By Melissa Antoinette Garza
This weekend, I have the privilege of going to see the new Disney live-action BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (2017) with some of my favorite people in the world. My sister-in-law Dani, who has great taste in books and movies, spoke very highly of it, so I’m anticipating it quite a bit.
In the meantime, I thought it would be interesting to watch other non-Disney adaptations, to examine the similarities and differences between each production. Currently on Amazon, the 2014 French film LA BELLE ET LA BETE is available for rent or purchase and is dubbed in English for American audiences. As the story was written by the French novelist Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve in 1740, I thought where better to start than with one from the same country as the original author.
The first notable difference is that LA BELLE ET LA BETE is rated PG-13 whereas the Disney counterpart is, of course, PG and oriented toward family audiences. France is known to be far less conservative with sensuality, nudity and sex. There are times when studios will make a lower-budget alternative to a big screen flick. More often than not, this occurs with family pictures (e.g. KUNG FU PANDA [2008] and THE LITTLE PANDA FIGHTER [2008] or UP [2009] and WHAT’S UP [2009]). It’s important to recognize that LA BELLE ET LA BETE is not one of these money grabs. It was made in 2014, was not created as a response to the Disney version, and most significant is not for young children. On Amazon, the title is in English and reads simply BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, which does have the potential to confuse those who are not eagle-eyed.
I’ve seen many reimaginations and retellings, but this is certainly quite different than any of those. LA BELLE ET LA BETE is narrated by a woman relaying the fairy-tale to her two young children. It begins when A widowed merchant (Andre Dussollier), finds himself with six children and suddenly poorer than ever before. He moves from a large estate to a small house.
One of his children, Belle (Lea Seydoux), who is the most optimistic of the bunch, isn’t disheartened with the change. Her optimism is tested when her father steals a rose from a magical castle he finds in the forest. The castle is owned by the Beast (Vincent Cassel) who threatens to kill Belle’s family if her father doesn’t become his servant.
Rather than having the family lose their father, Belle offers herself in place of the Beast. He accepts the proposal. Romance slowly blooms between the two though the Beast admits his affection far before Belle concedes she feels the same way.
Overall, there is a lot to be said for the production. The acting by all parties is fantastic. Both Belle and the Beast are likable and the viewer will undoubtedly root for the two to be together. Eduardo Noriega is easy to hate as villain Perducas. He carries a level of undeserved arrogance that Noriega channels brilliantly.
At times, the visuals are amazing and help aid in telling the story as much as the dialogue. The utilization of dark colors and nightfall brings forth the bleakness of both the Beast and Perducas. Contrastingly, the magical rays of light and the moments of sunshine emanates the optimism that lives within Belle and that which is being awaken in the Beast. Ice and water are also cleverly employed to create atmosphere and convey the emotion of the characters. The scenery makes the words spoken, all the more, effective.
That said, there are moments that the CGI and special effects are less than stellar. For example, a pack of whimsical, cartoonish, dogs stand out in the worst way possible. They look like they should be in THE SECRET LIFE OF PETS (2016) and not running around the Beast’s castle.
Another bone of contention is the overall look of the Beast. This is not a slight on Cassel as he is terrific in every capacity. His talent shines through the unrealistic appearance. He displays both the abrasive and sympathetic sides simultaneously. Still, if anything hindered the romantic connection between Belle and the Beast it was the blatant artificiality of the design. To be fair, I was not impressed with the look of Disney’s new Beast either. In fact, the only time I recall enjoying the look of a live-action version of the Beast was in the 1980s TV show.
One other slight pet peeve within the film surrounded the amount of dream sequences Belle had. The dreams are used to share a backstory of the Beast, but it was overdone and didn’t add much. They certainly could have been shortened as the running time is nearly 2 hours.
With those minor annoyances aside, LA BELLE ET LA BETE is a fun romantic adventure. It doesn’t have the same re-watch ability as the animated Disney feature, but it is most certainly worth a rent.
Scared Stiff Rating: 6.5/10
