"And Dave, we get it; you didn't like the Les Mis film. Now can you please stop mentioning it in every single thread pertaining to movie musicals? "
I just used it as an example as to why it is a good thing to give a non-singer no extra songs.
About the other subject, they did record many songs of Cinderella, which they did not use in the film. I almost heard the whole un-used Disney soundtrack during the title roll.
Ian McKellen talked to Collider briefly about the film and he mentionef at the end that Cogsworth dances with his WIFE!!! My guess would his on-screen wife is Audra McDonald as The Wardrobe....
I was very surprised by that aswell, but after reading this on the movie blog...
"McKELLEN: Unfortunately not, no. They’re using a variety of techniques, but the Cogsworth Clock, that has all been choreographed without me. I’ve added my voice to the picture, and the other way around, and then there is a big scene at the end where everybody comes back to life, and the prince is restored and I go back to being the majordomo and my wife appears and we dance together. So that was my big contribution to the film: being in the big dance scene. So, no. I wanted to be the clock, but I couldn’t. But my voice will be heard! And my face will eventually be seen!"
LINK = http://beautyandthebeastmovienews.blogspot.co.uk
it is making me even more excited for this movie. They are picking out those special movie moments (from the 1991 movie) for this new adaptation, which is making it feel more wonderful for everybody to look forward to including myself.
"Disney could have hired so much better, look wise. Better than Redmayne as Gaston...eek"
I agree as far as the Gaston character goes. I mean, Luke Evans is perfect, but I think Dan Stevens has been perfectly cast as the Beast aswell. Dan is very handsome, he can certainly act in a serious role, none of us have heard him sing in anything yet, but i think he will charm the socks off us all in "Beauty & The Beast". If he could do it to thousands of female viewers playing Matthew Crawley in Downton, he can certainly put it off in this role. When he is being interviewed, he has got the softest and quietest speaking voice that the character of the Beast has (nearing the end of the film when falling in love with Belle) and the Beast has also got a warm and gentle soul that I also think Dan Stevens has. Plus...his eyes are icy blue which is THE trademark of the Beast. I think we could have done with a better Lumiere, but hey ho......
"I agree, while I have big doubts on Dan as the beast and his acting capabilities, he does have the perfect look for the transformed Prince Luke Evans im not sure on either but he definately a better fit than Eddie "
Luke Evans is perfect for Gaston. As well as Josh Gad (LeFou), he is the only principal cast member in this film that can sing...
I know I've seen him in musicals here in the UK. He is a bland actor and is the same in everything I've seen him in. I hope he brings some charisma finally
"I know I've seen him in musicals here in the UK. He is a bland actor and is the same in everything I've seen him in. I hope he brings some charisma finally "
I agree about the "bland actor" as he was a bit like that in Tamara Drewe, but that was his first feature film after all of his theatre work. I really liked him inThe Hobbit films. He has vastly improved in his acting since Tamara Drewe, but as far as the singing goes, I think he's really good. As far as the charisma goes for Gaston, I think he will do fab and he obviously has the charm for the character. He has gone from being a complete unknown to being one of the hottest and sort after hollywood stars of today. I think the pairing of him and Josh Gad together as Gaston and LeFou in this film, will be amazing.
From all reports it sounds like they could just shoot the human characters (Watson, Kline, Gad et al.) and insert them with the original film's inanimate characters, with re-dubbed voices, until the end when the inanimate characters become human again and we see McKellan, Thompson, McDonald et al. come to life. The original movie is beautifully animated. Why would they redo it?
"From all reports it sounds like they could just shoot the human characters (Watson, Kline, Gad et al.) and insert them with the original film's inanimate characters, with re-dubbed voices, until the end when the inanimate characters become human again and we see McKellan, Thompson, McDonald et al. come to life. The original movie is beautifully animated. Why would they redo it?"
where have you read this?
Another photo has been uploaded by Luke Evans on WhoSay of another day of shooting...
I'll be at the Disney D23 convention in a couple of weeks and I plan on going to the Live Action panel and will be sure to report back if they show something.
"I'll be at the Disney D23 convention in a couple of weeks and I plan on going to the Live Action panel and will be sure to report back if they show something."
Awesome. If you can, get some pictures and upload them onto here. Do you think they would have something from there on the internet? video, pictures, etc...? i hope so.
Not sure if a teaser will be anytime soon... Isn't it still about 20 months away? (March '17) Teasers generally aren't further out than about 12-months max.
Yeah, I wouldn't expect to see anything any time soon. MAYBE a poster by the end of the year? BATB is following the schedule Cinderella did with filming over a year in advance. With Cindy, we got that teaser 10 months in advance. I think last year, though, at one Disney's events, they showed a clip of Cinderella way before they released anything official, so you never know.
I wouldn't even be excited for a teaser. It's likely going to be like the Cinderella one, except this time it's of the rose, and maybe a petal falling off.
I think, at least we will get from D23, are the first stills & official looks on the objects with Emma Watson, performing. I doubt we will get a trailer