Is the live-action version of 'Beauty and the Beast' any good? | The Tylt
The highly anticipated live-action version of "Beauty and the Beast" hits theaters on March 17. Beasties are ecstatic about the retelling of the Disney animated classic. Critics argue the remake is exactly the same as the original and doesn't add any new substance other than being live action. Is "Beauty and the Beast" a pointless remake? 🎥🌹
Is the live-action version of 'Beauty and the Beast' any good?
According to IMDB:
An adaptation of the Disney fairy tale about a monstrous-looking prince and a young woman who fall in love.
The film holds an average fresh rating of 68 percent on Rotten Tomatoes. Do you think it's worth seeing?
NPR's Andrew Lapin wrote there's nothing really that special about "Beauty and the Beast" in live action.
In contrast, Beauty's chief directive is not to conjure wonder, but nostalgia — in service of a generation trying to meme its childhood back from the enchanted castle of the past. There must be more than this provincial life.
Rolling Stone's Peter Travers gave the film three out of four stars.
Emma Watson, Dan Stevens and an army of all-star voices do justice to animated landmark – even if some magic is M.I.A.
Just by watching the trailer, some detractors determined the live-action film is a boring, exact replica of the Disney animated classic.
Now I'm 110% convinced that Beauty and the Beast is gonna be the most pointless remake, and it's gonna be a carbon copy of the original film— Mike Kobela (@MikeTheKobbler) November 14, 2016
Defenders are praising the film as living up to the hype.
Just been to see Beauty & The Beast. It was beauty and the best. 👏🌹— Tony Shepherd (@tonysheps) March 17, 2017