Search
100 Shakespeare Films
Book
From Oscar-winning British classics to Hollywood musicals and Westerns, from Soviet epics to...
Kelly Knows (95 KP) rated Child's Play (2019) in Movies
Jun 25, 2019
New Chucky Is My Favorite Chucky
I am a reborn Chucky fan after the wonderful 2019 reimagining that is Child's Play. It is not easy to follow a long-standing series with a history of both slasher success, and campy catastrophe. Child's Play is a fresh new story that puts a much-needed spin on a franchise that frankly had been run into the ground. At its heart, this movie is exactly what it is supposed to be, a thrilling tale of a killer doll run amok. Though I imagine some diehard fans are inevitably going to be disappointed, I call this a resounding win. I wasn't a fan of the Chucky design at first, but it won me over later during a hilarious teaching moment between Andy and his pal in the first act. The lighting and camera work are solid, with a haunting, playful score that draws out the tension like a blade. Parents be warned, there is plenty of brutality, and no shying from gore. Even jaded millennial kids should wait to see this one. The story is a fantastic satire of all things electronically assisted, and paints a believable portrait with bloody overtones. The thrilling premise really shines due to the superior talents of the cast and crew. Aubrey Plaza brings weight to a character that is almost unceremoniously sidelined for most of the movie. The real celebration is Gabriel Bateman's performance as Andy Barclay. The slower paced moments settle a pall of tension over events as you share in Andy's isolation and later persecution. The supporting cast won me over entirely. Even the cannon fodder characters are awesome, with a pleasant dose of likability that gives them depth, with varying levels of unpleasantness that will have you tongue in cheek rooting for Chucky at times. Good stories are enjoyable. Check. Great stories get us thinking. Double check. When top-tier tech meets malicious malfunction, Chucky will have us all asking ourselves... "Are you broken like me?
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Final Fantasy VII Remake in Video Games
Apr 28, 2020
Like many of you, Final Fantasy VII is my favourite game, ever. It was the first FF title I played all the way back in 1997, and have since played it through a silly amount of times in the years since.
The prospect of a remake was cautiously exciting to me, but any doubts I may have had were completely blown away withkn the first hour or two of play.
Final Fantasy VII Remake looks absolutely stunning. It plays on nostalgia in all the right ways as it brings characters and locations from the original straight into the modern times, and a few texture issues aside, it's one of the best looking games available.
The combat mechanics are superb as well. Fairly similar to FFXV in style, with some elements taken from XIII, make for an easily addictive play style, and one that has buckets of replayability.
There has been a lot of concerns raised about the decision to release the remakes in parts - this game is based on the first 5-6 hours of the original. Remake however, is a fully fledged gaming experience in its own right. After finishing the main story, my play time had clocked in at a respectable 42 hours, and this isn't taking into consideration endgame content, and new game plus mode. It's hefty for sure.
Nobuo Uematsu's beloved score from the original has had and incredibly crafted upgrade as well. The music score is just phenomenal, and elevates the whole thing to bigger and better heights.
This isn't to say that Remake is flawless, because it's not. The main issue that people have taken seems to be with the story (no spoilers, don't worry). A lot of the new stuff added to pad out the game is genuinely great, however, there are some big changes made to the original, which is bound to piss off die hard fans. Personally, I'm ok with it at the moment, but I do have some concerns about how it will effect future installments.
Some of the exploration is very linear, but honestly, it's something that didn't impact my enjoyment too much, especially with the likely hood of part 2 being more open.
All things considered, Remake is above and beyond what I thought we would get. It's a fantastic reimagining of a stone cold classic, and part 2 can't come soon enough. My heart is full.
The prospect of a remake was cautiously exciting to me, but any doubts I may have had were completely blown away withkn the first hour or two of play.
Final Fantasy VII Remake looks absolutely stunning. It plays on nostalgia in all the right ways as it brings characters and locations from the original straight into the modern times, and a few texture issues aside, it's one of the best looking games available.
The combat mechanics are superb as well. Fairly similar to FFXV in style, with some elements taken from XIII, make for an easily addictive play style, and one that has buckets of replayability.
There has been a lot of concerns raised about the decision to release the remakes in parts - this game is based on the first 5-6 hours of the original. Remake however, is a fully fledged gaming experience in its own right. After finishing the main story, my play time had clocked in at a respectable 42 hours, and this isn't taking into consideration endgame content, and new game plus mode. It's hefty for sure.
Nobuo Uematsu's beloved score from the original has had and incredibly crafted upgrade as well. The music score is just phenomenal, and elevates the whole thing to bigger and better heights.
This isn't to say that Remake is flawless, because it's not. The main issue that people have taken seems to be with the story (no spoilers, don't worry). A lot of the new stuff added to pad out the game is genuinely great, however, there are some big changes made to the original, which is bound to piss off die hard fans. Personally, I'm ok with it at the moment, but I do have some concerns about how it will effect future installments.
Some of the exploration is very linear, but honestly, it's something that didn't impact my enjoyment too much, especially with the likely hood of part 2 being more open.
All things considered, Remake is above and beyond what I thought we would get. It's a fantastic reimagining of a stone cold classic, and part 2 can't come soon enough. My heart is full.
postapocalypticplayground (27 KP) rated Cinder in Books
Jan 9, 2018
Cinder is a cyborg, looked down on by society and that's by the one's who can even bring themselves to look at her. A gifted mechanic, she spends her days as a ward of her widowed stepmother in a market booth, mending communications systems and other devices - ipads of the future. The Lunar Chronicles are set in a future where the world has come out of it's 4th world war, the planet is battle scared and it's people are battling Letumosis; a plague with no cure. On an otherwise seemingly normal day, 2 things happen in Cinder's life that will start her down a dangerous path. Firstly a visit from a disguised Prince Kai, searching her out to fix his broken droid and secondly another market worker being struck with the plague. Rather than sit out the quarantine, Cinder makes off from the market with the prince's android in tow, a decision which has far reaching consequences for those that Cinder then comes into contact with. A series of events then start unravelling everything that Cinder has ever known about herself and what she thought her future held, can she make it to the ball on time and get to the charming prince?
The Lunar Chronicles is a series that I have had my eye on for ages, so on a whim I picked it up from the bookshop and I am so glad I did. Far from a traditional reimagining of the Cinderella tale, this does have a few nods to the source material, some glaring and others more subtle, but is very much it's own unique story. I could not put it down, it was an light and easy read for me, a ton of content but non of it weighty or overly complicated, which many parts of the story could have been. It's a world full of strong characters and in this instance I felt a pang of sympathy for the "wicked" stepmother, although it's clear that the big bad in this incarnation is the Lunar Queen Levana rather than Cinders adopted family.
I was hoping that Cinders story would be wrapped up in this episode but it becomes clear that hers will be an overarching story in how these books play out, so I'm off to get Scarlett (book 2) as soon as i'm able. This is a perfectly paced story with lots of twists and foundations being laid for future books in the series, characters that you will love and hate and heart stopping moments that will keep you turning page after page.
The Lunar Chronicles is a series that I have had my eye on for ages, so on a whim I picked it up from the bookshop and I am so glad I did. Far from a traditional reimagining of the Cinderella tale, this does have a few nods to the source material, some glaring and others more subtle, but is very much it's own unique story. I could not put it down, it was an light and easy read for me, a ton of content but non of it weighty or overly complicated, which many parts of the story could have been. It's a world full of strong characters and in this instance I felt a pang of sympathy for the "wicked" stepmother, although it's clear that the big bad in this incarnation is the Lunar Queen Levana rather than Cinders adopted family.
I was hoping that Cinders story would be wrapped up in this episode but it becomes clear that hers will be an overarching story in how these books play out, so I'm off to get Scarlett (book 2) as soon as i'm able. This is a perfectly paced story with lots of twists and foundations being laid for future books in the series, characters that you will love and hate and heart stopping moments that will keep you turning page after page.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Pan (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
Where's the magic? Where's the sparkle?
The mesmerising story of Peter Pan has been told by numerous directors, playwrights and novelists over the years with Disney’s brilliant animation being one of the highlights in a series of standout moments.
Now, the story receives a very 21st-century makeover in Pan, but does director Joe Wright’s brooding reimagining sink or swim?
Unfortunately, this occasionally beautifully shot film ends up causing more of a headache than Michael Bay’s much-maligned Transformers series in a movie that lacks the magic and sparkle of the traditional tale, instead focusing too much on special effects and noise – my god this is a loud film.
Stars like Hugh Jackman, Rooney Mara, Garrett Hedlund and Amanda Seyfriend take their places amongst a cast of forgettable characters that never seem to make any sort of impression, despite Pan’s 111 minute running time.
Following the story of Peter, played by a particularly wooden Levi Miller, Pan takes place many years before the events of the famous story, following a similar path to the recent Alice in Wonderland remake and Oz the Great and the Powerful.
Unfortunately, including a previously unmentioned backstory to the character brings about the same problems as it did for the aforementioned films. Pan has no charm and is completely void of originality with the production team borrowing many elements from movies like Avatar, the Harry Potter series and even the Indiana Jones franchise.
Hugh Jackman’s Blackbeard is the only character to make any sort of impact and the Wolverine star is a delight to watch in a role that requires masses of cheese and just a little malice. The rest of the cast are as wooden as the galleons in which they are transported and this is a real shame, given the talent on offer.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is exceptional with some amazing sequences shot with flair and supreme confidence but the poor CGI detracts from the spectacle. For a film with a budget of $150million, it has some of the worst special effects I have ever come across.
Nevertheless, there is much for younger children to enjoy. The bright colours and constant shifts in tone ensure Pan never settles into a rut, despite its bland characters and lacklustre special effects.
Overall, Pan is a crushing disappointment. The special effects are poor, the promising cast never gels together and the story is a hybrid of other, better films that results in a movie that will leave you with a headache, rather than a sense of magic and sparkle.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/10/18/wheres-the-magic-wheres-the-sparkle-pan-review/
Now, the story receives a very 21st-century makeover in Pan, but does director Joe Wright’s brooding reimagining sink or swim?
Unfortunately, this occasionally beautifully shot film ends up causing more of a headache than Michael Bay’s much-maligned Transformers series in a movie that lacks the magic and sparkle of the traditional tale, instead focusing too much on special effects and noise – my god this is a loud film.
Stars like Hugh Jackman, Rooney Mara, Garrett Hedlund and Amanda Seyfriend take their places amongst a cast of forgettable characters that never seem to make any sort of impression, despite Pan’s 111 minute running time.
Following the story of Peter, played by a particularly wooden Levi Miller, Pan takes place many years before the events of the famous story, following a similar path to the recent Alice in Wonderland remake and Oz the Great and the Powerful.
Unfortunately, including a previously unmentioned backstory to the character brings about the same problems as it did for the aforementioned films. Pan has no charm and is completely void of originality with the production team borrowing many elements from movies like Avatar, the Harry Potter series and even the Indiana Jones franchise.
Hugh Jackman’s Blackbeard is the only character to make any sort of impact and the Wolverine star is a delight to watch in a role that requires masses of cheese and just a little malice. The rest of the cast are as wooden as the galleons in which they are transported and this is a real shame, given the talent on offer.
Elsewhere, the cinematography is exceptional with some amazing sequences shot with flair and supreme confidence but the poor CGI detracts from the spectacle. For a film with a budget of $150million, it has some of the worst special effects I have ever come across.
Nevertheless, there is much for younger children to enjoy. The bright colours and constant shifts in tone ensure Pan never settles into a rut, despite its bland characters and lacklustre special effects.
Overall, Pan is a crushing disappointment. The special effects are poor, the promising cast never gels together and the story is a hybrid of other, better films that results in a movie that will leave you with a headache, rather than a sense of magic and sparkle.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/10/18/wheres-the-magic-wheres-the-sparkle-pan-review/
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Tom and Jerry (2021) in Movies
May 16, 2021
Reinventing the wheel has always come with some sceptical reactions from me, and Tom and Jerry has always been one of those treasured memories for me.
Jerry sets up a new home in the Royal Gate Hotel just before a high profile wedding is scheduled. When new hire Kayla is tasked with solving the hotel's new found mouse problem, she brings Tom into the fold to help.
Tom and Jerry is a classic I love and the thought of reimagining it in this way made me dubious to say the least. Traditionally you're only supposed to see humans from (roughly speaking) the knees down after all... and there are a lot of humans in this.
I'm not sure that the story here really matters all that much, Tom and Jerry should be about their action-y interactions. And there's the initial problem, because they should be the focus, and they're not. The human contingent takes up a hefty amount of screen time, and that to me sort of goes against the original concept.
The animation style isn't great, I have issues with CG animation, especially when it comes to things with a strong existing style. Once the film found its footing though I did find that I wasn't noticing it much, and in the end, dare I say it, I quite liked the successful animation of Toots and how it encompassed the stereotypical evils of feline nature.
When you combine the story with the cast (human and animated) you do get an amusing film, but it does feel a lot like the first Garfield film in how long it will be in people's minds.
What I will congratulate this film for is that it give you so wonderfully nostalgic moments, I loved seeing the "what's in my hands" gag... or maybe I'm easily pleased.
Chloë Grace Moretz and Michael Peña make for fun allies and adversaries to Tom and Jerry. But I think my favourite humans were Patsy Ferran as Joy the Bell Girl and Rob Delaney as the hotel manager. Though not on screen very often they broke up the "serious" moments nicely and added a much-needed break from everything else.
Tom and Jerry was exactly what I wanted, though I don't think it was what I expected. It won't be winning any awards, but I was pleasantly surprised by what it brought to the screen.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/tom-jerry-2021-movie-review.html
Jerry sets up a new home in the Royal Gate Hotel just before a high profile wedding is scheduled. When new hire Kayla is tasked with solving the hotel's new found mouse problem, she brings Tom into the fold to help.
Tom and Jerry is a classic I love and the thought of reimagining it in this way made me dubious to say the least. Traditionally you're only supposed to see humans from (roughly speaking) the knees down after all... and there are a lot of humans in this.
I'm not sure that the story here really matters all that much, Tom and Jerry should be about their action-y interactions. And there's the initial problem, because they should be the focus, and they're not. The human contingent takes up a hefty amount of screen time, and that to me sort of goes against the original concept.
The animation style isn't great, I have issues with CG animation, especially when it comes to things with a strong existing style. Once the film found its footing though I did find that I wasn't noticing it much, and in the end, dare I say it, I quite liked the successful animation of Toots and how it encompassed the stereotypical evils of feline nature.
When you combine the story with the cast (human and animated) you do get an amusing film, but it does feel a lot like the first Garfield film in how long it will be in people's minds.
What I will congratulate this film for is that it give you so wonderfully nostalgic moments, I loved seeing the "what's in my hands" gag... or maybe I'm easily pleased.
Chloë Grace Moretz and Michael Peña make for fun allies and adversaries to Tom and Jerry. But I think my favourite humans were Patsy Ferran as Joy the Bell Girl and Rob Delaney as the hotel manager. Though not on screen very often they broke up the "serious" moments nicely and added a much-needed break from everything else.
Tom and Jerry was exactly what I wanted, though I don't think it was what I expected. It won't be winning any awards, but I was pleasantly surprised by what it brought to the screen.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2021/05/tom-jerry-2021-movie-review.html
The Abyssal Plain: The R'lyeh Cycle
1.0
Rate It
Book
With The Abyssal Plain, Holloway and Talley have managed to transform the Cthulhu Mythos into...
Wake Up, Sir!
Jonathan Ames and Jamie Keenan
Book
A brilliant contemporary reimagining of the greatest comic relationship of all time, which goes far...
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Fantastic Four (2015) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
An absolute snooze
Here comes yet another superhero film. Ending Marvel’s year that has included the charming Big Hero 6, the overstuffed Avengers: Age of Ultron and the surprisingly excellent Ant-Man, the Fox produced Fantastic Four reboot has a tough job trying to get audiences to forget the horror that came before it.
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
It’s been a tough ride for the quartet of heroes, but does director Josh Trank’s modern day reimagining of Marvel’s first team do enough to change perceptions?
Not by a long shot. Despite some excellent special effects, this yawnfest of a film that was plagued by rumours of constant behind-the-scenes tension and last-minute editing doesn’t have an ounce of originality in its short 100 minute running time.
Miles Teller (Insurgent), Kate Mara (Transcendence), Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) and Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot) take on the roles of Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Johnny Storm and Ben Grimm respectively and are fine, if lacking in any real chemistry.
Fantastic Four is above all, an origins story as the four young adults try to crack interdimensional travel. Naturally, things don’t go quite to plan and they, alongside fellow colleague Victor Von Doom end up with an unusual set of powers – with Doom becoming the main antagonist.
Unfortunately, the plot, devised by no less than three writers is a complete bore. There is hardly anything of interest throughout the entire film as Trank pushes his cast from one underwhelming set piece to another.
When things do get tense, it’s only for a five minute scene involving Doom breaking out of a research facility. This is when we get to see what Fantastic Four could’ve been, a dark and brooding film with a disturbing villain at its core.
However, it seems this has been pushed back to make way for an unusually flat sense of humour and an uninteresting origins story. Marvel films live and die on their comedic elements and unfortunately Fantastic Four is as poor as they come.
Nevertheless, the film’s special effects are on the whole, very good. The other dimension looks fantastic and The Thing in particular is rendered using excellent motion capture animation.
An underwhelming climax wraps up a bitterly disappointing outing for the four heroes. Most superhero films end with a spectacular showdown of good versus evil but Fantastic Four has none of this. The ending is clichéd, short and has no real payoff.
Overall, expectations were already low for this reboot and despite director Josh Trank’s obvious talent for direction, this talent is nowhere to be found in Fantastic Four.
A cast that doesn’t gel together, a poor soundtrack and a lack of tonal balance ensures it will rest alongside X-Men Origins: Wolverine as proof that Marvel Studios needs the rights to all of its heroes returning to it.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2015/08/09/an-absolute-snooze-fantastic-four-review/
Lee (2222 KP) rated Dumbo (2019) in Movies
Mar 31, 2019
It's set to be a busy year for live action Disney remakes, with Aladdin and The Lion King already lined up for release this year. Kicking things off though, is this reimagining of the 1941 classic Dumbo, with Tim Burton directing.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.
It's 1919 and Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) has returned from World War I, arriving by train to join the Medici Brothers Circus, where he worked before the war as a performer. But Holt has a number of issues to contend with on his return, the least of which being the loss one of his arms while in service. He's greeted at the station by his two young children, Milly and Joe, who lost their mother, Holt's wife, to influenza while he was away. On top of that, he learns that while he was away, the cash strapped circus owner, Max Medici (Danny DeVito) decided to sell the horses that were part of Holt's star act. Holt is put in charge of pregnant elephant Jumbo, with Max hoping that the arrival of a cute baby elephant will bring in the much needed crowds. It's a lot for Holt to come to terms with and adjust to.
Soon after, the baby elephant is born. But with clumsy, oversized ears, he's not quite the cute crowd pleaser they had all hoped for. Attempts to hide his ears only end in disaster, and ridicule from the circus crowds. Milly and Joe fall in love with the new arrival, and when they discover that he has the ability to use those big ears for flying, interest in him is quickly renewed.
The flying elephant not only draws in the crowds, but also the attentions of V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton), who offers Max a deal for him and his circus troupe to join his huge fancy theme park. It's at this point that the movie should really begin to soar, having introduced the circus family and their new arrival. Unfortunately, the arrival of Vandevere signals a sharp downward spiral in terms of story telling. The circus cast are all but forgotten, with the story focusing instead on the tired, familiar tale of sleazy, greedy businessman who is only interested in money and success, at the expense of the poor, trusting people who believed him.
The computerised Dumbo is simply oozing cuteness and technical wizardry. The eyes and the facial expressions are wonderful and he manages to steal every scene he is in. Every time he takes flight, it is a joy to watch. Unfortunately though, this version of Dumbo is trying to add a lot more to the original story and ends up becoming bit of a drag at times. The human characters are poorly written and mostly forgettable, and the movie really only soars when Dumbo himself does. While trying to steer clear of being a straight up remake, opting instead for the addition of plot and characters, it ultimately loses a lot of the charm. As with the recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, it's another case of style over substance.