Beauty and the Beast Discussion

[Siren]

I think UncleEd will be our new PapiBear.

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

OOPS! Sorry

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.

So far in all the adaptations I've seen, including very old ones, Belle never has a mother. She had a bunch of sisters in most the adaptations though. And she was the the last of them, and said to be the most beautiful. So very much like Ariel's situation. Which may be why they dropped her sisters from the picture

[Ariel'sprince]

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

OOPS! Sorry

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.

So far in all the adaptations I've seen, including very old ones, Belle never has a mother. She had a bunch of sisters in most the adaptations though. And she was the the last of them, and said to be the most beautiful. So very much like Ariel's situation. Which may be why they dropped her sisters from the picture

In the original story she even has brothers.
Maybe the 3 blonds ate her mother .
"Papa,i want to see the world outside".
"You can't,ever since the 3 blondes have eaten your mother i promised to mak sure you won't get hurt".

[Disney Duster]

Lazario, sorry I called you cruel if you didn't mean to be or think you were. Are you going to respond to what I said earlier about what you said? And what about Kossage? Anyway, I wonder if you aren't considering the fact that Belle's father doesn't get sick until later. I could understand that if Belle took care of him, then she should be more worried, but he seems pretty independent (and even smart like his daughter, being an inventor). I also wonder if maybe Belle was in too much shock over the situation and she didn't want to dwell on what she had just done. She might not even have vene been debating over whether to stay or not. The other thing is, though you will probably say it's not an excuse, I don't believe Disney movies are aimed at children, but they are made to be acceptable for children, and perhaps the actual situation was too heavy for kids, and so they needed to make it as light as they did. Also, I checked and Belle's crying is interrupted by Mrs. Potts and her son. I guess Belle could have been in such control of her emotions she wanted to be cheerful for company, as well as...polite?

UncleEd, well, you haven't come back so I don't know what that means, but I'll alsot you know I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, too.

Anyway, I just realized something else possibly bad in Beauty and the Beast. Why is it that the prince's servants, who are always shown to be kind and caring and very possibly loving to him, cannot break the spell, but Belle can? The Beast needs to love another and be loved in return. But Belle dressing the Beast's wounds and caring for him is just what his servants did, do, or try to do. So what does Belle have that the servants don't? She tells the Beast too control his temper, and tries to change him? But the servants tell the Beast that as well, when discussing Belle coming down for dinner. They try to change him, but can't. So then what does she have...oh yes! Girly parts.

It's not just that she's human, the servants were all human before. And it's not just that she's female either, as Mrs. Potts demonstrates. She needs to be young and hot. In order for the Beast to love someone, it needed to be a young hot girl. That's why everyone gets excited when "there's a girl in the castle", and even the Beast knows it: "Uh, master. Have you thought that, perhaps, this girl could be the one to break the spell?" "Of course I have. I'm not a fool." Nice, Disney, sex is required to break this spell. What's that you say, it's not about sex? It's about...romance? Okay, I'll give you that. But did the Enchantress specify that it had to be romantic love? No. And yet that's the only kind the Beast seems to be capable of. He'll love someone if he will enjoy getting into their pants. This is all so odd when the film's supposed to be about not liking people or judging them for appearences. Why can't the Beast just love someone without romance or sex?

I'm fully prepared to change my mind/opinion, but hey, I found it.

[Ariel'sprince]

It's not just that she's human, the servants were all human before. And it's not just that she's female either, as Mrs. Potts demonstrates. She needs to be young and hot. In order for the Beast to love someone, it needed to be a young hot girl. That's why everyone gets excited when "there's a girl in the castle", and even the Beast knows it: "Uh, master. Have you thought that, perhaps, this girl could be the one to break the spell?" "Of course I have. I'm not a fool." Nice, Disney, sex is required to break this spell. What's that you say, it's not about sex? It's about...romance? Okay, I'll give you that. But did the Enchantress specify that it had to be romantic love? No. And yet that's the only kind the Beast seems to be capable of. He'll love someone if he will enjoy getting into their pants. This is all so odd when the film's supposed to be about not liking people or judging them for appearences. Why can't the Beast just love someone without romance or sex?

.
"Tale as old as time,true as it can be,like a porn film,a night behind their wildest dirty dreams,Beasuty and the Beast".
"She really finish fast,he really get his clothes off quick,and they don't even use protaction".
okay,now seriously,i think it's romance (it will never be sex).

[UmbrellaFish]

Mrs. Potts was an old lady friend. Lumiere was a pal. Cogsworth was an elder. Chip was a little boy. Love is different. You are saying true love is the same as loving your best friend. It''s not. Belle was a young beautiful woman who touched his heart differently than any others.



YAY! For the first time in three days, I feel great after school!

[Disney Duster]

Sorry, I meant to write: Why is it that the prince's servants, who are always shown to be kind and caring and very possibly loving to him, cannot break the spell, but Belle can?

Anyway, you didn't get what I was saying, UmbrellaFish. I already pointed out that the enchantress did not specify romantic love. Why did she place the curse on the prince in the first place? Because he turned away an old woman and wouldn't give her shelter or acceptance. That was his test. That's how she knew there was no love in his heart. You don't just love people you want to kiss, she didn't expect the prince to kiss her. What about Jesus loving everyone? He wants to kiss or marry everyone? No. There are different kinds of love, but the prince didn't feel any love, until he got romantic or sexual feelings for the most beautiful girl in the village, even her name means beauty. The enchantress never said he needed "true love", and even then, who's to say that love for a friend isn't true? Yea, Belle touched him differently than others. And he felt it in the nether regions.

YAY! For the first time in three days, I feel great after school!

Why? You never even said why this was.

[Escapay]

Why is it that the prince's servants, who are always shown to be kind and caring and very possibly loving to him, cannot break the spell, but Belle can?

They were a part of the spell/curse. They knew Beast before he was Beast, and the whole reason the Enchantress put him under a spell was for him to learn how to properly treat others (namely strangers), and to earn that kind of treatment in return. By love she doesn't (as you said) mean romantic love, but just a kind of brotherly love. The unconditional world love that people have for those less fortunate, for those they know about, for those they care for, etc.

Thus, an outsider would need to be brought in who was not aware of what the Beast truly was. He or she would be a "clean slate", so to speak. The two of them would thus learn from each other about things like compassion and care, etc. It wouldn't necessarily have to be mushy kisses, flowers, chocolates, promises they don't intend to keep, etc., but a true and unashamed acknowledgment of the love and care they share for each other.

Since Beast basically imprisoned himself and his staff in the castle, and Maurice was likely the first guy to come along, he was still mean and angry. His last "guest" placed a curse on them, so he'd probably not be so kind to the next who'd come along. And when the next who'd come along ends up sitting in my chair, sipipng my tea, and wrapping themselves in my blanket, I'd be a bit pissed. The tea and chair I can forgive, but not the blanket. I'm very protective of my blanket!

The reason that it's a romantic love is because it makes for a good story. While I'm sure a buddy-buddy movie could be mined from the basic premise (a mean and nasty guy gets turned into a beast, a nice guy turns him into a nice guy and breaks the spell), male-female relationships sell more tickets.

Scaps

[Ariel'sprince]

Sorry, I meant to write: Why is it that the prince's servants, who are always shown to be kind and caring and very possibly loving to him, cannot break the spell, but Belle can?

Maybe becouse she don't know the Prince and he needs to be loved by a stranger? (that whould make sense in her spell).

[Someday...]

oh my,
you know the final dancing scene in beauty and the beast-
I think they recycled the dancing animation from sleeping beauty!
There are several moments when the prince looks strangly like phillip, and the pose at the end is the exact same as in the end of the dance in sleeping beauty.

[Dottie]

They did recycle that animation from Sleeping Beauty because they were running out of time and thought that it'd give BatB an appropriate ending. It says that somewhere on the audio-commentary of the PE.

[UmbrellaFish]

About the " I feel great!" part was because the past three days I had been getting headaches as soon as I got home from school.


Personally, I've always felt that the conditions of the spell were to find true love. Romantic love, really. That's what the audience was expecting, and if you had never seen trailers for the movie or posters, or even the title, you would probably have assumed it would be true love. I always thought she actually said that, but it's been awhile since I've last seen the movie.

The message of the movie is also about getting to know someone. If you don't agree with the "true love" idea, this may make more sense. When Maurice came to the castle the Beast dismissed him without even knowing him. You could say the only reason the Beast let Belle stay was that she was beautiful. But after he stayed with her for awhile, he noticed she was more than beautiful.


Now, I do have my own gripe with the film. I've always felt that everyone was using Belle. They didn't even tell her they used to be human.

[Ariel'sprince]

Agree with UmbrellaFish .
About everyone using Belle-i allways felt that Be Our Guest was that they're nice but they're nice to her only becouse she can brick the spell (notice how they're angry when she left the castle (for exmaple Lumier said he wished that she never found the castle) and i"m sure she whould go back to the castle) and only Mrs. Potts and Chip were really nice to her.

[Disney Duster]

Oh, yay, Escapay came in to actually address what I said! I was going to say I needed the filmakers to officially say the Beast needed to in love with someon he didn't know before the spell to believe it, but thinking on it, that must be the reason he was made a Beast in the fist place, so he couldn't rely on his looks and a person would love him for his insides. So, I just needed to think a little further, with your inspiration and provoking. I suppose the transformation could have just been to cause him pain while he tries to love his servants, but that's improbable. I was going to say Maurice did nothing bad to the Beast, and trying to stop Belle from amking her sacrifice was as kidn as the sacrifice itself, but you got that, too, when you explained that the Beast hated him because he took and used the Beast's things, and stared at him, etc. All I wonder now is will girls think they could only get an unruly man to love them if they were as beautiful as Belle, but that question is bound to enter any psyche from countless other media.

Well done, Escapay!

As for the abusive thing we talked about earlier, I still wonder if Belle leaving, and only coming back when the Beast needed her help, kind of overcomes Lazario's worries over the message that girls should stay with an abusive partner until they change. But she went back, and I think it's been proven that some girls leave abusive relationships but then go back.

[Escapay]

All I wonder now is will girls think they could only get an unruly man to love them if they were as beautiful as Belle

What girl would want an unruly man in the first place? Unless of course, unruly men are wild in bed.

Regarding UmbrellaFish's comment about whether Beast kept her around because she was beautiful, I never really thought of it that way. To me, it played out to Beast more as a simple prisoner exchange, albeit one he didn't expect. He sounded slightly surprised ("You would...take his place?"), but then regained his gruff and angry facade ("Done!"). It really wasn't a big thing for him until Lumiere & Co. were continually prodding him to be a gentleman and nice to Belle that he really thought "hmm..maybe she could be the one." There's a part in the film (I think when he's waiting for her for the dinner she never came down for) when he says something like "of course I've considered it!". But just as quickly as he considers it, he shrugs it off because he knows that he's a hard man to get along with. After all, he does say later "She'll never see me as anything...but a monster." With that he's pretty much acknowledging to himself aloud that he feels he is a monster. Because in life, at least in my experience, as long as you don't say something, a tiny-but-significant part of you will never believe it's true. Aside from his line to Maurice ("So, you've come to stare at THE BEAST!"), he never really says to himself that he is a beast or a monster. So when he is sad and upset that Belle wants nothing to do with him, he's finally and truly accepted that the spell may never be broken. He accepts that while he would have her the rest of his life (or until he feels like freeing her), it may never amount to anything.

When Belle finds the West Wing and the Enchanted Rose, she's pretty much crossed the line. For someone that wants "nothing to do with him", she's become quite a nosy girl. Thus, Beast's outburst. It's not only the invasion of privacy, but it's also a clue to why he is a Beast. He never told her about the curse, none of the servants did, because if she knew, it would ultimately affect any feelings she may develop. Would these feelings come about because they're genuine, or because she feels it can break a spell?

So while Belle has some knowledge of what happened (the slashed portrait, a strange rose...), she never asks questions. She knows she went too far and that some things are best left unexplained. Also, of course, she's frightened by Beast's outburst and so she runs away. Of course, Beast realizes that while she may be repulsed by him and possibly never love him, she's still his prisoner, and more importantly, a companion. That's why he rescues her. Even if he'll remain a Beast, the loneliness has really affected him, even with a houseful of enchanted servants. Their relationship, at least for him, just needs to be an amicable one if he's gonna spend the rest of his days as a Beast. Who knew they'd actually fall in love?

Of course, I could go on and on with my interpretation of the film and how it's about companionship rather than romantic love that's true and mushy and oh-so-maddening, but that'd take far too long...

Scaps

[Disney Duster]

What, Escapay, did you ignore the lines from the quoted lines I provided that suggest the Beast did keep Belle because she was beautiul and he thought only a beautiful girl could break the spell, because he could only love beautiful girl, and yes, in the romantic way?

Since you and beast_enchantment both said that you felt Belle and the Beast were friends at first and then Belle realized it was more, I can accept that. But some people say true love is when you seem like friends, but you want to sex, too. And sex covers everything, kissing and touching, okay everyone?

HAHA! I could even argue that if they were only friends, Belle only loved the Beast romantically when he was a hot prince, which is when they first kiss! And that would send the message you do still need to be hot to get someone to want to touch you in sexual ways! Good job Disney!

Anyway, Escapay, if the Beast didn't want Belle to find out about his past, that's just another suggestion he was keeping her for the spell. And if the Beast was so mean before, why does he let Belle take Maurice's place? If it didn't matter to him who broke the spell, some old man or a hot girl, then why do a kind, compassionate thing by letting Belle do what she wanted? I thought the Beast was an unkind, uncompassionate, unloving thing and that's why the spell was cast. But no. He's sees a hot girl and suddenly is kind enough to let her father go, to listen to her, to make a deal with her, to do what she begs of him. And after he didn't do what an ugly old woman begged of him. HMMM!

Aw, Escapay, I hope our differences, our arguing, our debating, don't hurt us. You're my friend forever and always. Like...Belle and the Beast?!?! Or...not like Belle and the Beast! And there goes another point made. Yes, I think Bell and the Beast were falling in love, because I don't think romantic love is just friendship with f***ing, but something more, something they had. If I'm wrong, and falling in true love is nothing more than forming a friendship with someone you're sexually attracted to, then so be it, I guess without the spell Belle and the Beast would live as friends who don't have any sexual relations ever in their life, or Belle continues on for someone she'll be attracted to and form a friendship with.

[Escapay]

What, Escapay, did you ignore the lines from the quoted lines I provided that suggest the Beast did keep Belle because she was beautiful and he thought only a beautiful girl could break the spell, because he could only love a beautiful girl, and yes, in the romantic way?

Don't worry, I read it. It's one of the theories I kept in mind, but one that I really couldn't subscribe to and aside from a flimsy "I can see/understand that argument, but I don't agree with it", there really wasn't anything else for me to add, so I opted not to address it. Plus, I tend to hover in and out of different parts of threads and often overlook some key aspects.

But some people say true love is when you seem like friends, but you want to sex, too.

Those people are idiots, plain and simple.

I could even argue that if they were only friends, Belle only loved the Beast romantically when he was a hot prince, which is when they first kiss!

I can see how someone can think that, but remember that it was the tearful and heartbreaking "I Love You" that caused him to transform back in the first place. For me, it was the final affirmation of the romantic love that had grown between them.

The first: Belle saves Beast - what? shouldn't it be the other way around? Perhaps, but Beast only rescues Belle from the woods because she's 1. his prisoner, and 2. his only real companion. He won't really let a prisoner run away, and he obviously wanted some new blood in the castle. Ten years (or so) of him and talking furniture really can be tiresome. There's really no love lost or gained between him and her at this point, not until it's Belle who saves him. And she could have easily left him for dead (or returned him to the castle and then leave again). Instead she stays. Mainly because she kept her word, but also because, at least in my interpretation, she felt something for him. It's not clear to her what she felt, perhaps it's gratitude for her life or obligation to her word.

Calling it love is something we can only recognize in hindsight (at least for me), and sometimes even I don't acknowledge that it's love. But the simple fact that she goes back says that there's something in her that's telling her to stay. It could be a newfound caring and compassion for Beast, it could be her obligation. But she goes back.

(just realized I wrote a lot of speculative mishmash for reason one, so we can either disregard it or strip it down to the simple fact: she could have left him to die, but she saved him.)

The second: Beast lets Belle go - simple, really. Sometimes when you love someone, you just have to let them go. And of course, Beast said it best when Coggy asked why: "Because...I love her."

The third and final: Belle returns - sure, she returns to warn him that his life is in danger. But at the same time, she's risking her life as well. She can only think the worst of what's going on at the castle, and as far as she knows, it could be ablaze with all the enchanted objects destroyed. But she returns, and she (obviously) passes by all the fighting and all the action and finds Beast.

And, of course, her superhuman strength returns when Beast is stabbed. She is able to not only pull him back towards her, but over the balcony and lay him down gently on the ground.

Finally, after she comes back and sees him stabbed and dying, she realizes that her captor has become her friend, and this friend lies dying in her arms. And, as is often the case before someone dies, there's so much you want to say with so little time to say it, so you condense it all into the three magic words that will always make or break a relationship: "I Love You".

Perhaps Elise McKenna (Jane Seymour) said it best in Somewhere in Time...

The man of my dreams has almost faded now. The one I have created in my mind. The sort of man each woman dreams of in the deepest and most secret reaches of her heart. I can almost see him now before me. What would I say to him, if he were really here? Forgive me, I have never known this feeling - I've lived without it all my life. Is it any wonder, then, that I failed to recognize you? You - who brought it to me for the first time. Is there any way I can tell you how my life has changed? Any way at all to let you know what sweetness you have given me? There is so much to say . . . I cannot find the words. Except for these - I love you.

She uses it in an entirely different context than Beauty and the Beast, but I always felt that behind Belle's words were these kind of thoughts and feelings. After all, up until her stay at the castle, Belle lived what was essentially a dull and listless life where her only escape was in books. Becoming a "prisoner" was an adventure for her that she never expected would lead to love, and that Beast, a man she initially is afraid of/despises/indifferent to, has become the man she loves, no matter what he looks like.

The kiss after his transformation was really just icing on the cake, but my god, what great icing! Probably the hottest kiss in animation.

I thought the Beast was an unkind, uncompassionate, unloving thing and that's why the spell was cast. But no. He's sees a hot girl and suddenly is kind enough to let her father go, to listen to her, to make a deal with her, to do what she begs of him. And after he didn't do what an ugly old woman begged of him. HMMM!

I still consider it a prisoner exchange. Plus, better to have a young prisoner stick around for 30-odd years than an old one for 30-odd weeks. If not for Lumy's continual proddings ("offer her a nicer room", "invite her to dinner", "learn to be a gentleman", etc.) he would have kept her up in the tower regardless how she looked.

Maybe it's the idealist in me, but I really can't see him keeping her "prisoner" just so he has something pretty to look at. I really wouldn't want Beast to become some vicarious narcissist by having Belle around to remind him of how beautiful he used to be. Still, your argument does provide interesting similarities to Pygmalion. Belle/Galatea represent a thing of beauty that entrances Beast/Pygmalion, to a point where they do fall in love with the woman, though they know they cannot have them in the...carnal sense of the word.

Aw, Escapay, I hope our differences, our arguing, our debating, don't hurt us.

Aw, Mike, they never will. That's what's great about discussions/debates like these. The subject matter is open to any interpretation that we can present our opinions without having to tread on toes or bite off heads.

Plus, as much as I love Beauty and the Beast and dual-rank it #1 with Aladdin so many times, sometimes the film just bores me. And sometimes I fall out of love with Belle. And sometimes I wish it was 60 minutes longer, shot in live-action, had less songs, and provide more character-building moments. I seriously think Beauty and the Beast as told by Disney would be so much better as a live-action drama. Not necessarily like Cocteau's classic, but something on par with Random Harvest in terms of providing believable/realistic but still "idealized" characters (based on otherwise two-dimensional character archetypes), and Moulin Rouge in terms of a unique-but-true-to-the-period visual "splendor".

You're my friend forever and always.

Click Here



(Edit: the link doesn't work because the site is currently down, but if/when it ever goes up, it's a pleasant animation that can be customized to any name and provides the same message)

Scaps

[Disney Duster]

Ah, you combated well once again.

I meant that it seemed the things you said in reply to UmbrellaFish seemed to touch on things I said, so I wondered if you even read what I said.

But some people say true love is when you seem like friends, but you want to sex, too.

Those people are idiots, plain and simple.

Hmmm...well, I constantly wonder if love is just a combination of things. Physical attraction, friendship, caring. But I'd like to think something that is a totally new feeling, true love or whatever you want to call it, magically is what makes us love someone differently from a friend or family member. But did you know that my psychologist told me the science of love requires sexual attraction? He told me when I told him I loved someone who didn't feel the same way. He said you can have feelings for someone but you're not in love until they love you back because that's also scientifically part of it. I mean, don't quote me on that because you'd have to talk to him for him to defend anything you don't agree with, but. Just to add, I currently think I love someone who is rather...beastly, many people don't think he's attractive, and I see he's not what the media (and Disney films!) say is attractive, and I but his beastliness is part of what I'm attracted too, I think. I don't know, love's confusing and complicated. So anyway, I'd like to believe you can love someone without them loving you, and maybe even without physical attraction. I could write a lot, but I'm going to stop here before this gets too off-topic.

I might as well add, I think I grew to become attracted to him, because I wasn't to enthralled by his looks before, so maybe Belle could have done the same thing and scientifically her love is sound.

I could even argue that if they were only friends, Belle only loved the Beast romantically when he was a hot prince, which is when they first kiss!

I can see how someone can think that, but remember that it was the tearful and heartbreaking "I Love You" that caused him to transform back in the first place. For me, it was the final affirmation of the romantic love that had grown between them.

I'm not quoting everything else, basically I think Belle only went to save the Beast out of kindness and she thought he may not actually hurt her because of little hints (he moved her to the room, invited her to dinner, saved her, and he never actually touched her). I already pointed out that Snow White took in a scary hag because of her goodness. All the princesses have some kind of good/kind thing going on, and I think that Belle's kindess was the driving force. Not even just kindness to care for a hurt being, but kindness to keep him company.

But I forgot she said she loved the Beast to break the spell, and that the Beast said he loved her. Oops. That disproves my "She only loved him romantically wehn he was human" idea. I suppose they could have meant 'I love you"...as a friend, but c'mon I admit that's weak.

Finally, after she comes back and sees him stabbed and dying, she realizes that her captor has become her friend, and this friend lies dying in her arms.

Hey! WTF? I thought they were more than friends by this time? What, she suddenly loves him more than that at the very last second when he's about to die?

I guess I should still see Somewhere in Time, but I didn't particulrly like that dialogue. One thing about me, Escapay, is I don't get very emotional with movies, or in general. But I've gotten very emotional over my beast. I think he actually has made me feel more emotional in movies, because how I feel about him connects to the songs or the sad or the romantic parts. That doesn't happen so much now, though, but I won't get into it beyond sometimes, currently, I think I don't feel anything until I see him, then I know I do.

I thought the Beast was an unkind, uncompassionate, unloving thing and that's why the spell was cast. But no. He's sees a hot girl and suddenly is kind enough to let her father go, to listen to her, to make a deal with her, to do what she begs of him. And after he didn't do what an ugly old woman begged of him. HMMM!

I still consider it a prisoner exchange. Plus, better to have a young prisoner stick around for 30-odd years than an old one for 30-odd weeks. If not for Lumy's continual proddings ("offer her a nicer room", "invite her to dinner", "learn to be a gentleman", etc.) he would have kept her up in the tower regardless how she looked.

Well, I was trying to say that he kept her around because she was beautiful and that made her more of a possible spell-breaker. I think the Beast either thought he could only fall in love with an attractive young girl, or he only wanted to fall in love with an attractive young girl.

Ah, everything you said about live-action Beauty and the Beast! Well, I know you're more a fan of movies and musicals in general, but Disney is perfect for fairy tales, even one such as Beauty and the Beast. I've wanted to make a live-action Cinderella for a while now, but it will always be perfect as the original Disney film I'm basing it off of, even if people ended up thinking the live-action one was "better" in certain ways.

Yea, your link didn't work, but it's the thought that counts and seeing my name in a URL brightened my day. How often should I check it?

[Escapay]

Ah, you combated well once again.

I meant that it seemed the things you said in reply to UmbrellaFish seemed to touch on things I said, so I wondered if you even read what I said.

Ah, okay, thanks for (re)clearing that up.

Those people are idiots, plain and simple.

Hmmm...well, I constantly wonder if love is just a combination of things. Physical attraction, friendship, caring. But I'd like to think something that is a totally new feeling, true love or whatever you want to call it, magically is what makes us love someone differently from a friend or family member. But did you know that my psychologist told me the science of love requires sexual attraction? He told me when I told him I loved someone who didn't feel the same way. He said you can have feelings for someone but you're not in love until they love you back because that's also scientifically part of it. I mean, don't quote me on that because you'd have to talk to him for him to defend anything you don't agree with, but. Just to add, I currently think I love someone who is rather...beastly, many people don't think he's attractive, and I see he's not what the media (and Disney films!) say is attractive, and I but his beastliness is part of what I'm attracted too, I think. I don't know, love's confusing and complicated. So anyway, I'd like to believe you can love someone without them loving you, and maybe even without physical attraction. I could write a lot, but I'm going to stop here before this gets too off-topic.

I might as well add, I think I grew to become attracted to him, because I wasn't to enthralled by his looks before, so maybe Belle could have done the same thing and scientifically her love is sound.

Love is complicated, isn't it? I think of all the definitions out there, all the different versions that I've read about and seen in film and TV, that there is at least one universal truth:

Love Hurts.

Yeah, yeah, that's about as cliched as one can get, but at the same time, it's so goddamn true that people will relish in a painful love. That overall emotion of "my god, I can't live without this feeling, and yet if I do, I'll really be better off...but I must have it!" It's pretty much the notion that you regret loving someone because of how it makes you feel, but you still love them anyway.

Pulling out another movie quote, this time from 1954's Sabrina and the character Baron St. Fontanel...

A woman happily in love, she burns the souffle. A woman unhappily in love, she forgets to turn on the oven.

Probably makes no sense, but it does to me.

Finally, after she comes back and sees him stabbed and dying, she realizes that her captor has become her friend, and this friend lies dying in her arms.

Hey! WTF? I thought they were more than friends by this time? What, she suddenly loves him more than that at the very last second when he's about to die?

I probably should have been more specific.

Mainly, we take friends for granted and we don't realize it, nor do we like to admit it. So when a friend is near death, or is suddenly gone, that's when we truly realize how much we did care for them, how much we did consider them a friend. Sure, Belle and Beast had fun times before she left for her sick pa. But there was still that "prisoner" idea looming over them, that both knew that even though they were friends, the friendship started off on really bad terms (even with Belle saving Beast the first time). When Belle's in the village with Gaston and the mob, she makes the comment "He's my friend", which is her assertation to the people that Beast really has some endearing qualities. (Then again, the town thought she was odd, so it probably wouldn't surprise them if she called herself a friend of the Beast!). She returns not only to warn him for his life, but also because she wants to share this epiphany, that she has finally and truly discovered a friend in him.

Thus, the stabbing and "death" hurt her greatly, as it's part of the whole "you don't know what you have until it's gone" mentality, and Belle has gained and lost her friend in one night. The "I Love You", meant both in its own sincerity and as her way of acknowledging a true friendship, is her final cry, her final words to him.

I guess it's the supernatural part of my mind that believes that the last words you hear on earth have a great impact on the afterlife, and for Beast, the "I Love You" was enough not only for the spell to be broken (perhaps the Enchantress was watching it all through a crystal ball and saying, "Hmm...yep, that did it!"), but also a will for him to WANT to return. So often we make the assumption that with the spell broken, he'd instantly come back to life, but the curse is so vague that he could have died loving her, then when she says she loves him, he'd be transformed back but still dead. Kind of like a deceptive Genie who says, "I'll grant you a wish". Then you wish for $1,000,000. The next thing you know, you get a call saying your mother has died, and her life insurance is $1,000,000. With Beast, at least through how I viewed the curse, the fact that she said she loved him was enough to break the curse, but that he heard it was enough for him to want to live again. Up until she came back, he was prepared to die and nearly welcomed it when Gaston came. Then, she came back and his hope was restored, but that knife stabbing pretty much turned him around again (he's probably thinking, "Geez, can't a guy catch a break?"). His final words were "At least I could see you one last time" (or something like that. I'd have to watch the movie, and I hate just watching a portion at a time).

I guess I should still see Somewhere in Time, but I didn't particulrly like that dialogue.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. It's one of my favorite pieces of dialogue in movies, and no matter how often I've heard it, I always cry when she says it...which brings me to...

One thing about me, Escapay, is I don't get very emotional with movies, or in general.

I'm pretty much the polar opposite, I tend to get very emotional with movies (though not as emotional as Kram, who'll get so invested in characters that if one he likes dies, he'll hate the movie.), which is probably one reason why I don't care much for action films over dramas and musicals. Action characters are often too hyperactive, energized, etc., that any emotional attachment I have is really based on adrenaline and anticipation for the story. Dramatic characters offer a bigger attachment for me, I will literally invest my whole mindset into how a character thinks/acts that I feel like I truly know them (if they were real of course). Kind of like Method viewing instead of Method acting, lol.

But I've gotten very emotional over my beast. I think he actually has made me feel more emotional in movies, because how I feel about him connects to the songs or the sad or the romantic parts. That doesn't happen so much now, though, but I won't get into it beyond sometimes, currently, I think I don't feel anything until I see him, then I know I do.

I know how you feel. Different people will always elicit different internal responses that we sometimes fail to notice if it's a genuine feeling or indigestion. Usually I don't wear my emotions on my sleeve, it's only really when I watch films. But I'll still feel differently among certain people than I do among others.

If you really wanna get emotional with your "beast", watch The History Boys, namely the part where Posner is singing "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered".

I think the Beast either thought he could only fall in love with an attractive young girl, or he only wanted to fall in love with an attractive young girl.

I can see that, too. I still subscribe to my prisoner theory mainly because to me, Beast had to love himself before he could love anyone else, or even know what love really is. (I think I said that about another character or another topic somewhere else, though I don't remember.) Belle helped him to love himself (taming him, essentially), that he eventually learns to love her too. Then again, maybe all this time I'm just trying to skirt away from the entire physical attraction aspect, after all, the whole theme/message of the film is to find the beauty within.

Ah, everything you said about live-action Beauty and the Beast! Well, I know you're more a fan of movies and musicals in general, but Disney is perfect for fairy tales, even one such as Beauty and the Beast. I've wanted to make a live-action Cinderella for a while now, but it will always be perfect as the original Disney film I'm basing it off of, even if people ended up thinking the live-action one was "better" in certain ways.

I probably shouldn't have said that Disney's BATB would be better as live-action, that's not what I originally meant, lol! I meant that the basic story that Disney has created would be great as a live-action feature (preferably by Disney) to sort of "complement" the animated version rather than try and remake/imitate/succeed it. After all, the 1996 101 Dalmatians was partly successful because it offered a more fleshed-out (or more padded-out, depending on who you ask) version of the story, while not trying to say, "1961 was then, we want you to think of Glenn Close when you see the word Dalmatians". The sequel (which a lot of people hate, unfortunately) further advanced the "complementing" idea by offering more character develpment regarding Cruella, while also presenting a familiar type of love story, with the help of dogs and a bird. Plus, Ioan Gruffudd one of my favorite actors, so I'll like 102 Dalmatians regardless.

With Beauty and the Beast, the animated version is perhaps one of my favorite interpretations I've seen of the story (others include the aforementioned Cocteau film, as well as the 1987-1990 CBS series), and I feel Disney could continue to build on what they've already developed, and create a truly spectactular live-action film. They're about halfway there as they added more material to the Broadway version. I haven't seen it (which I'm so upset about, as it closed, dammit), nor have I read what's new (I really don't want to be spoiled, or let it affect my own treatment of the story), but I'm sure there's enough material (along with more dramatic and character building elements to cut down on the songs) that would help Disney to make a live-action movie.

Yea, your link didn't work, but it's the thought that counts and seeing my name in a URL brightened my day. How often should I check it?

Until it works again, it's a very cute animation.

Scalps

[Disney Duster]

Love Hurts.

Yeah, yeah, that's about as cliched as one can get, but at the same time, it's so goddamn true that people will relish in a painful love. That overall emotion of "my god, I can't live without this feeling, and yet if I do, I'll really be better off...but I must have it!" It's pretty much the notion that you regret loving someone because of how it makes you feel, but you still love them anyway.

Hmm, I think I may have gotten the souffle thing. You just don't want to do anything if your unhappy, but if you're happy you may want to do too much and get too excited. Anyway, yea they say love hurts, but I don't know if I've hurt as bad as most people say they have. For my beast (I'm just gonna call him that for now, I hope he'd never be offended), I think I have felt sick for him, but I cannot tell if it was lack of eating or indigestion, etc. I don't really like to analyze love, you can come up with so many reasons to give up on someone. I think it really is best to think with your heart in love's case. And yet I'm constantly analyzing it, I just try not to.

I probably should have been more specific.

I didn't quote the rest because, well, I don't think she came to the castle thinking part of it was to tell him she was his friend, I think they both already knew that, I think it was all about saving him. But also, you still said they were prisoner/ward who became friends, when I think they were prisoner/ward who became friends who became lovers. Maybe they thought they were friends but then realized it was more romantic later. I think when Belle said she loved him, she meant beyond friends. You don't french a friend like that, which is exactly what she did after she said she loved him.

I did wonder if the Beast could have transformed into a human corpse, but I think the stab was either not fatal or the spell returned him to his exact former self (physically, of course) so it erased the wound. I guess the spell could have healed the wound as reward, like how I wondered if the prince never aged or the spell just decided to remove the aging as reward. Basically, I do wonder about it but I don't think the filmakers thought much about it because the main message is that love healed and restored everything, I think.

As for the Enchantress, I thought the magic almost had a mind of it's own and did everything that would make Belle and the prince happy, but I could understand if the Enchantress was like some godly figure who knew what was going on and sent down the sparkles. Somehow I'd like to think she died but her magic lived on, and I have no idea why, maybe because I think the Enchantress was a b*tch and if I were the prince I'd still wonder about her and be mad at her, unless the spell removed all the years he aged so he lost no time, like I had considered.

The will to live thing is nice, but because he didn't make a move on his own after Belle said the words (the magic was moving his body), I just don't think it was the case and maybe the stab wasn't fatal. I still don't see why the stab would be fatal if it was just in his back and he was a strong Beast.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. It's one of my favorite pieces of dialogue in movies, and no matter how often I've heard it, I always cry when she says it...

Well, the dialogue is confusing and perhaps even sexist. Every woman dreams of the perfect man? And every person has to get their perfect love (I think the people I know in real life are better than the "perfect" people I've dreamed) And this is the puzzling part: Forgive me, I have never known this feeling - I've lived without it all my life. Is it any wonder, then, that I failed to recognize you? You - who brought it to me for the first time. Wait, if she never felt the feeling before, then how did this man bring it to her, if he's been in her deepest secretist heart for so long in her life?

One thing about me, Escapay, is I don't get very emotional with movies, or in general.

I'm pretty much the polar opposite...

Wait, so you get more emotional with movies...than with people in real life? Or you just get that emotional more often with movies than people in real life? I think finding someone you love could be like investing yourself in a real person you know. I know it's a stereotype that women ask what men are thinking and men aren't thinking about much (or what women hope they are thinking about), but I have felt I wanted to know what my beast thinks and feels more than anyone else (and wonder if I asked him, he'd be annoyed and I'd find myself "the girl" in the stereotype). And by the way, love is different for everyone, one thing I don't like about romantic movies is people may not feel they are in love if they don't do or live up to the things that happen to the lovers in the movie. Which brings me too...

If you really wanna get emotional with your "beast", watch The History Boys, namely the part where Posner is singing "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered".

Thank you, but I don't want to watch romantic movies to deliberately feel sad or love for my beast. I think in a way, in another plane, it almost cheapens real love or will present ideas that will never happen to me and my beast. I mean, come on, it's two people acting like they're in love! True, the script is supposed to be written by people who have loved, and true, actors are supposed to bring real feelings into the fabricated situations of a play or film. Which also brings me to why I recently am not sure if I want to act, because I don't want to use my real feelings for my beast in a character who's supposed to love some girl in some musical!

Belle helped him to love himself (taming him, essentially)...

That's yet another thing that bothers me, which is why I was shocked Lazario[/b] liked it. I don't believe in changing someone you love unless you have to. I suppose the Beast was better off controlling his temper, because that could make him happier and it would be much better for the relationship, but all the manners and eating with a fork and spoon, ugh let your beast be who he is. Even though he was a prince before. And so the movie confuses me once again.

Now of course, being in a relationshop alone makes a change, and unfortunately there are changes that need to be made and it's hard for me to say how much changing I think is okay and what changes are okay etc.

I don't need to quote evrything you said about the live-action remakes, 'cause now I see what you meant, except you did confuse me when you said:

...but I'm sure there's enough material (along with more dramatic and character building elements to cut down on the songs) that would help Disney to make a live-action movie.

I thought you liked musicals. Why cut down the songs? Can't the songs be dramatic and character building, which is usually what good songwriters strive for in musicals? And live-action musicals can have lots of singing...

As for Beauty and the Beast's stage version, if you ever want to see your B&B a live-action movie musical (if I ever become a director, I would like to come to you to help me make your dream come true when I don't have other projects), you should research what critics hated about it. Almost every theater geek and critic says Disney's shows only make money and last on Broadway because of tourists. This bars Tarzan because that was not a hit movie, it needs to be a Disney classic to work, and it bars The Lion King because that actually is what critics and theater geeks consider a good show, more for the theatrics than the story and songs, though, I believe. Then again, Beauty and the Beast by itself almost made Best Picture, and theater people tend to be stuck-up and think theater's better than films anyway, so maybe you don't need to worry about what they criticized.

I read in maybe one or two places that critics thought the show wasn't as magical as the movie, that Gaston wasn't as sadistic in his killing and he died in a pony way, etc. So this would be a good sign for you if that was a main complaint, because then the live-action film can be truer to it's roots, namely the film it's based on, but in general still something uneniably Disney.

One thing that is not a big spoiler is the enchanted objects. Instead of actually being the objects when Belle meets them, they are slowly transforming until they are fully objects by the spell's end. This makes them more believable because then they can be half human half objects and you can see how this works better for live theater. The actors can move better, show their face and facial expressions, and be human-sized! But some people thought it added a more emotional element as the castle servants lose their humanity.

Until it works again, it's a very cute animation.

I meant how often should I check to see if it is working?

Scalps

OMG! I love you (as much as a friend you know on the internet can)!

[UncleEd]

"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."

I've heard it before wikipedia was a glint in a web designers eye.

"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. "

If you say so, Larry. But I have no ego. You have still failed to respond to any of my brilliant posts. I always win any battle simpley by just showing up. You prove so in your ignoring of my points.

"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."

And we should all give birth control to kindergarteners and abort all the babies we can!!!

"I respect your opinion but i don't follow"

I respect no wrong opinions.

"Where'd you get lost?"

From your first word.

"This movie is like a proven formula of fakeness."

You just hate anything charming and quaint, don't you?

"The symapthetic formulaic qualities, or the extreme situations? They never forget that the characters were supposed to be sympathetic."

You sure you haven't been watching the Good Times version?

"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?" "

No we don't know what was said before or after. That's what I'm talking about. You're only seeing the portion they want to drive sensationalism from.

"What about the fact some people find Johnny Depp attractive and some do not?"

It'sall in how he presents himself. Johnny Depp is a character actor who can become anybody. There are also people who find anything out there attractive. Hence why some do and some don't but in animation you're either handsome or ugly by design rules. You say you love how some ugly guy looks so there's your answer in your case why you find the prince ugly. Your standard of beauty is off from the mainstream.

Some guys like fat women other like skinny women. Does that mean either can't be beautiful?

"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 don't but God and nature does. It's not a matter or morality either.

" 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."

The Wild and Wild Life are 2 different films. Wild Life was Schumacher's project, the Wild was not. So once again you are wrong and I am right.

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

Crimes against nature and their Creator are one and the same.

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

You do know that Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale, don't you?

"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. "

In fairy tales all the girls are attractive and the prices are always handsome. It's just how it is. No one wants to read an idealistic story about a beast who tuirns into an ugly bald guy.

"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!"

There is a movement that claims it never happened and was just a propaganda thing and this isn't some fringe skin head movement. There are college professors around the world that teach this. So not even the facts can sway some minds.

" 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. "

I found the animated sequences to be quite entertaining and the live action was just as entertaining as any number of Walt era films.

"That's a version of Cinderella I never heard."


In the original version he beheaded them and put their heads on stakes in the village square and the birds pecked out their eyes.

"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. "

People who hate fairy tales always say things like that but I don't buy the feminazi view of the world. Those stories never harmed anyone and the same great women in history grew up with them so you can't blame stories for people's problems. Just like you can't blame slavery for why you're a black poor person or blame men for keeping you down if you're a woman.


"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."

In all the versions I've read she saves herself or gets help from her friends while she is saving herself.

"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. "

Bad and wrong are the same thing. Wrong things are never good for you and bad things are never right. Quit being a politically correct, wishy washy liberal and stand with your wrong opinions.

"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. "

No, they're not there and I highly doubt any women stay with abusive men because of this fairy tale. If they are then they're just pathetic and deserve whatever misfortune comes their way.

"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."

That was sarcasim again. I love the score for BATB and if it were a bad score then his peers wouldn't have voted it as the best.

"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. "

Whatever....

"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 Belle had suspicions because she knew the painting's eyes and the Beast's eyes before the Prince showed up. I'm sure she connected those two.

"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."

All of the stuff she talks about in the Cinderella story she just read applies to her situation. I stand by that.

"But Lazario's better than you. "

Larry can kiss my little white ass.

"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"

I alays assumed they got together after the end the first time I saw it and on the commentary Don Hahn suggests that was the intent. I don't believe Mrs. Potts is Belle's mother as her name is MRS. Potts. I have wondered where Mr. Potts went though.

"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. "

You're on drugs. Bel;le's voice is in no way screechy.

"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. "

A film condenses time. How do we know she never thought about him in all the time she was there just because we didn't see it? It would have held up the story to have her talk about him ever 5 minutes. Besides, there are plenty of BATB comics and books where she talks about her Father and tells stories about their life together. She thought of Maurice often.

"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."

That's because you're seeing it with your head buried deeply up into your ass.

"Cinderella is the only classic Princess I consider to be more than just a cliche. "

Ironic when a lot o people see her as the opposite.

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

Then you'll never see the folly of your ways.












"I think UncleEd will be our new PapiBear"

Um, no. Unlike Papi Bear my posts have substance. Try READING them...

"Lazario, sorry I called you cruel if you didn't mean to be or think you were"

Why should you be? Larry IS Cruel....

"Are you going to respond to what I said earlier about what you said?"

He won't because he's a coward.

"UncleEd, well, you haven't come back so I don't know what that means, but I'll alsot you know I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, too. "

I've just been super busy the last few weeks and haven't been keeping up to date with posts.

"Anyway, I just realized something else possibly bad in Beauty and the Beast. Why is it that the prince's servants, who are always shown to be kind and caring and very possibly loving to him, cannot break the spell, but Belle can? The Beast needs to love another and be loved in return."

I forget which version (broadway or animated) but one says "her love" and the other says "their love" and this was done to open it up to gay love. It was either their love was there first and on Brodway Disney changed it after complaints or vice versa.

Probably enchanted humans are void? It seems to be left unsaid that the details of the enchantment must be secret from the one to break tthe spell. The servants are all in the know.

"Why can't the Beast just love someone without romance or sex?"

Uh, just when did the Beast have sex with Belle? I missed that version.

"Nice, Disney, sex is required to break this spell. What's that you say, it's not about sex? It's about...romance? Okay, I'll give you that. But did the Enchantress specify that it had to be romantic love? No. And yet that's the only kind the Beast seems to be capable of. He'll love someone if he will enjoy getting into their pants."

That's just vile. The opening info is just a synopsis of what happened. We don't know the details of what the Enchantress said. Romance and sex are 2 different things and too many people don't understand that.

I think Escapay has it best with his love of a strange concept.

"Now, I do have my own gripe with the film. I've always felt that everyone was using Belle. They didn't even tell her they used to be human."

To a degree the objects were but I think they came to love Belle as family and wanted to see her get together with the Beast because they knew what kind of a nice guy he could be when he wanted to be.

"Regarding UmbrellaFish's comment about whether Beast kept her around because she was beautiful, I never really thought of it that way."

I think the Beast kept her around at first because she was a girl who could break the spell but eventually had feelings for her. That was the heart of the story.

"Mike wrote:
But some people say true love is when you seem like friends, but you want to sex, too.

Those people are idiots, plain and simple. "

I agree, pure idiots.

"Ah, you combated well once again. "

Why do you want to argue when you know you're wrong?

"But did you know that my psychologist told me the science of love requires sexual attraction? He told me when I told him I loved someone who didn't feel the same way. He said you can have feelings for someone but you're not in love until they love you back because that's also scientifically part of it. "

And fetuses are not human babies....If this were true then no one would be hooking up online.