Beauty and the Beast Discussion

[KubrickFan]

It isn't unnecessary, the filmmakers wanted to change it.

There's been plenty I've wanted to change about films I've done. But once it's done, it's done. The same rule should apply to animated films.

But it's sort of a double-edged sword because it does work in some cases. For example, I was all about the new animation in The Little Mermaid: Return to the Sea but that's because it made it better. There was no need to change Cogsworth's animation.

Well, I meant that it wasn't some random change made by Disney to give it a supposed 'Saturday Morning' look. It's a change made with a valid reason: the filmmakers didn't like the way it looked. I think a filmmakers can change all he wants in his films, because they are his films. Only caveat is that the original theatrical version should be available when it applies to big changes. And this was just one shot.

[Beast_enchantment]

Well, I meant that it wasn't some random change made by Disney to give it a supposed 'Saturday Morning' look. It's a change made with a valid reason: the filmmakers didn't like the way it looked. I think a filmmakers can change all he wants in his films, because they are his films. Only caveat is that the original theatrical version should be available when it applies to big changes. And this was just one shot.

One shot too many, kubrickFan.

[Goliath]

Oh, I already found it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZzxxBZUD-o

I don't understand this. And looking at it, I notice even more how "saturday morning cartoony" the imax version looks in general!!

And where are the details in his design?
Where are the backgrounds?
Where is his shadow?

You know, I *could* tolerate it, if only the adjustment made sense. It's like the crocodiles in The Lion King: WHY? If it served a purpose, fine, but this is totally unnecessary. Can somebody please tell me why Disney wastes time, money and effort onto this?

[ajmrowland]

Oh, I already found it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZzxxBZUD-o

I don't understand this. And looking at it, I notice even more how "saturday morning cartoony" the imax version looks in general!!

And where are the details in his design?
Where are the backgrounds?
Where is his shadow?

You know, I *could* tolerate it, if only the adjustment made sense. It's like the crocodiles in The Lion King: WHY? If it served a purpose, fine, but this is totally unnecessary. Can somebody please tell me why Disney wastes time, money and effort onto this?

I think the adjustment in the Crocodiles was to make it fit more with the rest of the scene/song.

[KubrickFan]

One shot too many, kubrickFan.

What, now all of a sudden filmmakers lose the right to change their films if they want to alter something they see as something that's wrong? Really?

[Beast_enchantment]

One shot too many, kubrickFan.

What, now all of a sudden filmmakers lose the right to change their films if they want to alter something they see as something that's wrong? Really?

No, not at all. Like a comment already made dozens of times already, filmmakers can change their work as much as they like. That is their right. But, for those that don't like the alterations, provide the original. Many forget that without the audience, without all the hype, the rave reviews, the oscar nods, Beauty and the Beast wouldn't be worth the computer files it is stored in to the Disney company. They should be grateful they had the money to alter the movie at all, because that money came from the revenue gained from that movie, and every other disney movie. Therefore Disney should respect it's audience and provide their original films because without that audience Disney would never have gotten off the ground 70+ years ago and would, therefore be nothing.

[KubrickFan]

No, not at all. Like a comment already made dozens of times already, filmmakers can change their work as much as they like. That is their right. But, for those that don't like the alterations, provide the original. Many forget that without the audience, without all the hype, the rave reviews, the oscar nods, Beauty and the Beast wouldn't be worth the computer files it is stored in to the Disney company. They should be grateful they had the money to alter the movie at all, because that money came from the revenue gained from that movie, and every other disney movie. Therefore Disney should respect it's audience and provide their original films because without that audience Disney would never have gotten off the ground 70+ years ago and would, therefore be nothing.

I agree that the Theatrical Cut should be available at all times, but this only concerns one shot. It's really not the effort, and is blown way out of proportion, I think. If you really want to focus on getting the TC of a film, why don't you pick Fantasia? A film that has been butchered a lot more than any other Disney film.

[Beast_enchantment]

I agree that the Theatrical Cut should be available at all times, but this only concerns one shot. It's really not the effort, and is blown way out of proportion, I think. If you really want to focus on getting the TC of a film, why don't you pick Fantasia? A film that has been butchered a lot more than any other Disney film.

Wether it's one shot or several, it's still the same insult to the fans.

[Beast_enchantment]

And let's not forget that there is more than one scene/moment altered for the Imax release:

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n71/ ... omp7-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

...And then there's the whole mistaken hair identity:

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n71/ ... omp4-2.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

You see, to me the entire movie has been 'butchered' because of the color and stripping away of artistic depth issue (but i am not going down that road again, i am simply making a point.)
But I still stand by my earlier statement-

One shot or several, it's still the same insult to the fans.

[KubrickFan]

And let's not forget that there is more than one scene/moment altered for the Imax release:

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n71/ ... omp7-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

...And then there's the whole mistaken hair identity:

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n71/ ... omp4-2.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

You see, to me the entire movie has been 'butchered' because of the color and stripping away of artistic depth issue (but i am not going down that road again, i am simply making a point.)
But I still stand by my earlier statement-

One shot or several, it's still the same insult to the fans.

Okay, what was re-animated in the scene with Belle? The colors are different, sure, but apart from that (even if you think of it as a change) nothing was changed in that shot. The first one doesn't seem to be the exact same frame, so I really can't comment on that one.
And it's still funny people seem to think the Laserdisc is automatically correct, just because it was released earlier than the dvd. That argument doesn't hold up.

[Beast_enchantment]

Okay, what was re-animated in the scene with Belle? The colors are different, sure, but apart from that (even if you think of it as a change) nothing was changed in that shot. The first one doesn't seem to be the exact same frame, so I really can't comment on that one.
And it's still funny people seem to think the Laserdisc is automatically correct, just because it was released earlier than the dvd. That argument doesn't hold up.

The Belle image was just me pointing out the colour issue. The Beast one is the exact same frame - remember, they messed about with the aspect ratio to appeal to widescreen viewers, which is why it looks stretched out. Can't you see the added fur lines?
And here we go with the ridiculous laserdisc/VHS argument again. You seriously think that the IMAX/DVD version was the original intent? It's a hideous mess!

[KubrickFan]

The Belle image was just me pointing out the colour issue. The Beast one is the exact same frame - remember, they messed about with the aspect ratio to appeal to widescreen viewers, which is why it looks stretched out. Can't you see the added fur lines?
And here we go with the ridiculous laserdisc/VHS argument again. You seriously think that the IMAX/DVD version was the original intent? It's a hideous mess!

I can see the added fur lines, but it was never mentioned anywhere, so I really don't know where that came from. The 1.85:1 aspect ratio is the intended AR by the filmmakers, but the vertical stretching seems like a genuine mistake, I'll agree with that.
And I have said this earlier: Neither versions seem right to me. I have seen in in theaters, but I was three years old. So I wouldn't have any idea how it looked on the big screen. But the Laserdisc looks too murky, too dark and too muddled, and the dvd has many color changes, looks too bright. The dvd also didn't benefit from the fact that there were multiple versions of the film on the same disc. Bitrates for the video were too low, even when it came out.
And of course there's the fact that they said the TC would be available on the dvd, and it wasn't. Filmmakers have the right to change it, but don't advertise it as the original product, then. The same thing happened to The Lion King.
But we'll see if anything is changed when the new PE comes out.

And I just wanted to say I'm not trying to attack anyone here. We're all Disney fans, and we all want the films out in the best quality. I hope we can just settle things and agree that the current PE still needs work, and hopefully all flaws will be corrected with the new PE .

[Marky_198]

Okay, what was re-animated in the scene with Belle? The colors are different, sure, but apart from that (even if you think of it as a change) nothing was changed in that shot. .

Except that the first one looks like a Disney classic and they stripped away all the depth in the 2nd and made it look like a saturday morning cartoon.........(not talking about colours)

But what on earth are we talking about????

Aside from the changed animation, how can anyone not see the cheapness and difference of that saturday morning cartoon look?
And all the loss of detail?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZzxxBZUD-o

Please.....

[wallymatters]

Ahh youtube...always accurate.

[Marky_198]

Ahh youtube...always accurate.

In this case the images represent the otv and the imax version very well.
Go compare the laserdisc with the dvd version please, and you'll see that it looks exactly like this.

Now you know this, anything else you have to say?

[wallymatters]

Ahh youtube...always accurate.

In this case the images represent the otv and the imax version very well.
Go compare the laserdisc with the dvd version please, and you'll see that it looks exactly like this.

Now you know this, anything else you have to say?

You're so touchy. Check your ego there bud.

[ajmrowland]

Okay, what was re-animated in the scene with Belle? The colors are different, sure, but apart from that (even if you think of it as a change) nothing was changed in that shot. .

Except that the first one looks like a Disney classic and they stripped away all the depth in the 2nd and made it look like a saturday morning cartoon.........(not talking about colours)

But what on earth are we talking about????

Aside from the changed animation, how can anyone not see the cheapness and difference of that saturday morning cartoon look?
And all the loss of detail?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZzxxBZUD-o

Please.....

Cartoons don't have half the depth that's in the film. How can anyone not notice that?

[Disney Duster]

So I found this saying this:

This YouTube video has been pointed out to me, regarding a scene reanimated in Disney's BEAUTY & THE BEAST of "Cogsworth" the talking clock character I was supervising animator for.

The first version was not animated by me (I think I was out sick or on vacation) and I frankly begged to get a shot at re-doing it myself because I felt it was over-done and the shimmy was un-natural forced. In the grand scheme of things, that shot never came....

...Until the decision to update the film for a special home video release, (including the originally cut song "Human Again.") The studio often takes the opportunity in these special updates to address other fixes and the directors and producers knew I always wanted this scene re-done. Unfortunately, I had left Disney during that period and wasn't aware of the change or of any of the new material on the character until it was all finished. I would have re-animated the scene in a heartbeat at no charge had I been asked and still wish I had. Apologies to both animators of versions one and two (both are top-notch feature animators) but I don't like either version much and had something much more "in character" in mind. But everyone's heart was in the right place here and no "conspiracy" was at hand.

However, you should still provide the original version of a film that all audiences fell in love with till you made a new version.

[Marky_198]

Thanks DisneyDuster, that's the article I was talking about in the other BATB thread.

[Mooky]

Random BatB fact: Robby Benson, the voice of the Beast, also directed several episodes of Friends... One of them is Season 3 episode "The One Where Monica And Richard Are Just Friends", which starts in a video rental store with, coincidentally or not, a shot of few Disney videos, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin among others.

I was re-watching Friends, it caught my attention and I just wanted to share it ... It wasn't really worth a thread of its own, so...