Why was Emma Watson cast as Belle???

She was also the last Bond girl in Spectre.

I agree with John. She was perfectly cast for the role btw. Some of the names mentioned in the op made me cringe.

Ignore Woozlewuzzle. Known troll from IMDb.

He was mocked heavily over at the Beauty and the Beast (1991) forum for saying that the movie is worthless because there are no famous people in it, only to be told that Angela Lansbury and Jerry Orbach are/were major actors (he came across as too young to know who they are), not to mention how fame isn't the same as talent. He didn't understand the casting of a lot of people for voice acting work with Broadway experience (Lansbury and Orbach are examples who with both Hollywood and theater credentials), which helps given that many of them do their own singing. He thinks there is no value in casting animated classics with people who are cast for talent, not the latest tabloid trash. While hiring trendier names did get more common after hiring Robin Williams (who, lest we forget, was a Julliard-trained actor), Disney still hires extensively from comedians, Broadway and popular music as it always has going back to its very beginnings.

This user also got laughed off the Batman board for saying Michael Keaton was the worst Batman with similarly ineffective, immature debate capabilities. And all of this favorite movies he rated highly were lowest common denominator blockbusters from recent years.

His arguments are always bizarrely mental and full of name-calling, just like the ones in this thread.

I really don't like Emma Watson much and I think she was completely miscast because of her name. She used to be cheery and innocent back in her Hermione days, but now just looks gloomy and jaded about the world ever since she went full misery guts SJW hipster. She's a child actress that doesn't really have the acting chops needed to compete as an adult, not to mention almost too associated with one role. She also looks really unhappy these days, as well as her just acting too modern, and that's not Belle, who has a more classic beauty look. In fact, Belle's cartoon design seems to be based on classic British actress Claire Bloom, who played the role in a now-lost Shirley Temple production. And Disney voice actress Paige O'Hara also looked the part, as well. Emma also doesn't have a mature, feminine look and I don't really associate Belle's look with a young teenager-looking person (despite being played by an actress in her 20s and the role being technically about 18).

She's also deeply misinformed about historical garments when she refused to wear a pair of 17th-18th century stays in a period piece. Stays (which are NOT restricting, contrary to Hollywood stereotypes--I can hear the period clothing bloggers screaming from here) and 19th century tight-laced corsets are not the same thing. She says a lot of uninformed garbage. If you don't want to wear stays, don't mouth off about historical garments you know nothing about and don't try out for period parts. The modernized clothing at her request did not benefit the film and just doesn't look right. The yellow dress is disappointing because there's nothing period about it. It's a modern couture prom dress, not a historical ballgown (admittedly, an 1860s anachronism in the cartoon), no matter how fanciful the story is.

And if you can't compete with these Broadway-quality singers without autotune... You're not going to measure up.

I haven't seen the film yet so I can't really comment on if Emma was a bad choice or not, but your choices are all too old. Emma at least has a freshness and innocence that Belle should have.

Thiz iz just moronic. Let's all leave woozlewuzzle alone and fen he'll stop trollin the boards. Simple