Beauty and the Beast Discussion

[Beast_enchantment]

Don't you know silly sarcasim when you see it? Sheesh!

Obviously I don't

So where does this Prince Adam name come from? I've seen it said before over the years but I don't think I've ever seen it cited for a source.

i think the name "Adam" originated from Wikipedia (reliable source?). it might have been mentioned in the Broadway adaptation but i think it's best if the prince remains unamed.

[Lazario]

Translation: I'm a loser, Ed! You see right through my half assed posts. Now I'm going to go in the corner and sulk now as I think about how I've wronged this glorious film...

Translation: Ed's "translations" are the work of delusional overdrive, and a need to compete with who he sees as a threat to his ego trip.

So thanks Laz for showing me the movie in a new way, it may not be all sachharine (sp?) and fluffy but it is a rather unique perspective

Always happy to help.

Go vote for Hitlery KKKlinton.

for once im agreeing with Lazario. this is out of order. i stuck up for you before but im not doing it again!

They all come over to my dark side eventually. ( j / k )

All it takes is one person more extreme than I am (perceived to be) to show other people that my point wasn't the least bit far-fetched at all. Certain weaker people will always take the easy route out of a serious discussion.

Couldn't have put it better myself! the Beast and Gaston are essentially the same character through different stages - one a human, the other a beast. both vain and superficial. both angry. the beast becomes the human and the human becomes the beast. this is why i consider Gaston to be one of the strongest Disney villians. he may not have magical powers or the ability to turn himself into a dragon, but he has an agenda. he wants Belle and the Beast is in the way of his prospect so he must eliminate it. sometimes the scariest thing imaginable isnt an evil witch or wicked fairy, but a human with a motive. Because he is human he is more realistic as a threat to the beast and to Belle.

That's a prime example of what I meant when I say you're reading too much into the film. That insight and goodness comes from you. Not the movie. People like this movie because it is superficial (in some ways it's clever, but it shirks that off when Belle becomes a prisoner- it throws away any chance it has for being special at that moment, where it becomes completely stupidly simplistic and mucks up big time). It's a blank slate that allows them to project all the goodness inside them into the movie.

Everything else is just pleasentry.

And again, Kossage - I swear I will get to your post very soon.

[Beast_enchantment]

That's a prime example of what I meant when I say you're reading too much into the film. That insight and goodness comes from you. Not the movie. People like this movie because it is superficial (in some ways it's clever, but it shirks that off when Belle becomes a prisoner- it throws away any chance it has for being special at that moment, where it becomes completely stupidly simplistic and mucks up big time). It's a blank slate that allows them to project all the goodness inside them into the movie.

I respect your opinion but i don't follow .

[Lazario]

Where'd you get lost?

[Beast_enchantment]

from superficial onwards.

[Ariel'sprince]

but i think it's best if the prince remains unamed.

I think that people more like him becouse he has a name (unlike The Prince and Prince Charming).

[Lazario]

from superficial onwards.

Okay...

People like this movie because it is superficial

This movie is like a proven formula of fakeness. They spend big money to make it look great, then they give their main characters the appropriate amount of sympathetic qualities but leave them in an extreme situation. What did people pay attention to? The symapthetic formulaic qualities, or the extreme situations? They never forget that the characters were supposed to be sympathetic. I'm saying you can't ignore the situations just because of the sympathy factor. But the movie kept pouring sugar all over everything - so I'm saying people ate the sugar and pushed away what it was coating.

In some ways it's clever, but it shirks that off when Belle becomes a prisoner- it throws away any chance it has for being special at that moment, where it becomes completely stupidly simplistic and mucks up big time.

I'm saying the movie had a good set-up at first. I won't deny that Belle is established as an interesting, progressive female figure, and Gaston is the bad guy, and we'll meet a man with a tortured soul. Nothing wrong with these elements. But, the movie screwed up when they forced Belle to become a prisoner. Because the next thing they did, was have her abandon her sense of intelligence and reason to follow the fairy tale format. And with no work to edge her carefully into the other emotions / feelings she portrayed. She would bounce from one to another without any gravity or weight to them. And I still think the actress's singing voice isn't that great. So, I'm not surprised. They fit hand in hand. She's less interesting than people think she is. And I believe I've provided proof to back up that statement. She started on an up note, but then she became a cliche.

It's a blank slate that allows them to project all the goodness inside them into the movie. Everything else is just pleasentry.

I'm saying a lot of ultra-mainstream family type movies are empty and just put a little positive message on the outside, with no real brains on the inside, knowing that the audience is smart enough to fill in the gaps. I don't admire that. And I know most smart people don't admire that either.

Everything of true substance you found in that movie, everything really special - is what you put into the movie. That's the way it works.

[Disney Duster]

...but seriously, we don't know in what context these interviews were done or how they were edited. As a film maker I know how easy it is to do trickery with film and be a Michael Moore.

Well, the interviews were not broken up into clips. They were one shot, with one track of dialogue (obviously or it wouldn't match the video). The only thing they could have edited was something before or after what the girl's actually thought, like asking the question, "What would you do if Belle was your friend and the Beast was acting like he did before he saved her from the wolves?"

He's either handsome or he's not. You can't intend to be handsome and not be. Otherwise there's a whole world full of ugly people who intended to be handsome...

What about the fact some people find Johnny Depp attractive and some do not? And you said you found plenty of women who said the beast as a prince is not attractive, meaning there must of been some who said he was. You and I both know the well-known saying, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." And I already mentioned the things about him that most people instinctively find attractive for a man: tall, buff, and hairless (except on the head). And it doesn't matter what women you meet have preferences for otherwise, you know that most male super-models have those characteristics.

"Well, I didn't find any whiffs of it, you did, and pulled them out, which means that if Lazario wasn't intending that, you're the one who presented it. I admit, I assumed you had problems with same sex marriage but that came from very clear indications as you tried to equate person + person (of same sex) with person + animal, and even more so by saying "what if I do have a problem with same sex marriage?"

See, you read stuff in my post I did not intend so there.

But you proved that you intended that when you wrote:

Homosexuality is immoral.

So I read that you had something against homosexuality and thought it was wrong, and there's the proof that you do. Oh, and by the way, "you can't inject your morality on others"!

I admit it's possible (meaning there's no official proof from Disney themselves but I'm choosing to believe you because there's good reason to) that Thomas Schumacher intended to put certain messages in films. I hope you know that "The Wild" actually did come out, and the animals of the film came out of a manhole in New York City...so if you said the project was shut down but it eventually surfaced (in a different form, of course), should I still believe you? Well, I will.

They're the same thing.

Person + person does not = person + animal. They can both be wrong to you, but the fact is those are two entirely different things.

And a male and a male and a femal and a female are not like a male and a female.

Correct. As my equation is also correct.

Doesn't Belle chew the Beast out and he's not a jerk after that? I still don't see the Beast as being abusive.

Right, but in real life if you chew an abusive partner out they won't always stop being jerks.

That whole thing is "You can't confine love to a flesh and blood body" is exactly the door that opens up. That isn't what the fairy tale is about but this is probably why he (and you) would rather it be changed this way.

But we never said love couldn't be confined to a flesh and blood body. In case you didn't notice, the beast's inhuman body is still flesh and blood. But he thinks and feels like a human, and can relate and connect to and talk to Belle like a human, making him able to love her like a human and her able to love him like a human. And I never said I wanted it changed so he stays a beast. I said I think a better thing to do would be to make him look less attractive and less like her. Thinking back on it, since the prince's selfishness partly came from him being so attractive in the first place (otherwise I doubt he'd turn away an ugly woman if he was ugly himself), perhaps that shouldn't be the case...and I should consider Lazario's suggestion...haha, and everyone else's too.

Then what if someone tells you it's their opinion the Holochaust never happened? Opinions can and are wrong all the time.

Well it's not their opinion, it's what they believe is fact. Whether something's wrong or bad is opinion, but whether concentrations camps killed many people or not is fact. And besides, all you have to is show them the facts!

" And I will have you know that I've seen Song of the South, I don't like it,"

Good for you! Why don't you like it?

I just didn't like it. It's had for me to pinpoint the whole thing, but I'd say I mostly found it annoying and boring.

The Prince didn't save Cinderella. She saved herself. In the fairy tale she also forgave her family but the prince killed them.

That's a version of Cinderella I never heard. But anyway, the basic structure of the story is something like a girl is in a bad situation, she doesn't do anything about it for a while, an invitation to meet a prince comes, she meets the prince, runs away, the prince comes after her or sends his men after her, and he or those men take her away from her bad situation to live with him. The message of not doing anything to get out of a bad situation until an invitation or a prince comes into your life so he can save you from that situation will always be present in every reasonably faithful version of Cinderella.

"I can find things that possibly refute the message upon further thinking by pointing out Cinderella does some things herself to help her out of the situation or the men can't really help her themselves, but the message was found."

You just deluded your own claim proving how it's not there. I can find anything I want to in any film I choose. That doesn't mean it's there.

No, Walt Disney's version of Cinderella gives Cinderella the chances to save herself. But that is only one version, and the basic structure of the story, she meets a prince and he takes her away from her abusive stepfamily through his men and the glass slipper search, is still there to be seen if one is able to.

According to previous things you've said there can be no right or wrong messages so whose to say a man saving you is wrong?

I never said there weren't right or wrong messages, I said there could be bad messages. And I never said a man saving you is wrong, though it's certainly not a good thing to depend on a person saving you, as in waiting until a person can save you.

"No, Lazario never said that. He said the film could send a bad message that could cause battered women to put up with abusive men."

I want to see numbers that prove this is true. If it is then it has effected women and men. Show me the numbers!!!

All I'm saying is the message in the film is there and could affect the children watching the film. Only statistics based on asking if victims who stayed with their abusive spouses and hoped they would change watched Beauty and the Beast could get close, but I'm unable to conduct such a thing, and it would take to long to reply back to you. And when I used the word "could" twice, there isn't anything to prove is true. You have to try thinking and seeing other people's views for that.

Sure they couldn't tell a bad score when they see one.

Right, so they couldn't tell Menken's score was a bad score when they saw it! Unless you didn't mean to write that, and I don't think you did. The score is well-made as Lazario said, that's why it won the award. But being well-made is different from it being simple or having other things wrong with it. So they couldn't see those things, or saw them, but gave the award because the other things weren't as important as the craft of the music to them.

Bob brought this subject up in the FIRST PLACE. If it's so traumatic to him that he can't talk about it then he should have kept his mouth shut about it.

There is no Bob here, but Lazario brought up some bad things about Beauty and the Beast. Only one bad thing makes him not want to talk about it, because he finds it so bad, which he didn't bring up, I did.

How do you know she didn't know? She obviously recognized the eyes in the painting, the Beast's eyes, and the Prince's eyss. I'm sure she knew something was up.

She didn't know because the Prnce said "Belle, it's me!" and she hesitated and had to look into his eyes to realize, "It is you!" So she didn't know it was him at first.

I'm sure she read enough fairy tales to know about loves first kiss and all that jazz.

Once again your assuming things. Love's first kiss wasn't even what was needed to break the spell. I'm going by what's actually in the film.

I NEVER said I was better than you but since you feel that way, thanks! I'll accept that I am you radical kook you!

But Lazario's better than you.

"If you don't agree, I think you're not looking at it the right way. If you don't like that, deal with it. I do not care."

Translation: I'm right! Look at me!!! You're all wrong! Me! Me! Me!

Oh, good, so you agree!

[Ariel'sprince]

I hope you know that "The Wild" actually did come out, and the animals of the film came out of a manhole in New York City...so if you said the project was shut down but it eventually surfaced (in a different form, of course), should I still believe you? Well, I will.

Hmm,what about The Wild?.

[Voiceroy]

Y'know, if some of these posts were printed out and laid end-to-end, they'd be over twelve feet long.

So I'll keep mine short and sweet.

Beauty and The Beast is my favorite animated Disney film, not counting the Pixar flicks.

Don't really have anything negative to say about it presently. The animation critic in me would, but I haven't watched the film since the Platinum Edition was released. And it has to be fresh in the memory for me to review it adequately.

In short, it's a well-animated fairy tale movie full of feel-good family-friendly Disney magic with a great soundtrack, and I find it very entertaining. I love it.

And at the risk of sounding like an emotional, overly-sentimental, decidedly un-macho guy, I'll confess that my eyes well up with tears at the end of the movie when Belle believes Beast is dead. My heart breaks every time. That's a moment and a message that I can identify with: that she could love and care for someone that deeply, in spite of their looks. That's what my heart longed for all through my teenage and college years because I believed I was unattractive.

Today, my wife tells me otherwise.

[Siren]

I think UncleEd will be our new PapiBear.

[Chernabog_Rocks]

I think UncleEd will be our new PapiBear.

You really should put a warning next time Siren, I almost choked on my drink laughing.

Anywhoo back on track. One thing I've never understood about Beauty and the Beast, where is Belle's mother? It seems as if she suffers from the often contaigous MissingParents Syndrome but I dunno, it just seems weird that there was no reference to her at all. Perhaps it's Mrs. Potts she's about the same age as Maurice and it would certainly explain the fact she's not around

Yeah I know I'm crazy for thinking such things, but I find thinking normal thoughts to be rather dull.

Edit: Fixed a name error

[Beast_enchantment]

I'm saying the movie had a good set-up at first. I won't deny that Belle is established as an interesting, progressive female figure, and Gaston is the bad guy, and we'll meet a man with a tortured soul. Nothing wrong with these elements. But, the movie screwed up when they forced Belle to become a prisoner. Because the next thing they did, was have her abandon her sense of intelligence and reason to follow the fairy tale format.

I disagree. Belle is, in my and many others opinion the most humanized of the Disney women. she is, yes portrayed as an intelligent woman at the begining of the movie. this has lead to a comman misconception that belle is a braniac and a bookworm. she reads books, not for knowledge but for escapism. she is bored with the village and its people who see her as an outcast because she dreams of something more than what she has. but when she encounters the Beast and is imprisoned, her dreams have come to life. she has the adventure and excitement she always wanted just being in an enchanted castle. her intelligence is never lost it is just expressed through her inquistiveness.

And with no work to edge her carefully into the other emotions / feelings she portrayed. She would bounce from one to another without any gravity or weight to them.

hmmm, i see someone wasn't paying attention.
let's address the main "emotions/feelings she portrayed" regarding the Beast.
she finds her father locked up in the castle tower, determined to confront the person responsible. that is until a tall, dark roaring figure grabs her and frightens her. she is scared, yes ofcourse she is. anyone would be. but despite her fears she realises what is best for her father, and despite the Beast's frightening appearance she bargains with him to take her instead. her father and freedom taken away from her she is devastated, and her father remains in her mind throughout her imprisonment. proof of this can be found when she tells the beast "If only i could see my father again, just for a moment. I miss him so much" after the ballroom sequence.
back to the Beast, her inquisitiveness eventually leads her to the rose where the Beast lies and is outraged that she ventured to the forbidden west wing. angered that Belle could have destroyed the rose, therefore destroying any chance of breaking the spell, and also ashamed that Belle has seen the extent of what his anguish has done to the room, he lashes out, frightening her. she realises she cannot stay in the castle any longer, fearing her life, so she escapes. she is attacked by wolves but the Beast, despite his fury previous saves Belle from death. she makes the choice to take the Beast back to the castle in his exhausted state. she realises that undereath his hideous exterior lies a human kindness, which ignites her primitive inquisitiveness. after dressing his wounds the Beast thanks her by presenting her the castle library, which she obviously is astonished by. a friendship begins to grow as is evident in the "Something there" sequence. not necessarily love but friendship that increases evidently during the ballroom sequence and again when he let's her go to find her father. Her love for the beast is only confirmed at the sight of his death, she realises who he is. he is everything she had wanted from the begining - excitement, adventure, a kind and gentle man, a fairytale. she only falls in love with him when she fears that she will lose what she wants - him!

And I still think the actress's singing voice isn't that great. So, I'm not surprised. They fit hand in hand. She's less interesting than people think she is. And I believe I've provided proof to back up that statement.

er... we are talking about the same person, arent we? Paige O'Hara? the renowned and notable broadway singer? well i guess that boils down to a question of taste, which doesn't surprise me.

She started on an up note, but then she became a cliche.

Belle was never a cliche. she remains unique and individual. if you seek a cliche look for Princess Aurora

[Someday...]

I like beauty and the beast, but then again I love the story- and the message it gave to women of the time (no matter what messy pig you marry, through nagging you can change them )
The songs are good, ideas imaginative and altogether enjoyable

[Beast_enchantment]

Anywhoo back on track. One thing I've never understood about Beauty and the Beast, where is Belle's mother? It seems as if she suffers from the often contaigous MissingParents Syndrome but I dunno, it just seems weird that there was no reference to her at all. Perhaps it's Mrs. Potts she's about the same age as Maurice and it would certainly explain the fact she's not around

Hey, i never thought of that, lol come to think of it Maurice and Mrs Potts were very close in the ballroom at the end of the film, if ya know what i mean

[Lazario]

Someday... , that is adorable! I love it. But, I think the movie had Beast change almost completely on his own. Almost no connection to Belle. The only time it seems she has any affect on him at all to change him for good, is when he sees her uncomfortable with him eating without using a untencil.

And I still think the actress's singing voice isn't that great. So, I'm not surprised. They fit hand in hand. She's less interesting than people think she is. And I believe I've provided proof to back up that statement.

er... we are talking about the same person, arent we? Paige O'Hara? the renowned and notable broadway singer? well i guess that boils down to a question of taste, which doesn't surprise me.

No it's not taste - it's performance. In my opinion, in the movie, her vocal performance is jarring and screechy. Which you can hear during the moment where she sings to the Lambs on the fountain about the prince-charming part of her book. I also remember it happening during the snowball fight bit, in the shot where she stands behind a tree and looks to be giggling a little.

This is another example of people assuming I didn't do my homework. If I didn't have a point, I would not have brought it up... I don't say things just to make people upset.

her father and freedom taken away from her she is devastated, and her father remains in her mind throughout her imprisonment. proof of this can be found when she tells the beast "If only i could see my father again, just for a moment. I miss him so much" after the ballroom sequence.

Oh, I noticed that. In fact... that's part of my point! It played a huge part in what I've been saying this whole time. Thanks for reminding me (though I remembered myself anyway). How many minutes into her imprisonment did it take for her to say that, in that scene? Well, the next thing Beast says to her is- "you're free." There's no other mention of him the whole time she's there (except by Ms. Potts). By all accounts, she doesn't think about him at all. Until the Beast is "weaken"ed enough to want to let her go. That's one of the top 10 reasons I called this movie manipulative. Because this is done for plot convenience - not for Belle's character. And until you can provide proof that I missed some other signal of Belle's sadness over her father, I think you have to admit I at least have a point. Whether you think I'm right or not, I do have a point. I think you fill the holes that are there yourself because you enjoy the movie's pleasent moments so much.

Belle is, in my and many others opinion the most humanized of the Disney women. She is, yes portrayed as an intelligent woman at the begining of the movie. This has lead to a comman misconception that belle is a braniac and a bookworm. She reads books, not for knowledge but for escapism.

I'm not really responding to any common misconceptions. Great point on the Escapism front. But... she is without question a character who is supposed to be a comment on free-thinking women. She clearly expresses a forward attitude on being a woman, asserts herself as an independent who is allowed to make her own choices. She puts down Gaston's idea that a wife should be seen and not heard, and all that he was implying. You know what he said.

Anyway, I'm not saying the movie did a complete flip on what she is. But what happens to her changes her a lot. And not in a progressive or healthy way at all. I think the movie attached what they considered to be an acceptable reaction for Belle to have (not a realistic or healthy one), perhaps so it would be in line with the fairy tale, which obviously is not in line with the way Belle is established as a character. Yeah, they tried to make it look like it was a love story. That's why it became so simple to the point of being insulting. To those looking at the movie the way it actually played out.

I think a lot of people don't see this movie the way I do. But that doesn't mean what I found in this movie isn't there. And, it's not hard to see that several of my examples are right in the movie. And ring true, quite loud-and-clearly.

she is bored with the village and its people who see her as an outcast because she dreams of something more than what she has. but when she encounters the Beast and is imprisoned, her dreams have come to life. she has the adventure and excitement she always wanted just being in an enchanted castle. her intelligence is never lost it is just expressed through her inquistiveness.

I think that's an example of you reading more into the movie than what is there. I'm all about signals. And I didn't see any of that. I know that that's pretty much what the movie wanted you to think. But there is no evidence of this whatsoever in the scenes where she is imprisoned. Where is any thought for her old life? Do you see or hear the villagers being mentioned anywhere after she goes to the castle? Does she mention books at all before she "sneaks out" of her room to search the castle? Where is her sense of excitement before she even goes into the castle? She never viewed the castle as an escape until the scene where she sneaks out of her room. And in that scene, she just opens her door and tiptoes out. That's all the explaination we get, that's all there is to support what you're saying. You really got a lot out of watching her walk down a hallway... Without explaining why she is doing so after crying her eyes out in her room. And I've watched the movie at least 6 times. The scenes of her exploring the castle were nice. Because they took us out of the conflict of her situation. But the movie still put us there without any regard for our, or her, intelligence (if we are right-there with the character).

That's why I think that when you say things like that, you're defending anything the movie does just because you liked the songs and the happy scenes were so pleasent. If anything, agree or not, I think you can see what I mean. Why I feel this way.

back to the Beast, her inquisitiveness eventually leads her to the rose where the Beast lies and is outraged that she ventured to the forbidden west wing. angered that Belle could have destroyed the rose, therefore destroying any chance of breaking the spell, and also ashamed that Belle has seen the extent of what his anguish has done to the room, he lashes out, frightening her. she realises she cannot stay in the castle any longer, fearing her life, so she escapes.

I consider that a weakness as well. If she has the chance to leave the castle at any point during the movie, fearing her life or not... why didn't she leave earlier? (You know- if she was so worried about her father all this time) Only because during this moment, she knew the Beast was UPSTAIRS. She knew she could get away during this moment. She didn't necessarily stay because it was an escape from the village. Or leave because she was legitimately more afraid of Beast in this scene than she was before.

she is attacked by wolves but the Beast, despite his fury previous saves Belle from death. she makes the choice to take the Beast back to the castle in his exhausted state. she realises that undereath his hideous exterior lies a human kindness

I saw the movie, I know what happens. What's your point?

I never said the movie didn't come up with a reason for the story progression. But it neglects what is healthy for a reasonable person put in the place of her character. Which I think is what viewers do when they watch the movie.

Her love for the beast is only confirmed at the sight of his death, she realises who he is. he is everything she had wanted from the begining - excitement, adventure, a kind and gentle man, a fairytale. she only falls in love with him when she fears that she will lose what she wants - him!

That's all in the story. A movie is more than just a story. It's also how the story is told. I'm not sure you're looking at how this movie told the story. Because I think you missed several key signals.

Belle was never a cliche. she remains unique and individual. if you seek a cliche look for Princess Aurora

Cinderella is the only classic Princess I consider to be more than just a cliche. Some people have pointed out that Ariel is a brat, which is a very parental way of seeing her. I think she's exactly what the movie wanted her to be- a teenager. And on that level, I think many of us can really relate to her impulsive thoughtlessness. She's not deep, but then, neither are most Disney characters (or characters in family films, for that matter). Jasmine is the only other princess that in my opinion remains true to her independence and liberated, self-made attitude. I think the Aladdin filmmakers probably took a lesson from the mistake Disney made with Belle.

Bottom line, Disney lets Standard Movie Emotions (the emotions a movie "allows" women to have to motivate and validate their behavior) decide how real, deep, and ideal Belle will be as a person. Nothing unique about that. Unless you actually still count what she says in the beginning of the movie as a reflection on how she acts as the movie progresses (or more appropriately, digresses).

[Beast_enchantment]

Bottom line, Disney lets Standard Movie Emotions (the emotions a movie "allows" women to have to motivate and validate their behavior)

you've just answered your own argument.

[Lazario]

I don't think that's possible. You can "answer" a question. But not an argument.

[neurotic_Donald_Duck]

Beauty & the Beast undoubtedly is a Disney masterpiece. B&tB is absolutely one of my Disney top five movies of all time. The music is magical; the animation is amazing; and the story is astounding. I never get tired of watching this Disney classic. Hopefully I’ll be able to get it next time if it’s re-released on DVD.

[Beast_enchantment]

Beauty & the Beast undoubtedly is a Disney masterpiece. B&tB is absolutely one of my Disney top five movies of all time. The music is magical; the animation is amazing; and the story is astounding. I never get tired of watching this Disney classic. Hopefully I’ll be able to get it next time if it’s re-released on DVD.

you and me are gonna get along just fine ! ! !