History YMMV / BeautyAndTheBeast2017

** Belle's entire characterization, which plays up her feistiness and practicality while downplaying most of her softer and more feminine qualities from the animated version. To some fans, this is a truly progressive, likable change, which makes her both more relatable and more believably "odd" and ahead of her time than her animated counterpart. To others, she just comes across as cold and arrogant compared to the warmer, kinder animated Belle, not to mention results in inconsistencies with the song "Belle", where now she's shown chatting animatedly to several people in town, all while they're singing [[InformedAttribute about how she's "nothing like the rest of us"]]. Others also find the 'ahead of her time' attributes [[CluelessAesop poorly thought out]].

** Belle's entire characterization, which plays up her feistiness and practicality while downplaying most of her softer and more feminine qualities from the animated version. To some fans, this is a truly progressive, likable change, which makes her both more relatable and more believably "odd" and ahead of her time than her animated counterpart To others, she just comes across as cold and arrogant compared to the warmer, kinder animated Belle.

** It's very amusing to see Creator/EmmaWatson in ''Film/LittleWomen2019'' after this, where she is now the traditionally more feminine and ladylike Meg March -- in stark contrast to her usual NotLikeOtherGirls characters.

* TheyWastedAPerfectlyGoodCharacter: As much as fans were impressed with the backstory regarding [[spoiler:Belle's mother]], many were still rather disappointed by the fact that her ''name'' was never mentioned. The same goes for the Beast's mother; and truly, the film attempts to paint the subject of the dead mothers as something important and an element that Belle and Beast could bond over and their characters develop with, but aside from one or two scenes they're never integrated fully into the plot.

* OlderThanTheyThink: The concept of a war being part of the backstory originates with the original fairy tale where the Beast's mother waged war to defend her young son's kingdom due to her late husband being unable to do so.

* EvilIsSexy: This version of Gaston is considered this by many real life fangirls. He's portrayed as a charismatic sociopath played by the handsome Creator/LukeEvans.

** The announcement that this [=LeFou=] is canonically gay raised a lot of eyebrows and remains a polarizing topic when discussing the film. There are people happy to finally see a LGBT character in a Disney movie since it shows Disney is trying to be more inclusive with how they write their characters, on top of feeling like it avoids [=LeFou=] coming across as just a dumb fool like he was in the original version. Ignoring extreme views on it, some feel that making [=LeFou=] gay was the wrong choice since anyone but the villain's bumbling minion would have worked better, or find it doesn't contribute anything to the story since there are only a few small moments hinting at [=LeFou=]'s sexuality and they have no relevance to the story. Bill Condon subsequently regretted bringing up this issue at all because of the backlash that resulted.

** '''''HE DABBED'''''[[note]]In the "Be Our Guest" musical number, Lumiere appears to [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1XiuCzfimM dab]].[[/note]]

** The longstanding debate over whether Belle and the Beast's relationship is AMathchMadeInStockholm or not has been renewed with this remake to the point that Emma Watson was questioned about it in an interview with ''Entertainment Weekly'' a month before the film's release. Suffice it to say, she didn't exactly put the issue to bed with her claims that it isn't, since Disney wouldn't want the lead actress in a gigantic would-be blockbuster disparaging it to the press. Some [[https://www.elitedaily.com/entertainment/film/beauty-and-the-beasts-abusive-relationship-emma-watson/1828119 critics of the finished film]] argue that it ''is'' an unhealthy relationship, and [[http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-beauty-and-the-beast this review argues that it's only made worse]] by the fact that in this version the Enchanted Objects are serving as ShipperOnDeck not just in hopes of becoming human again but to literally save their own skins (since the curse will ''kill'' them if it isn't broken) and have no problem with manipulating their relationship to do so.

* {{Narm}}:
** The bizarre, stilted delivery of the "Bonjour/Good day/How is your family?" and "Bonjour/Good day/How is your wife?" lines in "Belle". In the original those lines were sung as conversations between two characters, and so the pause between each line made sense. In this version the same character delivers all three lines, complete with now-inexplicable pauses.
** The "Be Our Guest" sequence ends in a SmashToBlack transition, which can feel really random.

* WTHCastingAgency:
** Creator/LukeEvans as Gaston. While Luke Evans is a solid actor, he lacks the same energy and physical stature that made Gaston such a fun character in the original film. It's understandable that it would be hard to find an actor physically large to match the animated one while also having a layer of charisma to him, but Luke Evans, despite his best efforts and doing an overall solid job with the actual acting part of the character, isn't able to provide the same charisma nor physical presence Gaston is known for.
** Audra [=McDonald=], one of the greatest musical theater singers of her time, is cast in a musical in a role with far less singing than the other characters. To add insult to injury, most of the other performers have minimal musical theater experience. The key exceptions are Dan Stevens, Kevin Kline, Luke Evans, and Josh Gad... ''and it shows'', with many critics singling them out as the highlights of the cast even though their screentime (especially Kline's) is relatively limited.
** Some of the reaction to Emma Watson as Belle has been this, with many feeling that she isn't ''nearly'' a good enough singer to justify being in the lead role for a musical movie (especially a Disney one).
** The film also cast Harriet Jones -- an acclaimed musical actress who at the time of the film's release was one of the two main actresses for Christine in the West End's ''Theatre/ThePhantomOfTheOpera'' -- as the Prince's mother, who doesn't even get to ''speak,'' much less sing. There is, at least, an explanation for her casting: originally she was supposed to have a singing part (singing a lullaby to the young prince), but test audiences thought that she was Hattie Morahan (the woman who plays Agathe). This led them to believe that the Enchantress was singing to the young prince... for some reason. Thus they recast the prince, put Harriet in a dark wig, and reversed it so that the ''prince'' sang to ''her.''

** Some people have commented that Emma Watson's singing doesn't sound too AutoTune-y, though others note her reliance on "talk-singing" and some conspicuous autotuning in segments, particularly in "Belle."
** In another case, some people were willing to watch this remake until they noticed how it seemed to "borrow" the look/overall aesthetic of the [[Film/BeautyAndTheBeast2014 2014 French adaptation that toplined Vincent Cassel]]. Others argue that the original animated movie "borrowed" elements from [[Film/BeautyAndTheBeast1946 Jean Cocteau's 1946 adaptation]], another French production, stating that those people should accept that Disney's version will always end up copying elements from the French even if they don't like it.

** The longstanding debate over whether Belle and the Beast's relationship is StockholmSyndrome or not has been renewed with this remake to the point that Emma Watson was questioned about it in an interview with ''Entertainment Weekly'' a month before the film's release. Suffice it to say, she didn't exactly put the issue to bed with her claims that it isn't, since Disney wouldn't want the lead actress in a gigantic would-be blockbuster disparaging it to the press. Some [[https://www.elitedaily.com/entertainment/film/beauty-and-the-beasts-abusive-relationship-emma-watson/1828119 critics of the finished film]] argue that it ''is'' an unhealthy relationship, and [[http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-beauty-and-the-beast this review argues that it's only made worse]] by the fact that in this version the Enchanted Objects are serving as ShipperOnDeck not just in hopes of becoming human again but to literally save their own skins (since the curse will ''kill'' them if it isn't broken) and have no problem with manipulating their relationship to do so.

* ItsTheSameNowItSucks: Quite a few viewers, including professional critics, are having this reaction to the most faithful of the Disney live-action rethinks of their animated canon yet, seeing it as little more than Disney cashing in on nostalgia for the original, perhaps in hopes of moving new and more tie-in merchandise. Negative reviews argue this remake does ''nothing'' better than the original did -- the most common comparison made is to Gus Van Sant's ill-fated ''Psycho'' remake -- with the AdaptationExpansion only bloating the runtime, weighing down the atmosphere, and making the story's flaws (in particular the StockholmSyndrome issue) stand out more.

* SpecialEffectsFailure:

** Beast's decision to let Belle leave the castle to see her ill father ends up looking very foolish and callous given the specifics of the curse in this version. [[WesternAnimation/BeautyAndTheBeast In the original film]], all that was said about the curse if it wasn't broken was the transformation of the Beast and the castle residents would be permanent, given the denizens didn't seem to be too bothered by their transformation Beast letting Belle go wasn't seen as a bad thing. In contrast, the remake adds that all the denizens turned into objects will become [[AndIMustScream immobile and inanimate if the curse isn't broken]]. While this could be seen as a Trolley problem dilemma, most instances of the Trolley problem force the user to pick between letting multiple people die by doing nothing or diverting the trolley [[TheNeedsOfTheMany to save more people, while sacrificing another]]. But in ''this'' scenario diverting the trolley (letting Belle go) will lead to '''more''' deaths than doing nothing, making Beast’s choice hard to agree with.

* The villagers were given an AdaptationalNiceGuy change by making them more wary of Gaston to the point of [=LeFou=] having to pay them to sing during "Gaston" and suspected him to try and killed Maurice. However, they were also given the AdaptationalJerkass treatment by being more bigoted towards Belle for less understandable reasons. Such as complaining to her about promoting female literacy in a time period where it's not looked down upon. In the end, it makes the ending where they regained their memories of being [[spoiler: former castle residents and servants]] hollow since they never apologize for their behavior towards Belle or realize that they almost killed [[spoiler: their friends and family.]]
* Beast's decision to let Belle go and see her father ends up looking very foolish and callous given the specifics of the curse in this version. [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WesternAnimation/BeautyAndTheBeast In the original film]], all that was said about the curse if it wasn't broken was the transformation of the Beast and the castle residents would be permanent, given the denizens didn't seem to be too bothered by their transformation Beast letting Belle go wasn't seen as a bad thing. In contrast, the remake adds that all the denizens turned into objects will become [[AndIMustScream immobile and inanimate if the curse isn't broken]]. While this could be seen as a Trolley problem dilemma, most instances of the Trolley problem force the user to pick between letting multiple people die by doing nothing or diverting the trolley [[TheNeedsOfTheMany to save more people, while sacrificing another]]. But in ''this'' scenario diverting the trolley (letting Belle go) will lead to '''more''' deaths than doing nothing, making Beast’s choice hard to agree with.

* UnintentionallyUnsympathetic: The villagers were given an AdaptationalNiceGuy change by making them more wary of Gaston to the point of [=LeFou=] having to pay them to sing during "Gaston" and suspected him to try and killed Maurice. However, they were also given the AdaptationalJerkass treatment by being more bigoted towards Belle for less understandable reasons. Such as complaining to her promoting female literacy in a time period where it's not looked down upon. In the end, it makes the ending where they regained their memories of being [[spoiler: former castle residents and servants]] hollow since they never apologize for their behavior towards Belle or realizing that they almost killed [[spoiler: their friends and family.]]

*** Is he a loathsome man in every single way? Or is he a DesignatedVillain? Some people think that Gaston went out of his way to give Belle flowers, and comfort her after the villagers harassed her, only to get rejected. Also, they think that Gaston, in offering to help Maurice rescue Belle, is more heroic and think that Maurice is wrong in denying Gaston his blessing. [[UnfortunateImplications Of course, this seems to imply that Belle somehow has no right to reject him since he was acting nice to her; and factors out the fact that guys do act nice to girls in order to manipulate them into liking the guy.]]

* AuthorsSavingThrow:
** In the 1991 film, fans often questioned why the painting of the prince looked like an adult young man, despite the narrative implying that he was cursed at 11 years old. In the official trailer for the adaptation, the painting shows up and this time the prince clearly looks like a child in it. In the film proper, however, the prince is still a grown-up when he's cursed. Interestingly, Lumiere's line "Ten years we've been rusting" from "Be Our Guest" has been changed to "too long we've been rusting", to make the timeline of how long the curse has lasted more ambiguous. [[note]]In the original film, it has been confirmed that he was indeed a child when he was cursed; in the original screenplay of the movie written by Linda Woolverton, the prologue mentions that the Prince was 11 years of age when he was cursed. The screenplay also mentions that the Prince was the reigning monarch of the kingdom he lived in and that Lumière and Cogsworth (unnamed at that point) were his regents. The depiction in the portrait was not an uncommon case: portraits of King Edward Tudor (Edward VI) depict him as looking 18 years of age, when in reality, he was 13 years of age when it was painted, as this was the case of children who were the reigning monarchs of their country.[[/note]]
** The curse is made more specific, both to answer the question of why no one in the village was aware of the castle until the events of the story unfolded, and to clarify how much time actually passed for the characters. (The action seems to unfold over late fall to early spring in the original, but this is rather subtle and opens up plot holes to what the non-castle inhabitants are up to during the winter.) The Enchantress erased the villagers' memories of the fact they had a castle and a prince nearby, and the castle is surrounded by EndlessWinter.
** Belle in the animated film has been seen as arrogant by some viewers, who feel she acts like she's too good for the town. Her changed backstory in this film, of having been born in Paris where her parents lived as bohemian artists, helps explain her attitude in a sympathetic way, making it clear that she's never fully felt comfortable living in the village and wants to know about the big city she was born in as well as just see the world in general. The villagers are also more openly antagonistic towards her: rather than just talking behind her back, they openly disparage her for teaching a little girl to read and break the washing machine she'd created to help with her chores.
** It's often pointed out that the Enchantress is particularly cruel because she cursed not only the Prince but also all of his servants who had nothing to do with how he treated her, in an extreme case of DisproportionateRetribution. This time around, Mrs. Potts admits that the servants should have protected the Prince from his heartless father but didn't, and are partially responsible for him becoming so cruel, as well as doing nothing to help the old beggar woman he turned out; thus, their part of the punishment is more justified. (Though you are left to wonder why a small boy, two visiting musicians, and a dog were also included in this punishment. This was actually {{lampshade|Hanging}}d by [[spoiler:[=LeFou=]]] [[http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1636550/was-mr-potts-the-character-worst-affected-by-the-beauty-and-the-beast-curse in a cut scene]] where he points out how many people suffered because of the curse and asks the Enchantress if it was really necessary.)
*** In addition, the fact that the Enchantress stuck around and guided events so that the curse would break suggest that she never intended to permanently punish anyone.
** In the scene when the Beast is injured by the wolves, the original implied that Belle picked up the Beast to get him onto her horse. However, there was no way someone of her size could pick up someone as massive as the Beast, even for a short time. In this version, Belle firmly orders the Beast to stand and she talks him through his pain so that the horse can get under him. Fans agreed this was much more realistic.
** Viewers of the animated film often wondered how the angry mob was able to find the castle so quickly when they had no idea of its existence or how Belle and Maurice found it. Here, Gaston is shown using the magic mirror he took from Belle as a map to it. Though, to be fair, this was implied in the original animated version since he had it in his belt and Mrs. Potts acknowledged it, just not outright shown.
** Showing how this trope [[Administrivia/TropesAreTools does not always work]], a major criticism of the film from some (particularly Creator/LindsayEllis) is the excessive use of this in an attempt to pander to bad faith critics of the original.

* DesignatedLoveInterest: Several reviews argue that Belle and the Beast lack romantic chemistry compared to the animated film. On the surface their romance plays out much the same as the 1991 version but the alteration of certain details changes how their relationship comes acros, and usually not for the better. In general their relationship is more stilted and emotionally (plus physically) distant. To start, the Beast was apparently fine leaving Belle in the dungeon here, seeing as it's Lumiere and Cogsworth who take her to a proper room, making him seem far more callous towards her. The Beast showing Belle his library comes off less as a heartfelt gift and a sign of the Beast's CharacterDevelopment, given that here he's ''showing off'' the library after insulting Belle's taste in books (and arguably lording his wealth over her). In the iconic ballroom scene both of them - though especially Belle - seem neutral rather than nervously joyous even though they're on the cusp of admitting their feelings. The film even largely skims over the added plot point of them [[BondingOverMissingParents both having dead mothers]] (i.e. when the Beast finds out what happened to Belle's mother, rather than try to comfort Belle he just makes some random comment about her dad and it never comes up again). Overall, they can come across less as two people deeply in love and more like tentative friends, and we're expected to buy them as a romantic couple just because it's ''Beauty and the Beast''.

* CriticalResearchFailure:
** Emma Watson notably didn't wear a corset for any of her costumes, arguing that Belle wouldn't be restricted and would dress in order to able to move freely. However, stays in the eighteenth century were designed much more to support the bust rather than reduce the waist -- they were essentially the ancestor of the bra -- and by necessity ''had'' to be easy to move in while still helping the wearer with both her posture and the heavy skirts and petticoats that were also a standard part of female fashions.
--->'''WebVideo/BernadetteBanner''': ...if I were the costume designer to whom Miss Watson had allegedly refused wearing a corset, I would have amiably and wholeheartedly agreed -- and then put her in a pair of stays.
** The entire idea of Belle being discouraged for teaching a young girl to read. The original gets a pass because it's deliberately pretty vague when it takes place, but the remake takes place in a period that can be narrowed down to pre-Revolution France. At that point of history, discrimination against female literacy was scarcely true; magazines for women and girls were quite common. Where this slips into critical territory is that the original ''Beauty and the Beast'' was at one point ''published'' in such a magazine!

*** Speaking of which, some viewers feel that Gaston should have been given his original death (where he survives his fall but gets eaten by wolves). The fact that he tied Maurice to a tree with the intent for wolves to devour him could have been the perfect setup for LaserGuidedKarma and a clever use of DiesDifferentlyInAdaptation. This makes how he still dies the same way he did originally a big missed opportunity.

** Also, ''how'' she begs for shelter. In the original, the scene is presented as her knocking on the door of the castle to request shelter, and when the Prince sees her appearance, he refuses. Here, she basically forces her way in and then begs for shelter, which makes her seem UintentionallyUnsympathetic since now it makes the Prince look completely justified in refusing to give her shelter, which was obviously not what the intention was. It causes the Prince to look UnintentionallySympathetic, since it makes it look like the Enchantress was setting him up to fail.

*** On the other hand, some fans who admire Watson for her feminist activism were deeply disappointed to see her most high-profile role since the ''Harry Potter'' films that of a character associated, fairly or not, with StockholmSyndrome (see above). Even though she and the filmmakers are making some effort to play up the character's intelligence and independence, for these fans [[http://jezebel.com/emma-watson-doesnt-think-stockholm-syndrome-is-an-issue-1792460572 it doesn't add up to much if she still falls in love with her initially-brutish captor]].
** The announcement that this [=LeFou=] is canonically gay raised a lot of eyebrows. There are people happy to finally see a significant LGBT character in a Disney movie, people who think it should have been a character ''other'' than a villain's bumbling minion, people who think it's needlessly kowtowing to political correctness, etc. (Even before this announcement, the casting of Josh Gad in the role was base breaking in and of itself.) In the actual movie, [[spoiler: there are only a few small moments hinting at [=LeFou=]'s sexuality and they have no relevance to the story, while the "exclusive gay moment" is him dancing with a crossdresser ([[ItMakesSenseInContext who was attacked by the wardrobe during the castle invasion]]) for a few seconds in the finale]]. Bill Condon subsequently regretted bringing up this issue at all because of the backlash that resulted. A few years later, Disney did a stealth retcon on it by announcing Specter from ''WesternAnimation/{{Onward}}'' as their "first" gay character.

** [=LeFou=], ''the villain's minion'', gets a ''lot'' of love from the film's fandom, partially because he's genuinely funny, but also because he's Disney's first openly LGBT character. The fact that he has a proper character arc [[spoiler:and a HeelFaceTurn]] helps, too. Many fans often say that they like him better than his animated counterpart, because of this.

** Also, ''how'' she begs for shelter. In the original, she (presumably) knocks on the door and asks for shelter. Here, she more or less breaks in and then begs for shelter. Now this might've been a way to give the Prince's character a good reason to refuse her (in the original he is disgusted by her appearance). But not only does it make the Prince a bit too sympathetic, it makes it look like the Enchantress was setting them up to fail.

* {{Applicability}}: Keeping in mind the debate as to whether or not [[WesternAnimation/Frozen2013 Queen Elsa's]] concealing her powers and then finding a form of freedom after being "outed" is a metaphor for LGBTQ individuals, a similar debate could be posed for the Beast, as he has to whether he is a human trapped in a beast's body, or if he is truly a beast after all. Much of how the plot proceeds is based on others' presumptions based on his outward appearance and on his own presumptions of how they will react to him (he had the ability to leave the castle and find his love any time, and ultimately his true love lived a short horse ride away in the neighboring village). This one is an easier sell, since the Beast is literally Trans, being trans''formed'' rather than transgender.

* UncannyValley: