Love of ‘Beauty and the Beast’ is built in and bulletproof

Back in the halcyon days of the video market, Disney came up with the ingenious strategy of releasing the classics from its film cinematic library for a tiny window (about once a decade or so). Once digital releases overthrew the VHS market, this practice was a little more difficult from a profit perspective.

Never one to miss an opportunity to squeeze a few more dollars out of an opportunity for nostalgia, Disney began cranking out real-actor adaptations of its beloved animated catalog. Starting back in 1996 with Glenn Close taking the role of proud puppy hater Cruella De Vil, Disney has produced a number of these human variations on older classics.

Results may vary, from stunning (last year’s “The Jungle Book”) to sad (2010’s “Alice in Wonderland”). But each has seemed to land large at the box office (minus last year’s lovely “Pete’s Dragon,” which technically was not based on a fully animated film), so expect the Mouse House to manufacture even more live-action adaptations in the near future ( “Cruella,” yet another “101 Dalmatians” riff, another “Maleficent,” and “Jungle Book,” “Pinocchio,” “The Lion King,” “Dumbo,” “Mulan,” “Tinker Bell,” and “Aladdin” are all currently in the works).  

So it comes as little surprise that they would attempt to cash in on their pride and joy, “Beauty and Beast,” for just such a treatment. After all, it was the first animated film to earn a Best Picture Oscar and launched a popular stage version since its release in the 1980s.

Disney enlisted some heavy hitters for the job, including director Bill Condon (who wrote “Chicago” for the screen and directed the acclaimed “Dreamgirls”), original lyricist Tim Rice to craft some new numbers for the version, “Harry Potter” alum Emma Watson for the lead, and an all-star cast with names such as Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, and Kevin Kline.

The love for this film (regardless of its final product) is built in and bulletproof. No number of attacks from critical arrows could pierce its armor. And while there are certainly a number of admirable aspects to this version, I think time will not be as kind to this as it is to the animated version, which still holds up well. And I suppose that is what is so frustrating/limiting about this version: the fact that it adheres so doggedly to its animated predecessor without taking advantage of its real-world liberation.

From the anthropomorphic knickknacks scattered around the house to the design of costumes and sets, it veers very little from its two-dimensional brethren. Ironically, that pen-and-ink version still manages to contain more depth, as there is a hollowness to the proceedings that this film fails to escape.

It’s lively (though inexplicably longer), and follows almost the exact pawprints of the animated version, but it feels padded with all the extra time tacked on. Most distracting, perhaps, is the decision to make Beast a CGI creation, when the character could have easily been handled by a human actor. In the first few scenes, you can see the attention to detail, but after a while, there is a certain rubbery quality that overcomes the role, and it is hard to see him as anything but a digital creation. In fact, there is so much digital landscape and computer-generated characters that this could almost qualify as an animated picture.

This need for replication tends to weigh down scenes that are supposed to soar; for example, the timeless “Be Our Guest” lumbers toward its conclusion here. But where it counts most is the very heart of the tale: the connection between Belle and Beast (played by Dan Stevens in the human form). When the fully digitized Beast abounds throughout the third act, it’s often more distracting to see the two interact, as it never feels like there is an actual “being” next to Belle.

This will all mean nothing to those who revel in the chance to witness the film on the big screen again with their children and sing along with the memorized tunes, but for those who are going in expecting new wizardry to be found in this version, this “Beauty” is a bust.