|
★★☆☆☆
23 April 2014
This article is a review of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (2014).Seen at the Berlin International Film Festival 2014. (For more information, click here.)
|
“A life for a rose,” The Beast/The Prince (Vincent Cassel)
BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is one of the most bonkers, gripping cinematic experiences one has had since 2000. Mashing together the monster-martial arts-period genres into a sexy, action epic is a rare feat. Director Christophe Gans has only made four films. It’s been eight years since last outing, horror computer game adaptation, SILENT HILL. Since 2006, FANTOMAS and THE SWEDISH CAVALIER were in the pipeline, but didn’t come to fruition. And now Gans has reteamed with Cassel, and added the human firework that is Léa Seydoux to an adaptation of the famous fairy tale. Does anyone not know the story?
BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is one of the most bonkers, gripping cinematic experiences one has had since 2000. Mashing together the monster-martial arts-period genres into a sexy, action epic is a rare feat. Director Christophe Gans has only made four films. It’s been eight years since last outing, horror computer game adaptation, SILENT HILL. Since 2006, FANTOMAS and THE SWEDISH CAVALIER were in the pipeline, but didn’t come to fruition. And now Gans has reteamed with Cassel, and added the human firework that is Léa Seydoux to an adaptation of the famous fairy tale. Does anyone not know the story?
|
|
It crushes one to report that BEAUTY AND THE BEAST is a misfire. In light of BROTHERWOOD OF THE WOLF, one hoped for a post-modern revamp: Maybe making Belle (Seydoux) a badass contemporary feminist icon who young women could look up to? Or, SHREK-style subverting? Unfortunately, what we have is a banal, reactionary interpretation; all ladies want, it appears, is a prince to love, and pretty dresses to do that in. Yawn. Also, is it just me, or do Cassel and Seydoux not suit family-friendly material? Hardly shrinking violets, they exude a winningly unwholesome sexuality.
1810, the Napoleonic era. No sign of the Emperor, but there is a three-hundred year old former prince living in a secluded castle in the words. Robbed of his Cassel-ness, and in place is a visage full of teeth and hair and anger. We don’t get to meet him for what seems like an eternity. Firstly, we have a tedious preamble setting up Belle’s family. Daughter of a wealthy merchant (André Dussollier), four of her siblings appear to be douche bags, only one has the requisite decency. Motherless, the merchant has been both parental figures; and with Belle, done a sterling job of instilling multiple virtues. Still, the Merchant puts all his metaphorical eggs in one basket, and his three ships containing the summation of his wealth are lost at sea. Forced to move to the country, the computer generated backgrounds falter and the lacklustre production design rears its head. Eschewing the real world for a simpatico fairy tale universe required more attention to detail, as well as greater vibrancy.
|
|
On a trip to run errands, the Merchant stumbles on the Beast’s castle and takes something that the owner holds most dear. Having a short fuse, the Beast, who, thanks to Cassel’s physicality rivals Ron Perlman’s take, demands the Merchant’s life. The latter must put his affairs in order and return to the castle the next day. Of course, Belle’s nobility means she exchanges places. Thus the intended love story unfurls, but no breeze catches it. Leaden, even with these acting powerhouses, the dialogue and tired artificiality hampers any chemistry – the ultimate crime in a love story.
Hints at KING LEAR and the work of Hayao Miyazaki are not expanded. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST skirts dire OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL territory. Did the filmmakers not see TANGLED to see how this can be done? What was desired was a film to stand next to THE ADVENTURES OF BARON MUNCHAUSEN. The creative crew/cast are so much better than this.
|
|
