Official "Beauty & the Beast" Film Adaptation Thread

[finebydesign]

[DigificWriter]

I think people are casting way too old for The Beast and Gaston, especially with the 24-year-old Watson as Belle. Even with the story set in medieval times and being a fairytale, there is only so far you can push the age gap before modern audiences will start complaining. My picks for those roles would be as follows:
The Beast- Kit Harrington, Richard Madden, Liam Hemsworth, Jamie Campbell Bower, Aaron Tveit
Gaston- Tom Hardy, Chris Hemsworth, Eddie Redmayne, Joe Mangianella, Jason Momoa

There shouldn't be that significant of an age gap between Belle and The Beast (6 years older is the max that you'd probably want to go). Gaston is where you could push the envelope a bit further age-wise because of the nature of the character.

[finebydesign]

Eddie Redmayne as Gaston ?? oy

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Well, you can't just focus on the age of the actor. Some can play and appear younger (especially with the magic of Hollywood, as we know from ITW). Emma Watson definitely comes off older than she is sometimes.

I'm currently obsessed with Dominic West, don't know how people feel about him though.

[sarahb22]

Whoever plays Gaston is not only going to have to be stone good-looking, but is also going to have to be a dynamite baritone. Richard White is a hard act to follow!

[Mrtrobz]

I hope they stay more true to the costuming of the original animation or era, the new Cinderella movie looks so distracting with the mush mash of 1900 - 1960 costuming.

[madbrian]

Maybe Zachary Levi as Gaston?

[perfectlymarvelous]

I do think Emma's voice will be ample for the part, if you tweak a few notes Belle could be easily played as a Mezzo instead of Mezzo Soprano, I can only really think that Change in Me is where she needs to hit a higher nite but that is optional in the score.
You do realize that mezzo and mezzo soprano are the same vocal classification, right?

Anyway, it's not like Belle is really written as a high, floaty soprano. There are a few higher notes but most of it sits in a middle range. As long as Emma isn't a contralto (or tone-deaf, which I doubt), she can probably sing it.

[DigificWriter]

Even with actors being able to play and appear younger, it's easier to get audiences to ignore actor ages on stage than it would be on TV or film, particularly if there's a significant gap between said actors.

I can almost flat-out guarantee you that if someone like Michael Fassbender or Hugh Jackman were to be cast as The Beast in this movie, complaints would be raised that they are far too old for the character, particularly in comparison to Watson. It's also far easier to have someone 'play younger' if the actual age gap between them and Watson is smaller.

Gaston is a role where more liberties can be taken with the age gap due to the nature of the character, but you still don't want to go TOO FAR lest you run the risk of incurring the same kind of objections that you would for a role like The Beast age-wise.

[finebydesign]

LOL Steve Blanchard was in his 40s when he played opposite Jamie Lynn-Siglar in Beauty on Broadway. She was just 21!

[Mrtrobz]

There are a few movies where the actors were older than the actress, Phantom had Gerard butler with a very young Emmy Rossum, SniwWhite and the Huntsman had Chris hemsworth with u Kristen Stewart and Sleepy Hollow had Johnny Depp with Christina Ricci these were all sort of cases where the guys looked older than the leading lady. I won't exactly mind though young or old Beast I just want someone who fits the part at the end of the day.

[JulesReverie]

If he bulked up Christian Bale style, Matt Bomer would make a great Gaston

[DigificWriter]

The thing about Phantom and Sleepy Hollow is that there's SUPPOSED to be a significant age difference between the main leads, as both the Phantom and Icabod WERE dramatically older than their respective romantic interests. Beauty and the Beast doesn't have that same sort of 'built-in expectation' relative to the titular characters, especially if you're going with the original film's cap of the spell needing to be broken before the Prince's 21st birthday.

[Dave19]

"Emma's take on the character is likely to be different than what we've seen from Egan and others, especially since she doesn't seem to be a natural singer, but that's OK. "

Yes that is ok. And type-wise she does seem quite right.
But then don't let her sing all the big numbers in a musicalfilm. Use a voice-over for the singing or make the songs as voice-over in general just like they did in Brother Bear, but don't expect a non-natural singer to get away with singing all these big ballads. The audience won't accept it. What's the point? Going through all this effort to make her sound "slightly acceptable"? I don't get it. It didn't happen with Emmy Rossum, It didn't happen with Gerard Butler, It didn't happen with Russel Crowe. "acceptable" is the opposite of "a great singing voice that takes the audience on a journey on film".

[a-mad]

Wow... lots of good stuff on this thread. Here are my thoughts:

I love the casting of Emma in this role. She was great as Hermione, but if you've seen her in Perks of Being a Wallflower, Noah, or Bling Ring, you know she is a helluva good actress. I love her... and think she will exhibit the character extremely well. As far as her singing voice - I would hope that Disney had her sing a bit before she signed on. I really can't see them dubbing her voice. They have to feel comfortable that she can do the songs justice. Hopefully that's the case...

I see nothing wrong with the direction Disney is taking with live-action films. If anything, I embrace it. I grew up watching live-action Disney movies (some cheesier than others...) and I've missed them. I love the direction animation is going, but it's exciting that they're delving into their deep library and providing live-action films for all ages. I thought they did a great job with Maleficent, and think that Cinderella will be terrific. Speaking of which - someone mentioned pages ago that they didn't think this Cinderella will fly. If the reaction of my kids, nieces, nephews, tweens, etc. is any indication - they CANNOT WAIT for this movie. Disney has done an excellent job marketing it, and it's being released right at the cusp of Spring Break with little competition. I picture this doing extremely well. If it does... and BatB does well, I wouldn't be surprised if they do R&H Cinderella in 4-5 years as well...

Oh, as far as casting:

Beast - Chris Pine
Gaston - James Marsden

[Bilbo3]

"Yes that is ok. And type-wise she does seem quite right.
But then don't let her sing all the big numbers in a musical film. Use a voice-over for the singing or make the songs as voice-over in general just like they did in Brother Bear"

But then why even have it be a musical if no one can sing the parts? Belle isn't that hard of a part to sing but you have to have a great singing tone to pull it off. If Emma doesn't have that (I'm assuming she does or else why cast her) then don't have it be a musical. The audience has to fall in love with Belle the moment they see her. They won't be able to do that if Emma looks uncomfortable with the singing. No one wants to see a Russell Crowe or Pierce Brosnan situation again.

I trust that Emma has a great singing voice because she kind of has to, to play one of the most beloved Disney princesses. Those songs are ingrained in people's heads and they want to hear them sung right.

[broadwayguy2]

By that logic, most of the beloved musical movies of the Golden age would never have been made.

[Mrtrobz]

Would it be terrible if they lowered the keys? I'd rather hear the songs song well in a lowered key than on key but sounding weak.

[Bilbo3]

Many of the golden age musicals had actresses who couldn't sing in them. No way that would happen in this day and age. Imagine what those films would have been like if the actresses had to have sung? It wouldn't be called the golden age, that's for sure. Thank god for Marni Nixon.

No I don't think anyone would even notice if they lowered the keys. I'm pretty sure Susan Egan had lowered keys for the Broadway show. Just as long as Emma has a great tone quality and can sing while acting, we won't have a problem. She just has to be able to sing and sing well.

[Mrtrobz]

I guess it is sometimes sacrilege in theatre to even suggest a lowered key but in film I guess such liberties can be taken, atleast this progressed on a fast track since coming back into rotation after years of being dead, at one point they'd announced a reimagining from Beasts prospective but I truly do think the musical show is they way to go for them to add more character depth and have a fair amount shown from Belle and the Beast.

I think this will be able to adapt easier than Into the Woods but perhaps I am biased, I think a few of the songs could easily be omitted in this without making too much of an impact.

[Bilbo3]

When I think of a Beauty and the Beast live action film, I think of a large scale spectacle ( like the movie and Broadway show). I can't wait to see the inside of the castle. The design in the cartoon is so detailed and the one on stage blew everyone away. It received an applause on some nights.

It will probably be easier to adapt than into the woods because Disney won't be trying to get rid of act 2 in this one

[rjm516]

James Marsden as Gaston would be perfection!

[jo]

Just a thought --

Wouldn't the general market for this be the much younger demographics? Would the quality of singing be as important as it would be for more mature-type musicals? Of course, it has to be well-made, with an acceptable singing quality, but not necessarily the soaring musical theatre-quality. Of course it would be more desirable for it to appeal likewise to the more mature market - but what considerations will be most important in doing the movie? The casting of Emma Watson seems to harken to her popularity in the movie franchise which appealed to the younger crowd ( Harry Potter). How many Harry Potter fans have actually been to see stage musicals?

I think the success of the animated movie ( it was the first animated movie to be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar) speaks for itself. I am not sure if the Broadway adaptation will be the template for this live action musical ( emphasis on "live action", compared to "animated")? Maybe the film project will try to place emphasis on what worked so well in the animated movie?

[Mrtrobz]

It will be interesting to know what direction this will take, we do know that they intend to use the 1991 songs and in an interview Condon said he'd use most if not all of the Broadway tunes, yet and all Linda Woolverton is no where near this but Evan Spiliotopoulous has written it with a revised draft by Stephen Chbosky, it could take the form of an amalgamation of the two, I do think they could cut back on the musical numbers from the Broadway show seeing as they will be using all of the main numbers from the animated film, I do want to hear Home and If I can't love her, Bill Condon did go and see a few Beauty and the Beast tour productions so it could be placing more emphasis on the show.

[Bilbo3]

"Just a thought -- Wouldn't the general market for this be the much younger demographics? Would the quality of singing be as important as it would be for more mature-type musicals?"

I think it would get treated the same as any other musical film. As it should. The Broadway musical is a bit darker than the cartoon, Gaston slaps Belle in the face. Yes it's a cartoon, but it's been proven that anyone can sit down and fall in love with the film (and stage musical) young and old.

Besides, if it were just for kids, do you really think all these adults would be commenting on this thread? Everyone loves Beauty and the Beast.

[jo]

You're right - I would fall into that category

Although, by itself, the animated movie stood on its own with the Oscar voters ( who are decidedly not young) - having been nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.