What's New?

So I’m sure you’ve seen this around:

Yup, Beauty and the Beast is getting a remake. And it’s hard to get excited for it.

It is not because Beauty and the Beast is the latest in a long, long line of remakes, reboots, sequels, sequels-that-are-remakes, sequels-that-are-soft-reboots and cinematic universes that have dominated the blockbuster scene in recent years. Nor is it because this year’s box office could be the first sign that the general population is growing tired of the practice.

Neither is it because Beauty and the Beast is a sacred text for which any other iteration is folly; there were adaptions before, there’ll be adaptations in the future.

And it is certainly not because it’ll ruin childhoods the world over – the original is still omnipresent, Disney aren’t snatching your Blu Rays away in the middle of the night, your childhood is fine.

And it’s no question of ‘why’ either; as a significant part of Disney’s infrastructure and image, the idea of letting such a powerful potential cash-printing machine go unused would be a poor choice. Following the money in this instance does not lead to a huge Disney conspiracy; it’s simply very good business practice to make this film.

The only question I have for Beauty and the Beast is this: what’s new?

Take the first Disney live action remake, 1996’s 101 Dalmatians. The 1961 original was a bright and breezy romp which had a song and not much else. Puppies are born, Cruella wants an impractical dog hair coat, gentle hijinks ensue, they sing Roger’s one hit wonder around a piano.

The 1996 version succeeded by juicing up and modernising Cruella, going full throttle with Glenn Close’s barnstorming performance. Her hold over Anita as an insane, Anna Wintore type boss introduces a fresh dynamic to these character’s relationship and the remake simply glories in her every swish of her coat and every flick of her cigarette holder. She nails every snarky, snippy, lip curling moment, the ‘what’s new?’ question silenced when an early mystery of a disappearing Bengal is solved by a shot of her casually glancing over her new white tiger rug. The animatronic puppies fall to the wayside as she stomps about the place – the reason for this film existing is her and a world without this Cruella would be an emptier one indeed.

There was also much to be championed about the remake of Cinderella. The original was Walt Disney’s favourite film, but again it’s slight on story. The Prince doesn’t even get a line and the mice take centre stage. In Kenneth Branagh’s version, not only is The Prince given plenty to say, he takes an active role in wooing and searching for his Cinderella and he’s given a real, sweet relationship with his father. All this was missing from the original and by giving the Prince, the Stepmother and Cinderella more to do, there’s new depths to be mined in the characters, the charm of the original given a boost by a relatable cast of characters.

What was new for these two remakes were fleshed out, interesting characters. They also helped themselves by steering clear of the musical legacies of their originals; Cruella DeVille and Bippity Bobbity Boo are iconic but stand apart from the musical flavour of their host films and were wisely glossed over in the remakes. Even The Jungle Book managed this (just) by giving Bare Necessities and I Wanna Be Like You to Bill Murray and Christopher Walken, neither actor (as Honest Trailers pointed out) renowned for their singing prowess. By hiding the songs, the story and technical whizzpoppery of The Jungle Book could come forward, something which had been lacking in the original.

All this is a roundabout way of wondering just what was missing from Beauty and the Beast? The story is epic. The main characters are relatable with full arcs and completed stories. The songs are the film. It is the best version of this story Disney could hope to make.

What’s new? Details are Spartan right now, but Emma Watson’s starring. That seems to be it so far. An actress famous for playing a bookish but brave character will play a bookish but brave character – she’s hardly breaking new ground. 

As a contrast, take the live action remake of The Little Mermaid. Again, details are thin, but Lin Manuel Miranda is writing the music, which is enough to justify anything’s existence. What’s new about The Little Mermaid is him and his enormous energy for anything Mermaid related. I mean, just look at this glorious nerd having the time of his life and tell me you're not a little bit excited for what he's going to do when he gets his own hands on a piano: 

                                                           

Beauty and the Beast could be great. It could be wonderful. It could even be magical. It doesn’t look like it will be anything new.