The original Beauty and the Beast captivated audiences of all ages in classic Disney fashion and helped solidify the studio's animation renaissance of the '90s that began with The Little Mermaid (whose own live-action remake is just around the corner). The animated best picture nominee revitalized Disney's fairytale tradition of telling tales as old as time with memorable songs, lovable characters, and masterful animation, becoming an instant classic.

The 2017 live-action remake, directed by Bill Condon, served as a half-hearted, beat-for-beat emulation of the original and follows in the recent studio trend of translating favorite Disney toons into big-budget live-action adaptations. As mentioned, The Little Mermaid is the latest in this trend, with early reactions suggesting it may be the best Disney live-action remake yet. While the films preceding the 2017 remake weren't direct remakes of Disney classics by being full-fledged reimaginings or spin-offs like Alice in Wonderland (2010) and Maleficent (2014), Beauty and the Beast aimed to reiterate the same scenes and plot as the animated original with only minor changes thrown in to fill a longer runtime. This set a precedent for the regurgitative Aladdin and Mulan remakes that followed.

RELATED: Every Live Action Disney Princess Movie, From 'Cinderella' to 'Aladdin'

The Live-Action 'Beauty and the Beast' Mishandles Its Characters

Dan Stevens and Emma Watson in Beauty and the Beast
Image Via Disney

Although the remake is built on virtually the same script as the original, right down to the dialogue, it fails to capture the original's masterful pacing and focus on character. The exploration of the characters' relationships and motivations is lost in live-action translation under Condon's direction, resulting in a film that is somehow more rushed, yet longer than the original. The film's mishandling of story and character is perfectly illustrated in what is intended to be a key moment in the relationship on which the entire film is built.

In the 1991 original, Belle (Paige O'Hara), just after being treated to dinner with the show-stopping "Be Our Guest," investigates the castle's forbidden west wing, where she finds the ransacked and tattered quarters of the Beast (Robbie Benson). The scene relies heavily on the Gothic foreboding atmosphere of the Beast's lair and builds tension as Belle nears the enchanted rose. When the Beast finds her, it is a moment of weighted intensity as he confronts her in an explosive outburst of rage that scares her off. After she leaves, the Beast realizes he just let his emotions get the better of him again in a moment of visible regret. This is an important, humanizing beat for the Beast as it shows the gravity of his mistake and informs his decision to rescue Belle from the wolves in the scene that follows.

The Live-Action Movie Ruins an Important Character Moment for the Beast

Emma Watson as Belle looking at the rose in Beauty and the Beast
Image Via Disney

In the 2017 version, Belle's (Emma Watson) investigation of the Beast's (Dan Stevens) room has very little buildup against no discernable change in atmosphere. When Belle reaches the rose, the Beast quickly finds, scolds, and scares her off in a matter of seconds. The sympathetic moment of the Beast's reaction to his own rage is replaced with a distant wide shot that doesn't communicate anything about how the Beast feels at that moment. This makes the Beast's decision to save Belle feel hollow as, by this film's understanding, he saves her for no reason.

Aside from the rushed pacing, the key difference between these scenes is the exclusion of the Beast's moment of despair, having scared off his only possible chance at love. A small scene, but one that shows a pivotal look into his character that makes his call to action in the next scene believable. He felt bad about how he behaved to Belle and saved her because he cares. In the remake, there is no such sympathetic moment of realization to inform his decision to go after her or show he is self-aware and reflective of his behavior and what it might have cost him. In short, the Beast didn't save Belle because the character was motivated to do so, but because it is expected by the audience.

This Represents a Major Problem With Disney Live-Action Remakes

Emma Watson and Dan Stevens dancing as Belle and the beast in Beauty and the Beast
Image Via Disney

The exclusion and alteration of moments such as this are emblematic of the shallowness of most other Disney remakes in their approach to storytelling. Because the film knows the audience is so familiar with the stories being told, they take moments like the Beast’s grief for granted since the audience is expecting it and knows it happens, while the film itself doesn’t do the necessary storytelling to make the events feel natural to new eyes. Beauty and the Beast plays to this by relying on the audience's knowledge of the narrative to fill in the gaps in the character's motivations. We know the Beast goes to save Belle because we have seen the original, but the live-action Beast’s motivation to do so is not properly communicated. The film doesn't illustrate the emotion of the moment and instead shows the action of the scene without the subtext. Classic scenes like Mulan’s dramatic decision to join the army or Jafar’s gambles are power are shown in live-action, but don’t feel as believably told as their animated counterparts.

Let's hope The Little Mermaid won't make a similar mistake and Disney have learned from their past. Sure, most of the audience has already seen the animated original when they go to see the Disney live-action version. But we still need the same attention to detail in terms of character and plot that the original animated versions had. It's in these smaller moments that the magic is truly found.