Beauty and the Beast Discussion

[ajmrowland]

^

And to Duster's song, I think a belated will do.

[Margos]

The point is she could tell it was him, the one she loved, with a look. Not with time. Not with dialogue. By sight.

Right. But it's like being blind and gradually falling in love with someone, then magically recovering your sight and recognizing him/her the moment you see them for the first time. That's not love at first sight. It's recognition at "first sight." Two totally different things.

[Disney Duster]

It still implies you can tell who the person is through sight. Perhaps only with time, speech, and other ways of getting to know the person, but sight was one way, it was the final thing needed for Belle to know him and kiss him. And so then it's like all the past fairy tale couples. Perhaps they saw each other's souls through sight.

Escapay, I had been thinking of your plastic surgery eyes speech all this time.

The Beast keeps his pretty blue eyes. Some people have squinty eyes. And this is one thing where the Disney film perhaps didn't go all the way through on the "outer beauty doesn't equal inner beauty, you can't fall in love with it" message if Belle fell for those pretty blue eyes and they stayed the same.

But of course, it was how they were animated that showed the soul inside moving those eyes, so it was the soul she fell in love with.

[Escapay]

Err...I wasn't really concerned about the color of the eyes, and IMO, color had nothing to do with it. My point was his eyes stayed the same, and that's how she recognized him.

Compare his angry eyes and his tired eyes:


To his nice eyes and his human eyes:


It goes with what I said earlier:

As a Beast, you always saw him with these dark angry eyes. Not necessarily squinting at you, but almost furrowed and tired. When Beast began to be a nicer guy, his eyes were beaming, they became thoughtful and very...safe. [snip] Belle could recognize the Prince was her Beast through his eyes. She recognized the thoughtfulness and the goodness in them.

The animator could have colored Beasty's irises in brown or green or purple or honey mist auburn, and it'd still have the same effect: Belle would recognize him in his eyes. It's like the Peter Gabriel song. She gets lost in his eyes and reaches for him from the inside.

albert
(who will now go off to watch Say Anything since that song is stuck in his head with all the talk about eyes)

(images courtesy of MagicalScreencaps.com)

[Disney Duster]

Color? You forgot the fates of the squinty or beady-eyed people who's eyes are considered less attractive but need love too. "You have pretty eyes" is a comment most laid onto attractive people. Why didn't they transform his eyes into something ugly or animalistic? Why did they cop out?

Just like in Ricky of the Tuft, a fairy tale by Charles Perrault of Cinderella fame. The girl chooses to love the squinty-eyed man, and he becomes beautiful, but it is suggested he merely becomes beautiful to her, he does not really transform. If Beauty and the Beast had been done that way, well, that would quite enforce that inner beauty message without need of a literal transformation.

It looks like the Beast's big heavy eyebrows may be playing a part in how his eyes look...

But other than that, your case proved well.

[Escapay]

You forgot the fates of the squinty or beady-eyed people who's eyes are considered less attractive but need love too.

No, I didn't. Because I'm talking about the Beast's eyes, not hypothetically "less attractive in the eyes" people.

Why didn't they transform his eyes into something ugly or animalistic? Why did they cop out?

Why should they have to? Did you want them to turn his eyes a demonic yellow to signify that he's really a beast, then stay yellow even after he's human?





It's not about the color of the eyes. It's about the eyes themselves. Why they picked blue over any other color is their prerogative (likely to do with Belle wearing blue, and thus being different from everyone else. Only Beasty has blue eyes in the movie), but it's not some sly way of saying "Haha, people with blue eyes are still attractive even when they're a Beast". My whole point is that the eyes remained the same, when he was a human, a beast, and a human again. It's the way he expressed himself in the eyes that made it different, not the color. When he was Beasty, his eyes were angry and beasty too. When he was becoming more and more human, they took on a more human look, even though they are the same eyes.

Just like in Ricky of the Tuft, a fairy tale by Charles Perrault of Cinderella fame. The girl chooses to love the squinty-eyed man, and he becomes beautiful, but it is suggested he merely becomes beautiful to her, he does not really transform. If Beauty and the Beast had been done that way, well, that would quite enforce that inner beauty message without need of a literal transformation.

Sure, let Beasty stay a beast. Disney'll be accused of supporting bestiality, but who cares? The message of true inner beauty is intact.

His transformation is necessary, it returns him to the human that he was, is, and always shall be unless he ticks off the Enchantress again. The Beast form was the curse, and Belle fell in love with the beauty inside the beast. Do you honestly expect Belle (in any version of the story, not just the Disney version) to want him to go back to looking like a Beast after the curse was broken and he was transformed to his true self?

• "Belle, it's me!" Prince said.
  
  "That's great, but since you're not dead anymore...think you can go back to being a big furry beast?" Belle asks. "I won't kiss you unless you're a beast."
  
  "WTF?" Prince & audience says.

His true self when he was mean and nasty was a Beast, which is what the Enchantress cursed him as, thus making the outside match the inside. He'd look the way he acted: beasty and mean.

When his true self became a kind and gentle person who cares/loves others, his transformation reverted him to a human physical form to reflect that. The outside matched the inside again.

It's like when Eve held WALL-E's hand. That connection was the "transformation" (and likely the transference of data) that made WALL-E become who he originally was. There were no "physical" changes like in Beauty and the Beast, but the same concept. A transformation/return into who you really are.

albert

[Disney Duster]

Since when are beady and squinty a color?

Attractiveness of eyes also relies on shape and other things.

Gaston had blue eyes.

I understand what they accomplished with the beast's eyes looking good as he becomes good inside. That is brillaint and sophisticated.

Yet, it stands that these pretty eyes are the kinds of things people say are attractive about others, the kinds of things of physical beauty people say they could fall in love with. If they are the very same shaped eyes, the same pretty shape, and it is these that Belle looks into to decide to kiss the guy...

His true self? So I guess your true self includes your physical form? No. Once again we are coming to the dilema of "it's only the inside that matters" but "we need to look human again!"

Yes, this is not Ricky of the Tuft where the hero's transformation is a brilliant change in perception. This was faithfulness to the original tale, where beauty was given as a reward because kindness was realized to be the best of things. Yes kindness is the best thing, so let me reward you with something I've said is less important. Your true self is the inside...but no wait it's also the outside.

It good to be faithful to the original tale, but other Disney films have been criticized when the problems people have with those films come from faithfulness. And yet Beauty and the Beast was also very unfaithful in other spots.

[Margos]

Duster, are we even talking about the same things? If the eyes were different, she might not have believed it was the guy she fell in love with (who she just saw die, btw), and no, probably wouldn't have kissed him. Why? Not because he's unattractive, but because she wouldn't know it was him. She fell in love with a beast. After seeing the beast die, she watches the corpse magically transform into some dude she's never seen before. She's not like "Hmmm.... Well, OK, I don't know this guy, but if he's attractive, I'll kiss him." She's more like, "OMG, WTF!? Hey... wait a minute.... that's my boyfriend! Yay! He's alive!" So... love at first sight? No, not by any interpretation.

[Escapay]

Since when are beady and squinty a color?

Since when are beady and squinty part of any of the arguments made about the Beast's eyes?

His eyes remained his eyes, it's how he presented himself through his eyes that made them look different. I may have used the word "squinty" before when referring to them, because the Beast would narrow his eyes in a squinting way.

Attractiveness of eyes also relies on shape and other things.

I'm not denying that. But you're so goddamn fixated on the physical aspect of everything that it's getting harder and harder to take this particular discussion seriously.

Gaston had blue eyes.

An oversight on my part, then.

His true self? So I guess your true self includes your physical form? No. Once again we are coming to the dilema of "it's only the inside that matters" but "we need to look human again!"

Oh lordy lordy lordy.

This is a human story.

It's about a human, who ticks off an Enchantress.

She curses him, and his curse is for him to look non-human.

Belle falls in love with him, the inside of him, regardless what his non-human look is.

As a result, his curse is lifted, and he looks human again.

Belle recognizes that the human was indeed her non-human because:
1. She saw him transform.
2. He said "it's me!"
3. She recognized the eyes were the same.

Do you really expect him to want to stay non-human, or for Belle to want him to be non-human again, simply so that the message of "It's only the inside that matters" is 100% fulfilled?

What a crock.

Yes kindness is the best thing, so let me reward you with something I've said is less important. Your true self is the inside...but no wait it's also the outside.

Again, you're too fixated on the physical aspect of the story. I'd write more, but really, what's the point?

It good to be faithful to the original tale, but other Disney films have been criticized when the problems people have with those films come from faithfulness. And yet Beauty and the Beast was also very unfaithful in other spots.

So what's your point? Because the filmmakers were faithful to turning him back into a human, that that was actually the wrong decision?

Sheesh...

Duster, are we even talking about the same things? If the eyes were different, she might not have believed it was the guy she fell in love with (who she just saw die, btw), and no, probably wouldn't have kissed him. Why? Not because he's unattractive, but because she wouldn't know it was him. She fell in love with a beast. After seeing the beast die, she watches the corpse magically transform into some dude she's never seen before. She's not like "Hmmm.... Well, OK, I don't know this guy, but if he's attractive, I'll kiss him." She's more like, "OMG, WTF!? Hey... wait a minute.... that's my boyfriend! Yay! He's alive!" So... love at first sight? No, not by any interpretation.

Someone gets it. Finally.

albert

[Disney Duster]

No, Margos, you are not getting what I'm saying and not talking about the same thing.

Same goes for Escapay.

The Beast's eyes should have only been "his eyes" in the way that he moved them, the way he looked through them. When I was little and Belle said "it is you" I thought "How can you be sure? He didn't do very much to prove it!' which goes to say Belle merely looked and saw who he was by sight, by the look he gave her. But if his eyes are the same pretty shape and color, well, wasn't that easy...

And about the faithfulness, what I am saying is Disney has been criticized for some things they did that were faithful to what they were adapting, so I can do the same thing to this film, especially when this time around they were unfaithful in other spots so they picked and chose and didn't have to keep the ending that way.

What I'm mad about is how this film can be loved and some think the best because apparently it has the message looks don't matter in love and happiness, yet those pretty eyes stay the same and they both look gorgeous before they kiss and live happily ever after.

I'm done with this. I was going to point out how sight allowed Belle to see the Beast's soul and love him just like the previous Disney fairy tale couples so that they could all be one equal happy family but if you're going to go against it then have your hypocrisy.

[akhenaten]

eye is window to the soul. u can tell a lot about a person by looking him in the eye,sincerity etc. . regardless of its shape pre and post.

[Escapay]

The Beast's eyes should have only been "his eyes" in the way that he moved them, the way he looked through them.

And...they are!

Must I pull a Marky and repost the same screencaps over and over again?

When I was little and Belle said "it is you" I thought "How can you be sure? He didn't do very much to prove it!' which goes to say Belle merely looked and saw who he was by sight, by the look he gave her. But if his eyes are the same pretty shape and color, well, wasn't that easy...

His eyes were the same shape and color. That's how she recognized him.

And about the faithfulness, what I am saying is Disney has been criticized for some things they did that were faithful to what they were adapting, so I can do the same thing to this film, especially when this time around they were unfaithful in other spots so they picked and chose and didn't have to keep the ending that way.

But your arguments against Beauty and the Beast in that respect make no sense. You wanted Disney to be "unfaithful" to certain parts of the story in order to promote the "it's the inside that counts" without considering the points I already made above (1. human story, 2. non-human form is the curse, not the cure, 3. Belle loves him for him, not for his physical self, 4. That's what breaks the curse, he becomes human again). It's ridiculous, and having him remain beasty does not fit at all with the character's journey or the intent of the actual story.

Your problem is that because they both are attractive by the end of the film, you view it as a threat to non-attractive people and a sly Disney subliminal message of "Only pretty people will be happy!". Please!

What I'm mad about is how this film can be loved and some think the best because apparently it has the message looks don't matter in love and happiness, yet those pretty eyes stay the same and they both look gorgeous before they kiss and live happily ever after.

I'm done with this. I was going to point out how sight allowed Belle to see the Beast's soul and love him just like the previous Disney fairy tale couples so that they could all be one equal happy family but if you're going to go against it then have your hypocrisy.

All I've done is continue to say his eyes were the same and that was how Belle recognized him. You're the one that twisted it all into a pseudo-epic battle of Attractive vs. Ugly.

albert

[Disney Duster]

Aha! I've caught you!

You said his eyes only changed because of how he move them...

But then you siad they remained the same shape and color through the whole thing!

You said yourself in plastic surgery they are the hardest things to change. If his eyes remained the same attractive shape and color, and pretty eyes are something people care most about physically and fall for, then his eyes should have changed to something less attractive and beastly as a beast, and back to their original shape when he's a prince. And then, only have the way he moves them and his soul looks through them be what she recognizes. And it could well be, but it could also only be how they physically look that she recognizes, which is not good, and not what the film has been trying to say all along.

[Escapay]

Aha! I've caught you!

You said his eyes only changed because of how he move them...

But then you siad they remained the same shape and color through the whole thing!

*sigh*

Backtrack a few posts, Dusty...

• My whole point is that the eyes remained the same, when he was a human, a beast, and a human again. It's the way he expressed himself in the eyes that made it different, not the color. When he was Beasty, his eyes were angry and beasty too. When he was becoming more and more human, they took on a more human look, even though they are the same eyes.

His eyes are his eyes, that's how they're the same. But what he *did* with his eyes is what made it different.

Thus, when I said:

• His eyes were the same shape and color. That's how she recognized him.

It's in reference to Beast with his "human" eyes.



I'm not saying that his eyes were the same frickin' shape from beginning of the movie to the end. If it were, it'd be a horrible animation decision by Glen Keane.

You said yourself in plastic surgery they are the hardest things to change. If his eyes remained the same attractive shape and color, and pretty eyes are something people care most about physically and fall for, then his eyes should have changed to something less attractive and beastly as a beast, and back to their original shape when he's a prince. And then, only have the way he moves them and his soul looks through them be what she recognizes. And it could well be, but it could also only be how they physically look that she recognizes, which is not good, and not what the film has been trying to say all along.

*sigh*

Why do I bother? Someone answer that question, please.

albert

[Disney Duster]

Do you not realize what the difference is between the unchangeable shape of eyes and the changeable movement of the eyes? The shape of the eyes you can't change with plastic surgery vs. the way you can make your eyes look?

Take for instance how Ariel's eyes are different from Belle's as are different from Aurora's.

If you don't think the design of Belle's eyes are why you find her the hottest Disney princess...you keep telling yourself that.

[Escapay]

Belle is hot for many reasons. Eyes are just two of them.

But I don't see what that has to do with Beast's eyes being the same eyes when he's human, when he's a Beast, and when he's human again.

This conversation is boring me now because it's degenerated into a trivial argument about how someone sees and interprets animated eyes. Dancing squirrels are more interesting.

albert

[Disney's Divinity]

Why do I bother? Someone answer that question, please.

albert

I was wondering that.

I'm pretty sure me and Disney Duster had a discussion about this same topic earlier in the thread. It was more about the beauty/soul message though. Less eyes.

[Super Aurora]

If you don't think the design of Belle's eyes are why you find her the hottest Disney princess...you keep telling yourself that.

We think Belle is hot because she got a FINE body and nice perky tits. That should be common knowledge by now. But I guess a gay person wouldn't understand that concept. So I forgive you.

[Elladorine]

Dancing squirrels are more interesting.

[SpringHeelJack]

Wow, I just popped in to see what was going on here. I'll just... be on my way again...