Official "Beauty & the Beast" Film Adaptation Thread — Page 46

one of the busiest-looking film posters i've ever seen. why do they need everyone's face on it?? plus why even show the servants in their human form?

Am inclined to agree with you gypsy101 - it just looks like an technical exercise in Photoshop without any creative flair or anything coming close to the striking bold beauty of the original animation designs. Or even the musical logo.

That wig tally is too damned high...

gypsy101 said: "one of the busiest-looking film posters i've ever seen. why do they need everyone's face on it?? plus why even show the servants in their human form?



"

I feel like we're going to get a couple of flashbacks/moments early in the film where we see their human form, so that we can connect the physical person to the enchanted object. In the original film, everyone was animated, so I feel like you could get away with not showing their human forms until the end, but here I feel like it helps to see their human form so that we can see the human qualities in their enchanted forms.

Not sure if that makes sense, but just my rambles lol.

Emma's tone and power sound better, but the way how she sings the Reprise is kind of odd. She's talking the lyrics?

Updated On: 1/8/17 at 09:49 PM

I don't like it, it bugs me. Her voice is shaky as hell and weak.

^THIS

No matter if the live action of BATB sucks or not, the only thing that matters that that we have Josh Gad as Lefou, Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts, and Audra ****ing McDonald

Updated On: 1/8/17 at 11:07 PM

JennH said: "I'm truly beginning to mourn when movie musicals had casts that could sing as well as dance when needed. "

usually back in the day they had people dub the singing actually

I think what's saddest is you know Disney wants a perfect sound and so they've auto tuned her past pitch correction and it just doesn't sound like a natural voice at all. I mean why not change the key even? Maybe she sounds better lower perhaps?

In her defense Paige O'Hara practically speaks those last few words too. I'm less disturbed about the autotune or her singing style and more about the crazy weird mood they went for in this ad. Is it a romance about the beauty within or a horror movie.

Also the boring looking shot of Belle actually singing the number. That song in the animated movie is so exhilarating with the sunset and the angles and that big field she runs into. I guess they could have had that kind of exciting shot before that one but i don't know.

Updated On: 1/9/17 at 12:13 AM

Sad to say that new trailer lost me too. The whole thing looks overproduced, over CGI'd and tacky. And Ms. Watson, bless her, even with that painful autotuning doesn't sound good. I don't think any big star today would allow themselves to be dubbed in a movie musical (the exception of course, being Minnie Driver in The Phantom of the Opera, since it was obvious they weren't ever going to find a true movie star who could sing that role) but the studios would never would have allowed Watson's level of singing to be permitted in the musicals of yesteryear, and I do think its a shame that is is now not only acceptable, but the standard in movie musicals today.

Updated On: 1/9/17 at 12:21 AM

Keep in mind that these are her isolated vocals without the final orchestra track. It was edited to fit into a 30 second clip with cheesy trailer orchestrations. I had a feeling they'd debut some singing during the Globes tonight, but I wish it was a fully realized version from the final film.

I saw previews of this movie over the weekend. And while I like Emma Watson just fine as an actress, watching that preview just depressed me. There is no reason for this movie to exist. My daughter agreed, but said Watson seemed well cast. My response: "Can she sing?"

Seeing it made me want to see the original version. Seems like a big waste of everyone's time, even if they presumably can make money on it.