ManiakJiggy This is How Movies Should Be Made

Ghoulumbe Better than most people think

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

adonis98-743-186503 A modern-day take on the "Beauty and the Beast" tale where a New York teen is transformed into a hideous monster in order to find true love. Beastily is definitely better than it usually gets credit for especially the message it tries to send about what does beauty truly mean like in reality? The acting wasn't that bad and i even enjoyed Neil Patrick Harris as this blind man persona i thought he was very good in his role. The film has it's fair share of flaws as well tho but still they don't really destroy it completely or make it cheesy and stupid.. (7/10)

furrh-54131 READ the book! Much better! Don't waste your time on this garbage

Kirpianuscus not exactly for the acting or script. for plot or for the moral lessons. but for discover of cultural references. for presence of Mary Olsen. for the good intentions for present new version of the Beauty and Beast. and the only bad thing is the status of not convincing of the film. against the huge potential of story. it is a didactic demonstration about selfishness and true love. using not the most inspired tools. and nothing more. sure, the story remains beautiful and the message noble at whole. but the presence of Pettyfer is not enough. and the chemistry between the leading actors - not real convincing.

A_Different_Drummer ... what sort of movie this would have been with different actors? First and foremost this is the kind of script you don't really see much of anymore, especially in teenage rom-coms. It is as much a stage play as a movie script. Percentage-wise, the number of scenes with the same two characters BY THEMSELVES running lines off each other (Pettyfer and Hudgens) is very high. And therein lies the good news and the bad news. The good news is that Director/Writer Daniel Barnes took risks, the kind of risks you can only take when you are, in point of fact, both the director and writer on the production. He placed all his trust in his actors, and gave them lots of room. The bad news is that it doesn't always work. I am not sure where the fault lies -- since with issues of "chemistry" you need something to compare to -- but if I had to guess, I would point the finger at Hudgens. This film was done at the end the very unusual arc in her career when, as far as teen movies went, she was the "it" girl, she was the girl every high school guy would sell his parents to gypsies for. Whether or not she can deliver this promise is another matter. She is cute, she is sweet, she is vulnerable. But that's fine for love at a distance. Love in tight closeups with tricky dialog is another matter entirely. (If you want to see a quirky Disney rom-com done to sizzling perfection, look at THE CUTTING EDGE, also in my reviews, where the characters completely sell the romance from the first scene, to the delight of the audience). A very ambitious effort which never really hits the target.