Ralph Says BEAUTY AND THE BEAST Plays It Safe, But Is Magical Nonetheless.

Share Button




The original “Beauty And The Beast” is one of the best animated films ever. Its story is timeless and captures the relationship between Belle and the Beast perfectly. Walking into this live-action telling, I was hoping for the story to add new elements while keeping the core story the same.

My biggest positive is how Director Bill Condon captured the magic and the romance of the original film. It’s not easy to capture what someone else did while also adding your own personal spark, so on that front, I was impressed.


One other positive I have is the casting. Emma Watson and Dan Stevens nailed it as Belle and The Beast. They perfectly embodied what I wanted from the characters while also giving them personality and charm. Props to the Casting Director Lucy Bevan for bringing these characters to life.

While I did enjoy this film, it’s by no means perfect. What I would like to have seen played out differently is the overall story. I liked that it had the same structure, but wish that some of the events would’ve played out in a more original way. This isn’t a huge negative because I really liked the film. That being said, having more original ideas could have separated this from the classic Animated film.


One last gripe I have isn’t a story or character flaw, but a character design issue. The Beast, for my taste, looked horrendous. When I’m judging special effects, I ask myself if the character looks human/animal like, or if I can tell that CGI was used. Dan Steven’s Beast looked computer generated, and was frankly designed poorly.


“Beauty And The Beast” does its job of re-telling of the classic 1991 Animated film. It captures the magic and wonder of the original. My main issue was that it was very safe in telling the story and didn’t have original ideas.

FINAL WORD: StarStarStarHalf StarEmpty Star