A Mediocre Live Action Remake of a Disney Classic

Rating: 4/10 (18 March 2017)

I will be the first person to acknowledge that remakes often can be a necessary part of this industry. But this entire project just didn't sit well with me from the get-go. So let's dive in, shall we?
1) VOCALS:
This was a musical, and as such being the case, it is inexcusable to have Watson as the lead for such a classic. She never had vocal coaching, and from the trailers alone this was clearly going to be CPU corrected throughout to compensate.
As predicted, her voice has been largely manipulated in post. And considering that Walt Disney himself made such a big deal out of the musical production in all of his movies, I cannot understand the complete and total neglect of the soundtrack (again, something largely responsible for what made the original so magical).
2) CGI:
Take a moment and go look at some pictures of CGI work in Life of Pi. Then compare this to Beast's face or any other animation in this remake. I would then like you to ask yourself the following:
How could it be that Life of Pi managed to create imagery of far greater quality on a budget which was $40 million LESS than that which Disney was working with.
3) PRODUCTION & SET DESIGN:
I liken this aspect to someone making everything out of cardboard and then painting it in solid colors so as to exactly match the original. Again, I do not understand why the set looked so lifeless considering Disney has opted for a live-action remake. I couldn't help but feel this was lacking any form of originality with which to carry the movie.
4) CASTING:
Lucy Bevan was the casting director for this one. Some of her more noteworthy credits include The Golden Compass, An Education, Nanny McPhee Returns, Maleficent, 300, and Cinderella. It is quite clear after taking a good look at her directorial resume just how hit-or-miss this person is when it comes to choosing the right people for the right roles.
And once again, with such a strong backing for this film, I find myself left dumbfounded wondering why Disney would take such a gamble with arguably the greatest story to ever come out of the magic factory.
ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS:
This entire project just feels like it was overseen by an entirely new group of execs and with no other intent other than the money. I wouldn't be so harsh, but this is Disney. An organization which prides itself on utilizing fantastic music, strong performances, astounding visuals, and detailed CGI. Yet every single one of those pillars has been overlooked.
I have no inherent problems with Watson. She has proved capable in one of my favorites: The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012). However, this role was not for her. This is one time where taking the risk (aka learning to sing for the part) was a mistake. A task far too great for her to overcome.
If you are in your early teens, have young children, or are an avid fan of Harry Potter, then this Disney remake is for you. The excitement of seeing familiar characters on screen in real life will be excitement enough, bringing about a sense of nostalgia long sought after.
Simply put, this isn't how films were meant to be created. Shame on you Disney. It's not OK for a company of such proportions to ignore standards spanning nearly a century, instead demonstrating such blatant disregard for the original.
I give this 4 stars. There was nothing special about it. The problem was that Disney chose to reboot a film which was already an 8/10 and failed to bring about any hint of originality.
Looking ahead, I really hope you don't ruin Mulan and The Little Mermaid with similar mistakes. We are currently 0/1. I will remain optimistic, however, given the success of Cinderella. But for the love of all that is good, Disney! PLEASE pull it together in upcoming endeavors.
A FINAL NOTE:
For too long I have seen disingenuous reviews scattered throughout in the opening weeks of any larger budget film release. This is really starting to bother me IMDb! You guys should be able to create some sort of list or set of requirements that must be fulfilled in order to leave a review: for example, requiring users to have rated at least 500+ films, contributing to at least 3 different parts of this community, or even just ensuring the account has no suspicious activity which would be indicative of illegitimate, over the top reviews.
There are of course going to be opposing views out there, however I challenge those suspicious of unwarranted criticism like what I have offered here to go and inspect the profiles to see which ratings are associated with long-time active members. For this movie alone, nearly half of all ratings over 8/10 come from accounts which were made just weeks ago and whose activity consists of but one single rating for the film. These falsified reviews are taking away from the validity of overall IMDb ratings!
Please, please, PLEASE do something about this :(
----- 4/10 STARS -------- Review by Searsino -----