The CW has given their new Beauty and the Beast TV series a great timeslot, following their most-popular show, The Vampire Diaries. On the negative side, it’s also airing opposite seriously tough competition — Glee, Person of Interest and Grey’s Anatomy. Can it compete? Is it even worth watching?
In this version of the classic tale of Beauty and the Beast, a young girl is saved from being murdered by a mysterious creature/human. Years later, as a homicide detective (Kristin Kreuk), she comes face to face with her mysterious savior (Jay Ryan). He ends up helping her solve crimes while she helps keep his identity a secret. The cast also includes Nina Lisandrello, Brian White, Max Brown, Nicole Gale Anderson, and Austin Basis.
Sound like it’s worth your time? Before you decide, take a look at what some of the critics think:
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: “It’s tough to imagine how anyone could make a more ham-fisted wreck of a remake of 1980s CBS fantasy series Beauty and the Beast than The CW’s effort, debuting on Pittsburgh’s WPCW tonight at 11:30 after the Steelers game… The CW’s Beauty is laughably bad in myriad ways. There’s no sense of star-crossed lovers, just a plasticized romance between a Cover Girl and a glum, anger-prone male model.”
LA Times: “None of the which is even as mildly interesting as it sounds, and, indeed, I grew weary even as I watched, despite Kreuk’s hypnotic eyes, the broody lighting and roiling soundtrack. It is all so dreadfully familiar — the lovely, headstrong and feisty heroine, the nice guy who wants her (in this case, the medical examiner played by Max Brown) and the broken bad boy she loves instead… One can only hope that this marks the last limping leg of the inter-species romance, because in real life, true love should not include a partner whose first instinct is to kill you.”
Boston Globe: “Last season, ABC’s Once Upon a Time and NBC’s Grimm proved that there is an appetite for updated fairy tales. The CW has taken the hint, and contrived this pretty, and pretty empty, series. It’s a market move, nothing more.”
Salt Lake Tribune: “I’m not sure I have the words to describe just how bad The CW’s Beauty and the Beast is. I’ve only been doing this for 22½ years, after all… The first episode of this Beauty and the Beast remake isn’t entirely devoid of entertainment value. But laughing at this show — not with it — wears off before long. Bad is bad, and this is terrible.”
Hollywood Reporter: “Only The CW would take a super hunky dude who would make most women swoon and call him a Beast because he’s got a couple of cuts on his face that, strangely enough, make him magnetically more attractive to other beautiful people. That is either awesome or messed up, or awesomely messed up. Because The CW doesn’t even get it. If the network got it, someone would have said, ‘Hey, guys, this is ridiculous even by our standards. You know that, right?'”
USA Today: “There’s a murder solved in tonight’s opener, but the murderer is so obvious, it’s hardly worth worrying about. Odds are you’ll spend more energy trying to decide whether Kreuk and Ryan are more sinning than sinned against: They’re terrible, but the material may have left them with no other option. Luckily, in this world of 1,000 channels, you have plenty of other options. Exercise one.”
What do you think? Have you seen the new Beauty and the Beast TV series? If so, will you watch again?
Joe Biden looked and acted like a beast, so Paul Ryan was the beauty.
Oops sorry, that was the debates.
I really liked the show and I look forward to unravelling some of the mysteries from the first episode.
[…] night, The CW unveiled their new Beauty and the Beast TV series. Were the ratings beastly (like its reviews) or beautiful (like its […]
I watched and it didn’t seem so bad as all the critics make it out to be. Plus keeping in mind that actors tend to develop their character more as more episodes are made. I think it unfair to judge a new series simply from the pilot episode. I’m definitely going to continue watching for new episodes.
What the hell with those critics, just cause they don’t like the show, it’s not worth watching? they better change their job if they think that only what they like is good.
I Love CW ’cause it airs great series and I’m sure Beauty and The Beast will not disappoint.
He has a facial scar?!?
MONSTER!!
The “Beast” part of him is what he becomes when adrenaline kicks in. He clearly states that they (the mysterious “they” that were mentioned in the episode) become unstoppable. It does seem like he has gained minor amounts of control over this problem, but it’s only episode one, so who knows what will happen? People forget that being a beast does not necessarily mean outwardly; how shallow is our society, that we automatically assume a beast is someone that has been disfigured physically? Maybe it’s the Psychology major in me, but it seemed pretty obvious that the term “Beast” is… Read more »
Oh come on. He changes into a beast..and it is a remake of the beauty and the beast show. Please dont try to look for deep psychological meaning behind why it is called a beast on a CW show. It is typical CW tv of beautiful people and they couldnt dare have a beastlty looking character all the time, so this is their compromise.
I wasn’t looking for a deep psychological meaning, I was simply stating that being a beast can be more than just looks. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that is mine. And he doesn’t “change into a beast,” he’s not a werewolf. I was just pointing out that I don’t think it’s *only* his physical appearance that’s supposed to make him a beast, rather his entire being (ever since he went through whatever crazy program while in the military). I have watched (and LOVED) a ton of the CW’s shows, I know how they are about the shallow/physical aspects.… Read more »
To correct you, most pilot episodes to not suck. They might be devoid of depth, but they certainly do not suck. This one does and, yes, he has to look like a monster on the outside since the show is piggy backing on the very well known fairy tale. Even if the beastly side of him is supposed to be on the inside; which it is not; they have done nothing to insinuate that in any way. The show is very haphazard and they should just cancel it because I do not see how they can salvage it at this… Read more »
would rather watch a flaming **** bag die out
The whole point of BatB is getting past a monster on the outside to fall in love with whats on the inside. He turns into a beast (barely shown so far, but looks like some vampire looking man)…but so what. It only happens when he gets agitated. So 99% of the time he is a sexy stud..and he wants to “feel more human”.
Give me a break. TOTALLY missed the point of all the BatB stories.
I knew going in that Kristin Kreuk was no Linda Hamilton, and no way was whatzisprettyface going to be as beastly as Ron “Hellboy” Perlman, but allowing for that I’d be curious to hear what other people think.
Mr. Ryan: Like you, Jay, I was very much in love with the characters of Catherine and Vincent. He was consantly behind her or beside her or rescuing her. That, I believe, is a wonderful way of a real man to act. Vincent has to stay removed from Catherine in a small way, but in a greater way, he keeps watch on her because greater “animal-like” forces are after her, following her because of the way her mother protected her. Who was after her mother? And what section of the military gave Vincent some kind of shot that make him… Read more »
I’m waiting for the varied mysteries to be shown to all the viewers. Is there someone else behind the “black” curtain, or will Vincent be given more of a healing tonic that might help work better with Kristen? I wonder?
I loved it! Sooooooo good. Damn he’s sexy!
THIS SHOW SUCKS!!!!!
…I’m still trying to decide what about the Beast is ‘Beastly’. So far, I’ve seen he has some scars, and is legally dead on paper.
…….What’s so beastly about that? He looks/seems purely human to me.