sign in
register
Watch
Disney Plus Apple TV Google Play Movies
+6
Beauty and the Beast
Disney Plus Apple TV Google Play Movies
+6
JustWatch
Remove ads

Beauty and the Beast

2017
Romance
Musical
2h 9m
An adaptation of the classic fairy-tale about a monstrous prince and a young woman who fall in love. (imdb)
Directed by:
Bill Condon Bill Condon
Written by:
Evan Spiliotopoulos Evan Spiliotopoulos Stephen Chbosky Stephen Chbosky
+1 more
Starring:
Kevin Kline Kevin Kline Ian McKellen Ian McKellen Ewan McGregor Ewan McGregor Stanley Tucci Stanley Tucci Emma Thompson Emma Thompson Emma Watson Emma Watson Josh Gad Josh Gad Dan Stevens Dan Stevens Haydn Gwynne Luke Evans Luke Evans Gugu Mbatha-Raw Gugu Mbatha-Raw Sonoya Mizuno Sonoya Mizuno
More
Genres:
Romance, Musical, Family/Kids, Fantasy
Country:
USA
Language:
English
imdb More information at IMDb
See title update history
Suggest an edit
Show Less
Your probable score
?

Beauty and the Beast

2017
Romance
Musical
2h 9m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 39.58% from 1790 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(1790)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
beedubBeeDub
Rated 25 Mar 2017
75
30th
A dull, plodding, garish do-over of the 1991 classic. Every single aspect of this remake feels rote, mechanical, and uninspired; it's like listening to a cover band that has no understanding of what made the original band fresh and exciting. Utterly unnecessary.
Rated 25 Mar 2017
bowfingerbowfinger
Rated 17 Mar 2017
40
32nd
Another classic made instantly forgettable in the live-action world. Thanks, Disney!
Rated 17 Mar 2017
ytadelYtadel
Rated 31 Mar 2017
3
28th
A soulless exercise in mimicry. Maybe if this exact film came out in a world where the 1991 version never existed I'd be impressed by its songs and characters and story and look. We'll never know. What I do know is that this movie just does all of those things worse than Disney did 26 years ago. Angela Lansbury shits all over Emma Thompson. This isn't even a reimagining with SOME creativity put into it like the recent Cinderella and Jungle Book - just a hollow retread. Bill Condon is an asshole.
Rated 31 Mar 2017
billyshearsBillyShears
Rated 24 Mar 2017
70
53rd
Weird inappropriate subplot where the chamber pot keeps sabotaging the plan.
Rated 24 Mar 2017
davidblastDavidBlast
Rated 26 Nov 2018
50
43rd
It's not a particularly terrible remake. Just remember that supporting something like this means that you'll be seeing a shot for shot remake of 'A New Hope' with a CGI Chewie soon enough.
Rated 26 Nov 2018
mentaculusMentaculus
Rated 29 Mar 2017
36
11th
A violently uninspiring retread, wasting far too much talent in a vain attempt to force a timeless text to be more accessible for the Now. Lighting for 3D, interestingly, created environments flat and uninviting; there are dance sequences where we see no dancing, and songs with no singing. Gad's Lefou, much-lauded as progressive, is merely a regressive caricature we can still look down on, weirdly forced into the narrative for brownie points. Stevens brings the only beauty to this beast.
Rated 29 Mar 2017
adragon91ADragon91
Rated 17 Mar 2017
45
25th
I don't know about you guys, but I was left thinking "What was the bloody point?" and came out feeling underwhelmed as everything felt weaker compared to the 1991 original. Emma Watson is not very good, and they didn't change it enough to make it stand out like The Jungle Book or Pete's Dragon remake.
Rated 17 Mar 2017
nathan_sNathan S
Rated 05 Apr 2017
1
6th
In translating one of their greatest animated classics into live action, Disney has mechanized the magic. A rote, hollow, uninspired retread which begs the question: why, though? Of course, we all know the answer.
Rated 05 Apr 2017
beer94Beer94
Rated 18 Mar 2017
64
48th
Some of the extra exposition and musical numbers are a bit pointless and don't really amount to much, plus it becomes slightly overproduced with jarring CGI on occasion too. It's a very competent adaptation overall though and I admire that they've edited the script/songs to fill in a few plotholes from the animated version. I might be slightly swayed by my nostalgia here, but yeah I quite liked it overall.
Rated 18 Mar 2017
timecapsuleTimeCapsule
Rated 21 Mar 2017
75
75th
This live-action remake of a Disney animated classic is a mixed bag. The movie is at times a shot for shot recreation, but however did attempt to add a few new things. Strangely this film has parallels with Peter Jackson's "King Kong"(2005) remake. Here Disney used a few new songs along side some extra character development and some upgraded exposition to enrich the story. However like the Kong remake the additional scenes as well as the reliance on CGI detracts something from the original magic
Rated 21 Mar 2017
kasperlKasperL
Rated 14 Jul 2017
80
86th
Most reviewers seem to either shrug this movie off or hold a grudge against it, but I thought that it was uniformly excellent.
Rated 14 Jul 2017
leonardisLeonardis
Rated 22 Mar 2017
84
45th
I found this to be a really solid remake of an already endearing classic. My only complaint I have about this was that it felt slightly rushed, at least for me. I'm sure that won't be a problem for anybody else. The visual effects are amazing, the choreography and music was done very well, and the whole movie really is envisioned well. I also liked the additional characters and character development. All of the actors were great in this too. This isn't up there with the original, but it's good!
Rated 22 Mar 2017
bentienbentien
Rated 17 Mar 2017
53
35th
Lavish production that sometimes copies the original animated film 1:1 with bravour, and other times makes fine adjustments to explain some of the plot holes. However, the worst part is the new (and superfluous) songs, the long running time and - not least - the feeling that this film is by no means really necessary.
Rated 17 Mar 2017
ippeiIppei
Rated 03 May 2017
75
73rd
I really enjoyed this film and I thought they showed the right amount of respect, whilst trying to keep it fresh. The plot points they tried to fill were actually quite well done (except for that weird book). Emma Watson is perfect as Belle and the rest of the cast is pretty good too (except why is Ewan McGregor the only one with a French accent? Baffling). Let's be honest though, as soon as the opening score came on, they had me.
Rated 03 May 2017
suture_selfSuture Self
Rated 17 Apr 2017
2
13th
Whenever a new song came on I had to grit my teeth and tightly hold onto my theater chair lest I start screaming as a result of the unbearable musical pain inflicted on my ears. Also, if you make the completely irrational and unjustifiable decision to see this, prepare to be 1) eye gouged by some truly awful CGI and 2) run over by a nostalgia train. This was an empty, pointless, profit-motivated exercise in humiliating everyone involved in the original movie (a movie I actually like very much).
Rated 17 Apr 2017
xakkmasterXakkMaster
Rated 03 Jul 2017
60
29th
Not bad, just totally unnecessary. Unfortunately, Emma Watson as Belle is just too distracting.
Rated 03 Jul 2017
space_popeSpace Pope
Rated 20 Mar 2017
70
51st
It was a really well made, if unnecessary, remake of what may be the most beloved animated film of all time. I've never been particularly enthralled by the Disney magic, so it wasn't anything special to me beyond being a decent romantic musical. But my wife, who holds the original very dear to her heart, absolutely adored it. If nothing else, that's worth something to me.
Rated 20 Mar 2017
frederikaFrederikA
Rated 28 Mar 2017
65
58th
I still struggle to find anything resembling proper artistic justification for Disney's Live-action overhaul of their entire back-catalogue, but ignoring that, this updated version works well enough, and I especially enjoyed the decisively un-Disney character design of the various (in)animated objects.
Rated 28 Mar 2017
corbadCorbad
Rated 19 Mar 2017
65
42nd
An extraordinarily weak story is a foundation upon which no lovely visuals, tiny (tiny) feminist influences, catchy music, and capable performances can sit comfortably. The film may be a nearly perfect live-action recreation of a beloved classic, but in its model lies the horrible flaws and in its recreation lies an enormous missed opportunity.
Rated 19 Mar 2017
matthew_parkinsonMatthew Parkinson
Rated 18 Mar 2017
30
17th
The new Beauty and the Beast is a remake that serves very little purpose except to give everyone a hit of nostalgia and remind us all how great the 1991 version is. In an unforgivable 129 minutes, this movie gives us weak characters, an uninteresting plot, and it can't even produce much of a spectacle when it comes to the musical numbers. It doesn't do anything better than animated version, also does several things far worse, and it doesn't change enough to justify its existence. What a waste.
Rated 18 Mar 2017
indyatmnINDYATMN
Rated 18 Jul 2017
90
88th
It'd be hard to find a blockbuster more unnecessary than this. Not a reboot or a remake, but essentially a live-action-reiteration of 91's animated classic. There's nothing to even update here since 1 of the things that made the original so memorable was Disney's decision to make this particular "princess" fiercely independent & strong-willed the 1st time around. 3 decades later, female characters like Belle are a dime a dozen. Still, for kids who never saw the first 1, this is just as charming.
Rated 18 Jul 2017
mkellinsmkellins
Rated 22 Mar 2017
30
11th
Another unnecessary remake of a Disney movie. All the extra backstory and new songs feel forced and uninspired. I would have loved to see a new take on the story, but sadly they settled for copying the old film. Don't waste your time on this.
Rated 22 Mar 2017
kokoskotekokoskote
Rated 26 May 2017
90
65th
Loved the costumes, choreography, story, visuals, and most of the songs. I was pleasantly surprised by other singing voices too. I liked the new songs as well as the old, but felt that the old songs on the animated version were sung better. Emma Watson makes this really great.
Rated 26 May 2017
thorn969thorn969
Rated 04 Jun 2017
62
63rd
A very nicely done, faithful adaptation of the animated movie. It was fun and beautiful... but somehow, I couldn't get excited for it.
Rated 04 Jun 2017
seethruskinSeethruskin
Rated 03 Apr 2017
4
51st
If you're gonna go out and say a characters cannon gay at least show some penetration!!!!!!
Rated 03 Apr 2017
korteeKortee
Rated 30 Mar 2017
71
72nd
Disney does it again. To think about it it's the opposite story of what Cinderella is and one of the few classic fairytales where prince charming is more than just the looks.
Rated 30 Mar 2017
maddogmaddog
Rated 17 Mar 2017
78
55th
Very uneven in its approach. At times it is visually resplendent, sometimes it has painful CGI rendition. Added exposition feels organic, but then ends up not in later scenes. The mob scene feels very disjointed with the rest of the story. Actors are in the element and out. Emma Watson shines as a worthy Belle, Ewan Macgregor charms as Lumiere, Josh Gad great as Lefou. Ian McKellen, a less enjoyable 'wooden' Cogsworth. Gaston and Maurice's character tweaks are less enjoyable. Original is better.
Rated 17 Mar 2017
mwgerbmwgerb
Rated 07 Jan 2018
52
47th
Retains some but not all of the magic of the original. The additions seem almost universally out of place, but the original parts vary from actor to actor. Emma seems to struggle a bit with the role and the vocals, but Dan Stevens nails the singing and the princely parts of the character, and Luke Evans & Josh Gad make a lively and lovably homoerotic duo.
Rated 07 Jan 2018
luna6ixLuna6ix
Rated 28 Nov 2021
63
19th
I've already made it clear that these CG remakes have no legitimate business existing, but while there is an argument for readapting the same story, with some revisions, it's the complete disposal of classic Disney songs wholly ingrained into generations of people who grew up knowing them, that is the real travesty here.
Rated 28 Nov 2021
htimanhtiman
Rated 29 Mar 2017
70
44th
This is a movie that has no real reason to exist. It does nothing better then the original Disney movie, and it does several things worse (like Belle's singing). Its also a bit too long and none of the added songs are memorable. But, I can't help but like it, since its based on a very good movie. Because of that, I'm probably too generous with my score, but its not a bad movie. Just an inferior version of a very good movie. It didn't need to be made, but for what it is its not bad.
Rated 29 Mar 2017
filliganFilligan
Rated 18 Mar 2017
71
23rd
Some added material fills in the gaps for character backstory, and that's about all that this does better than the original classic. Ironically, this live action version tends to forget the humanity of its characters more than the animated counterparts. Top marks to Stevens, Kline, Evans, and Gad, and most of the cast is serviceable, but there's not enough charisma and charm -- it's enjoyable but just not memorable. It feels like what it is: a cash grab.
Rated 18 Mar 2017
burkayadaligburkayadalig
Rated 18 May 2017
80
65th
Surprisingly entertaining... Wish Belle was someone else not the dull Emma Watson
Rated 18 May 2017
amazedemonamazedemon
Rated 24 May 2017
60
21st
Sigh, a disappointing shot-for-shot remake. The highlight was the production design and (ironically for a live-action remake) the CG animation. Gad's Lafou is the only character improved from the original. Every memorable moment is one from the animated film, expect without the soul or charm; bringing us to Watson. Her performance is stilted and forced; her character mandates the villagers be uglier, meaner, and less intelligent than their animated counterparts. Trite, unnecessary and uneven.
Rated 24 May 2017
fenixdownfenixdown
Rated 30 Mar 2017
64
22nd
Not bad for a hollow retread.
Rated 30 Mar 2017
jschlanskyJSchlansky
Rated 09 Jun 2017
52
31st
Watched twice in a row. The 2nd time was against my will... I was sat on.
Rated 09 Jun 2017
gyrro7gyrro7
Rated 19 Mar 2017
68
24th
the songs felt like soulless karaoke. very little emotion coming across in the delivery of the lyrics. you could definitely feel howard ashman's absence from this project.
Rated 19 Mar 2017
foxyrussianFoxyRussian
Rated 25 Mar 2017
92
81st
Well the reviews seem diverse, I think this movie really nailed most parts. The extra exposition really added on the original and fixed a few logical flaws from the original. It seems less Stockholm Syndrome than the original. The singing is great, the musical numbers are fun (NEVERMORE IS AN AMAZING SONG), and, as always, the talking furniture steal the movie. A few times, the script kind of poorly conveys a few topics, but luckily the poor conveyance doesn't last for to long.
Rated 25 Mar 2017
goremeatgoremeat
Rated 02 May 2018
40
21st
Tries harder but achieves less emotional pull than the '91 version.
Rated 02 May 2018
judge_holdenJudge Holden
Rated 25 Mar 2017
4
51st
Let's get a couple things straight. First, Dan Stevens is adorable. Second, I'm of course very angry at my girlfriend (now wife) for dragging me to this. Finally, ...ikindoflikethesongssoshuddup
Rated 25 Mar 2017
burstbubbleBurstBubble
Rated 29 Mar 2017
65
40th
Some things worked well and improved the story, while others nearly ruin the film as a whole. The worst part is Belle (Emma Watson). Her performance is bland and her singing is a Frankenstein nightmare of pitch correction and spliced takes. The duet between Emma Watson and Audra McDonald just emphasized the robotic tone of Watson's voice and how much I wish Disney had re-recorded off takes in the studio afterwards.
Rated 29 Mar 2017
cagedwisdomcagedwisdom
Rated 19 Mar 2017
75
65th
The Beauty and the Beast story has never really been done completely right. The setting is what really makes both this and the original, with great atmosphere, characters and music. But there's something about the character development that just isn't right. Anyway, the best live action Disney adaptation so far maybe.
Rated 19 Mar 2017
bunyasBunyas
Rated 19 Sep 2020
55
20th
There's nothing interesting, different or attention grabbing in it apart from some visuals, choreography and Emma Watson's charm.. A big meh!..
Rated 19 Sep 2020
kgbelliveaukgbelliveau
Rated 02 Apr 2017
89
76th
Another stellar live action version of a film that defined the childhood of an entire generation and it sure was magical. Visually stunning the film was accentuated by the creation of the objects that came to life and then beautifully acted by the limitless talents of the cast. Emma Watson is a fine lead actress and of course her beauty helps showcase the dynamic love being developed between Belle and Dan Stevens' Beast. A stellar and magical film.
Rated 02 Apr 2017
punqPUNQ
Rated 20 May 2017
60
89th
Beauty and the Beast is Disney being very thorough in delivering a extended "remastered" version of their famous animation film. It grew on me, even if everything didn't feel natural enough to get fully lost in this Disney world.
Rated 20 May 2017
badfurdayBadFurDay
Rated 31 Mar 2017
7
75th
I'm forced to rate this highly (by my standards) because I tend to dislike Disney productions in general, dislike the original Beauty and the beast, went to this movie with negative expectations to please my girl... and it turned out to be really good. Sure, it still has the weak Stockholm syndrome-ish plot of the original, but it's modernized just right, and the gorgeous set design and great acting make this into a wonderful movie experience. I was legitimately impressed.
Rated 31 Mar 2017
torberntorbern
Rated 23 Mar 2017
60
20th
Unnecessary, but functional... and, I'll concede - at certain very specific points - completely magical. The cinematography and live production design are crazy good. The CGI character design, and added songs... not so much. Luke Evans as Gaston is a DELIGHT; Ewan McGregor's Lumiere is the film's biggest disappointment. (There's also the whole 'girl is held against her will and essentially forced to "fall in love"' issue. Grown-up me can't quite feel the Disney magic in that particular conceit.)
Rated 23 Mar 2017
sophiesophie
Rated 02 Aug 2017
50
27th
I really dislike all the remakes but I can't seem to just not watch them
Rated 02 Aug 2017
bitabita
Rated 11 Jun 2017
90
85th
Tale as old as time True as it can be
Rated 11 Jun 2017
fra_paolofra paolo
Rated 04 Apr 2017
16
7th
I fell asleep.
Rated 04 Apr 2017
antidood1antidood1
Rated 20 Jun 2017
50
17th
This movie is not entirely without its merits, but I'm just tired of these flat, CGI'd-to-death fairy tale remakes. Some sets look nice, and towards the end the character of Gaston actually goes from useless to mildly interesting, but those are shimmers of light in an otherwise forgettable and unappealing movie. No wait, let's stop referring to these things as movies and call them what they actually are: products. New review: compared to other cinematic products, this one was not so bad.
Rated 20 Jun 2017
magdabagmagdabag
Rated 25 Apr 2017
82
47th
Sue me, I didn't like this movie as much as everyone else in America apparently. Though what was added to the story wasn't terrible, I would've liked the original story brought to life a bit better. With the story put aside, I thought Watson and Stevens did a great job with bringing the classic characters to life. All around, I really liked this movie.
Rated 25 Apr 2017
knwsvxgzmkNwsVXgzm
Rated 31 Mar 2017
5
26th
Shipping Lefou and Gaston
Rated 31 Mar 2017
tavingtonTavington
Rated 11 Jun 2017
2
37th
Watched it because of Emma. Just daydreaming that she will fall in love with me, being ugly as the beast. Maybe I'm a bit less hairy.
Rated 11 Jun 2017
dresd_r_e_s_
Rated 20 Feb 2018
3
65th
A fine adaptation that per definition can't beat the orignal. Really not that much to say - it's an animated movie made into a live-action movie... *Good
Rated 20 Feb 2018
alvowoalvowo
Rated 30 Sep 2018
50
29th
Doesn't really improve in any way on or add anything worthwhile to the animated version and fails to capture its magic with an overproduced, overpolished artificiality. Even the songs don't flow well with constant changes and breaks. Watchable but dull.
Rated 30 Sep 2018
sagesledgeSageSledge
Rated 06 Apr 2017
40
15th
Over-designed, oddly soulless, and miscast to high heaven, "Beauty And The Beast" both pales in comparison to the original, and fails to stand on its own in any way, shape, or form, with songs both new and old falling flat, portrayals of beloved characters that are equal parts unnerving and unnatural, and a script that hastily attempts to fill in the downright unimportant plot holes of the original through hackneyed, rushed, and woeful means. Watchable? Yes. Heartfelt, inspired, or unqiue? No.
Rated 06 Apr 2017
kenmeistersKenMeisters
Rated 06 Mar 2019
57
31st
Dan Stevens is a pretty boi, then he is a pretty beast and then he is a pretty boi again. Dan Stevens is pretty is what I'm saying.
Rated 06 Mar 2019
nothingsgoodNothingsGood
Rated 17 Mar 2017
50
46th
Here's what I don't get about movies like this: the template is already written for you with a great movie that everyone liked, and then you add a bunch of crap that doesn't need to be added and you barely use any of the stuff that worked. Bill Condon definitely blew it here.
Rated 17 Mar 2017
natebarriosnatebarrios
Rated 14 Jul 2017
50
18th
all that money and talent and you made a movie that already exists. close your eyes and think of the color grey, describe how you feel, and that's what this movie made me feel.
Rated 14 Jul 2017
the_beastThe Beast
Rated 16 May 2017
7
75th
Luke Evans is as exceptional as Ewan McGregor is atrocious.
Rated 16 May 2017
beccaa2406Beccaa2406
Rated 17 Sep 2017
59
30th
Why does this exist? Fine, but pointless.
Rated 17 Sep 2017
chemical404chemical404
Rated 23 May 2017
27
9th
Knowing Disney of late I was expecting them to ruin a beautiful tale that prepares young girls for arranged marriages to ugly old dudes and teaches table manners with blatant feminist agenda. In fact, I didn't mind ideology of it. It's just the movie was boring and it sucked. Those songs, omg so horrible. Even Emma's cuteness didn't save it for me, at all.
Rated 23 May 2017
parexus2Parexus2
Rated 06 Jul 2017
80
93rd
All the bad reviews on here make me question whether or not people think they are too good to sit and enjoy a family movie or.. just did not like it. I didn't come in to this movie expecting some masterpiece, I came in expecting a nice family movie with some good lessons and I got exactly that. A fantastic family film.
Rated 06 Jul 2017
mandymandy
Rated 29 Mar 2017
6
44th
Surprisingly entertaining and visually attractive family film.
Rated 29 Mar 2017
tj_monsterTJ monster
Rated 12 Nov 2022
60
43rd
Definitely a above average film. But even without seeing the original i can tell that this is far worse. The cringe, the stupid disney actors. The annoying accents. I just wish i watched the original and original only.
Rated 12 Nov 2022
caramlefloatcaramlefloat
Rated 04 Jan 2018
90
82nd
Really loved it! CGI and the acting and the costumes. This adaptation didn't disappoint.
Rated 04 Jan 2018
dyannethorneDyanneThorne
Rated 12 Dec 2017
75
75th
While mostly keeping to the animated original, this is still polished of with smoothing over of the plot holes (yay!), improved set design (yay!) more in-depth writing (yay!), new jokes (yay!) and new songs (nay!). Gaston is the biggest improvement; he's a more nuanced jerk and a joy to watch. Belle is annoying in the beginning, bland in the middle, but a great finish.
Rated 12 Dec 2017
gogolitgogolit
Rated 28 Mar 2017
60
23rd
Emma Watson basically tried her best to ruin and distort the original movie's message in her own clueless way but in hindsight far better than most of the disney live remakes since
Rated 28 Mar 2017
bakcheiabakcheia
Rated 29 Dec 2017
15
22nd
Quite unbearable at all points in its excessive running time, the new Beauty and the Beast was an exercise in how much I could endure watching Disney play with itself on screen. While I barely made it through the laughable CGI and the unintentional highlighting of incredibly questionable character motivations, I'll be left with the knowledge that at least I didn't pay money to see this. :) I wish I had my two hours back though...
Rated 29 Dec 2017
montycircusMontyCircus
Rated 04 Apr 2017
40
38th
I didn't really like it, but then again I didn't enjoy the original as a kid either. Romance doesn't cut it for me. Just as the only thing I liked about "Les Miserables" was the "Master of the House" song, the only thing I really liked about this was the "No One ____s like Gaston" song. If there's a song, make it funny or I tune out. My biggest problem with the film other than that was Lumierre. He was a great character in the original, but in non-cartoon form he lacked expression.
Rated 04 Apr 2017
vv238vv238
Rated 07 Feb 2020
29
25th
From, Disney Corporation, the studio that brought you [The Jungle Book], comes a [live-action remake] of a classic adventure: [Beauty and the Beast]! Starring a diverse cast including: [Emma Watson], [Dan Stevens], and [racial minority #2]! With daring themes of [feminism] and [criminal compliance]! The CGI [castle] will leave you breathless! See it today!
Rated 07 Feb 2020
guillaumeGuillaume
Rated 22 May 2017
70
37th
Decent "adaptation" of the animated film, starts off as a live action tribute to Disney's original, with no more than decent singing by Emma Watson (it's so heavily auto-tuned it's hilarious). The castle and the animated characters are really well done, except for the beast. I really like Dan Stevens (Legion, Downton Abbey), but he makes a fool of himself as soon as the curse has been lifted.
Rated 22 May 2017
lenaclena_c
Rated 23 Mar 2017
3
43rd
Not blown away 'cause it's impossible to live up to a classic like that, but there's no reason for me not to recommend it. I think they did a good job and stayed true to the original story and the characters. *Recommendable
Rated 23 Mar 2017
mcproustMCProust
Rated 29 Jul 2021
44
7th
Even if you manage to abstract yourself from the naked cupidity at the heart of the project, 'Beauty and the Beast' is a shoddy piece of filmmaking, and nowhere more evidently than in its music. What a shame, considering the quality of Alan Menken's original compositions, to spend so much of the runtime listening to Waston sounding for all the world like an electric shaver, or suffering through the post-'Wicked' tremolos of any of the new numbers. Stevens is well-cast but barely used.
Rated 29 Jul 2021
mjoc0723mjoc0723
Rated 05 Oct 2021
10
2nd
Absolutely awful.
Rated 05 Oct 2021
maakalmaakal
Rated 15 Jun 2018
65
24th
Really unsure why this was necessary.
Rated 15 Jun 2018
damildamil
Rated 17 Apr 2017
55
34th
Not very good. Bad casting, especially Emma Watson, who is lifeless and can't sing. Kevin Kline is great. The musical numbers were disappointing. Often poorly performed, and always poorly directed and edited. There were some new story elements I actually really appreciated and I thought enriched the story, but others were completely superfluous and slowed the movie down to a halt. Good production design and costumes and stuff. This version just had barely any of the magic of the animated one.
Rated 17 Apr 2017
mistereeemistereee
Rated 10 Feb 2024
40
16th
The animated version is better!
Rated 10 Feb 2024
flipzoflipzo
Rated 28 Mar 2017
67
13th
I will talk about the Italian version. The original 1991 movie was absolutely awesome. But this... This is a painful adaptation, the songs don't match the original and this made everyone to scratch his head. The new Italian lyrics portrait Belle as a selfish snob rather than a naive dreamer. Despite my love belongs to Emma Watson, she did a great play, I can't but think that Belle is the cartoon version of Emily Ratayowski, that couldn't play the role because, you know, "reasons".
Rated 28 Mar 2017
tvbTvB
Rated 31 May 2023
65
10th
Beautiful soundtrack.
Rated 31 May 2023
rezasalimirezasalimi
Rated 18 Jul 2017
29
4th
Lovely but not as a film ! The cartoon version is still fresh and magical .
Rated 18 Jul 2017
glumpy99glumpy_99
Rated 05 Mar 2018
33
4th
Lumbering, self-serious 're-imagining' is heavy handed where it should be gossamer light - Watson seems miscast, and looks mightily uncomfortable for most of the film; an excellent supporting cast is reduced to pantomime ham here, with Kline especially egregious. Weak score with only the memorable titular theme to recommend it, but Thompson can't touch Angela Lansbury's more restrained rendition.
Rated 05 Mar 2018
cowfrappecowfrappe
Rated 20 Oct 2017
50
17th
Unnecessary and lacking the magic of the animated version, stuffed with extra, terrible songs and some pretty bad CGI.
Rated 20 Oct 2017
mactonightmactonight
Rated 25 Sep 2017
10
0th
The opening sequence was enough to convince me that I would not enjoy this film. Not even the fantastic, Tony award nominated Josh Gad could save this trainwreck for me.
Rated 25 Sep 2017
panzerwolfpanzerwolf
Rated 06 Jan 2018
30
7th
It feels like it's made on some basic formula and with the beauty of original animation gone from it, it just ends up all sappy and filled with nothing but CGI gimmicks to make it all Disney magical as hell.
Rated 06 Jan 2018
quez2goquez2go
Rated 08 Apr 2017
57
24th
This movie works for me on some levels, but I think most of the credit for that belongs to my love for the animated original. Emma Watson is a flat and unresponsive Belle and the screenplay is beefed up with some moments that are unnecessary and a bit odd (like a magic teleportation device), and others that spoil the emotional impact of the story (the added song for the beast). On the plus side Luke Evans is a great antagonist who deserved a better death scene.
Rated 08 Apr 2017
tofoftofof
Rated 14 Sep 2017
10
83rd
Grown up expansion to the original.
Rated 14 Sep 2017
kavuKavu
Rated 05 Feb 2018
64
37th
Surprisingly decent. Does what it set out to do.
Rated 05 Feb 2018
levinelevine
Rated 09 Jun 2019
20
6th
As a carbon copy of the animated version, this is a film with no raison d'être. Emma Watson is...... really not a great actor. Or singer. The production design is very nice and some of the other actors are slightly fun to watch so it's not abysmal, just... unnecessary.
Rated 09 Jun 2019
jessjess125Jessjess125
Rated 10 Aug 2022
100
99th
Another comfort movie I love to watch when I am sad.
Rated 10 Aug 2022
cosmicmonkeyCosmicMonkey
Rated 19 Apr 2017
60
17th
I mean it's not terrible, it's a perfectly watchable piece of film, but I'll be damned if I can really think of anything positive to say about it. Everything they added and changed was completely unnecessary and added nothing new to the story and everything they kept was simply a less joyous, more boring version of the original. If you want a live-action Beauty and the Beast watch Cocteau's superior 1946 version instead.
Rated 19 Apr 2017
daphnlDaph_NL
Rated 24 Oct 2017
58
60th
Not amazing, but not bad either. I remember watching the videotape as a child and it was wonderful. As you would expect, a remake like this will never live up to our childhood memories. But Beauty And The Beast is visually good and they didn't change the story too much. I like that. So 58/100.
Rated 24 Oct 2017
hotsakehotsake
Rated 11 Dec 2017
30
9th
Well that was disappointing. I didn't have high hopes for this but I didn't expect it to be this shitty. Emma Watson sucked as did the poorly animated beast. Luke Evans was the best part of this.
Rated 11 Dec 2017
anarchisticaanarchistica
Rated 29 Dec 2020
40
22nd
The original cartoon was probably my favourite Disney movie as a kid. This version just doesn't work as well. It looks great, sure. But the songs are worse, the story is worse and they added nonsense like a plague backstory and another magical object - that they only use once and then forget about. The misogyny is too on the nose, and Belle's response to this makes her look like a bit of a dick. It also doesn't help that the Beast lives in the uncanny valley.
Rated 29 Dec 2020
wicheWiche
Rated 30 Dec 2019
70
58th
Quite beautiful, but this never appealed to me. Not in the previous version, not in this version.
Rated 30 Dec 2019
smilkstasmilksta
Rated 09 Jul 2017
40
7th
The beast should've kept his beastly form to challenge the norms and Belle should have fought for the rights of children (so they could read) women (so they would not be objectified) and old men (so their wisdom would not be called insanity) in her village. Their union took the best of them, their love is not beautiful or romantic because it imprisoned them in the useless, empty and stale happy ever after.
Rated 09 Jul 2017
xenophuleXenophule
Rated 04 Jun 2017
7
32nd
Watch: in 3D if you can, Matine if this isn't your favorite Disney story | I realized: I never really cared for B&tB. It's an exercise in Stockholm Syndrome that never really clicked with me. That said: it was enjoyable and the translation to Real Life was well done. I like that they put in extra songs (from a stage play maybe?) Overall: my opinion hasn't changed for the story, but it's not a bad movie at all. And I'm sure that if you're a fan of B&tB this will be your jam.
Rated 04 Jun 2017
gatoquentegatoquente
Rated 12 Apr 2019
97
90th
Touching and riveting. My SCORING: 99-96=Great; 95-90=Very good; 89-85=Good; 84-80=So-so; 79-70=Boring; 69-1=Forget it
Rated 12 Apr 2019
cstewart64CStewart64
Rated 27 Mar 2017
12
55th
W4E1P1S1V1M2A1R1. Almost gave it a zero on acting, but Dan Stevens surprised and saved the day. Also considered a zero on visuals because the beast was so poorly executed, when we've come to expect so much from CGI. But the rest of the film was beautiful. Totally unimpressed by the flabby "expansion" of the story, but the core is still solid.
Rated 27 Mar 2017
movie_houseMovie House
Rated 06 Aug 2017
60
28th
It is very rare to see a film that everyone seems to love, but has no soul, no life, nothing going for it. This is just a bad film.
Rated 06 Aug 2017

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...