DVDizzy Forum

Does anyone else besides Cogsworth get a first name (what is his name btw)?

Also is there any more backstory on the Prince besides his dead mother and abusive father? Do we get to know why the father was abusive?

JeanGreyForever wrote:Does anyone else besides Cogsworth get a first name (what is his name btw)?

Also is there any more backstory on the Prince besides his dead mother and abusive father? Do we get to know why the father was abusive?

Three of Gaston's henchmen are actually called Tom, Dick, and Stanley. Besides that, no one else gets a first name. Cogsworth's name is Henry.

No more backstory on the Prince besides what you mentioned. We do not know why his father was abusive. Mrs. Potts just says he was a cruel man. I actually wish the movie would've explained why the Prince is a prince and not a king since his parents are dead. Also, they did not explain if he was a reigning monarch. The townspeople don't have a sovereign.

tsom wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote:Does anyone else besides Cogsworth get a first name (what is his name btw)?

Also is there any more backstory on the Prince besides his dead mother and abusive father? Do we get to know why the father was abusive?

Three of Gaston's henchmen are actually called Tom, Dick, and Stanley. Besides that, no one else gets a first name. Cogsworth's name is Henry.

No more backstory on the Prince besides what you mentioned. We do not know why his father was abusive. Mrs. Potts just says he was a cruel man. I actually wish the movie would've explained why the Prince is a prince and not a king since his parents are dead. Also, they did not explain if he was a reigning monarch. The townspeople don't have a sovereign.

Thanks for answering my questions. I didn't expect them to actually name three of Gaston's guys Tom, Dick, and Stanley but I suppose it makes sense considering the lyrics. It's interesting that they named Cogsworth Henry, because I was just reading a tie-in-book to this film (Lost in a Book) and there's also a character named Henri there. In this book, Cogsworth was part of the French army and has a story about his adventures for every situation which exasperates the other objects and Belle. This same book also talks a little bit about the prince's origin but didn't go deeper than what I said before so I was hoping the movie would. The royal status was always a bit confusing so I was hoping they would go deeper into that but I guess not.

pick wrote:estefan, thanks for all the information! Let me ask you please, is the soundtrack "Overture" anywhere to be found in the movie, or it's something they did only for the album? Thanks a lot!

Nope, they just launch straight into the familiar prologue music. Listening to the Overture, it would have been lovely if they went for a classic movie musical approach and played it over some opening titles. But I guess audiences these days aren't accustomed to the lavish opening titles that start classic movies (unless it's a James Bond movie) and just prefer the film launch right into the story.

Musical Master wrote:Oh I can't believe I forgot to ask this, but what did you think of Dan Stevens as The Beast?

He was good. He plays the role a bit softer than I expected (the famous "Then go ahead and STARVE!" line lacks the roar of Robby Benson's Beast), but he does a good job of showing the character's vulnerability and the goodness that peaks out from underneath.

The film cleverly plays up the differences between Gaston and the Beast, through the acting choices of both Evans and Stevens.

estefan wrote:

pick wrote:estefan, thanks for all the information! Let me ask you please, is the soundtrack "Overture" anywhere to be found in the movie, or it's something they did only for the album? Thanks a lot!

Nope, they just launch straight into the familiar prologue music. Listening to the Overture, it would have been lovely if they went for a classic movie musical approach and played it over some opening titles. But I guess audiences these days aren't accustomed to the lavish opening titles that start classic movies (unless it's a James Bond movie) and just prefer the film launch right into the story.

Thanks!

Sotiris, lol, I love Yzma. Especially in her cat form.

Disney's Divinity wrote:You're having an argument with yourself by relying on RottenTomatoes. Did I indicate that I consider it a barometer of success? The fact that I hated Cinderella 2015 despite these great reviews you’ve mentioned should’ve been a hint. I believe my argument was that Cinderella 2015 was the lesser film because of its failure to achieve the same financial success as the other re-makes and inability to draw the same interest (particularly in comparison to other female-lead films like Maleficent and Alice). And I’m sure that argument will still stand after B&tB-LA and its soundtrack rake in the dough the next few months. Cheers.

The argument that this will make more money will probably work, and that it has more people interested in it may work, but that this film will be more successful does not work as it was not more successful in critical accliam. I still win. It's sad you think the film and soundtrack raking in money is the important thing. How shallow.

An article about how the "Be Our Guest" sequence was filmed:
http://ew.com/movies/2017/03/10/beauty- ... our-guest/

And three new TV spots:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OgcVK9DtVA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkMP0-fj6k4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9yWumIwh6o

I like the soundtrack. Emma Watson is the weakest link. I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt, but I can't help but thinking Katharine McPhee or Samantha Barks would've been much, much better suited. I'm tired of weak singers being cast in such prominent roles - this is a $300 million dollar musical! She is acceptable as a high school music performer, but not a lead.

Disney Duster wrote: The argument that this will make more money will probably work, and that it has more people interested in it may work, but that this film will be more successful does not work as it was not more successful in critical accliam.

Financial success is a measure of success? In fact, I’d say it’s the most important measure in this case considering the re-makes only exist to make money. And it's the only metric I was using when this argument started 50+ pages ago, I think?

How shallow.

Well, you’d be familiar with that term. As opposed to considering professional critics the Word of God on all things?

EDIT:

Actually, searching back, these were my first posts responding to you (which, admittedly, responding to you is always the worst mistake, but...):

Me wrote:It [Cinderella 2015] was successful, but not nearly as successful as Alice in Wonderland or Maleficent. I'm confident B&tB--whatever the critics may say--will blow it out of the water. More interest, better cast, etc.

Me wrote:Let’s just be honest that Disney does not care about critics. They care about money. If they can get the critics along with the money, great, but money comes first with Disney always. *shrug*

Also, I forgot to include The Jungle Book, which also far outgrossed Cinderella. Maleficent did 250 million more than Cinderella, the other two twice as much as it. I'm not really concerned about scrutiny. Any criticisms of B&tB live-action by the same people who find the new Blanderella to be a masterpiece would sound incredibly hollow to me.

Re-writing history to benefit yourself, Duster, now that's just sad.

Emma Watson weighs in on the gay subplot in Beauty and the Beast
http://ew.com/movies/2017/03/10/emma-wa ... gay-lefou/

PatrickvD wrote:The movie version of Evermore is amazing. Some of Menken's best since the 90s. I hear echos of Hunchback and a bit of Phantom of the Opera. No doubt a chilling moment if the film.

I agree. I prefer Josh Groban's version, but the movie version is great too. I think it's highly probable the song gets an Oscar nomination next year.

I like the rest of the new songs too, although I think the demo of "Days in the Sun" is much better than the final version. It seems the Beast was supposed to sing it at first. It's a shame they changed it. Maybe they thought there were enough songs for the Beast, or perhaps "Evermore" was done later and replace this one as Beast's song.

And I don't understand why they keep saying in press releases, interviews, etc. that there are three new songs when there are actually four if you count Aria, the song performed by Audra McDonald. I guess they don't include it because it's very short, but it's still a new song specifically created for the film.

Marce82 wrote:Other than that... it seems like a lot of the songs have been modified where a pause in the song has been added (for dialogue?), killing the flow of the song... this happened quite a bit with the Broadway versions as well. (for example, in Belle, right after the Bimbettes sing, there is a pause in the flow of the song).

I noticed that too. If these pauses are for dialogue maybe they'll work better in the film, but I don't like them. As you said, they kill the flow of the song.

D82 wrote:

PatrickvD wrote:The movie version of Evermore is amazing. Some of Menken's best since the 90s. I hear echos of Hunchback and a bit of Phantom of the Opera. No doubt a chilling moment if the film.

I agree. I prefer Josh Groban's version, but the movie version is great too. I think it's highly probable the song gets an Oscar nomination next year.

I like the rest of the new songs too, although I think the demo of "Days in the Sun" is much better than the final version. It seems the Beast was supposed to sing it at first. It's a shame they changed it. Maybe they thought there were enough songs for the Beast, or perhaps "Evermore" was done later and replace this one as Beast's song.

I'm loving Evermore as well since I first heard it, although I actually prefer Dan Stevens' take on it. It has more soul imo compared to Josh Groban's.

I listened to the demo version of Days in the Sun, and I think I prefer it as well. It really does sound more like it was made for the Beast, or at least parts of it since a good chunk of the song is about regret. I am glad though that the enchanted objects got their own song although I'm not sure why Belle is singing with them. I don't think she was necessary especially since she basically hijacks the latter half of the song about her childhood and loss of freedom, neither of which contrasts well with what the objects have to endure imo. Can anyone explain the first part of the song with the young prince singing? I've heard it's a flashback where he is singing to his mother on her deathbed but it seems like an odd transition to go from him to the present with the objects. What's the context of the scene: is there a flashback before the song starts, with the song starting at the end of the flashback or is the flashback literally just those first few lines of the song? Do we even see the prince and mother or are they just offscreen?

D82 wrote:

PatrickvD wrote:The movie version of Evermore is amazing. Some of Menken's best since the 90s. I hear echos of Hunchback and a bit of Phantom of the Opera. No doubt a chilling moment if the film.

I agree. I prefer Josh Groban's version, but the movie version is great too. I think it's highly probable the song gets an Oscar nomination next year.

I like the rest of the new songs too, although I think the demo of "Days in the Sun" is much better than the final version. It seems the Beast was supposed to sing it at first. It's a shame they changed it. Maybe they thought there were enough songs for the Beast, or perhaps "Evermore" was done later and replace this one as Beast's song.

I'm loving Evermore as well since I first heard it, although I actually prefer Dan Stevens' take on it. It has more soul imo compared to Josh Groban's.

I listened to the demo version of Days in the Sun, and I think I prefer it as well. It really does sound more like it was made for the Beast, or at least parts of it since a good chunk of the song is about regret. I am glad though that the enchanted objects got their own song although I'm not sure why Belle is singing with them. I don't think she was necessary especially since she basically hijacks the latter half of the song about her childhood and loss of freedom, neither of which contrasts well with what the objects have to endure imo. Can anyone explain the first part of the song with the young prince singing? I've heard it's a flashback where he is singing to his mother on her deathbed but it seems like an odd transition to go from him to the present with the objects. What's the context of the scene: is there a flashback before the song starts, with the song starting at the end of the flashback or is the flashback literally just those first few lines of the song? Do we even see the prince and mother or are they just offscreen?

JeanGreyForever wrote:Can anyone explain the first part of the song with the young prince singing? I've heard it's a flashback where he is singing to his mother on her deathbed but it seems like an odd transition to go from him to the present with the objects. What's the context of the scene: is there a flashback before the song starts, with the song starting at the end of the flashback or is the flashback literally just those first few lines of the song? Do we even see the prince and mother or are they just offscreen?

After the wolf chase, Belle tries to nurse the Beast back to health. As he's resting, Belle asks why the objects are still cool with him after he caused them to be cursed, especially since they didn't do anything. Mrs. Potts responds that after the Beast's mom died, his cruel dad made the Beast cruel just like him and the servants didn't do anything about it. While they are talking, it turns out the Beast isn't sleeping but has overheard the conversation. He looks solemn and melancholy as he reminisces about being a young boy singing to his sick mother on her death bed while his father takes him away from her bed. There's no flashback before this song. The flashback is literally those few lines. You see the prince, his mother, and his father.

Ahhh!! I'm trying to avoid spoilers but I just wanted to ask.

Is it me, or is "Be our Guest" missing in the Overture? I kind of annoys me every time I listen to it. haha

Must resist listening to the songs though.. only 3 more days!

Is there anyone here who purchased the soundtrack, the deluxe edition set? If yes, how is the packaging?

Sicoe Vlad wrote:Is there anyone here who purchased the soundtrack, the deluxe edition set? If yes, how is the packaging?

The regular version looks like any other soundtrack.

I've seen images online. It looks like the other deluxe packaging follows the same for the 2-Disc Frozen, Moana, and Into the Woods with the digipak packaging.

Cool! Thanks for letting me know.

I have ordered the deluxe soundtrack, and I was really curious as to how the packaging is.

Now the RT rating is back up to 70% again.

Sicoe Vlad wrote:I have ordered the deluxe soundtrack, and I was really curious as to how the packaging is.

Here are a pair of unboxing videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKu-tzutiPA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xus7sh5cRrg

The first one is for the deluxe edition. The video quality is not very good, but you can get an idea of what it looks like.

By the way, here are some photos and concepts of the film's sets:
http://ew.com/movies/beauty-and-the-bea ... e-us-swoon