View Full Version : Beauty and the Beast
charliepanayi
05-23-2016, 02:16 PM
It's still ten months away but here's the first teaser trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp0DE1hyO6o
Night Fury
05-23-2016, 02:20 PM
The music!!!
The hype!!!!
Formalhaut
05-23-2016, 02:27 PM
It's not going to be another gritty live-action re-imagining is it? Is there going to be Belle riding a stallion into battle?
... okay, I actually watched the teaser. It is live-action, but it seems beguiling, to say the least.
My feels for this movie are real.
charliepanayi
05-23-2016, 02:59 PM
It's not going to be another gritty live-action re-imagining is it? Is there going to be Belle riding a stallion into battle?
... okay, I actually watched the teaser. It is live-action, but it seems beguiling, to say the least.
Disney doesn't do gritty re-imaginings really with these live-action adaptations, they go for play it straight and rake in the cash.
Mirage
05-23-2016, 03:33 PM
well i like the animated movie so maybe i'll watch this
Shauna
05-23-2016, 04:14 PM
Neat. I am looking forward to this.
Pheesh
05-23-2016, 04:24 PM
Who's doing Lumiere's voice? Cause it sounded really... not good.
The music was awesome though. NF will drag me to see this either way but I'm optimistic that I'll enjoy it. BatB was one of my favourite Disney films as a child.
Shauna
05-23-2016, 04:27 PM
Who's doing Lumiere's voice? Cause it sounded really... not good.
Haha, I thought the exact same thing.
Geez, they cast Ewan MacGregor as Lumiere. Could they not have gotten someone a bit more French? I love Ewan but...
Pheesh
05-23-2016, 04:49 PM
Obeu Un Kenobleu
That wasn't a "trailer" so much as a "teaser". It was still enough to get me hyped though.
I've been excited for this movie ever since I heard it was actually happening. So far all the live-action adaptations Disney has been doing have been good to great.
Also, Alan Menken is doing the score, and 90% of what that man touches turns out fantastic.
I'm fairly optimistic about this movie. Most of Disney's live action remakes have been good, but I don't think any have bettered the original versions so far, and I thought Maleficent was downright awful.
However I think Ewan MacGregor as Lumiere is an utterly awful decision. Is it hard to find an actual French voice actor?
Still, I'll probably go and see it in the cinema.
I'm not even that big of a Beauty and the Beast fan but because of Emma Watson this movie has my hype.
Miriel
06-08-2016, 11:37 PM
I feel like Emma Watson still looks kind of like a little girl, so I really wish they had gone for someone who look a bit more grown up and substantial. She is such a little waif of a person. But damn if that music didn't give me happy little shivers up my spine.
Pheesh
06-09-2016, 12:43 AM
I thought much like in Final Fantasy (and other JRPGs/anime I guess) games, all the Disney princesses were an obscenely young age. Younger at least, than Emma Watson is or looks.
charliepanayi
11-14-2016, 02:33 PM
First trailer proper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvW_L8sTu5E
Mirage
11-14-2016, 02:39 PM
I thought much like in Final Fantasy (and other JRPGs/anime I guess) games, all the Disney princesses were an obscenely young age. Younger at least, than Emma Watson is or looks.
I dunno, I think Belle must have been in the early 20s or so in the animated movie. That's the impression i got anyway.
Freya
11-14-2016, 02:46 PM
It looks so pretty :3
Mirage
11-14-2016, 02:57 PM
It does!
Pheesh
11-14-2016, 10:47 PM
It looks good, but Gaston doesn't look Gaston-y enough.
The dress disappoints me. ;;
Mirage
11-15-2016, 06:12 AM
It looks good, but Gaston doesn't look Gaston-y enough.
That's my only gripe. He needs to be more of a beefcake
maybee
11-16-2016, 10:09 AM
Pros : It looks beauitful, like a fairy tale classic come to life. She makes a fantastic Belle.
Cons : It looks like the same exact movie, expect live-action. British Actors ? Beauty and the Beast was French ! >: Belle's famous golden dress, is now a yellow disappointment.
charliepanayi
11-16-2016, 10:21 AM
Lumiere apart, it's not like any of the characters in the animated film sounded French either!
Shauna
11-16-2016, 10:54 AM
Yeah, and it looks like they've removed any attempt to make Lumiere sound French now too.
charliepanayi
11-16-2016, 02:03 PM
Yeah, and it looks like they've removed any attempt to make Lumiere sound French now too.
No, that's just Ewan McGregor's terrible attempt at a French accent
Shauna
11-16-2016, 02:06 PM
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, and it looks like they've removed any attempt to make Lumiere sound French now too.
No, that's just Ewan McGregor's terrible attempt at a French accent
xECUrlnXCqk
Marshall Banana
11-17-2016, 06:54 PM
I couldn't get through the trailer. :( I wanted to be excited for this.
I think seeing the enchanted servants in their CG forms is what killed this movie for me. I don't know what I expected...
On a side note, I recently went into a Disney store for the first time in a long time and noticed it was selling GASTON PLUSHIES. And they're so good! https://www.disneystore.com/plush-toys-gaston-plush-doll-beauty-and-the-beast-medium-20-12/mp/1405946/1000267/?CMP=KNC-DSSGoogle&s_kwcid=AL!5079!3!95242946784!!!g!58505125000!&ef_id=VOkZyQAAAS-1frDQ:20161117190402:s
Aulayna
11-17-2016, 07:08 PM
I couldn't get through the trailer. :( I wanted to be excited for this.
I think seeing the enchanted servants in their CG forms is what killed this movie for me. I don't know what I expected...
Yeah I was the same on my first watch, but then a few minutes later I thought to myself "why are you getting worked up over a CGI talking cup?" Not disparaging how you feel, just noting that I mentally laughed at myself for my own thoughts - which is something I haven't done in a while!
Being my 2nd favourite Disney Princess film, I had pretty high expectations for this. I wasn't really disappointed with the trailer (I actually think they've nailed it with Gaston, he really looks like an arrogant dudebro to me) and will deffo be going to the cinema for this!
Skyblade
11-21-2016, 05:34 PM
I couldn't get through the trailer. :( I wanted to be excited for this.
I think seeing the enchanted servants in their CG forms is what killed this movie for me. I don't know what I expected...
On a side note, I recently went into a Disney store for the first time in a long time and noticed it was selling GASTON PLUSHIES. And they're so good! https://www.disneystore.com/plush-toys-gaston-plush-doll-beauty-and-the-beast-medium-20-12/mp/1405946/1000267/?CMP=KNC-DSSGoogle&s_kwcid=AL!5079!3!95242946784!!!g!58505125000!&ef_id=VOkZyQAAAS-1frDQ:20161117190402:s
Oh, good, I'm not the only one.
It wasn't specifically the CG, I just thought a lot of it looked...bad.
The characters aren't nearly as expressive. Going for a more "realistic" view of the enchanted items mean that there isn't as much room for the over the top zaniness that infused the film with so much personality. It seems subdued and less engaging because of this.
It's clearly trying to mimic the original in a lot of areas (like Gaston's song), but it doesn't have the same life that the animated version had.
I am a bit interested that they appear to be drawing it closer to the story, with the father taking a flower (in the original, he betrayed the laws of hospitality after being the Beast's guest, a BIG no-no), and Beast making the offer for her to trade, rather than Belle volunteering.
But really, I think this is just going to be a pale imitation of my favorite Disney film.
Honestly, I haven't even watched the trailer yet because the design I saw for Beast on the picture they posted on fb is just... not doing it for me.
Aulayna
01-02-2017, 11:33 PM
vXwOmqpoae8
sxSSH6IFVRc
maybee
01-03-2017, 04:12 AM
So glad that Disney is saying that not every castle servant was transformed into a object- that means that no poor soul transformed into the new castle toilet.
charliepanayi
01-31-2017, 01:54 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Nl_TCQXuw&feature=youtu.be
charliepanayi
02-03-2017, 05:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vScUbKoE-qs
maybee
02-04-2017, 10:36 AM
Honestly, I haven't even watched the trailer yet because the design I saw for Beast on the picture they posted on fb is just... not doing it for me.
He looks too tame and friendly, and something that you would see out of a Twilight-esque teen romance novel. While in the original animated Disney movie, he was gruff, aggressive, lurked in the shadows and it was hinted that he even murdered some of his own staff hence why the West Wing was highly forbidden to Belle ( Not just for the Rose ). ( Look around the scene where you see The West Wing, damaged furniture and items everywhere, torn to shreds )
http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/7678ab2caa1c47d8eb968583312c20c6.png
That's what made the original so good and magical, the fact that somebody could ever love a Beast like that and learn that there's good within him. And the TRUE Monster was the handsome town hero. The " Prince Charming ".
TRUE. I also liked the old design much more because it was basically all-animal with only the eyes looking human. This new beast is a weird mix of features all around, so the eyes just aren't that striking anymore.
charliepanayi
02-04-2017, 07:06 PM
I think the Beast is something that would be hard to do in a live-action film without making him too scary or ridiculous.
Though 'murdered some of his staff'? Wouldn't that completely ruin the film's message of 'don't judge on appearances'?
I'm reasonably pleased with how he looks. I agree that the animated version is more spot on for the plot and the film's message, but ever since this movie was announced I was really worried about how he would end up looking in a live action film. I was sure he was going to either look completely retarded or completely repulsive. But they managed to make him look like neither of those things, so I'm okay with it.
I mean, he could have looked something like this...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/11/a5/81/11a5810690f2e170b188dab0472e86bf.jpg
maybee
02-07-2017, 09:42 AM
Though 'murdered some of his staff'? Wouldn't that completely ruin the film's message of 'don't judge on appearances'?
Not canon, though hinted that he could've murdered one or a few of them while in a "Beast rage ", true, though he was a Beast after all, and if Belle hadn't broken the curse, he would've lost full control of his emotions. Though again, hinted that he could've- and not canon.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f322/MistyTang/DA%20Related/Featured%20Movie/Capture3.jpg
https://nbasso1.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/west-wing-beauty-and-the-beast-these-dark-disney-secrets-are-super-creepy.jpg
I actually like Ron Perlman's Beast. Mostly because he's Ron Freakin' Perlman, who is as close to an irl Beast as you can get
I actually like Ron Perlman's Beast. Mostly because he's Ron Freakin' Perlman, who is as close to an irl Beast as you can get
Holy crap, I had no idea that was him. :p
charliepanayi
02-21-2017, 11:54 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpRIFM8Wwo8
Okay, why does every movie have to have like 60,000 trailers nowadays?
Bubba
02-21-2017, 12:09 PM
This looks god-awful. The casting is terrible and judging by the pile of wank that was The Jungle Book remake this will be just as bad.
charliepanayi
02-21-2017, 12:24 PM
Okay, why does every movie have to have like 60,000 trailers nowadays?
To give your film the best chance of making a crapload of money probably.
But then you go to see the movie and realize you've basically seen 90% of it already!
This is so dumb!
charliepanayi
02-21-2017, 12:41 PM
Well they still get the box office money if that happens! Besides, trailers and clips etc aren't compulsory to watch.
THAts why I don't dont :p
This looks god-awful. The casting is terrible and judging by the pile of wank that was The Jungle Book remake this will be just as bad.
But The Jungle Book was fantastic...
maybee
02-22-2017, 04:32 AM
Don't see the point if seeing this at all, the movie is almost the exact same as the animated classic and Emma can't sing all that well.
I don't know why Disney is doing these live actions remakes, they are not needed, the animated classics are beloved classics for a reason. The only theory I have is that stupid Snow White live action remake craze that happened a few years ago might of made Disney panic that studios would live action the fairy tales Disney is originally known for and their version would be forgotten, so they are live-acting their tales before any other studio does. That, and nostalgia is hot.
Yeah, Maleficent was okay because it was a completely different take. This pretty much looks like a shot for shot remake
charliepanayi
02-22-2017, 09:07 AM
I don't know why Disney is doing these live actions remakes, they are not needed, the animated classics are beloved classics for a reason. The only theory I have is that stupid Snow White live action remake craze that happened a few years ago might of made Disney panic that studios would live action the fairy tales Disney is originally known for and their version would be forgotten, so they are live-acting their tales before any other studio does. That, and nostalgia is hot.
....
How many times does it need to be spelt out? You know why they're doing them. Cinderella, Maleficent and The Jungle Book made tons of money. This will make tons of money, it might well be the biggest film of the year bar The Last Jedi. They are doing them because they make money. If you think this film looks terrible, that's a perfectly valid opinion and you can state it no problems, just stop being dense as to why it exists.
Shh, guys, shh
Let's not get jumpy.
charliepanayi
02-22-2017, 09:25 AM
Sorry, it's just annoying. I could understand if people just said 'this film looks terrible' etc but it feels like some people don't seem to realise how the film industry works.
I think maybee just feels that, from an artistic standpoint, she can't see the point of this movie. The financial aspect is a given, and she probably knows that. It's just that some people believed Disney simply had more artistic integrity.
And hey, I kinda agree. I get why they'd make it financially, bug even though I really like Emma Watson and Beauty and the Beast is my favorite Disney movie (as if you couldn't tell), I don't really see the point of seeing it since it doesn't feel like it'll add anything OTHER THAN some money for Disney.
That still totally subjective, though
I don't know why Disney is doing these live actions remakes, they are not needed, the animated classics are beloved classics for a reason.
A) Because live-action and animation are two different things. It's like asking why there are Broadway musicals based on these films.
B) None of these films are shot-for-shot remakes, so much as they are re-imaginings. Maleficient told a completely different story from a different perspective. Cinderella expanded on the protagonist's backstory in a way no film has ever done, and certainly way more than the original animated film did. Pete's Dragon was not even the same genre of film, and The Jungle Book too expanded on the protagonist's backstory in a way the animated film didn't (and also gave us a satisfying, non-bummer ending).
C) Nostalgia + Brand Recognition = Printing Money
I don't know how Beauty and the Beast will turn out. If it is a shot-for-shot adaptation (although I don't think so since the trailers have scenes that never happened in the animated movie i.e. the castle full of human subjects) then that is kind of unimaginative, but it still has good reason to exist. There are so many scenes in Disney films that would be absolutely wonderful to see in live-action. I personally can't wait to see what they do with Be Our Guest and Human Again. Although to be fair those will be more cgi than live-action. :p
maybee
02-23-2017, 08:22 AM
How many times does it need to be spelt out? You know why they're doing them. Cinderella, Maleficent and The Jungle Book made tons of money. This will make tons of money, it might well be the biggest film of the year bar The Last Jedi. They are doing them because they make money. If you think this film looks terrible, that's a perfectly valid opinion and you can state it no problems, just stop being dense as to why it exists.
Woooooooooooooooooow
http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/10/You-might-need-to-chill-a-bit-GIF.gif
MJN SEIFER
03-02-2017, 06:58 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing this. I actually really love seeing remakes that are live action, when the original was not. It's always fun to see how they will do certain things, and it's ultimately something that fascinates me.
Formalhaut
03-02-2017, 09:56 PM
Me and Mr. Carny are thinking of seeing this next weekend.
I should probably watch the original animation first though. ^^;
The Summoner of Leviathan
03-02-2017, 11:45 PM
So anyone's thought of Disney's first "gay moment" going to be in Beauty and the Beast with LeFou being gay and in love with Gaston?
While the whole "want to be him/want to bang him" feeling is something cool to explore I feel like picking the antagonist's sidekick whose name literally means "the crazy" kinda bad choice. I think diverse depictions of gays is important but picking this as your official first gay moment/dedicated subplot is not the best. Especially since Disney has a history of gay-coding villains.
Formalhaut
03-03-2017, 02:56 AM
So anyone's thought of Disney's first "gay moment" going to be in Beauty and the Beast with LeFou being gay and in love with Gaston?
While the whole "want to be him/want to bang him" feeling is something cool to explore I feel like picking the antagonist's sidekick whose name literally means "the crazy" kinda bad choice. I think diverse depictions of gays is important but picking this as your official first gay moment/dedicated subplot is not the best. Especially since Disney has a history of gay-coding villains.
I'm inclined to agree after I heard about it. 'Gays are evil' is a pretty established trope and making the first gay moment be about the villain and his sidekick is... I don't know.
How are they going to characterise Gaston and LeFou? If they are able to characterise them as flawed but decent individuals as opposed to rampaging, cackling villains, then it'll work.
Scotty_ffgamer
03-03-2017, 04:28 AM
All I know is I now have a lot of posts on Facebook of people refusing to see it specifically because there is a gay character, which is always sad to see.
I know nothing of this remake really, but I could see it be done well depending on what they do with the characters. I could see it be done bad too. We'll see soon I suppose.
Me and Mr. Carny are thinking of seeing this next weekend.
I should probably watch the original animation first though. ^^;
the fuck, formy?
charliepanayi
03-03-2017, 09:04 AM
The whole LeFou thing has provoked criticism, I'll be interested to see if they play the relationship between him and Gaston exactly like they did in the animated film. In light of the news about LeFou part of me wonders if in this version Gaston is still defeated but doesn't die.
Formalhaut
03-03-2017, 01:36 PM
OMG spoilers.
:p Kidding, I already knew about that. I'd wager Gaston won't die in this movie if they characterise him more sympathetically and make his actions less reprehensible. It's certainly possible and makes for a slightly more optimistic ending.
I do wonder whether Gaston will notice LeFou's affections, or even consummate those affections.
Nah, he'll be even more of a fuckboy than in the original, I think. Which worked before - not every villain needs depth in order to serve their purpose in the narrative. Heck, the most memorable and effective villains in the series have been straight foils to the protagonist with zero redeeming qualities and we still loved them for it. The story of Beauty and the Beast is all about the growth of the titular two, so we don't need Gaston to be more complex in order to make that interesting.
And Lefou was already pretty heavily coded gay in the original, so I really don't see the controversy. I mean, in the end maybe it's not very fortunate for the only queer character in a story to be this, uh, bumbling, but then shouldn't we normalize queer characters by implementing various types of characters, both flat and rounded, who also happen to be queer?
Formalhaut
03-03-2017, 02:04 PM
I see your point: if anything villains with overly complex motivations and personalities can be terrible. I'm trying not to say the S-word here, but he springs to mind immediately when I think of bad villains.
Thing is though, I'm not sure how they'll be able to play off LeFou's affections without some sort of feedback from Gaston the villain. If Gaston is played straight (no pun intended) as this simple smurfboy villain, how would he react to LeFou's affections? And we know something will happen because it is being described as a subplot and a 'moment'. If the entire subplot was just LeFou monologuing to himself it couldn't really serve and peter out.
If Gaston acknowledges that his sidekick has feelings for him, but he's played as a smurfboy villain, the only recourse I see his character doing is to push LeFou away or say something mean. Unless his redeeming quality is that he actually cares for LeFou enough (romantically or platonically, doesn't really matter) that he openly accepts LeFou's sexuality for who he is.
We've talked about Gaston a lot. It'd be interesting to see how if and how they characterise LeFou in this film.
Either way, it is a brave choice for their first attempt at a gay subplot, that's for sure.
EDIT: Fynn makes an interesting point which I completely forgot to address. Personally, I don't mind LGBT characters being villains, or the sidekicks of villains, or being morally dubious. Because gay people can be anything in society, from the heroes, the villains and everything inbetween. As long as it is done well, and not just being bad for the evulz. Having said that, the 'gays are villains' trope is pretty well-established, that it is surprising to see them choose it here.
Do we actually have anything confirming that Lefou has the hots for Gaston in particular? Because from the sources I've seen they only indicated that him being gay is an important moment for Lefou, so I kind of understood it as, there's a big coming out thing for Lefou, and not that he's actually gonna be seducing Gaston or anything.
Also, you keep skirting around the most important issue, Forms
I should probably watch the original animation first though. ^^;
So, do you wanna fix this now or should I come and hurt you severely?
Formalhaut
03-03-2017, 02:35 PM
Do we actually have anything confirming that Lefou has the hots for Gaston in particular? Because from the sources I've seen they only indicated that him being gay is an important moment for Lefou, so I kind of understood it as, there's a big coming out thing for Lefou, and not that he's actually gonna be seducing Gaston or anything.
I don't think Disney is too secure in themselves to have an openly gay seductive scene in one of their films. I've been reading news about the film's impression with some Christians, and the ones that aren't up in arms about it are writing their own commentary articles about the ones up in arms about it. Unfortunate though it may be, I don't think we'll be seeing seduction or any sort of gay physical intimacy in this film. And they could probably do it in this film because it is live-action. I'm just guessing here, but I imagine it'd be harder to convince Disney to include a gay subplot in their animations.
I think LeFou will have a coming out moment, but such moments necessarily imply that there is someone to come out to. I think that will be Gaston. Or maybe someone else? Who knows, we're just speculating at this point. I will say though, I'm really looking forward to seeing what'll happen. I've not discussed so much about a film pre-release in ages.
EDIT: Oh, and I'll see the original animation with Mr. Carny at some point before we see this film.
We might as well get a Paranorman moment with an off-screen love interest. Lefou was literally a walking gag in the original and I doubt his role is gonna be important enough for his sexuality to be the source of such controversy. So there's really nothing indicating ANYBODY that could be the source of his affection.
It'd be kind of weird if it was Gaston honestly, especially if he turned out to reviprlcate, since that would basically be saying "all those aggressively hyper-masculine narcissists are actually just in the closet! Closet homosexuals are the real villain!"
Kind of undermines the original's message regarding masculinity and gender roles in general
Formalhaut
03-03-2017, 02:51 PM
It'd be kind of weird if it was Gaston honestly, especially if he turned out to reviprlcate, since that would basically be saying "all those aggressively hyper-masculine narcissists are actually just in the closet! Closet homosexuals are the real villain!"
I have a feeling Gaston won't reciprocate. Because I agree, if it turns out Gaston was actually gay or bisexual all along, it falls incredibly close to what you put quite accurately.
Assuming Gaston is played like the original. If they soften the role of his character, there could be enough space for them to avoid falling into that trope. Whether or not they will remains to be seen. I've not viewed any of the trailers because I don't really watch film trailers, so I don't have an inkling of how they'll play it.
Was LeFou portrayed as quite wimpish, effeminate and ineffectual in the original? It'll be interesting to see whether or not they maintain that if that was the case. They would be painting a target on their chest if they made LeFou into the effeminate gay man pining after the buff, muscular man. Which, you know, happens, but I get the feeling if the characterisation of the two characters is key to the whole thing's success.
If they are viewed as relying too much on tropes or worn stereotypes, people will complain. On the other hand, merely having a gay character in the film is making some other people complain.
Lefou Osceola Lefou. He is the Fool. Wouldn't call him effeminate, but his distinct features are his wackiness and his undying admiration of Gaston.
He was really fun to watch tbh and it's sad I won't get to see him speak with his head stuck in a tuba this time around. Apparently Josh Gad values his teeth or something, idk
charliepanayi
03-03-2017, 05:35 PM
The reviews are out now - some decent, some not so decent, pretty much the mixed reception I expected.
The Summoner of Leviathan
03-03-2017, 11:32 PM
The director said specifically that LeFou is gay and has feeling towards Gaston that vascilate between "wanting to be him" and "wanting to be with him" and would have a big moment.
I have nothing against gay villains as long as they aren't a trope. Hell, the book I just finished had a gay villain but was a typical evil villain that happened to be gay (wanted to tap the protagonist who was incidentally gay as well). However, if this is Disney's first "official" gay moment then it is weird to pick LeFou given their history of gay-coding villains. I am in no way saying it will be bad, hey it might work and be good, but I see potential for it just being the same old shit.
maybee
03-04-2017, 12:42 AM
However, if this is Disney's first "official" gay moment then it is weird to pick LeFou given their history of gay-coding villains. I am in no way saying it will be bad, hey it might work and be good, but I see potential for it just being the same old trout.
Never understood this- a few animated Disney villains were designed by a gay person. Andreas Deja, designed Gaston, Jafar and Scar- that's why they might come off as a bit "gay", because Deja is gay himself.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/7e/1b/c5/7e1bc57193ee48f8d45508359d7db322.jpg
The only Disney villain I can think of maybe being "gay coded " is Ursula from the Little Mermaid, whom was based on a famous at the time Drag Queen, and maybe Captain Hook.
But Gaston, Jafar, Scar- they all were created a gay man.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gdpXt3WsRyg/TtRk1qdJgFI/AAAAAAAABZ0/NbkQ56c0RDE/s1600/tumblr_lrffzdCe9y1qzek9fo1_500.gif
MJN SEIFER
03-05-2017, 01:41 PM
All I know is I now have a lot of posts on Facebook of people refusing to see it specifically because there is a gay character, which is always sad to see.
Let me guess, they're accusing it of being some kind of SJW movie.
This kind of thing annoys me, yes, I know that SJWs exist, and I'm sure they are indeed as annoying as people say, but it's also annoying that a writer can't include a single character who's even slightly diverse these days without their movie being accused of being SJW-Propaganda. Even having a strong female character seems to be a problem with these kind of people...
All I know is I now have a lot of posts on Facebook of people refusing to see it specifically because there is a gay character, which is always sad to see.
Let me guess, they're accusing it of being some kind of SJW movie.
Surprisingly, no, I've yet to see anyone say that, and I'm shocked. All I've seen so far is the religious angle, that a gay character in it = homosexual indoctrination tool = against the will of God = won't see because God wouldn't love me anymore.
http://www.dw.com/image/37806489_401.jpg
MJN SEIFER
03-05-2017, 02:33 PM
Oh, I see. Well hopefully this is a sign that "SJW" won't be everyone's go-to assumption now.
charliepanayi
03-05-2017, 04:22 PM
Gaston was Disney predicting MRA types years in advance!
FFNut
03-08-2017, 02:18 AM
I am honestly surprised Disney made him gay to be honest. They had a giant money maker with this before the announcement yet since they mentioned it you now have divided your audience into 3.
The people who will watch it for Disney being brave to bring in a gay character.
The people like me who will watch it for the story that is classic and timeless
The people who will take a stand against it without watching it just to push their anti gay views down their throats.
Personally I always assumed that he may have been gay the way he would look at, and praises Gaston. This announcement never shocked me nor did it change my mind if I watch the movie or not, but I think it may flop as a result of them opening their mouth. I hope I am wrong though as the story itself is great.
charliepanayi
03-08-2017, 08:42 AM
It's not going to flop, only a few idiots will care about this (plus Russia, who have now given the film an adults-only rating apparently) and it will have a negligible effect on who goes to see it.
FFNut
03-08-2017, 10:51 AM
The Christian and Muslims won't go to see it because of that stance. I see nothing but boycott all over. Really I know parents too that don't want to explain to their child yet about gay people so they will boycott too. It's not a small amount of people. It's a large chunk that don't really say anything or complain openly but they are there.
Honestly, I'd think it's more a vocal minority. Here in Poland, we are traditionally Catholic with a government with a very substantial right end at the moment. I haven't seen any controversy here, tbh, even though you'd expect it.
charliepanayi
03-08-2017, 01:53 PM
The Christian and Muslims won't go to see it because of that stance. I see nothing but boycott all over. Really I know parents too that don't want to explain to their child yet about gay people so they will boycott too. It's not a small amount of people. It's a large chunk that don't really say anything or complain openly but they are there.
Watch as this film makes over a billion dollars (or close to it). Both recent Star Wars films had a few idiots declaring they'd boycott it, and that didn't stop them raking it in. Also, I suspect a lot of cinemagoers have heard nothing about this 'LeFou is gay!' stuff anyway
NOOOO OOOONNNEEE
Gays like Gaston
Loves to play like Gaston,
Makes homophobes boycott and pray like Gaston!
maybee
03-09-2017, 01:08 AM
The Christian and Muslims won't go to see it because of that stance.
Christain here ! And would see a movie if there was a gay character/ gays characters in it, same with reading a book, watching a show or playing a game with non-het characters.
Not all of us stand in streets holding signs saying " If you like Dumbledore, you are going to hell ", and yes non- het Christians exist.
'
The wacky Christians, yeah, they will boycott for sure. Always believed that Jesus loves us, even if we are not straight, and it's not our right to judge.
Squall Leonhart Loire
03-09-2017, 01:18 AM
I never watched a Disney movie in my life. :noidea:
I just got back from seeing it. It was very good, probably as good as a live-action film based on this story could be. Animation did it far better justice in my opinion, particularly during the scenes where the household objects are singing. But they did a great job with it and many scenes absolutely shined in this version (the ballroom dance, in particular).
The one thing that surprised me is that while every other song from the original film and the Broadway musical are present, "Human Again" is nowhere to be found. It's a very important piece of the original film and musical's history, so much so that they re-inserted it in one of the re-releases of the animated film complete with full animation and voice work years later, and the fact that it was left out, even with Alan Menken scoring the film, is baffling.
Also, the "gay moment" in question was so subtle I didn't even notice it until looking up what it actually was afterward. There were at least three other moments that were far less subtle, but even those were for comic relief and no more controversial or inappropriate than a Bugs Bunny in drag cartoon. :p
charliepanayi
03-19-2017, 05:03 PM
As expected, mammoth opening weekend:
http://variety.com/2017/film/box-office/beauty-and-the-beast-box-office-1202011662/
As expected, mammoth opening weekend:
http://variety.com/2017/film/box-office/beauty-and-the-beast-box-office-1202011662/
No surprise there. I'm happy that these live-action adaptations are enjoying so much success. I very much enjoy them for what they are. It's clear that the people who worked on this movie very much cared about what they were doing, so good for them.
Man, Disney is absolutely unstoppable right now. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Cars 3, Spiderman: Homecoming, Thor: Ragnarok, Coco, and Star Wars: The Last Jedi are all Disney productions that are still going to come out this year that no one even has to wonder whether they'll be roaring successes or not.
Simona Padmore
03-20-2017, 11:30 AM
I haven't watched it yet, but I'm really looking forward to it. I'm going to the movies this weekend:D
Shauna
03-20-2017, 12:12 PM
#today
Night Fury
03-20-2017, 03:10 PM
#today
Not in the mood for it #today Shauna
Shauna
03-20-2017, 06:55 PM
I don't care about your mood swings. :colbert:
It was rather good. Ewan McGregor's terrible French accent was less grating after I got used to it. Which was really the most important thing.
Sefie1999AD
03-21-2017, 08:08 PM
Some thoughts after the super fangirl mode / nostalgia hype mode has gone down a bit. :D
*SPOILER ALERT!*
First of all, the film was amazingly dark for a Disney movie. I know the original had wolves, and one of the characters shooting another character with an arrow and stabbing to the back, but with live action, the violence just felt more intense. The movie was also quite tear-jerking several times, being much more touching than the other recent live-acted Disney remakes I've seen. It was interesting that the parts I considered the saddest were different from the ones in the animated film. At times it felt like the Disney magic that can deeply touch you is back. I'd say most of this was thanks to Alan Menken's lovely songs and musical score, as well as the lovable cast of characters.
I'll start with the music first. The returning songs from the 1991 animated film were great, and the new orchestrations sounded more epic than ever before. Out of the new songs, "How does a moment last forever" was somewhat unmemorable, but the two songs that played later were better, especially "Days in the sun", while I think "Evermore" is the one that will get the most attention out of the new songs. No songs from the Broadway musical were present, but I was happy to hear that an instrumental version of "Home" was included.
As for the characters, Emma Watson's singing could have been better, but when it comes to acting, I thought she was an excellent Belle. For her songs, her performances of "Belle" and "Belle (Reprise)" could have been stronger, but her singing seemed to get better as the movie went on, especially for the songs "Days in the sun" and "How does a moment last forever (Montmartre Reprise)". Oh, and Belle's costumes are just lovely. :jess: After seeing acted versions of Aurora and Cinderella (in Maleficent and Cinderella) as pleasant but ultimately flat characters who do virtually nothing in the story, it was nice to see a more independent protagonist. Belle is quite strong-willed as a character, to the point of being stubborn or even rude to the people around her. It's a nice touch added from the Broadway version how Belle and Beast are both lonely and considered odd by the people around them, so they can relate to each other.
Gaston was another nice presentation of the "looks can deceive" theme. He seemed like a charming character at first, but later turned out to be a narcissistic douchebag. The way how he manipulates people with his powerful presence as the village hero suited his narcissistic character very well. It's funny how Beast (when he was still a prince) started off as a very similar character as Gaston, with the difference being the direction where their character development takes them, which brings us to the question: "What makes a monster and what makes a man?" (à la Hunchback of Notre Dame). As for other characters, Lumière was still a great character even with his accent, and it was great to see Ewan McGregor sing again, which I hadn't heard since Moulin Rouge. I've always considered Cogsworth a clumsy and annoying character, but Ian "Gandalf" McKellen managed to make him likable. The rest of the cast was enjoyable too.
As the movie is 45 minutes longer than the animated film, there's some extra character development that gives the characters more background and explains why they act the way they do. The movie also fixes many of the plotholes of the animated version. Most of these additions and changes work and add up to the story, but with a few exceptions. One of the things that especially worked was how Gaston didn't throw Maurice out of the pub, but pretended to believe him and helped him on his attempt to rescue Belle, so that he could win the favor of Belle's father. Of the things that didn't work, however, do you remember how the animated movie had Maurice first trapped in the Beast's castle, and then Belle rejected Gaston and sang how she wants more than this provincial life? Well, on this film, these two events had been swapped, and the pacing felt odd when Belle reached her father only two minutes after he was taken prisoner in the movie. Another thing that I don't think worked as well was when Belle looked at the magic mirror. In the animated film, she saw her father dying alone in the forest. Here she saw the townspeople threatening to take him to the insane asylum. I think the former evoked more feeling of danger, though to be fair, this fixes the "Why didn't Belle just take Maurice to the castle after finding him in the forest" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hm9ezomDhQ&t=1m10s) problem in the animated film. For the most part, the movie stays loyal to the 1991 film, which is both a strength and a weakness. Since I am a huge fan of the animated movie, it was fantastic to see all the great moments again in live action, but as a downside, some things didn't translate too well. For example, the CGI looked strange at times, especially on flashy scenes like "Be Our Guest".
Was the 2017 remake better than the original, animated film from 1991? Of course not, you can't just beat the original. However, I thought it was still a worthy remake that blows the other recent live action remakes away, and in terms of character development and storyline, there are times when the remake even surpasses the original.
Scotty_ffgamer
03-22-2017, 07:38 AM
Just saw it, and it was lovely. It really brought me back to performing it in high school, which was one of the more fun musicals I was in. It really captured the spirit of the original while still being its own thing. Really the only thing that took me out of the movie was my familiarity with the original. I'd expect certain lines and then they weren't there.
Overall, I'd say both the original and the live action remake are pretty close in quality to me. I thought I'd just think afterwards that it was good, but I'd rather just watch the cartoon; however, i know there will be times where I'll be in the mood for the live action one more.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.