Emma Watson rose to fame through her role as Hermione harry potter movies, but she has certainly demonstrated the ability to move beyond that part in her acting career. As Disney’s recent habit of turning animated classics into more mature live-action favorites continued, Watson played Belle in the 2017 film beauty and the Beast.
Critics and audience members alike praised Watson’s performance in the role, and she seemed a particularly convincing belle—perhaps because Hermione had already established her as a smart book lover. Was! What fans might not know, however, is that Watson almost played Cinderella in the live-action remake of that particular story.
Cinderella is an outstanding piece of Disney princess history
Cinderella has been a part of the Disney catalog for a very long time. The animated film Disney, released in 1950, is one of the most classic examples of a Disney princess, and Cinderella herself has become an icon. The story of the rag-to-riches princess is so enchanting that many have added it to their real-life wedding ceremonies!
When it came to remaking classics into live-action versions, cinderella Wasn’t the first film to get treated. In 1994, Disney’s live-action version the jungle Book Put a new spin on the 1967 animated film. In 1996, 101 Dalmatians The update to the 1961 animated classic brings us Glenn Close as the villainous Cruella.
Cinderella also wasn’t the first Disney princess to get a live-action equivalent. That honor will go to Aurora (Sleeping Beauty), played by Elle Fanning in 2014 harmful, but she was not the star of the show, which was a fresh fantasy sleeping Beauty than a true remake.
2015 release cinderella For the first time a Disney princess animated classic was brought to life with live actors as an actual remake, and it was a highly anticipated occasion.
Emma Watson turned down the role of Cinderella
Finding the right actor to play the titular role of the overworked princess was an important part of the production. cinderella come to life Emma Watson was not only a top candidate for the position, but she was actually offered the position. In the end, the star turned it down. As buzzfeed report, his eyes were on the future. she knew that beauty and the Beast A future live-action remake was in the works, and she was more related to Belle than Cinderella. It was a risky move on her part to turn down a guaranteed role that wasn’t even officially in the works, but it ended.
The part of Cinderella went to Lily James, and the role helped her Downton Abbey Actors make the leap from the small screen to films. Ever since she got a chance to showcase her musical acting talent in films Mama Mia! here we go again And yesterday.
Did Emma Watson Make the Right Call?
As we all know now, Emma Watson’s decision to wait for Bayley’s part beauty and the Beast Got the solution exactly two years later cinderellahandjob beauty and the Beast became the second Disney princess film to get a live-action remake, and Watson stole the show as The Beast with Dan Stevens as the brilliant Belle. She definitely got to play a role that resonated better with her personally. Was it the right call from a professional standpoint?
A comparison of the two films based on their Rotten Tomatoes score shows that Watson did the right thing. whereas cinderella fared well among critics (receiving an impressive 83% rating and earning rotten Tomatoes‘ labeled “Certified Fresh”), beauty and the Beast was also well received. Watson helped the film reach 71% rotten Tomatoes‘Critics score.
When it comes to audience reception, the two films are almost indistinguishable, and both have done quite well. cinderella Receives a score of 78% viewers, while beauty and the Beast reached an impressive 80%. Ultimately, both films found a lead that worked well and opened to a rapturous reception for the live-action princesses.
‘Beauty and the Beast’: ‘Be Our Guest’ Looked Very Different From the Original Result