"Just a thought -- Wouldn't the general market for this be the much younger demographics? Would the quality of singing be as important as it would be for more mature-type musicals?"
I think it would get treated the same as any other musical film. As it should. The Broadway musical is a bit darker than the cartoon, Gaston slaps Belle in the face. Yes it's a cartoon, but it's been proven that anyone can sit down and fall in love with the film (and stage musical) young and old.
Besides, if it were just for kids, do you really think all these adults would be commenting on this thread? Everyone loves Beauty and the Beast.
Countdown til Jordan comes on raging about how much loves me! 3..2..1...
Although, by itself, the animated movie stood on its own with the Oscar voters ( who are decidedly not young) - having been nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.
Oh agreed it definitely stands on it's own. However, I've always slightly preferred the original Broadway musical. Everything is just more fleshed out.
Regarding the songs - I would love it if they kept "No Matter what". It's such a great moment between Belle and her father. It will likely get cut though. I actually think they might keep "If I can't love her'. It fleshes out the Beast. Depending on how Good Emma's vocals are, I would think they would keep "home" or write an entirely new song. I doubt "A change in me" will survive and I pray they keep "Human Again".
Countdown til Jordan comes on raging about how much loves me! 3..2..1...
This is really exciting! I saw the touring production (that I hear pales in comparison to the Broadway one), and it was a magical experience!
Emma Watson is an excellent choice for Belle!
Gaston- Chris Pine or James Marsden (may be "been there done that" though)
Beast- I don't know. I a lot of the choices in the thread are too old. I read a response in the thread saying that with movie magic they could make them look young "like Into the Woods". I must say that Streep looked very young in Into the Woods, and that was due to a combination of an excellent costume, herself and mannerisms, and the blue lighting...nothing else, I think. However, that worked for her character....she was not playing a love interest to someone 20 years younger than her. Like, Hugh Jackman? He could pass for Watson's father. *shrugs*
I don't know how they would do the objects...CGI probably. I agree with NPH as Lumiere...how about Timothy Spall as Cogsworth? Yes? No? Maybe so?
"It will probably be easier to adapt than into the woods because Disney won't be trying to get rid of act 2 in this one"
Now that I think about it, Kendrick could have made a good Belle. It would have been 'been there done that' but she could have pulled it off. Emmy Rossum would have been great also.
Countdown til Jordan comes on raging about how much loves me! 3..2..1...
Stoked for this film, and even more excited with the casting of Emma. I hope they keep 'Home' in as well as 'Change in Me' but I think it follows the animated film pretty close.
Bilbo, I was thinking this yesterday too. TBH, I would not be surprised if they came to Anna before Emma and Anns turned it down because she's taking a break in musicals.
As harsh as it sound Anna Kendrick wouldn't suit Belle, she is too plain, she has an allure about Her but she certainly isn't the great beauty that the village gush about.
In my personal opinion I think Anna is a hilarious person and talented vocalist, but her acting always comes off very stiff to me. Often times I feel like she's "acting."
That's not harsh, Mrtrobz. You're just speaking your opinion. I feel the same way about Emma. I've never really thought she was believable enough to be the prettiest girl in town. She always played the girl next door in her films and even then, I've always thought she was the weakest out of the 3 in Harry Potter and perks of being a wallflower. I'm not sure she will be able to lead the film, but we will see.
Countdown til Jordan comes on raging about how much loves me! 3..2..1...
I have no idea of his background other than currently being on a VH1 scripted series, but Craig Horner would do really well as the Prince, appearance-wise.
Well, I think the attraction to Belle is a combination of her looks and the "peculiar" quality about her. She's not like the other girls in the town who obsess over Gaston and their looks. Belle seems to be more concerned with books...somehow this enhances her beauty.
I can totally picture her in the iconic yellow costume as she descends down the stairs...
As for Lumiere...shouldn't he be smooth and suave?
Craig Horner was on one of my favorite summer shows a couple of years ago called "Legend of the Seeker". It lasted two seasons. Its very good if you want a fun fantasy series to watch.
"I think lying to children is really important, it sets them off on the right track" -Sherie Rene Scott-
Hopefully they'll fix the time problems they had in the original movie. During Be Our Guest, Lumiere reveals that the castle has been cursed for ten years. If the prince is about to turn 21 that means that he was only eleven years old when the curse began, despite being portrayed as an adult in the stained glass images shown during the prologue and in the portrait.
They can fix that whole issue by just taking that line out of the song.
Or they make the spell last for 5 years and change his age to 24.
About Ryan Gosling, I would love to hear more of his singing but I do like his sound. He has this wonderful old fashioned gentle vibrato going on that reminds me of Prince Philip in Sleeping Beauty, or the old films from the 30's/40's and 50's.
Didn't they remove the 21yo clause from the musical? The spell was only permanent by the time the last rose petal fell. Terrence Mann was clearly not 21 when they did the show.