rarely smiled in their romantic duets, but the chemistry was more than evident. Dan Stevens and Emma Watson’s, on the other hand, is entirely absent. Speaking of which....

 

Emma Watson as Belle: I'm no actress, never was, never will be, and I'm not going to sit here and say it's easy to be Belle... but, damn it all, it should NOT be this difficult! Watson has none of the spirit, restlessness, and charm that make Belle a great character. Every single scene is just "dull surprise", left and right. A giant beast? Dull surprise! Talking objects? Dull surprise!. A big-ass library? Dull surprise (God, I love “MST3K”). In the original, Belle is indeed chafing under small town life, but she still finds joy in the little things, most notably her books. Here, Belle's bored with her small town, but she's only bored (which is NOT fun to watch). She reads, but you never get the sense that she truly loves it, or that it strikes her imagination, or even if she gets anything at all out of it (she never geeks out, not even once). Instead of feeling empathy, I was just reminded of Betty Draper’s classic admonition: “Only boring people get bored!” There's no awe and wonder during "Be Our Guest", Belle's just mildly amused, as if seeing LOL Cats for the first time. Remember those old commercials where unsuspecting people had their usual coffee replaced with Folgers? They showed a wider range of emotion in a minute than Watson could muster in 2 hours! The animated Belle has been criticized for being “too perfect”, but I have to disagree. I like that Belle was human enough to be bothered by people talking smack about her, sad over losing her freedom, and resentful but also afraid of the Beast. Here? The most passionate emotion Belle displays is being slightly miffed. When the Beast catches her in the west wing, she doesn’t run away in fear so much as storm off in a huff (I kept waiting for her to say “Well, I never!”). I think they were trying to make her stronger, but instead they achieved the opposite.

And then there’s Watson’s singing. To Emmy Rossum of The Phantom of the Opera, I can only say this: I'm sorry. I'm sorry I dismissed you as a bland, vacant-eyed, slack-jawed little twerp who could merely carry a tune. Yes, your acting in the aforementioned film was weak (but with Joel Schumacher at the helm, you can easily be forgiven), but you know what? At least you could sing. Watson’s voice, on the other hand, is blatantly amateurish, has no feeling or lyricism, and is auto-tuned within an inch of its life. I realize that it’s unfair to complain about Watson’s singing, considering that Belle has been played by the likes of Paige O’Hara, Susan Egan, Andrea McArdle, Toni Braxton, and Annelise Van der Pol, but the casting directors let star quality override vocal quality, so that’s on them. Hermione Granger be damned, Emma Watson is now on my crap list of unforgivably dull actors, right up there with Mia Wasikowska. I’m through being brainwashed into thinking cute li’l ingenues are more talented than they really are. Wasikowska and Watson are boring, and Jennifer Lawrence is good, but, as I’ve recently realized, far from great. Yeah, I said it.

Belle learns early on about the curse. Because who needs tension?!

 

A finale crammed with mood killers, most notably  head-stabbingly awful “take my wife, please!” joke. While the original ended with a one-liner, it was meant to be cute and didn’t ruin the mood. The exchange between Belle and the Prince was the absolute worst moment killer I've ever seen; not only did it obliterate the tone, but it brought to mind the final scene in Young Frankenstein. Hey, I love Mel Brooks as much as I love Disney, but the two don’t go together. At. All. It’s like combining a frozen hot chocolate with a pint of Guinness: it’s a gross, horrid idea that will just hurt your head and tummy.

 

Both the revelation about Belle's mom and the moronic plot hole device (or MPHD), that magical book thingy that transports you places... or maybe it doesn't... no wait, it does, because Belle picks that stupid plague-tainted pen.... GAAAAHHHHH! Was nothing thought through?!?! First off, who cares that Belle's mom died from the Plague? Why is this relevant? How does it move the narrative forward?  How does it inform Belle's character? And why didn't the Beast give Belle the MPHD? He said himself he had no use for it! Do you have any idea how beneficial during the climax had the characters had the foresight to use it?!?!? Instead, it’s introduced, never used again, and serves no purpose except to show that the central characters I normally love don’t have the good sense that God gave pudding!

 

The climax looks for all the world like a cut scene from a video game, and is astonishingly unexciting. Also, Belle spends the climax in her underwear. No use parsing words, she’s in her underwear. Goddammit, Disney, are you trying to attract the Apatow crowd?

 

The Enchantress plays a much bigger part than in the original... to the irreparable detriment to the narrative. By expanding her role, the mysterious, morally ambiguous specter from the original now comes off as way more villainous and horrible than she should, while at the same time less interesting. This also ruins the overall tension of the story and what should have been the most heartbreaking part of the climax, because it gives the impression that she was just screwing with everyone. The rose, the crucial ticking clock... doesn't matter. She can just waive the conditions of the curse on her own?! Lady, innocent people suffered because of you! I hate to say it, but you're the real monster here!!

 

 

Terrible use of the cast, including...

 

Josh Gad as Lefou: A cinch of casting on paper; after all, Gad’s stout, quirky looking, has Disney street cred thanks to Frozen, can be hammy and silly without being too irritating... so why does he go throughout the movie acting as though he has gun in his back? What I always appreciated about the original Lefou was that he was ostensibly the dopey sidekick, until it’s revealed that, bumbling goofiness aside, he’s every bit the destructive, reprehensible bastard Gaston is. Here? He’s a creepy, bland, effete weirdo with an out-of-nowhere character arc that makes no earthly sense. He’s also the one they made gay, and it’s just stupid. I don’t like the implication that Lefou’s motivations are driven by romantic frustration, and that gay men are inherently clingy creepers.

 

Ian McKellan as Cogsworth: Only this movie could make Sir Ian utterly unmemorable as Cogsworth. That was the casting choice I was most excited for, because it seemed so perfect, having McKellan’s trademark gruff yet pompous voice coming out of a clock. Instead, they give him way too little to do, and I can recall about 1 or 2 funny lines he had. I personally thought it would have been funnier to make Cogsworth gay instead of Lefou, because think how nice it would have been if Cogsworth had been reunited with his boyfriend at the end, and we could have been spared the horrible “take my wife, please!” gag at the end. Sorry to keep harping on about that, but it really, REALLY bothered me.

 

Ewan McGregor as Lumiere: Eh, he was all right, I guess. Kind of hard to mess up Lumiere. My philosophy is that as long as McGregor doesn’t do an American accent, I like him fine. Not that anyone cares, but I will miss Jerry Orbach for the rest of my days.

 

Kevin Kline as Maurice: Wow, Maurice is boring and redundant in this. It doesn’t help that you never feel the connection between father and daughter at all. His song is also cheesy and dull.

 

Luke Evans as Gaston: An awful Gaston, just appalling. He lacks the charisma, bravado, and necessary menace to pull off the role. I didn’t believe for one millisecond that this guy had every woman (or dude) in the village swooning over him, or that he could drive the entire village to riot and storm the Beast’s castle. When Donny flippin’ Osmond is a better Gaston than you, something is very, very wrong. 

 

Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts: Look, I love Emma Thompson, love her to bits, she’s practically a goddess to me. But all I could think was, “Bitch, sit down, shut up, and let Audra McDonald sing ‘Beauty and the Beast’!” Speaking of which... 

 

Audra Macdonald as the hideous, nightmarish singing wardrobe whose name I don’t care to remember: Why would you cast this Broadway icon, who has a voice that could shame the angels, and not only fail to cast her as Mrs. Potts, you don’t have the presence of mind to give her a whole song to sing?! For shame, Disney. For shame.

 

Stanley Tucci as Whathisfaceohwhocares: I like Tucci a lot, he’s a chameleon of an actor, but he’s getting way too self-indulgent in his portrayal of physically repulsive characters (this lends itself to another plot hole that would take too long to gripe about).

 

Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette: She’s the French maid and Lumiere’s love interest. That’s it, really. Why can’t this poor, lovely, talented woman catch a real break?!

 

The aborted and/or pointless character arcs:

 

Cogsworth promises he’ll stand up to the Beast, and is teased for his subservient ways. Is this resolved? Nope.

 

The freakish, nightmarish wardrobe apparently suffers from narcolepsy. Why? Who knows. Is this mentioned again? Nope. Did I care? Take a guess.

 

Maurice is allegedly an overprotective father because Belle’s mom died from plague (um, sad, but who cares?) and he had to leave their former home. Yeah, Maurice sure is overprotective, letting Belle wander the village unescorted, leaving her alone for long stretches of time and entrusting the care of the farm to her, nurturing her love for reading, supporting her individuality, and not pressuring her to get married. Jeez, Maurice, cut the damn apron strings. Also, there’s nothing heroic or even that admirable about doing the only sensible thing. I wouldn’t praise someone who remembered to feed their kids or pay their taxes on time, so what’s so great about Maurice getting his infant daughter the hell out of a plague infested house? To quote Chris Rock: "You're supposed to, ya dumb motherf***er!" 

We’re supposed to cheer for Lefou turning against Gaston... even though it’s less seeing the error of his ways and more “why doesn’t Gaston like me? I’m a nice guy!” 

Now, lest you think I'm just a big ol' Negative Nancy, here is a quick list of things I liked about the movie:

Dan Stevens as the Beast: Matthew Crawley, who knew?! Stevens was the absolute highlight for me. He is the only actor who knows what movie he's in, the only one having any real fun, and the only one who breathes some heart and soul in this mess. He's an absolute joy from beginning to end. I didn't even mind the Beast "man-splaining" to Belle how overrated "Romeo and Juliet" is, because, well, it is.

I'll grudgingly admit I like the opening scene (Stevens is clearly having the time of his life as a loathsome popinjay). I also like that they expand on the spell, so that there is an international memory wipe of the prince, the castle, and its inhabitants, that it's always winter but never Christmas... oh, no, wait, that's Narnia.

Chip's introduction is super cute, reminiscent of a Looney Tunes episode.

The scene where Belle calms her horse so the Beast can pet him is really sweet. It's a direct ripoff of a scene from Robin McKinley's Beauty, but I needed to be reminded of something good at that point, so I'll let it slide.

I genuinely liked the character design for the servants. I always wondered how or if they could pull it off, and at least they did that much.

The new songs are forgettable... except for "Evermore". Now this was a return to form, absolutely lovely, and one of the rare Disney songs that capture how simultaneously wonderful and painful love can be. I don't regret buying the single, because Josh Groban sings the hell out of it, and I love the familiar motif that plays throughout.

Edited April 16, 2017 by Wiendish Fitch

[Grace284]

8 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

The Enchantress plays a much bigger part than in the original... to the irreparable detriment to the narrative. By expanding her role, the mysterious, morally ambiguous specter from the original now comes off as way more villainous and horrible than she should, while at the same time less interesting. This also ruins the overall tension of the story and what should have been the most heartbreaking part of the climax, because it gives the impression that she was just screwing with everyone. The rose, the crucial ticking clock... doesn't matter. She can just waive the conditions of the curse on her own?! Lady, innocent people suffered because of you! I hate to say it, but you're the real monster here!!

 

Every time I think about the movie a new terrible thing about The Enchantress occurs to me. Cursing the servants for not telling their prince to be nicer was bad enough, but she made it so that when the last petal falls their fate is to become inanimate forever? Are they still sentient? Do they just die?  That's so much worse than The Beast's punishment! Sure he stays looking like a GoatBear, but at least he's alive, not dead or trapped for eternity in the form of a teapot, unable to speak or move.

Edited April 16, 2017 by Grace284

[Wiendish Fitch]

51 minutes ago, Grace284 said:

Every time I think about the movie a new terrible thing about The Enchantress occurs to me. Cursing the servants for not telling their prince to be nicer was bad enough, but she made it so that when the last petal falls their fate is to become inanimate forever? Are they still sentient? Do they just die?  That's so much worse than The Beast's punishment! Sure he stays looking like a GoatBear, but at least he's alive, not dead or trapped for eternity in the form of a teapot, unable to speak or move.

Right? And why curse poor Chip and the dog?! What did they do to deserve it?! Dammit, by expanding her reasons for cursing them, you make her seem worse, not better!

I can't believe the writers thought they could "improve" Belle and make her stronger; they not only fail at that, all they do is make her weaker and less interesting. So they made Belle the inventor. Does it play into the plot in any other significant way than that one unremarkable scene? Is it a Chekhov's gun that comes up later? Or maybe she further wins the Beast's heart by inventing something that helps him or the palace inhabitants out? Nope! It's completely, utterly pointless! Also, in the climactic scene where she and her father are escaping from the prison wagon, does she cunningly plan the escape in such an astonishingly clever way that Steve McQueen would weep with envy? Nope! She just hands her dad a damn hairpin to pick the lock! Belle's usefulness is officially on the same level as Golden Age Lois Lane or Sweet Polly Purebred from the old Underdog show! Belle finds out that her mom died from plague, does this inform or shape her character in any way, shape or form? NEEE-YOPE! It's just there! Cause, I guess, it bothers people that we don't know why Belle's mom's dead (show of hands: how many of you guys actually care?). Funny, when I first watched the original as a kid, I just figured, "eh, mom probably died in childbirth or something. Ah, well."

Edited April 16, 2017 by Wiendish Fitch

[Matt K]

9 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I realize I’m a month late posting this. I wasn’t sure anyone cared about my opinion, and I honestly feel a little foolish for anticipating this movie. But I had to get this off my chest. I plan to be long-winded, so read on at your peril.

You might enjoy this video then, you are definitely not alone with those gripes. 

 

[Grace284]

11 hours ago, Matt K said:

You might enjoy this video then, you are definitely not alone with those gripes. 

 

I don't always agree with Rob and Doug but I have to admire their passion.

"I thought Lumiere and Cogsworth were okay."

"NO!"

Edited April 17, 2017 by Grace284

[Spartan Girl]

On 4/16/2017 at 10:15 AM, Wiendish Fitch said:

Maurice is allegedly an overprotective father because Belle’s mom died from plague (um, sad, but who cares?) and he had to leave their former home. Yeah, Maurice sure is overprotective, letting Belle wander the village unescorted, leaving her alone for long stretches of time and entrusting the care of the farm to her, nurturing her love for reading, supporting her individuality, and not pressuring her to get married. Jeez, Maurice, cut the damn apron strings. Also, there’s nothing heroic or even that admirable about doing the only sensible thing. I wouldn’t praise someone who remembered to feed their kids or pay their taxes on time, so what’s so great about Maurice getting his infant daughter the hell out of a plague infested house? To quote Chris Rock: "You're supposed to, ya dumb motherf***er!" 

I don't think that's what they meant by that.  Maurice wasn't overprotective in the usual sense; I interpreted it as him using the fear of plague as the very reason why he and Belle stayed in that awful village for so long, despite the fact that they were ostracized by their narrow-minded neighbors.  I mean, most people in that position would have moved a long time ago, but to Maurice, it was better to stay in the country where there was less chance of getting the plague.  Yeah, in the cartoon, Maurice was planning to ditch the town once and for all if his new invention was a success.  Still, I always wondered why they stayed there so long.

And yes, getting Belle out of Paris was the only sensible option, so maybe it shouldn't be glorified.  All the same, leaving your dying wife behind, despite the fact that she pushed for him, is a terrible thing to live with.  The fact that Maurice refused to talk about it a long time was kind of another way of being "overprotective" because he probably wanted to spare Belle the pain of that knowledge.  But again, that's how I interpreted it.

[Irish Lass]

I saw Beauty and the Beast last weekend and it was fantastic in my opinion. The new songs added were a special touch as well and especially "Days In The Sun" and " Evermore" were outstanding. The performance during the song "Gaston" in was a show stopper in my opinion. Both Josh Gad and Dan Stevens were my favorites in the movie although I think they all did a wonderful job. 

[pezgirl7]

I seriously can't stop listening to Evermore! That song has really grown on me. I predict that it will be nominated for an Oscar, that Josh Groban will sing it at the ceremony, and that it will win Best Original Song! :)

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, pezgirl7 said:

I seriously can't stop listening to Evermore! That song has really grown on me. I predict that it will be nominated for an Oscar, that Josh Groban will sing it at the ceremony, and that it will win Best Original Song! :)

Or Dan Stevens!

[pezgirl7]

39 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Or Dan Stevens!

Since they deepened Dan's voice, and probably auto-tuned him, I just can't see them having Dan perform live. From interviews I have seen, I don't think he would be comfortable with that. I'm not even sure what his voice sounds like live!

[NUguy514]

I saw this and was left pretty cold by it.  All it made me do was go home, watch the 1991 version, and cry through much of it (it's one of my all-time favorite films).

Emma Watson seems like a cool person, and I love how smart she is and how involved she is with various causes.  However, I just don't think she's a good actress, and it bums me out to write that.

I am very much of the opinion that Josh Gad should be heard but never seen on camera because he is always playing to the goddamn balcony with his goddamn facial expressions, and I CAN'T WITH HIM.  I wish I'd been able to see him in The Book of Mormon on Broadway, I loved him as Olaf, but I've never liked him in any live-action TV show or movie I've seen him in.

Audra McDonald should've been Mrs. Potts, although the CGI seemed to rob all of the enchanted staff of any personality at all for me.

Dan Stevens was terrific, though; I really loved him in this and thought he was the real bright spot.

I will say that I went with a whole group of friends, and most of them really enjoyed the film.  One of my friends, though, who actually works at Disney in a well-paying job, HATED this.  He, like me, is a huge fan of the animated version, and he was so disappointed by this.  We were the only two in our group, though, who didn't really like it.

[Mazz]

I took my 5 year old daughter to see this when it first came out and she is quite the antsy one, but during this movie she sat there mesmerized the entire time with a huge smile on her face. She still dances around the house as Belle and singing the songs. For me of course the original animated movie that came out when I was 1 years old has a lot of meaning for me as I grew up with it and it is my favorite Disney animated movie. Angela Lansbury as Mrs. Potts in the animated film is just awesome. Also Emma Watson voice does not compare to Paige O'Hara, but Emma did a wonderful job. Dan Stevens, Ewan McGregor, Luke Evans, and Josh Gad were all fantastic. I also loved all the new additions to the musical numbers.

Edited April 19, 2017 by Mazz

[Browncoat]

I saw this again last night and still love it.  Perhaps I'm not as attached to the 1991 version as some are, though I love that one, too.

[Bruinsfan]

On 4/16/2017 at 6:07 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

Or maybe she further wins the Beast's heart by inventing something that helps him or the palace inhabitants out?

I'd think inventing some kind of handled currycomb he could use to painlessly remove tangles from fur would have made him fall in love a lot sooner.

[ExplainItAgain]

I just saw this - can't believe it's still in theaters. Not only that, but the theater was packed!

I'm one of the few that's never seen the animated movie. Of course I'm familiar with the story and the songs but for some reason just never had an interest in seeing it.

I LOVED this version. I thought Dan did a good job as the beast and I'm a big fan of Ewan singing so Be Our Guest was one of my favorites.

I spent a long time wondering where I had seen the actress who played the Enchantress before - finally dawned on me that she was Elinor in Sense & Sensibility!

The yellow dress was gorgeous and moved beautifully during the dance.

Glad I got to see this on the big screen - probably won't be in the theaters much longer.

[pezgirl7]

On 5/13/2017 at 6:57 PM, ExplainItAgain said:

I spent a long time wondering where I had seen the actress who played the Enchantress before - finally dawned on me that she was Elinor in Sense & Sensibility!

That's funny, because at first I thought you were referring to the movie Sense and Sensibility, in which Elinor was played by Emma Thompson (Mrs. Potts). But I googled it, and Hattie Morahan also played Elinor, but in the Masterpiece Theater version.

Disney has released the entire "Belle" scene online: https://twitter.com/beourguest/status/864129631535943681

Also, the DVD is released on June 6, and you can see a little preview of the special features, including the table read, which I am really looking forward to! https://twitter.com/beourguest/status/863031277724807169

[ExplainItAgain]

2 minutes ago, pezgirl7 said:

That's funny, because at first I thought you were referring to the movie Sense and Sensibility, in which Elinor was played by Emma Thompson (Mrs. Potts). But I googled it, and Hattie Morahan also played Elinor, but in the Masterpiece Theater version.

Oh yes, I love both versions but I just recently saw the Masterpiece Theater version so it was top of my mind. And Dan Stevens was in that version too.

[Conotocarious]

On 5/15/2017 at 6:27 PM, ExplainItAgain said:

Oh yes, I love both versions but I just recently saw the Masterpiece Theater version so it was top of my mind. And Dan Stevens was in that version too.

I love both versions too but the Masterpiece theater one is undeniably more faithful to the book. I saw it all on Youtube last year and I thought it was amazing. And I loved the cast except I preferred Greg Wise as Willoughby because I thought he was much better looking than the MT Willoughby.

Edited May 22, 2017 by Conotocarious

[Dejana]

Behind the scenes footage of Dan Stevens before the CGI. Perhaps I've been underrating Emma as an actress all this time! :)

 

[piequinn35]

Love it! the song beauty and the beast always gets me, I always fight not to cry when I hear it lol!

[Spartan Girl]

Got it on Blu-Ray and watched it last night.  There are some pretty good special features, including a look at the pre-shooting table read, for which they went all out.  The part where Emma Watson actually stood up to do the waltz with the Beast stand-in while Emma Thompson got up to do the song was the best part.

Among the deleted scenes was a character named Monsieur Toilette, who...well, I think you can figure that one out.  Ew.

There was an alternate version of "Days in the Sun," featuring a different young Prince interacting with his mother, as well as the Beast getting an extra lyric or two.  It was beautiful, but Bill Condon felt he had to redo it because test audiences apparently thought the Queen looked too much like the Enchantress.  They were different actresses, it was just one of those unfortunate coincidences.  Personally, I didn't think it was a big deal, but whatever.

On another note, Ewan McGregor apparently has never seen the original cartoon -- despite the fact that he has FOUR daughters.  In a weird way, I think this worked in his favor.  He just cut loose and had fun with the role of Lumiere, making it his own.

[Jediknight]

Just saw it on Blu Ray.

I liked it.  Everybody involved did excellent in their roles, and yeah, this movie has the Production Design Oscar locked up.  There's not even a question that it's got that Oscar locked up.

I liked the change to LeFou's character.  He's no longer the sadistic sidekick of Gaston, the decision to show him growing disillusioned with Gaston, and having him realize that Gaston was a monster was a fantastic decision.  Belle getting to do more in the final battle was a nice change.  Having the librarian look around in surprise at how Gaston was getting everybody riled up was another nice addition, he and LeFou were the only ones who realized that everything Gaston was saying was bullshit, wouldn't lead to anything good, and that Belle was right.

[absnow54]

The 1991 version was playing on FreeForm this past weekend, and it actually made me appreciate the 2017 version more. I think the musical numbers in the animated version are still superior (the unnatural scaling of the anthropomorphic appliances helped and brighter color scheme helped) but the story is much tighter in the 2017 version. They did a good job of filling in the "hey, wait..." plot holes that I never questioned when I was a child, but are blaringly obvious now.