Utopia Talk - Movie Talk - Beauty and the Beast

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Jul 17 21:53:07 2018

Utopia Talk / Movie Talk / Beauty and the Beast

Palem
Person. Mon Mar 27 11:13:34
"ISN'T IT SO COOL HOW WE'RE MAKING A LIVE ACTION REMAKE OF BEAUTY AND THE BEAST?!"

That's about the extent of the argument that the movie isn't a giant waste of time. I've described the movie as "aggressively ok" to my friends.

6/10

Cherub Cow
Member Mon Mar 27 20:33:50
lulz. Yeah I've been under the impression that its market success was mainly due to Emma Watson's carry-over Harry Potter fans :p

Palem
Person. Tue Mar 28 14:10:17
I say this as someone that actually likes Emma Watson. Her acting was very poor, although to be fair it may have been less of her acting and more of poor writing.

The whole thing was just lazy. Its like they decided that people already knew the story, so there was no reason to tell it again The new songs weren't very good and the old songs were poorly done.

Cherub Cow
Member Tue Mar 28 17:21:07
They did the old songs from the cartoon? :D
..oh noes.. XD

Palem
Person. Tue Mar 28 20:18:14
Some. You can't really get away from the big ones like Be Our Guest, Gaston, Beauty and the Beast, etc. They added new songs but the whole thing just doesn't compare to the original.

Also, the whole gay character thing was crazy overblown. There's one instant of two guys glancing at each other and half a second of them dancing.

Cherub Cow
Member Tue Mar 28 20:33:42
No 5-minutes make-out session? :/

How CGI was the Beast on a scale from Langoliers to Beowulf? ;)

Palem
Person. Tue Mar 28 20:55:50
I have seen neither of those, so I can't say. I can say he looked...OK? I'm really not the biggest fan of CGI characters in the first place, but I guess you could say he looked pretty good, albeit unimaginative. They didn't really make many changes from the cartoon version to the cgi version.

McKobb
Member Tue Mar 28 21:11:32
Langliers was the shit!

show deleted posts

Palem Person.	Mon Mar 27 11:13:34 "ISN'T IT SO COOL HOW WE'RE MAKING A LIVE ACTION REMAKE OF BEAUTY AND THE BEAST?!" That's about the extent of the argument that the movie isn't a giant waste of time. I've described the movie as "aggressively ok" to my friends. 6/10
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Mar 27 20:33:50 lulz. Yeah I've been under the impression that its market success was mainly due to Emma Watson's carry-over Harry Potter fans :p
Palem Person.	Tue Mar 28 14:10:17 I say this as someone that actually likes Emma Watson. Her acting was very poor, although to be fair it may have been less of her acting and more of poor writing. The whole thing was just lazy. Its like they decided that people already knew the story, so there was no reason to tell it again The new songs weren't very good and the old songs were poorly done.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Mar 28 17:21:07 They did the old songs from the cartoon? :D ..oh noes.. XD
Palem Person.	Tue Mar 28 20:18:14 Some. You can't really get away from the big ones like Be Our Guest, Gaston, Beauty and the Beast, etc. They added new songs but the whole thing just doesn't compare to the original. Also, the whole gay character thing was crazy overblown. There's one instant of two guys glancing at each other and half a second of them dancing.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Mar 28 20:33:42 No 5-minutes make-out session? :/ How CGI was the Beast on a scale from Langoliers to Beowulf? ;)
Palem Person.	Tue Mar 28 20:55:50 I have seen neither of those, so I can't say. I can say he looked...OK? I'm really not the biggest fan of CGI characters in the first place, but I guess you could say he looked pretty good, albeit unimaginative. They didn't really make many changes from the cartoon version to the cgi version.
McKobb Member	Tue Mar 28 21:11:32 Langliers was the shit!
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: