IMDb > Beauty and the Beast (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Beauty and the Beast
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Beauty and the Beast More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 18 reviews in total 

41 out of 57 people found the following review useful:

absolutely awful

Author: Cristina Cristina from Romania
29 January 2010

This movie is awful. I just wasted precious minutes that I'm not getting back. After watching the movie on fast-forward (I couldn't bare to watch it full), I thought there were dozens of ways in which I could have spent this wasted time.

Estella Warren was a..let's say..good cast. although such a bad script and lines would make even Sean Connery look like a B-grade actor. The troll, the Beast and the gore scenes looked so fake that I wonder how was it possible for this movie to be directed in 2009. What budget did this movie have?? A few thousand dollars, probably. The movie completely destroyed one of the best animations. I will totally erase this movie from my memory and cherish the true "Beauty and the Beast".

I rated it 1/10 just because 0 isn't possible.

*** excuse my bad grammar, I'm not a genuine English-speaker.

Was the above review useful to you?

36 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

Don't try with this movie

Author: Haytham from Egypt
26 January 2010

I think that 90 minutes are too much for that nonsense, I have not seen such horrible acting, bad directing or terrible dialogue. I have seen the cartoon, that was produced in 1991, which was marvelous compared to this failure.

Please, if you want to do something enjoyable stay away from this film and watch a football match, watch a silly comedy show or go to sleep.

But if you're going to watch it. remember that I warned you and say to your kids "don't be afraid from this fake beast, boys"

This film really deserves to be one of the worst 10 movies that can be watched ever.

I rated the film 1 because I couldn't rate it 0.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

David Lister tries for a second time and has an epic fail... again.

Author: Erik (ErikAngelofMusic) from Somewhere between here and there
7 March 2010

Once upon a time, David Lister, the director of this version of Beauty and the Beasts(2009), directed another movie called Blood of Beasts(2003). It was another film based on Beauty and the Beast and it was awful, but terribly funny in a way it was never meant to be. Because Blood of Beasts(2003) was so awful, it made sick and twisted sense for him to try to go ahead and redo it.

With David Lister (as one of the most ineffective directors around), I knew what I was getting into. Low-budget? Yes. Bad costumes? Yes. Bad directing? Yes. Bad acting? Heh, let's try NO acting. It was perfectly set up for accidental comic brilliance.

Let me say this: David Lister has really out-done himself this time. Beauty and the Beasts(2009) is even worse than Blood of Beasts(2003), and that is no small feat.

I laughed the whole way through. Between the miniskirt with the brown vinyl corset thrown over it, inappropriate uses of CGI, the Botox lips-of-doom, the high school theatre costume department reject wigs, and the ketchup-for-blood effects, if I did not laugh I would have cried, it was that painful.

Even then, let's chalk that up to low-budgeting. If there are good actors and good directors, any film can shine. My favourite Beauty and the Beast film, the Czechoslovakian Panna a netvor(1978), is riddled with the signs of a low-budget: simple special-effects, second rate costumes, natural and sparse sets. Still Panna a netvor(1978) is brilliant, making up in plot, intensity and acting what it lacked in money. With this in mind, Beauty and the Beasts(2009) has no excuse.

It was excruciatingly painful, so much so that you have to be masochistic to watch it more than once, but I think I could have forgiven much of it had the film had even the barest sense of humour. Everyone takes themselves much too seriously. Imagine a campy Vincent Price flick like the Abominable Dr. Phibes(1971) in which they try to be serious? It wouldn't work, and it didn't work here.

I'll give it a point for the potential of the story. It was an interesting idea which happily did not conform to the established version of Beauty and the Beast, and it *could* have had interesting repercussions. Still, and not surprisingly, it failed to deliver.

This is the sort of traumatic experience in which an "I survived Beauty and the Beasts: A Dark Tale 2009" t-shirt should be made so that you can be admired and pitied all at once.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 41 people found the following review useful:

Let the beast remain inside the cage

Author: mshabaz
25 January 2010

I happened to saw this movie today regardless of the many warnings that I will be wasting my time if I do. And yes, I believe, I not only wasted my time, I forgot what the real story of Beauty and the Beast was. I wonder why nowadays anyone can come up with an empty plot and file up the movie name with a title of a legendary story. Someone should stop this, or we may be seeing Snow white with Pinochio dancing in Cinderella's ball.

Estella Warren was a good cast, but Director David Lister failed to bring up some nice actor with her. Though I saw one at the end, just thirty seconds ago the movie was ending.

AS far as gore is concerned, the effects and graphics looked exactly what a low budget movie should display.

In no way this movie can be classified as a family movie, or a movie for children, because of the so much blood and gore in it, which all looked artificial though.

This one deserved 3/10, because I need to rate at least something.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Bad acting, bad effects, bad script, bad quality. Bad, bad, bad. Really only two reasons to watch. I say D

Author: Tony Heck ( from United States
3 April 2011

How can you prove your innocence if everyone thinks your guilty. After many townspeople wind up dead, the Beast (Parascos) is blamed. Belle (Warren) and her father know the truth but it may be too late to help. Where to begin....This movie was lame. It reminded me a lot of the "Hercules" and "Xena" TV shows, without the witty dialog. It was a made for TV movie (I think) so I can't be too harsh on the effects, but when someone's head gets cut off and 2 little squirts of blood show up, I mean come on. I think this one was rushed out to coincide with the movie "Beastly" that is in theaters, and it shows (that it was rushed). I was not expecting a lot from this, but it was really, really bad. Ill stick with the cartoon. There were really only two reasons I kept watching, you will know why when you see this. It's actually almost worth watching to see how bad it is. I give it a D.

Would I watch again? - Never again will I watch this

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

don't Watch.

Author: rynex74
23 January 2011

basically, the movie is Shite! although Estella warren is really hot! could've been better if you made a porn movie out of this. i'm not saying that you should. but the movie is just horrible! special effects is a 1 out of 10 acting is a 4 out of 10 costume, i can give it a 7 out of 10 (just because Estella looks really HOT!) just please! if you plan on watching this or buying this movie, Don't! it's completely Boring, bad acting. bad Background music. and as i said, better if they made a PORN movie out of it. it's just that awful. i have seen the original cartoon and its better. even though there is a twist on the tale, when i watched it, the storyline basically changed. as i said better if it showed some skin or better if it was made for porn.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

Laughable attempt at making a movie!

Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
7 February 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie, well I use the term movie loosely here, is bad.

It seemed like someone had gotten the idea to bring a camera along to one of their live roleplaying game sessions in the forest. It was horrible! Lets go through the "movie", shall we?

THE ACTING? - What acting? Whatever they portrayed here was amateurish at best.

THE CAST? - Well, Estella Warren was so badly cast! I didn't know they had Botox lips back in the medieval times. Her lack of acting was astounding. Rhett Giles was perhaps the one with the most outstanding performance, but it was a half-hearted attempt at best.

THE CGI/SPECIAL EFFECTS? - They meant well enough with the creature/troll (whatever you want to call it), but it was poorly implemented in the movie, it looked bad. The textures and design of the creature were good, but it was just too poorly put into the movie. And for some reason magic also turns clothing to stone, not only flesh?! One of the more laughable scenes was when the beast turned into the prince, and his old, filthy clothes turned into rich garments worn by royalty? Alrighty then, so I guess the sorceress not only curse the prince, but his clothing as well? What the hell!?

THE SET/SCENERY? - Nice enough, though some question should be brought as to how far up was the sorcerer's room in the tower? Apparently it was super easy to climb up there. Easy enough to throw a small leather pouch up there. And for some reason, the castle had surprisingly few guards and soldiers stationed there. The village, well let's just say what village? It consisted of two or three buildings.

This movie seemed even to be too crappy to be shown on the Hallmark channel. I watched it with no expectations and a handful of doubt as to how good (or bad) something like this would turn out to be. And it turned out BAD! I didn't give it a rating of 1, because I managed to sit through its entire length, determined to see it to the end. And I am glad that it did end. It was a horrible fantasy/adventure experience.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

surprised at all the bad reviews....

Author: belleoftheball-669-250512 from United States
22 February 2010

Im really surprised by all the bad reviews this movie has gotten. I, for one, immensely enjoyed it. First of all the plot was completely original. For once I didn't have it figured out in the first 10 minutes and think that gave it a nice twist. Yeah the special effects weren't great but they were still gory. Give 'em some credit at least they put some thought into it. I also REALLY LIKED BELLE. I hate the movies that have a quiet, demure heroine in it. This time, Belle had spunk! She was a witty, sarcastic little spitfire and kept me laughing through the whole movie. I was also really glad to see that she didn't end up playing some tragic, defenseless victim. She and the beast saved each other quite a few times throughout the movie and I was glad that FOR ONCE their was a couple who I could look at as equals. I give it a 7 because essentially, to me, this movie looks like a rough draft of a really great movie. It is a little cheesy, but to me that just adds to it.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Um OK 2009 goes back to the dark ages

Author: blackrose1989 from australia
12 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

So story line was alright. But acting poor...the beast his make up effects where alright but his transformation was poor.

Spoiler: heads being chopped of and the arterial spray was to great and not really in the formation of an arterial spray, and the fact that they kept talking after they had no head. Really?

To me it felt like it was done by drama students in grade 10.

Belles Short dress was not apt of the time, nor was the low cleavage.

I am in no way comparing to Disneys Beauty and the Beast. but that is still a classic where i think this movie could win the worst movie ever.

The fact that the beast did nothing in order to be transformed. Where as the original book clearly states that his pride was his own downfall.

Bit too twisted from the original script.

If you don't mind corny than go ahead and watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

a beauty of a film not in the least

Author: RavenGlamDVDCollector from South Africa
26 October 2014

This is not the B-A-D movie I expected after two months of involvement with it on IMDb; see my message 'Consumer Alert' on the board post. I expected a very weak movie after all the negative reviews. For sure, this isn't a great movie, but it does have moments. The problem with it, is that it is SERIOUSLY FLAWED.

I also have the misfortune that after having to reschedule my planned watching of this title from late in August to tonight, I watched this one a week after THE STRANGER WITHIN, and in that one, Estella Warren is the aging former star (unbearably close to harsh reality) and that hindsight is totally bothersome when watching this movie. There are several very obviously unflattering angles here of the Beauty's face that should have been discarded and re-shot, but no, the Director wallowed on.

They were too intent on blood and gore, and didn't even realize that their blood and gore wasn't exactly well-filmed. Oh, an A+ for effort here, but look at that junk: it's laughably shoddy. Blood spurting from severed arteries would be six-feet high gushers that would ruin any camera within sight!

The standout is the troll. It was creepy, really creepy, like Yikes!! The Beast looked like E.T. met Vincent of the 1987 TV series. But the real beast that did all the slaying was Estella's uneven acting. For shame! You can't act for toffees, girl! You're much better on the DVD's interview where you are just yourself and excited about the movie. Stilted and uneven, gives way too little, especially in scenes where she is supposed to be distressed, like when the troll grabs her, it's like she's just reciting half-heartedly something vaguely pathetic, but OK, she knows her movies are going straight to video anyway, so why the hell bother, huh?

Estella, I understand you are a great person, but these performances are gonna haunt you for the rest of your life, dear. And people who know RavenGlamDVDCollector know that I defend the actresses and their titles all the way till the cows come home, but Estella, darling, you have to be more convincing all the way through... It's like this, baby, you have to pretend the bad stuff is really happening, like that mean old troll has really grabbed you, and you're scared, desperate...

If only they'd have done this when Estella was truly in her prime. As a pin-up model she was great! I'd not have gone on (so much) about the hammy acting then...

Oh, and this is also a review of THE STRANGER WITHIN. Estella Warren fans stay away from that one. Rather watch ol' BEAUTY AND THE BEAST A DARK TALE again. It has moments...

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history