Old Films for New

For this assignment, I have chosen to look at Beauty and the Beast. The original was one of my favourite Disney films as a child, and its recent remake still makes my list of favourite films of all time. Because of this, I feel as though it would be a good choice to explore these productions in closer detail.

Beauty and the Beast, first released in the year 1991, is an American animated romantic fantasy. It is Disney's thirtieth feature-length film and, despite being produced in America by Walt Disney Pictures, the story itself is a French fairytale. The original version of this film was directed by Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise, and stars Robby Benson – an American actor, singer and director – as the voice of Beast, and Paige O'Hara – an American voice actress, singer and actress - as the voice of Belle. The film's budget was twenty million US dollars, half of the budget of Disney's popular film The Little Mermaid, which inspired the production company to decide to animate Beauty and the Beast after several unsuccessful attempts in the 1930s and 50s. The funding for this film came from the success of The Little Mermaid, released in 1989, which made two hundred and eleven million US dollars at the box office. This Hollywood mainstream film was not internationally co-produced, and was the second Disney production to use the Computer Animation Production System (CAPS). It was also the first full feature-length animated Disney film to use Computer Generated Imagery (CGI) for part of its creation. The iconic ballroom scene features the traditional drawn characters in a CGI made setting. At the time, using CGI was rare as it was only just beginning to be developed, so this was a big step for technological advancements in film production. After Disney distributed this much-loved film worldwide, and because it was shown across the globe then it would have been played in all good cinemas. The film received a universal certificate rating because it is suitable for all age groups and is appropriate for the viewing of young children due to its lack of mature or distressing content. The film was originally intended to be a stand-alone, solo piece, though due to its success a few smaller bonus films – such as Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas – were released by Disney. As someone who watched this film as a child, I feel as though the animation and narrative is appropriate for the target demographic while still remaining enjoyable for an older audience. It is possible to see how the film has aged now, especially when compared to its modern sequel, though this can only be a positive as it allows us to see just how far film production has come during the twenty-six years between the release of the original and its remake.

Due to Beauty and the Beast's success, the film had a live-action remake released in 2017. Emma Watson, made famous following her role as Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter film series, starred as the female protagonist Belle alongside Dan Stevens – best known for his portrayal of Matthew Crawley in Downton Abbey – as Beast. The film's budget was set between approximately one hundred and sixty million US dollars and two hundred and fifty-five million US dollars, at least eight times the amount used to create the animated original version of the popular fairytale. This successful Hollywood creation was co-produced by Walt Disney Studios and Mandeville Films, and is an international co-production as it features actors from both America and varying British countries. While I was unable to find any evidence of the intervention of funding bodies, this film is considered to be one of the most expensive feature-length productions ever made. Motion capture acting was used for the majority of scenes featuring Stevens' character, Beast, in order to bring the character to life. Stevens had to wear a grey bodysuit covered in sensors as well as stilts in order to create the character, and was required to perform his scenes twice. Once while on set, then again recording his lines with a facial capture machine in order to be able to bring the many facial expressions of the Beast to life. Once it had been distributed by Disney in February 2017 – March 2017 for the US – the mainstream film was shown in every major cinema due to its popularity. Cinemas such as VUE even showed a sing along version of the film due to its success, which had the lyrics to each song come up across the screen in time to each track so that the audience could join in. This musical romantic fantasy production was rated PG due to mildly violent content, danger and scenes which a younger audience may find scary, though the sequel was still popular with a variety of demographics. Personally, I found that this recreation stayed true to the 1991 original, which was important to me as a viewer. There was a lot of speculation as to whether or not the classic tale would be ruined by a live-action remake, though I feel as though this production did the story justice.

Both films share the same major production company – Walt Disney Studios – and even though the 2017 remake was co-produced, Mandeville Films has its headquarters at Walt Disney Studios. The production company is so successful that it has purchased many production companies and studios, few better-known examples including Marvel Studios, ABC and Fox Entertainment Group, and owns the American film ranch called Golden Oak Ranch. This is unsurprising as Disney is one of the most well-known, popular companies, and despite its age it continues to release films that draw in a lot of money, audiences and media attention.

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_and_the_Beast_(1991_film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty_and_the_Beast_(2017_film)

http://collider.com/beauty-and-the-beast-behind-the-scenes-video-dan-stevens/

https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/how-family-friendly-is-beauty-and-the-beast/