‘Beauty and the Beast’: 5 Reasons the Disney Fantasy Scored at the Box Office

Courtesy of Disney

Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast” scored with audiences, racking up a massive $170 million domestically to become the biggest March debut ever and the seventh-best opening in history. The fairy tale remake added an additional $180 million to its haul from international territories, raking in big bucks in major markets like China and the United Kingdom.

Once again, Disney has successfully updated a “tale as old as time” for a new generation of moviegoers while retaining the sense of wonder and magic that made the 1991 animated version of “Beauty and the Beast” a cultural touchstone for an older audience. It continues the studio’s successful collection of live-action remakes of cartoon favorites like “The Jungle Book” and “Cinderella” and helps propel star Emma Watson to the top of the A-list. Here are five reasons “Beauty and the Beast” smashed records.


Movie fans grew up with Watson, watching the precocious young girl become a woman onscreen as she played Hermione Granger in eight Harry Potter films. Since leaving Hogwarts behind in 2011, Watson has been choosy with her projects. She’s taken supporting or ensemble roles in “Noah,” “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” and “The Bling Ring,” but seemed to be biding her time, trying to find the right blockbuster-hopeful to headline.


Emma Watson stars as Belle and Dan Stevens as the Beast in Disney's BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, a live-action adaptation of the studio's animated classic directed by Bill Condon.

Box Office: ‘Beauty and the Beast’ Smashes Records With Towering $170 Million Debut

The wait was worth it, even if it meant that Watson was forced to cede the lead in “La La Land” to Emma Stone in order to waltz across the screen as Belle. The plucky heroine was the right match for the Brown University-educated Watson, a celebrity who has used her platform to speak out on women’s issues and gender equality.

“She talks about things publicly and she has a point of view,” said Greg Foster, CEO of Imax Entertainment, the big screen company that broke records showing “Beauty and the Beast.” “She speaks to the millennial generation in an authentic way.”

Her candor and political drive has earned her a passionate following on Twitter, where her 24 million followers eclipse those of Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert Downey Jr., and on Facebook, on which 34 million people checked out trailers and photos from the “Beauty and the Beast” set. As a sign of her popularity, 28% of audiences in a ComScore survey said that Watson was the major reason for attending the film. That figure rarely tops 10%, according to the research firm.


With the possible exception of “The Lion King,” “Beauty and the Beast” may be the most beloved film in the Disney canon. It’s the only traditionally animated offering to nab an Oscar nomination for best picture and, along with “The Little Mermaid,” helped usher in a new renaissance at the Mouse House that lasted from the late 1980’s to the mid-1990’s. Its presence can be felt across the Disney landscape — in its consumer products lines, cruises, and in Broadway shows.

That ubiquity helped turn the remake into a multi-generational smash. A wide swath of moviegoers was weaned on the story of Belle, fed up with her provincial life, and the moody Beast whose heart she captures — and, oh, those singing and dancing candlesticks and teapots! They, in turn, wanted to share the magic with their own children. Families accounted for half of the opening weekend audience, with the two largest demographics comprising of children under 12 and people between the ages of 26 and 34, the same group that were preadolescents when the animated film hit theaters. The filmmakers more or less left the plot from the animated film intact, padding it with a few new songs.


Emma Watson stars as Belle and Dan Stevens as the Beast in Disney's BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, a live-action adaptation of the studio's animated classic directed by Bill Condon.

‘Beauty and the Beast’: Emma Watson & Cast Bring the Classic Songs to Life

That all translated into a nostalgia drive-smash, according to Disney distribution chief Dave Hollis. He noted that each time a new image for the film was unveiled or a trailer was released, it went viral.

“People hold the original film in such high regard,” he said. “We made this one new and contemporary while leveraging the fanship that already existed for the story.”


It’s hard to believe that not that long ago many studios dismissed the female audience as less important than the male one. There was a belief that getting boys into cinemas was crucially important and that if you built a film that was geared at that set, the girls would follow suit. Thanks to smash hits like “The Hunger Games,” “Maleficent,” and “Pitch Perfect,” that short-sighted thinking is passé.

The first “Beauty and the Beast” represented a turning point for Disney heroines. Unlike previous animated women and girls, Belle didn’t just sitting around humming with the sparrows while waiting for her prince to come. The remake continues the first film’s message of empowerment, digging deeper into Belle’s backstory to reveal what happened to her late mother and making her even more fervently opposed to the advances of the boorish Gaston (Luke Evans). “Beauty and the Beast’s” feminist DNA translated into ticket sales, with females comprising 60% of the weekend crowd.


The studio has become synonymous with a kind of big-budget entertainment in recent years. After buying up colossuses such as Lucasfilm and Marvel, Disney is dominating the multiplexes releasing Star Wars adventures, Avengers sequels, and, now, elaborate live-action fairy tales that are catnip to consumers. At a time when Netflix, the internet, and a glut of quality cable programming are making it harder for studios to figure out how to get consumers off their couches, Disney has figured out how to sell the kind of spectacle that can’t be replicated on an iPhone or even the most tricked-out of televisions. Its logo carries a promise that audiences will be able to venture off to sprawling cinematic universes that represent escapism in its most essential form.

“Disney just knows how to make these big blockbusters,” said Jeff Bock, a box office analyst with Exhibitor Relations. “Most studios have four or five big hits and then they suffer a big miss. But they can do no wrong.”

Its success isn’t necessarily trickling over to the other players in Hollywood. Disney earned 60% of the film business’ profits in 2016, according to a recent report by Cowen & Company’s Doug Cruetz,  even as returns across the rest of the industry were down by a third.


It’s been over a month since “The Lego Batman Movie” debuted, a long stretch without a major family film release. Instead, the box office has been dominated by a slew of violent films, such as the hard R-rated “Logan” and “Get Out,” as well as the monster thriller “Kong: Skull Islands.” With schools on rolling spring breaks, there are a lot of parents out there looking to do something with their kids. That helped make “Beauty and the Beast” the de facto choice for moviegoers with families over the weekend, a position it should retain at least until “The Boss Baby” hits theaters in two weeks.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 20

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. I definitely see why this recent remake generated so much in box office sales. I was less than 4 years old when the original Disney animated movie Beauty and the Beast came out and now parents in my generations are seeing it with their kids. The adults that are the most nostalgic have a gorgeous wardrobe remake of their own.

  2. Alex Meyer says:

    The original film was one of my all-time childhood favorites, and this live action remake definitely delivered!!!

  3. willy wonka says:

    This list is WRONG. How is the MUSIC not even mentioned? Emma Watson brought nothing to the table but her name. She can’t act, sing, or dance. Stop hyping up her performance.

  4. Paully says:

    The original created a lot of good will, The Mouse returned the favor to the fans (Fan Service) by making an “good” movie..
    This seems to be a concept that WB/DC can’t understand..

  5. The Truth says:

    All those bashing Emma Watson’s performance or pontificating that BATB would’ve been just as successful with another actress are hopelessly clueless regarding blockbuster casting. Analytics categorically confirm that the target market for this film loves Watson more than any other actress by a substantial metric margin. They don’t care if her singing is less than stellar. For her virtually unrivaled global following, she’s intelligent girl power personified and the optimal Belle hands down. And every marketing professional in the business will confirm that she delivered her audience in spades. End of story.

    And those who ludicrously pronounce that Watson will never be an A-list actress are amateurishly out of touch. Every major producer and director in town would work with her in a heartbeat.

    • Bigstik says:

      Then how do explain the success of Cinderella, Alice, The Jungle Book? None of those movies had stars in the lead and two of them made a billion dollars. It’s all about the IP, not the actor. Her perfornance in this movie, just like in all her movies, was terrible.

      And sorry mister Lang, but this doesn’t propel her anywhere. If Potter didn’t do it, this won’t either. All of her movies outside of Potter did nothing at the box office. Her fans only want to see her Hermione or Bellmione. Plus she’s 27, that’s getting old for an actress in Hollywood years.

      • cn says:

        Alice had Johnny Depp and like Jungle Book relied on visual effects. Cinderella meanwhile lacked both the stars and visuals and it ended up with a significantly lower box office gross. Like Angelina Jolie for Maleficent, BatB wouldn’t have soared as high as it did if it wasn’t for Emma Watson.

    • VoiceOfReason says:

      You’re delusional. She fit the character of Belle because she herself is a bookworm and feminist, but she is not an A-class actress. Every single supporting actor outshone her in both acting and singing.

  6. Sally says:

    Those comments are right Emma is the worst part of the movie. The film was a success no matter which actress played Belle. In fact all the supporting cast was the best. And definetely EW will never be an A-list actress she has been terrible all these years and is not going to get better any soon.

  7. Truth Teller 2 says:

    Emma Watson was NOT the reason people went and saw this. She was the WORST part of the film. You could have put Andy Dick in the role of Belle and people would still go. It was nostalgia for the original that got people through the door.

    • cn says:

      Without Emma Watson, the movie would likely have topped only $700 million. Whatever your opinion is of her and her performance, there’s no denying that she’s a major pull for the movie’s audiences just like Angelina was for Maleficent. Remember that the two lowest grossers of these remakes are Oz and Cinderella and they both lacked stars. Junglebook is an exception because it relied heavy on the visuals.

  8. galavantsquire says:

    I don’t agree with the 1st point. I was underwhelmed with Emma Watson’s performance. She’s okay in this, However, I do agree with the rest of the points, it’s Disney- it’s flop-proof because the original animation was a classic and well-loved.

  9. Dancer21 says:

    This movie is great in spite of Emma… not even the heavy auto tuning could save her. It was slow and painful when she was “singing”. I’m surprised they didn’t just have someone else sing for her. Everyone else did beautifully!

  10. Daryle says:

    How could the MUSIC not have been among your five top reasons! Sheesh!

  11. VoiceOfReason says:

    I think it’s very inaccurate to say this was a hit because of Emma Watson. Her name certainly helped, but she was also anchored by a very strong supporting cast of actors like Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Ewan Mcgregor, etc, as well Alan Menken, the composer of the incredible original music and the Disney brand. This was clearly a team effort, not just one actress leading the movie.

  12. Tara says:

    Funny, my friends and I watched because of Dan Stevens, and then loved it for the music and ensemble cast performance. Cmon Variety. Emma Watson doesn’t have the star power to pull this number so she should not be the #1 reason for this movie’s success.

  13. Dinaa says:

    Loved the movie……Emma was grand!

  14. Mark says:

    If done right, the lion king remake could make 200 mil opening weekend

  15. Joanne says:

    Funny, EW is the reason I didn’t see it.

More Film News from Variety