10 Disney Mistakes FIXED In BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (2017)
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 06. 2024
- 10 movie mistakes, goofs & plot holes that Beauty And The Beast (2017) fixed from the 1991 Disney classic!
Subscribe for more! ► bit.ly/FlicksSubscribe
Connect with Jan on Twitter ► / jan_gilbert
RELATED VIDEOS
--------------
17 Easter Eggs & Hidden Details In Beauty And The Beast (2017) Only True Fans Noticed ► • 17 Things YOU MISSED i...
20 Secrets About The Making of Beauty And The Beast (2017) ► • 20 SECRETS About The M...
Beauty And The Beast (1991) Facts Only True Disney Fans Know ► • 8 Things YOU DIDN'T KN...
Beauty And The Beast Movie Review ► • Video
Beauty And The Beast Final Trailer Easter Eggs ► • BEAUTY AND THE BEAST F...
PLAYLISTS YOU MIGHT LIKE
------------------------
Movie Deleted Scenes & Rejected Concepts ► bit.ly/MovieDeletedScenes
Amazing Movie & TV Facts ► bit.ly/ThingsYouDidntKnowVideos
Easter Eggs ► bit.ly/EasterEggVideos
Reviews ► bit.ly/FlicksMovieTVReviews
Marvel ► bit.ly/MarvelVideos
DC ► bit.ly/DCVideos
Fox Marvel Movies ► bit.ly/FoxMarvelVideos
Star Wars ► bit.ly/StarWarsVids
Disney Animation ► bit.ly/DisneyAnimationVideos
Pixar ► bit.ly/PixarVideos
Game of Thrones ► bit.ly/GameOfThronesVideos
SOCIAL MEDIA & WEBSITE
----------------------
Twitter ► / flickscity
Facebook ► / flicksandthecity
Google+ ► google.com/+FlicksAndTheCity
Website ► FlicksAndTheCity.com
Featured on flicksandthecity.com/10-movie-...
DISCLAIMER: Any images and video used belong to the respective copyright holder and are used under fair use rules for the purpose of criticism and review.
Just A Little More by HookSounds www.hooksounds.com/
Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast” is a live-action re-telling of the studio’s animated classic which refashions the classic characters from the tale as old as time for a contemporary audience, staying true to the original music while updating the score with several new songs. “Beauty and the Beast” is the fantastic journey of Belle, a bright, beautiful and independent young woman who is taken prisoner by a beast in his castle. Despite her fears, she befriends the castle’s enchanted staff and learns to look beyond the Beast’s hideous exterior and realize the kind heart and soul of the true Prince within. The film stars: Emma Watson as Belle; Dan Stevens as the Beast; Luke Evans as Gaston, the handsome, but shallow villager who woos Belle; Oscar® winner Kevin Kline as Maurice, Belle’s eccentric, but lovable father; Josh Gad as Lefou, Gaston’s long-suffering aide-de-camp; Golden Globe® nominee Ewan McGregor as Lumiere, the candelabra; Oscar nominee Stanley Tucci as Maestro Cadenza, the harpsichord; Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette, the feather duster; six-time Tony Award® winner Audra McDonald as Madame Garderobe, the wardrobe; Oscar nominee Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, the mantel clock; and two-time Academy Award® winner Emma Thompson as the teapot, Mrs. Potts.
Directed by Oscar® winner Bill Condon from a screenplay by TBD based on the 1991 animated film, the film is produced by Mandeville Films’ David Hoberman and Todd Lieberman with eight-time Oscar-winning composer Alan Menken, who won two Academy Awards® (Best Original Score and Best Song) for the 1991 animated film, providing the score, which will include new recordings of the original songs written by Menken and Howard Ashman, as well as several new songs written by Menken and three-time Oscar winner Tim Rice. - Krátké a kreslené filmy
*NEW Beauty And The Beast video just uploaded!*
*Movie Mistakes & Plot Holes* ► czcams.com/video/6UfMiji866s/video.html
For my full Beauty And The Beast playlist click here ► czcams.com/play/PLi8DA5V4mmmfXbSdLMUZfGHtNlXJr4vtx.html
Flicks And The City I would like to know the relationship between mrs pot and mr pot why mrs pot live in the castle with chip while mr pot doesn't?
tiếng việt lớp 4 khuất phục têntiếng việt lớp 4 khuất phục tên And The City of tiếng việt lớp 4 khuất phục tên
Wanetta Lee because mr Potts wasn't there.
Flicks And The City I
I
These are great fixes. I also really liked how the new movie raises the stakes, turning the enchanted servants into inanimate objects if the spell isn't broken. I think it helped the audience understand the desperation of everyone in the castle.
Yes, that was such a lovely addition to the servants' story, Katie! :-)
Please keep making these videos! You do a great job, and this was one of my favorite movies in a LONG time.
Katie Gould Agree! And I like how Mrs. Potts explained that the servants weren't completely innocent in how the prince turned out. It bugged me that they were cursed just for being there in the original.
Angela Janusauskas Absolutely!! The fact that they were cursed too always unsettled me, but this movie held them accountable and solidified the bond the servants have with the prince, in my opinion.
Actually while the original movie didn't explicitly spell it out, if you listen to the commentary on the original film the directors talk about what would have happened if Belle didn't break the curse. They said that the servants would have completely turned into inanimate objects and the Beast would've forgotten being human and how to speak, becoming an animal entirely. So while it wasn't explicitly stated, the fate of the servants was always decided (at least to the directors) since the original movie and wasn't made up for the live-action movie.
I like that Bell took that huge fucking snowball to the face.
CrunchyTofu apparently it took 2 days to shoot
SeychellesLover
It must've taken two days to just form the snowball because bejeezus it was big
CrunchyTofu It was so funny 😂😂😂😂😂
CrunchyTofu 😂
I actually always thought they stopped aging when they were enchanted. That would explain why chip was so young.
I agree. That's what I assumed happened. He looks the same age before and after.
That’s what I thought too-
Thought same
One thing I love is how it points out more reasons Belle is a "funny girl" because the man she talks to says "sounds boring" when it comes to reading, she passes a school and only boys are reading/learning while in the next scene the girls are being housewives and only cleaning! That's another difference from the original that makes more sense and really points out the time period this is set
i liked that.
Don't forget her Donkey Powered washing machine so that way she could wash the clothes AND read at the same time!
Even though the washing machine idea wouldn't have worked, because the
lye soap in that time period needed hot water to make suds, and no type
of washing machine was invented until the Victorian era--and even THEN,
laundry was so intensely-manual that it took 3 days to complete. Lol, no
wonder they thought she was a funny girl...or slightly insane...she was
rolling dirty clothes and soap chips around in a barrel in the public
well...
Also, if this was the mid to late 1700's, as the costumes
would indicate, then there is no reason why women wouldn't be reading,
especially in a prosperous village like hers, whose main industry
appears to be markets. And if the women were running the businesses
along with their husbands (as they appear to be doing) then they would
be competently literate, because they would be expected to handle goods,
money, and records). I guarantee that the milliner and her 3
daughters could read--they could not make orders for the expensive
material they were using and selling if they couldn't read, because lace
and satin and such would not have been locally made and would have had
to come from Paris. (Also, if that icky mean woman was actually married
to Cogsworth, then that meant she would have had to be a lady at
court--and she most certainly would have known how to read--unless part
of the curse was taking away her ability to read also...?) We must
assume that Belle's father is the one who taught her to read,
considering that they left Paris when she was an infant. If the girls in
the village couldn't go to school for some reason, but all the MEN in
the village were literate because the village had decided that education
was important--and that its populace was made up of not just farm
laborers, but business-owners and merchants--it stands to reason that
there would have been at LEAST a handful of other fathers who would
enjoy teaching their own daughters to read, simply because it's useful.
Having Belle be the only literate woman in the village in this one was
just a tactic to make us feel disdain for the villagers.
The story of Beauty and the Beast plays during a time it is normal for women on being able to read. The story was published in a magazine FOR women and was written BY a woman.
Belle being an inventor in this version makes no sense because the plot of her inventing that washing machine (out of the blue, might I add) never pays off. She invents that one thing and that's it, we are supposed to believe that she invents stuff now and is oh so smart. And that is why the town hates her while that was never the point in the original.
You forgot to mention:
That they explain what happened to Belles mother historically.
They explain what happened to Beast parents..Mother than Father.
They explain why the Beast behaves so cruelly..Beyond the typical spoiled prince.
They also explain why the servants are still kind to him in a more relatable sense.
Also, they change Gastons arrow to Musket shots..and change him from a hunter to a War Hero.
Lefou realizes Gaston is a jerk and his character actually has remorse for his actions..
They developed the character Le Plume more.
Cogsworth has a wife.
They bring in the Piano which was a minor character in the spinoffs into the movie and tie him in with the Wardrobe.
Lastly...They show realism when she doesn't reveal her feelings before his last breathe which pulls the heart strings more.
Also the ENCHANTRESS has a name and is actually seen throughout the story!!!
Belle doesn't touch the rose in this film..She nearly does in the orignal.
Also the father lost his way and got sick..But, managed to get home.
In this one he is tied to a tree and left for dead with the Enchantress playing an active role in saving him. Big difference and accurate.Because in the orignal he would have died before reaching home...
Carrionangel8911 they can't fit everything lmao
Oh, yes, there's so many, aren't there?!! Appreciate you sharing those! :-)
Forte is in the Movie!? I really want see this more now. Just read it, it's not Forte but a different character called Cadenza I still want to watch it.
time works differently in the castle too
They also imply that the Enchantress led Belle's father to the castle because the tree was fixed when he tried to find his way back with Gaston... Who else would be able to do that other than her?
I actually didn't notice this until I saw the alternate scene, but another mistake that the movie fixes takes place during the Mob Song. In the animated 1991 classic, when Gaston leads the villagers to Beast's castle, he seems to know where the castle is despite never have been there. Yet in the 2017 remake, it shows that Maurice actually takes Gaston and LeFou to the fork in the road where he found the castle and goes into detail what the path looked like, thus giving Gaston the ability of locating the castle.
snowcloud8 Definetly right!
snowcloud8 don't forget the magic mirror that showed Gaston the castle
plus gaston in this movie use the magic mirror to guide them to the castle "show me the castle"
It isn't so much a plothole as just never explained.. It's never said in the original that the townfolks aren't aware of the existence of the castle.
Not really a fix, but I liked how LeFou progressively realized that Gaston is the villain here unlike the animated movie where he stuck by him until the end. And I loved the addition of one line in the Mob song where LeFou says "There's a beast running wild, there's no question. But I fear the wrong Monster's released..."
In French, the translation said something like "There's a wild beast yes, but it's the mad man guiding us". It is indeed a clever addition! ^^
Really? His name translates to "The Fool," of course he would stick by Gaston's side. He and the rest of the villages are all fools for being on Gaston's side because they are irrational villages who would follow their local hero when presented with something they don't understand. They have a line about it in the mob song.
LeFou's character is supposed to be a bootlicker. He admires Gaston and wants to stick around. There was no reason for him to change his way, this development came out of nothing.
And him "paying" the townfolk to sing does not help, it only further emphasises his bootlicking character. It also helps to add confusion. Because why would the townfolk follow Gaston blindly, just trusting him when before they were suspicious of him and didn't like him much.
@@rike1775 LeFou's purpose in the animated movie was to be comedic relief. He would constantly fly through the air, get punched in the face, get stretched, etc. That's really easy to do with animation, however it's much harder to do with live action. They made the plot for LeFou in order to keep him a significant character, otherwise he would be a pointless, bland character.
Best live action remake ever! I'm so glad they added more of the original story to it, like her asking for the rose and the father picking it.
One more little small mistake fixed by the movie. In the animated version, the prince opens the door to the old lady, since the prince usually has 1000 servants to do that. But in the live action, the old lady enters herself the castle.
Good point! :-)
C.B. Colin but it brought us to yet another plot hole....why these servants or castle guard did not prevent the enchantress from entering the castle and be the one to be cursed instead....hehehe
Maybe he just wanted to get it cause he is not lazy.
Peter Santillan she entered thru the back.
She is an enchantress, don't you think she can just will her way into anyone house whenever she likes? She can just charmed the guard.
Another plot hole that was fixed was an explanation of how the Beast came to be so cruel. He learned this behavior from his father, and the servants in the castle let him. They are now trying to undo this and change him. Their motivation is that if they can fix him, they can undo the curse on themselves.
Marc Miller maybe his cruelty was due to his being more and more of a beast as time went by?
Rav91314 That's what I thought too, seemed like an unnecessary detour. I would be pretty grumpy too if I were in his spot.
Rav91314 the beast was cruel before he was a beast, that's why hr was cursed
Yes he was cursed because he was mean, but what Marc Miller is explaining is that the new movie gave us more information about WHY the prince was like that. It's how he was raised after his mother died. Personally that's one thing I like about this new movie, the fact that it gave us more back story into the beasts life and what happened before the enchantress showed up. Plus the explanation of what happened to Belle's mother as well.
That isn't a plot hole from the original. The narrator says the prince was spoiled, selfish and unkind as a result from having everything his heart desired. Disney trusted their audience more back then to make inferences and fill in the gaps without delving into an unnecessary backstory, it seems.
Belle had left the castle in her ball dress and had remained that way when she went home to find her father being locked up by the town. Nobody questioned where of why she was wearing such beautiful attire and nobody commented on how she was previously missing.
She also rode in that dress through the cold outside and somehow managed to take it off while riding back to the castle. There's also the question of how long it would've taken one to ride the horse from the castle to the forest, then the village because when she got to the village it didn't seem like much time passed for Maurice.
Kulsoom Mohsin the look on their faces when they saw her in the yellow dress implies how confused they are
FlowerEmblem zthucjf
possibly, however brief facial expressions don't validate the absurdity of it all through the villager's eyes as well as her father's
She was judged as a "run-away" by gaston so, perhaps, they though she run away with a man
they do look confused, but again its just a dress, and people were so mad into putting maurice in a "freak place"
because Gaston influence them alot
The remake was beautifully made and fixed the plot holes I always had questions about. The new scenes added about Belle's mom were an incredible touch.
I love how they added the family background of both belle and adam, which explains the plot a lot more
That was an interesting way to flesh out their backstories, wasn't it. :-)
Speaking of Adam, they *still* never say human name!
and that bothers me, they still never spoke Adam's name.
I really expected them to add that.
I'm no expert, but from what I've read, the reason why they never mention Adam's name is because Disney never officially gave him a name. He was originally just "the beast", and his real name being Adam is just a fan theory. At least from what I understand.
Caitlin Naughton apparently the name Adam was mentioned in a cd rom game for Beauty and the Beast. But it's never mentioned in any of the movies.
I LOVE THEY MADE THE CHARACTERS SLOW DOWN AND EXPLAIN THE WHOLE THE WHOLE DETAILS WITH SERIOUSNESS AND GESTURE!😃
Plus I hope I get a book you're giving away FLICKS!😃
Yes, there's definitely lots more backstory for the main characters in this new version. :-)
Did you read my comment from the Easter Egg video!?!😃
Beau Fonville and t
New plot holes:
1. The enchantress was nice enough to give the Beast a book to travel anywhere he would like in the world. So what's the point of having the mirror as the 'only window to the outside world'
2. They could have used the book to teleport to Maurice's side and teleport him back to the castle instead of letting Belle go.
3. How did Belle remember Paris?
Things that the older one did better:
1. It slowly revealed that Beast had a heart in a more subtle way. An example is that Belle was originally left in the cell, but due to Beast feeling sorry (without being convinced by his servant's) he gave her a new room.
2. Belle was actually scared and showed that she was upset to the new captive circumstances. Lumiere doing 'Be our guest' was a major turning point in the story which Belle accepted her new surroundings in a better light as it calmed her down.
3. Gaston wasn't a 'villain' in the beginning, but just an arrogant and egotistical man. He becomes cruel gradually throughout the movie.
4. The iconic dance was done in a more realistic fashion. The Beast and Belle were encourage to have a meal together, it got them in the mood. Then, THEN being the key word, Belle get's the idea to end the evening with a dance, and asks the Beast. It was on a whim, and that made it more human in my opinion. Imagine going on a date, and following a strict schedule of point A to point B. That's so boring, some parts might be planned, but parts that aren't to plan, done on a whim, or done by instinct is what makes romantic dates in stories so much more realistic.
Don't get me wrong. The new movie was enjoyable and all, but I don't understand why people say that the new one is 'perfect'. Yes it fixed plotholes, but it introduced new ones. Yes some parts were better in a story sense (i.e giving Belle and Maurice a backstory), but the old one progressed the story in better and more realistic way. If you don't believe me, write up what happens in each movie and take a look in the perspective of the characters, what they are going through, and how they come to their decisions. It was a blast to do so, so I encourage people to do so. :D
The new version is good enough, but the original is pure magic and has much more emotions. I feel really sad that the acting is much better in the animated movie, and I really didn’t like how Watson felt like only ”trying to act”, there was no emotions.
then there's that sweet moment when he lets her go and instead of hearing him roar in anger and rage, he sings loudly about his affection to her, when setting her free. that's real love right there.
Erin Lorraine I didn't explain my comment well, you are right about his regret, but in the reboot, he doesn't regret or show remorse making his love more genuine and true. which was lovely, and the new songs are pretty good as well. C:
honestly, i really didn't like the song too much. probably because i love the broadway song too much. well, that and the fact he was talking about how tortured he is now that he knows love but can't have it and how he'll be way more miserable now than when he was first cursed. i don't know, that kind of rubbed me the wrong way.
I don't know Beast going emo felt really off to me. I like the original because it's more subtle. He looks at the rose knowing what her leasing would mean.. but he let's her go.. he is roars because he has lost her and he knows that.. he's conflicted.. That sounds more to me like real love to me.. making the sacrifice while wanting not to
Yall are crazy, the song is beautiful.
Actually the emotion is the same in both. Just that in the original it is indeed more subtle, his sad eyes and his roar makes you know he understands what releasing her means and that it hurts him, but he also knows it is the right thing to do. In the remake, you actually hear his thoughts, that also makes you know that he understands what releasing her means and that it hurts him but it was the right thing to do. It's just in song form. I do get how some people would like the original more in that part and others the remake, since that is just a matter of taste and also a matter of how the scene gets to you. To me, I really like both versions of that scene. The remake one fits better with the whole remake movie, because the Beast is known to be more educated and thus him singing about it just goes better than just roaring would
The main plot hole that always bothered me was the age of the characters. I liked how in this one it was more implied that they were frozen in time and ageless. I also think it makes the enchantress look a little better. If he was only 11 it really makes her the cruel one to curse a little boy who maybe doesn't know any better.
Quite right, Becca! :-)
Plus, what kid doesn't know the "Don't let strangers into the house" rule?
True! :-)
Well in this one she barges in and doesn't knock and doesn't give a chance chance he isn't even given a chance to apologize. I know the narration says otherwise but I'm just going an what they are showing. It still doesn't answer how long but given how much dust I suppose about ten or fifteen years which means the beast is probably in his thirties and Belle is about 18 or so since she mention she is young to be married.
well i dont know about europe, but i remember when studying greek mythology, it was considered standard to let travelers into your home, one reason being they could be gods disguising themselves to see how good of a human being you are. this culture could have similar hospitality rules.
One thing I found interesting was when Maurice came back to the tree and it was back up right and he said that it must of been fixed by magic. The only plausible explanation would be that Agathe The Enchantress purposely struck the tree down so Maurice would find the castle. I think it was her plan all along for Maurice to go to the castle knowing Belle would find him and take his place. Perhaps she even saw Belle reject Gaston and formed the whole plan right then knowing Belle wasn't shallow.
Could be. Sounds like the most realistic explanation.
yeah, both these options are possible
IMO Agathe orchestrated most of the breaking of the curse. Clearly it wasn't going to be broken in time, so she brought down the tree so that Maurice would be captured and Belle would trade places with Maurice. Then she saved Maurice in the forest so that the Beast would have to choose to let Belle go to him and Belle would have to choose to come back. And finally, of course, she actually had to save everybody in the castle's life because the curse STILL wasn't broken in time. She must've HATED that whole job. Not the most shining moment on her resume.
whats the ending of the movie?? please
You need to read the book "Lost in a Book" Disney released.
There they explain why the enchantres decided to curse the prince, and who rellay pulled the strings behind the story (in the real-live action movie) :)
I've always thought that the scene where Maurice took the dark road was made to make fun of horror movie.
In Beauty and the Beast animation, the beast had problems in reading. That was a bit weird, due to the fact that he had this huge library in the castle. Why to have a library if you can't even read? They made a very good change in the live action movie - the beast had "an expensive education" and knew most of the books. :)
Human again and the reading scene was not in the original 1991 theatrical release or the VHS release. The song was added in the Broadway version in 1994 and the sequence was added to the DVD release in 2002 as a promotional "all new song to your favorite classic" rerelease. It feels like an extraneous sequence because it was added 11 years later as a marketing technique. Personally I skip human again sequence because it alters the pacing of the film to me, feels out of place and a unnecessary added characterization of Beast not true to the original storyboard. But mostly because it wasn't what i remembered watching when I was a child in the 90s lol
Watching the original as a kid I never questioned any of those things. Now I'm glad the new movie is fixing those mistakes.
haha, I know right?! :-)
My opinion too.
Not really a plot hole, but I like that they make Maurice go to a market instead of a science fair. Gives more explanation why he would go down the same path so many times and I honestly didn't think there were many science fairs back then
That's a really interesting point - thanks for sharing! :-)
Yeah, also steam engine/steampunk wasn't existed up until 19th century. With the advent of steam locomotive and industrialization. The tale took place around 18th century.
No did a beast , nor was there a curse to turn people into objects and beasts nor there will ever be ! It's fictional, they made up non existing details for fun ! It's another made up dimension! Why are you all soooo into this like it's some real stuff ?
although they are clear in the animated version that Maurice is a strange man for his inventions - could be implying he is before his time, too.
Yes that's true! Also the fact that she asks for a rose is just sooo cool since that is what she asks for in the original story! And also why the Beast gets so mad at Maurice, since he decides to steal one of his garten. It has a more symbolic meaning and the fact that they made it more true to story is amazing.
Great video! But I wanna add in a couple more things. In this version, we got a backstory on Belle's mother, and how her death was tied in with the historical Black Plague. I know this is something I'm sure a lot of people wondered about, and plus it gave us some extra Belle/Beast bonding time. They were able to relate on some level, because they both lost their mothers to illness. Beast notices that, and we see his remorseful/sensitive side. He even apologizes to Belle for calling her father a thief. Which leads me into my next cool moment: did anyone else notice the creators' callback to the original fairy tale at the beginning of the movie? Maurice asks Belle what she would like when he returns, and per the original story, she asks for a rose. So the Beast gets angry not only because Maurice is a stranger entering his home, but Maurice attempts to take a rose as well for Belle, like the fairy tale. He gets locked up for being a thief and then Belle comes to rescue him, willingly taking his place in exchange for the rose Maurice tried to take. I was really pleased when I noticed this during the movie, happy that they were hailing the original source material for both movies. And I'd had my fingers crossed that the Beast would have a solo in this version, and I personally find "Evermore" to be a lovely and thoughtful song, because the Beast is describing how he never needed anyone before, but Belle makes him feel something other than anger, and he vows to always treasure the time he had with her if he never sees her again. Again, it shows a more sensitive side to the Beast, and highlights the change Belle ignited in his heart. Plus, gotta love Dan Stevens' rendition of it in the movie; it really was beautiful. I also love when he says to Gaston at the end "I am not a Beast", because that expresses the humanity he managed to find within himself. I can't remember for that was in the 1991 film or not, but it's cool either way. Loved this new version, and I look forward to adding to my collection when it comes on DVD.
yeah I really loved them putting that of the true original story in it as well.
It wouldn't be the Black Death, as that took place in the mid-14th century. There was a Great Plague of Marseille in France, but it took place in 1720, perhaps not the right time to fit with this movie's timeline, and besides, it didn't reach Paris anyway.
Speaking of the "I am not a Beast" line, I sensed a call back to the who-is-the-monster-and-who-is-the-man concept of The Hunchback of Notre Dame, another story about a deformed French man trying to find love.
That reminder of the old story is nice but feels out of place. In the original Belle has bitchy sister, wanting so many things but Belle, as humble as she is, asks for just a rose. That shows that Belle enjoys simple and nice things. In the movie she wants one because there is one in the painting.... Nothing more. She barely knew her mother so wanting one as like a 'throwback' for all the great memories can't be used as an excuse either.
belle can lift beast up. she can se wingardium leviosa :p
the belle said "you have to stand, you have to help me"
LOL I love it! It is sooo true! XD and how about some Avada Kedavra on Gaston XD
Jo Preston
It's leviOsa
Not leviosA
That’s why she said “You have to stand, you have to help me” so she can get him to the castle so it actually makes perfect sense on how she lifts him up
Hahaha true. She can lift anything.
I LOVED all these corrections in the new film. I also loved how Lumiere and Mrs. Potts explain the curse to Belle in the new film, leaving only the "love" part out but now she had a better reason to live with these talking objects without questioning her entire mental sanity haha. I honestly loved it. I don't know how Disney is going to top this remake. The animations were insane, the whole cast was amazing, the music was unbelievably nostalgic and throwback-y and wow just.. wow.
Lovely to hear just how much you enjoyed the movie, Karla - so much to love about it! :-)
It also fixes the random snow storm in the original movie lol. It always bothered me that it was spring/summer in the day and then at night it was cold and icy
Absolutely, Braeden! :-)
Braeden Messer true. This could also mean that the curse happened in winter and the rose has shed off its petals for about 6 months only until belle arrived.
Actually in the original film, the season was autumn. So the heavy rain and eventually snow was very natural. Autumn was specifically picked because of the symbolism behind the season. However, in this film they changed the normal season to be summer, June. The castle and the surrounding woods were in eternal winter like in Narnia. I have no idea why this is was changed.
That was not a snow storm that was salt in the original Beauty and the Beast.
AryaForce I think it was a homage to the original fairy tale, Maurice is actually travelling in the winter, while it's eternal spring/summer at the beast's castle. Of course, in the original fairy tale, it was an evil fairy who changed an otherwise nice prince into a beast, so in this case, the winter represents the coldness of the beast's heart.
Originally, it made no sense that Belle had to leave the castle. Her father was sick, but he could have been brought back to the castle to be nursed back to health. In the new movie, he is being attacked and locked up, so she truly must leave to save him.
I really love how they fixed all those mistakes, it makes the film so much better! One other mistake I noticed they fixed was the idea in the first film that the Beast couldn't read, as he was a prince and would likely have had a good education. It makes much more sense in the live action film where he joins her in quoting Shakespeare and says that he had "a very expensive education".
Those are nice remarks on mistakes fixed in the new movie.
However there are some more subtle details that I enjoyed as well:
1) In the animated version, the beast couldn't read. Now, them falling in love seems already odd enough by the name of the movie, but at least in the new version, he's a well read men and loves reading just as much as her, so they have a big thing in common that they both love (and which nobody had appreciated before in Belle's life except for her father).
2) In the animated version, the beast takes her to her room (all of sudden a change of manners seems a bit too rushy), in the new one, the servants ignore the master's rage attacks and bad temper and give her all they can to welcome her.
3) In the animated version, the horse runs away leaving Maurice in the woods with the wolves and he, mysteriously, outruns them!! An old, fat, flabby guy outrunning a pack of wolves (which don't seem to be too far from him). In the new version, they fixed that point as well, the horse doesn't abandon the owner, but comes back for him.
4) The enchantress: you don't see her in the animated version. She's part of the story at the beginning and that's it! Here you see that she's keeping close and she observes what happens.
5) In the original version, she says "I love you" right before the last petal falls. Well, that always seemed to me as too predictable and forced upon the viewer that she all of sudden realizes she's in love with him. In the new one, he dies. Everybody's turned into lifeless objects, and then she realized that she actually loved him, and the enchantress turns back the curse, although in theory it should be too late. But she was there. She goes with the angry mob and gets inside that castle and goes directly to Belle and the Beast, to observe maybe? Or she knew it was time? Anyway, she's there, and SHE TURNS AROUND THE CURSE.
Those things (together the improvements detailed in the video) made me enjoy the story much more.
beast kind of has to die and to have the enchantress 'fix' it, right? otherwise, those wounds from gaston would still be there ;-)
Another thing is the live action movie gives a much better explanation for Beast's attitude at the beginning of the movie- he was raised that way by his father at a very young age, which none of the servants intervened with and he had no mother there to show him kindness or compassion.
she cheated ^^
Acelover3000 yep
Guido Lizzi I also love how in the end Belle tells the beast that he should grow a beard as that line was supposed to be in the animated movie but was later removed.
I'm glad they mentioned something about Adam's family and past and how hard he was raised in a cold way
Yes, that was a nice addition to the story, I thought too. :-)
Socandpaf Name isn't Adam
Abby "What was the Beast's actual name? Neither the movie nor the stage musical give him a name. In the DVD commentary to the movie, the creators mention that they neglected to give him a name. However, in a licensed CD-Rom trivia game that came out years after the movie, he's referred to as Adam."
animelover1979 ugh you guys love to copy and paste the same sentence.... 1. the DVD game was licensed by Disney, NOT created by then. the game was created by a completely different company that has nothing to do with Disney. During this time, Disney was having other company's make their video games then they would license them for profit. If the Beast had the name Adam, they would of said so in the film's or the original stories. There's even video recordings over the producers talking about how they never gave him the Adam or a name in general. He just goes by Beast.
The prince would have a french name!
I fucking love the new Beauty and the beast remake
Chantal Dorado same. at the end, I wasn't crying, I was out and out bawling. Body shaking, tears pouring, sniffly mess.
Same
Chantal Dorado I was too. I'm in a production of the stage version so watching the characters I made such a connection with practically die made me bawl.
Me too!
Chantal Dorado it's terrible af they ruined it
I loved the live action remake of the Beauty & the Beast. It added scenes, dialogue, and songs that gave additional story line compared to the original animated film. It explained what happened to Belle's mother. It added answers to some of the questions that I never knew to ask before.
Something I loved about the live action that wasn't necessarily a problem before was the Beast getting the song Evermore. Personally I feel like it gave the Beast a lot depth in giving his emotions. It shines a lot more light on him and his own conflicts. It was personally something I really enjoyed not to mention it's was in general a great song. And the fact Josh Groban had sung the soundtrack version just made it so much better for me.
+Mac Davis I very much missed the roar at the end though, found it more emotional and beastly-like... in general the beast doesn't roar enough here ;)
Mac Davis I never cried in movies before, but after beast sang evermore i burst into tears. It was so beautiful!
Shae Shockley Honestly, I never cry in movies either, but I was so on edge at so many points in the movie. The scenery was beautiful, the soundtrack was amazing, and when they actually turned into the appliances I actually teared up. It was so weird because I know how it'll end and I never really even was sad about it in the animated version because I knew how it ended.
Actually I HATE so much that scene, it made me feel so unconfortable, I find it so unnecesary when whe already had the little song of him as a little kid. I really dislike his adult-beast song, man I really REAAAALLY hate it!! T^TU
Mac Davis Evermore is brilliant and the beast needs his own song.
I really forgot about the puddle until you talked about it :) that was a great idea to still hint to it in the new Movie. Also having them explain what happened to her mother was alittle dark but still gave it a good story
I love the puddle fix, Izzy! I think that and the Eiffel Tower are my fav ones! :-)
I think that the remade version was amazing! Everything was so well-done, and as you said, everything made much more sense. Emma Watson is one of my favorite actresses!!
Loved the remake. Especially Beast's song.
I love all Disney remakes. Beast song gave me goosebumps and literally made me cry. His song and the sound of voice, sounds like he heartbroken to let belle leave. Also I love Emma Watson!
It's amazing to me that this version was able to fix all these without making what it's dong an in your face thing. I saw it and thought man this story is far better more flushed out which you expect because live action is a longer time frame but now you realize that they didn't just write new material for just the sake of needing it! Amazing job you earned a subscriber!
I know, right, they did a really great job with all that, didn't they?! Lovely to hear you enjoyed my video and thanks so much for subscribing! :-)
Flicks And The City Yes they did! Makes me think I should film a second review and give them credit for it 😂 & you're very welcome!
lol! :-)
There might actually be another one in regards to the curse. The beasts castle appears to be stuck in permanent winter, while several characters mention that it's June. This could imply that while days and nights do pass, there might be some form of time suspension or repitition going on with the curse. Although as you said it's been quite a bit shorter than 10 years so there wouldn't really be a need for the curse to mess with time.
Well it's not like the Enchantress necessarily knew if or when the right girl would come along to break the spell. The people in the castle didn't age (Chip stayed the same age), so we can reasonably assume time was standing still in that spot or looping. If the spell were to be broken, I think the enchantress would figure being an object for years would be enough of a punishment for the castle staff so she made them ageless. Once the spell was broken they could start off human where they left off.
they were stuck in winter at the castle - it froze time (and the garden, obviously lol)
The reason I said it's been a shorter ammount of time is because Mr Potts isn't siginficantly older than Mrs. Potts, the same for Cogworth and his wife, they weren't cursed so they would have continued to age naturally.
Steven Higgins it could have been like 5 years and age gap wouldnt be too different. Time defiently froze in the castle in terms of aging but they still felt 5 years or so pass.
Minette L Boroda Exactly, 5 is shorter than 10 and I did say it was a shorter amount of time than in the animated version.
Honestly, I loved how when she asks mr. Potts what he lost how he replies that he can't remember. Reminds me of Neville Longbottom!
Contrary to what other people believe, I loved the remake! It added something more to the story, and helped tie up some loose ends and fill in some plot holes. Its also worth mentioning that given the confirmed time period in which the remake takes place makes a well read and inventive belle even more feminist than she already was in the cartoon.
They changed the lyrics of Be Our Guest from 10 years we've been rusting to Too long we've been rusting. Also the Enchantress WAS the one to undo the curse when the rose died. Also Enchantress is in the new one alot BUT in disguise as a woman called Agatha. The Beast/Prince has a background stating the prince had a hard life.
Oh yeah in the new one each time a rose petal falls the castle would self destruct and when the rose finally died Lumiere,Cogsworth, Mrs Potts etc all became real objects during the Climax scene. I love how Belle says would you grow a beard,the prince laughs and growls LOL.
Love the 2017 one more.
Loved how it showed the servants and the castle being affected by the curse as each petal fell! Such a lovely detail! And that little growl after her beard comment at the end was very funny! Glad you enjoyed the movie so much as well! :-)
Apparently, in the animated version, Paige O'Hara ad-libbed the diaogue 'Do you think you can grow a beard?'. It almost made into the final cut. Think I saw on an interview with Bill Condon, where he mentioned that it was a deleted scene?
when the prince growls I was like: save the beast for the bed thank you
Thank goodness i didn't say it out loud cause it will be so awkward
Where Gaston is French and yet doesn't know what 'je ne sais quoi' means. Don't know if that was a joke or if he was being serious but... 😂
it's a joke on the meaning of the word (so many people use the phrase without knowing it literally means 'i dont know'). not sure how that'd translate into other cultures/languages..... i'm sure we'll find out in the bluray extras :)
je ne sais quoi literally means "I don't know what that means"
Its because:
1) its a joke around the meaning of the phrase(see the 2 comments above me)
2) gaston is not educated enough to know what all the french words mean and knows only the words that are significant to the war front
its s joke
Yes, when I said 'I don't know if that was a joke' I was highly aware that it was indeed, a joke. 🙄
This is exactly one of the reasons why I loved the live action!
The remake was magical! I loved it so much!
During the credits, children started dancing and going crazy, having fun! XD
i love it when the live action tells us that the peoples in the castle become less human when the rose petals fall one by one.
It was actually mentioned in the stage version a few times, once is when Mrs. Potts says "And I can hardly bend over anymore."
They Perfected these Plot holes! definitely put the missing pieces of the puzzle back together! well done!
Indeed! :-)
my favorite is how they said "beast can't read" in the animated version. but he is a prince and they acknowledge that he was given a high education.
it was 'the beast hasn't read in years and has forgotten some of it' not 'never learned' in the animated version.
BadgerPride89 I know but still they emphasized he couldn't read which was changed in the live action
I appreciate that in second because it shows that Belle and Adam share something in common with one another instead of Belle teaching him like a little puppy. Also, since he was lonely in the castle even with all the servants, he probably spent a lot of time reading on his own since that was his only (realistic) entrance to outside world just like how Belle viewed the books she read.
Ok um she wasn't teaching the Beast how to read she was more reminding him since he hasn't done it for so long. That's why in the scenes of him reading he's reading Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. For a logical person to past the time is to read, but we are talking about a very spoiled and stubborn guy who probably was in a continuous spiral of self pity and anger.
Human again and the reading scene was not in the original 1991 theatrical release or the VHS release. The song was added in the Broadway version in 1994 and the sequence was added to the DVD release in 2002 as a promotional "all new song to your favorite classic" rerelease. It feels like an extraneous sequence because it was added 11 years later as a marketing technique. Personally I skip human again sequence because it alters the pacing of the film to me, feels out of place and a unnecessary added characterization of Beast not true to the original storyboard. But mostly because it wasn't what i remembered watching when I was a child in the 90s lol
While these fixes do make more sense in the remake, I fell in love with the original. Credit where credit's due, the special effects of the remake were stunning and I got a chuckle from a couple of scenes, but for me, the original comes out on top.The remake just doesn't do it for me.
I think in the same way as you!, The original has an special appealing and I also think that the movie didn't have to make sense at all, come on! he have spells and talkative furniture, an enchanted castle....nothing makes sense !. I didn't care who was Belle and Besst"' parents , I didn't care about how much time the Beast spent being a Beast, the music, the characters, the dance....that things DID made sense to me!
100% agree like my mom said don’t mess with a classic
Same here! Was looking for a comment like this lol 💜
The live-action remake created its own plot hole by adding the magic book. Belle should have used it to save her father faster.
Ooh, interesting point! :-)
I did like that when Belle and the Beast transport to Paris, he acts like he's been there before - a socialite prince would have. But does he forget he's now a beast when he offers to show her the sights? That was weird, no?
Also, if Belle had used the magic book to go to her father, then she would have HAD to return to the castle, right? I thought the book was a round trip thing. The beast certainly sacrifices more if he tells her to go and she doesn't have to return.
Yeah that surprised me, but maybe he thought they could see more since it was dark out, or maybe he just got carried away by his excitement to be in Paris with Belle. Either way, it's probably a good thing they didn't stay in Paris for too long!
Katie Gould He did seem excited, and it's nice to think that he feels more human when he's with Belle!
I've never noticed the mistakes in the original movie! Nice video👍🏼
Thanks, Jowan! :-)
This movie is simply amazing to me. I'm a production designer and just looking at all the period accurate costumes and sets just blows my mind. I know how hard of work it is to make something period accurate and it adds another level to the film for me. Another thing is seeing all those extras in the opening town scene dancing along and singing blows my mind. Extras tend to do whatever the hell they want and seeing them all so well coordinated just threw me through a loop.
Love the old and new versions but yes the new one makes more sense and feels more concrete. The snow is flowing upwards at one point when Belle first arrives at the castle. Thanks for the review.
I only noticed one mistake and I wasn't looking for any; when Belle buys the bread from the baker and puts it in her pocket, it's missing afterwards with no explanation of how this happened or where it went.
You're certainly eagle-eyed, Carlos! I'll have to look out for that next time I watch! :-)
I thought it was a little confusing in the live action when Belle and the Beast go to Paris how she sings about the Paris of her childhood and also the phrase 'easy to remember, harder to move on' but when they show her mother being sick and Maurice grabbing Belle and going away, Belle is still a baby...?
Completely loved the movie though, I just have that small detail on my mind.
I think it was mainly bc her father has been painting stuff from that time and telling her stories so she probably grew up hearing about it? that's the only explanation I can think of
Yared VC I think she meant (after all the stories and painting from her father) it was easy to look back and take joy in the time when it was simpler and they were whole however she did need to move forward which is so hard because she didn't want to forget that she did have a mother even if she didn't know her so it was easier for her to remember through second hand accounts. Also 'knowing the Paris of my childhood is gone' it is when she actually realised what happened and finally comes to term with the fact that her dream childhood her father told her about could never happen. She was faced with what actually happened to her mother and now knowing her childhood that she wanted really was gone is really hard to move on from that and easier just to try and remember
I really like how they fixed those! I didn't even know/realise the mistakes since I last watched the animation maybe 10 years ago
theory time: so about the wolves. i feel like the wolves were the castle guards. I mean there's royalty there so there must be guards. in the original, they were just forest wolves, but in the remake after the tree fell and maurice found himself in the path to the castle, the wolves attacked but he ends up in the castle, also one of the wolves had a scar on its eye, when belle was going to find her father, there were no wolves but when she left that's when the wolves appeared, probably to chase her back, but i think, because of the fact that time was running out and that servants were turning into objects the guards were losing the human in them so maybe that's why the beast had to jump in and save her. its a long stretch but i also think it works
Some of these mistakes are ones the filmmalers themselves admitted to making.
Though I always assumed the enchanted objects never actually aged in the amimated version.
Absolutely true; this video is really about how the new filmmakers go about acknowledging and correcting those mistakes. :-)
Another fixed :
In 1991 version Belle said to Beast after wolves scene when she treat Beast's wounds, "By the way, thank you for saving my life" and than Beast replied "You're welcome". In the new one, she didn't thank him in that time, but later in "Something there" scene she said that. It's more realistic, I love it.
I like that they fixed the problem of why the village knew nothing about the castle in the near-by forest but it always makes the enchantress seems a lot meaner. You need to learn to love someone...and earn their love in return...oh, by the by, I'm making everyone who isn't already here forget you. Good luck.
Belle was wearing her boots when she went to the castle to look for her papa, then suddenly was wearing her espadrilles while she was at the castles library...the same espadrilles she was wearing when she was reading to the little girl...😀
i love this movie sm, may be unpopular but i like this version better
Love them both! :-)
i actually preferred the new live-action movie over the animated version! It's much more detailed!
But the animated version will always had a nostalgic memories!
My biggest issue was the book. if the book can take you anywhere, then it could have taken Belle home at any time. but instead it's used as a poorly crafted plot device solely for the purpose of explaining more of Belle's past. Hell, they could have rescued Maurice once he was trapped in the back of the coach and returned to the castle using the book without ever alerting the villagers. The book causes more plot problems than it fixes them and it was poorly introduced into the story in the first place. what would have been better would have been if Belle had found the music box Maurice had been working on that ended up abandoned in the snow, and found some sort of secret there. since the box was of that room, she could have still had her song and explanation to the beast.
Also, Maurice makes it home after Belle takes his place... but didnt take the horse. Why not? And how did he manage not to get attacked by wolves or die of hypothermia? he was an injured old man. no way he made it home on foot in record time.
One change I liked was when Gaston, even though he didn't believe Maurice, went with him to try and rescue Belle before losing his patients when Maurice had trouble finding the way back. Whether they believed there was a beast or not, if a man comes rushing in in a panic claiming his daughter was in danger from something, people should still take it seriously and try to at least find her to confirm she's not in danger. It also helps explain how Gaston knew where the castle was in the mob scene.
I loved everything about the movie except that the song "Human Again" wasn't included. I'd love to see that scene and song added later on, or to a special edition of the film.
Human Again was only added to the special edition of the 1991 film too. For me personally I can take or leave that song.
I know! It's one of my favorite songs in the film. I was excited to see what they'd do with it, but they cut it all together.
Days in the Sun is the equivalent to Human Again tho
It was such a perfect film, I watched it on opening day and it brought back so much nostalgia. Several of these plot holes I noticed had gotten filled and I liked the slight backstory approaches they filled in like a little of Prince Adam's life as a child as well as the whole Enchantress scene being added instead of being a complete narration with static stained glass pictures telling the story.
I actually liked the live action much better than the original... and I loved the original...So yeah
i mean the live action was a little more definitive n showed the bonding between belle and beast slowly n perfectly rather than the original where it was rushed...and it also showed us the story of how belle's mother died n how prince adam became cold hearted because of his mother's death....
I absolutely LOVED the live action... Amazing!!!
anyone else agree with me?
Absolutely! I thought it couldn't possibly be as good as the original.... and then it was better! I honestly think the people who hated it are just trying to be unique. Because the movie was awesome! :)
Bat Spidey Yeah, I agree.😊
Bat Spidey I agree too , I like the original but the live action was better for me , is amazing !
I disagree. The characters have no god damn chemistry and their established bond feels forced. Many plot points were opened without being closed in a proper way and historically it is all over the place. They tried too hard to please everyone and the movie comes off as a political statement.
I really like how the curse not only effects the castle but the village as well by having the villagers' knowledge of the castle wiped away from their memories and how some of those villagers were loved ones of the servants, like Cogsworth's wife and Mr. Potts.Because in all honesty, you'd think a village that small would have prior knowledge of a huge castle right in their backyard.
I enjoyed how belle and beast fell in love through more than just living together
They also solved the weather problem of it frequently switching from snowy to not snowy in the original
Right. I noticed that. They made a point to have Maurice say "It's snowing.....in June......" lol. Just to show that the movie knows it's weird and makes us know it's part of the curse
when chip was first shown in the 2017 movie, his handle was on the side of his head instead of his nose
One thing, though, that I love about the first film is that Belle always outsmarted the Beast while throwing snowballs so she never got hit by one (it was also very funny). In the new one, he actually got her IN DA FACE with that giant ball but that would've injured her (and probably make her really angry) because she even fell on her back and hit her head on the cold ground. It was also pretty funny but...oh well.
alkestro I wouldn't say it would make her angry. She probably sat up and laughed it off. The scene was about having a bit of fun with one another.
Sides, I get hit in the face all the time with snowballs and clean shirts by the people I love. Im clumsy by nature so falling flat on my back is nothing new. I just laugh it off with everyone else because I probably look pretty funny going down.
It's all in good humor, nothing more.
I like that they got rid of the unnecessary "before his 21st year" part of the curse! It's a magnificent film, you can see the love that went into the making of it in every detail.
Very true, Lili! :-)
I thought that "before his 21st year" could have been interpreted as the length of time he was the beast, not his actual age (before his 21st year of beasthood, I mean). Presumed that magic makes you immortal and so him and the servants were frozen in time, if you will (which would've explained why Chip was a boy), but that's just me.
That's what I thought honestly =)
i am waiting for mulan now 😍
Me too! :-)
Ducky quill it's basically destroyed, the directors have confirmed that there will be no General Li Shang, and no songs. :(
No Shang??? WHAT?????
ariana grande would play a perfect role for little mermaid
Yes! Remake of Mulan will be epic.
i loved how the new movie shows the changes in the castle and the objects with the falling of every petal of the rose! the effect shown is breathtaking
This is great, I also liked how they had the villagers not taking Gaston's side right away, and considered Maurice's point of view first, and how LeFou started to question Gaston, as it makes it far less awkward at the end when the villagers suddenly realize they were going to murder their Prince.
One of my main issues with the original movie was that you can trace, maybe three days having passed in the movie. That's an awful short time for them to fall in love.
We can do this by following Maurice.
Day 1: Movie starts, Maurice goes to the fair and by night fall is at the Beast's castle. It then feels like Belle reaches the castle on the same night. Maurice is sent back to the village via the walking carriage and busts into the tavern only to be thrown out. Then Belle has dinner that same night (Be Our Guest), and wanders into the West Wing, gets frightened by the Beast and runs away. Beast rescues her and they end up at the castle where she tends to his wounds.
Day 2: Belle and Beast play in the snow and something's there that wasn't there before. Beast gives the library to Belle and they read and slurp soup. Lafou waits outside Belle's house for their return.
Day 3: The big ball, dancing, etc. Maurice gets his butt in gear and he goes off into the woods again. Gets lost. Bell flees to help her father, and takes him home. The mob shows up for Maurice, then goes off to kill the Beast. Final fights ensue. Love conquers all. The end.
The new movie seems to stretch the time a bit, at least. We don't know how many days Agatha was tending to Maurice after she found him.
that's interesting. But i actually assumed it to take several mounths, with the seasons changing.
"how long as the little guy been waiting for them?"
When Gaston finds Maurice alive in the tavern, he says that he has spent the last five days trying to find him...
Has anyone ever thought if beast was so bad that the witch cursed him what about Gaston
because somehow the enchantress believe the beast still have love inside his heart
YesIAm well gaston died by falling through a bridge (which they didn't dwell on) so he got his just desserts.
Maybe it has to do with the fact he's a Prince? She might be concerned about the guy who rules the land if he becomes a tyrant, but she can't go around and teach a lesson to every asshole she meets. In fairytales, withches and fairies generally care about royals more than peasants and common folks.
It's just like when Maleficent got pissed at not being invited at the birth party, because Aurora is a royal, so she feels more concerned (add to that she was the only one left out). If she got angry at every couple who forgot inviting her for their babies, the whole kingdom would be cursed XD
Lilyl- hahaha so true! :)
Did anyone get kind of choked up at how sweet it was at the end ballroom scene when Madame Garderobe held the dog while singing the iconic song?
Also, what the live action film did that the animated one didn’t, was a part when after belle and the beast had danced and were talking outside. In the animated film the beast asks her if she is happy with him and she says ‘of course I am, I just miss my Father.’ But in the live action film, when he asks Belle the same question, she replies with ‘can anyone be truly happy if they aren’t free?’
I like that they changed this line because I don’t think anyone is truly happy if they aren’t free, even if Belle did love the beast. She loved her Father and her home so much more and that was her happy place.
And they fixed one big plot hole! It says that a girl has to fall in love with the beast BEFORE the last peadle falls! But after the last peadle falls, Belle says she loves him! Thats too late and a plot hole/ mistake. But in the live action they made the enchantress walk to the tower too see how her curse works. And when the beast dies and the peadle falls, the enchantress sees that Belle loves him and so SHE turned the curse back herself!! Tough it was too late, she saw that someone loves the cursed prince.. so the enchantress thought: "oh the time is over but never mind i take the spell back!"
but it wasn't a plot hole in the original movie, she says 'i love you' then the last petal falls. like, seriously, there's a whole musical cue, the petal falls, everyone's sad, boom, light beams.
the only thing that makes me sad: emma watson is no longer hermione granger.
Fida Aifiya my only flaw is that its set in France but she kept her British accent.
Fida Aifiya I mean she could have moved there ppl live in all kinds of places.
In the "original" movie, Everyone had an American accent except lumiere. In the new one, every one has either a british accent (which is more likely because Englanders move france.) or an American accent. And just in case, just because Emma was born in france doesn't mean that she knows how to do a French accent.
In the 1991 movie, the spell occurred 10 years ago, but the prince and Chip clearly didn't age. That never bothered me. I figured that no one ages when under a spell. But the way Belle got the injured Beast onto her horse did bother me back in 1991. I'm glad you commented on that.
Also, in the original Gaston and the mob only had a single picture to know where the castle was, while in the remake Maurice _showed_ Gaston where it was.
I loved pretty much everything about the new movie and all the changes they made. Things made a lot more sense, although I did have questions about the timeline. It's never really specified how long the curse had been in effect for, but the fact that the petals fell so quickly in the short span of the movie was a little off for me.
I loved that they took out most of the creepy Stockholm Syndrome-esque nature of the original. They gave everyone a much more fleshed out character. The Beast's behavior was explained, and also why the help felt so loyal to him instead of angry. They blamed themselves for not saving him from his father's influences.
I think the best part of all was Le Fou. I know there's homophobes throwing hissyfits about it, but damn...it was well done. I had heard about the hype going in and expected that the subtle little hints Le Fou was making would be the extent of it. Even that would've been great...representation in any small form is good. But the fact that they not only gave Le Fou an actual realized character, made him end up being one of the good guys, AND gave him that little dance with the guy at the end...it meant so much to me. My nieces and my mother saw the movie with me, and I was just so happy for them to see that. My mother has taken a long time to be more accepting (she grew up homophobic), and every time she would see a gay couple on tv or in movies she would begin to understand it more. My oldest niece (9) knows I'm gay, and she has been exposed to a lot of same-sex couples as well (we all watch the show Shadowhunters together, and love Malec). My youngest niece (5) doesn't know, and hasn't been exposed to it much. So her seeing that moment and us talking about it afterwards was really important for me.
In general...the movie was just everything I wanted it to be and more. It was perfectly cast, the adaptation between movies was great, and it added so many special moments without taking away from the original. It was the epitome of how these disney live-action remakes should be done.
I’m so late, but I’m also one of the people who has soooo much to say on LeFou. Like, they somehow manage to keep his comic relief-y side while showing that he’s still a HUMAN. He has lines that prove it and a realization that Gaston may be the true monster. He has a sort of fake idolization of him. One of these reasons, may be bc since he was revealed to be gay, I think it was implied that he liked Gaston (I’m not shipper of it, sort of (Luke Evans and Josh Gad have a fantastic bromance tho and it resonates in the film)) he even has this line:
“There’s a beast running wild there’s no question, but I fear the wrong monsters released.” His character development along with every one else’s was gold
Both movies forgot these plot holes - What happens AFTER the Beast reclaims the throne? The whole town forgot about the castle and royal family, then most likely made some kind of self-government. They won't give it up easily to a sudden Prince who was missing for 10 years. When, most likely, not everyone remembers with or without the assistance of the curse.
Also, where is the King and Queen? Beast's parents? There's no way that they should be dead, the original Disney draft suggested at least a Mother of the Beast.
And what about the mob? After they get beaten by furniture, how will the Mob go home? Would they be scared of every object in their house?
And Gaston - the town LOVED Gaston. Once the town learns their new Prince and Princess are somewhat responsible for Gaston's death (and possibly others) what will happen?
@pixie bubbles--- he wasn't a crown prince -- he was just a rich guy with good heritage, money, and a castle....lots of rich non-royals in france had castles. i assume that it's like lords and ladies of england, like in downton abbey -- rich and powerful land owners, but not necessarily in any real expectation of being a ruler. maybe he was a 'foreign prince'. there were all sorts of levels of nobility (who could sit in various chairs with the king or queen, for example). BTW, i'm an american, so i probably don't understand the royal hierarchy very well.... those more aware of the intricacies of french nobility, correct me if i'm wrong!
at the time before the revolution, only like 1% of the population were nobility but they owned 1/5 of all land. the main issues would be if he'd want any taxes due from the townspeople after they'd apparently gone without during the time of the curse. as a member of the 2nd estate [nobility], the beast would normally get money from the villagers that rent or work on his family's land.
it seems gaston is bourgeois [rich family but not nobility - usually lawyers or merchants...or maybe gaston's dad had done some good military work and they gained power but not quite the title of 'noble'], and since the next upper ranking guy (beast) was forgotten, gaston presumably had a lot of power in the town (notable since he was a hunter, and that wasn't really allowed by non-nobility). since no one remembered their local prince (that was probably majority land owner), maybe the town was supported by gaston's family factory or mine or winery or something. perhaps gaston earned further power by his becoming a captain in the military (war of austrian succession???? the 30 years war doesn't seem to fit, anyway)
....perhaps people from other villages saw this bougie's level of power and got mad at not having the same autonomy from their own regional nobility, which contributed to the revolution ;-)
it is curious what beast's dad did. if he were part of the standard french nobility sometime around the beginning of the 1700s, he'd presumably be a standard a-hole courtier spending all the time vying for little bits of incremental growth of power at versailles.... what happened to beast's dad? why did no one in versailles bother to look for the heir of that estate (beast)? did the enchantress' curse expand that far?
i would assume that once any issues arose of who owed what to whom (the church, king, whatever), beast and belle wouldn't really fight it too much -- they know it's not worth the bloodshed or messy court back-stabbing and would simply want to be happily ever after living quietly in the castle. best case scenario is that he'd become the main guy in town (since gaston is dead) - the one that would supply a place for them to work and someone to make the tough calls. since he's learned his damn lesson not to be a greedy, vain a-hole, hopefully he would be well-loved..... so not to be executed during the inevitable revolution :-p
ORRRR since it's a fairy tale, maybe none of that even happened and it was simply an alternate universe.
I'm not sure if it was in the old or new one, but at one point, the wardrobe talked about not being able to fit through the door, but then in the fight scene, you see here out of the room in which she was trapped.
another thing fixed - originally the beast showed belle to a more comfortable room and belle still hated him after that. but in the new one, Lumiere and Cogsworth show Belle to her new room, and the beast gets enraged when he finds out. That makes more sense.
The only problem I had with both the animated versions is they should have turned Gaston into a beast at the end instead of killing him in a fall from the castle
dragonweyr44 That would ruin the whole point of "The beauty is within" kinda thing
There's a French version of Beauty and the Beast from 1946 (the inspiration for the 1991 Disney version, actually) in which Belle's suitor from the village, named Avenant in this film, IS turned into a beast and the Beast turns into a handsome young man.
I also loved how Le Fou paid everyone to bring up Gastons confidence rather then everyone just thinking that his the most intelligent and handsome guy ever seen. Le Fou paid them all to make him seem well loved. As well as how they changed a few of the lines making it a bit realistic. I also thought that it showed his strength as he carried the women and Le Fou at the same time. Was definitely as well developed character and movie as not everyone thought he was as beautiful, they would be manipulated, as well as Le Fou
I thought the paying thing was interesting too. Poor LeFou was really busting his ass and his pocketbook to make Gaston feel better.
LeFou paid the townfolk because they don't trust and like Gaston a 100%. That gives them motivation to pretend to like him for that one scene.
Having that established, why did the townfolk suddenly trust him when it came to the Beast being evil and wanting to 'come for their children'. What reason did they have to believe him? In the original the folk acted on emotions rather then logical decisions. In this one they first act on a logical decision (not trusting Gaston for a good reason) and then suddenly on emotions.
what really amazing is that Disney saw that we pointed out these mistakes and fixed them. Can't wait to see it soon!
I love these commentaries! Thanks FATC!
I think the Beuaty and the beast 2017 is sooo amazing. Emma Watson is the perfect belle and I can't wait to watch the movie
Yeah! Much better than Maleficent which is absolutely rubbish of ruining King Stefan and depict the fairies as idiots
But one question, for both movies : Doesn't chip have brothers? So where were they when they became human again
yeah, in the animated version, he has many brothers and sisters. There was a scene that Mrs. Potts tells him to get in the cupboard with his brothers and sisters ,tons of little tea cups. (in the end of the animated movie when the curse is broken, no other child appears) In the remake it seems like he's an only child.
mathy〈3 well, it actually makes more sense to me that Chip is an only child - since Mrs Potts appears to pay the most attention to him alone.
I love this video! I noticed a lot of that! Very detailed that they took the time to fix it! 😊
Didn't think about all these things! Thank you for the clarifications! The new movie is beautiful and very well done!
Well, a plot hole that I found in the remake is that Belle and her father left Paris when she was only a baby so she can't have any memories of it and she definitely did not spend her childhood there. Also, in a picture or drawing that appears on the original animation Belle is sitting next to her mother and she is about five years old so her mother can't have died when she was so young! Please tell me what you think! ;-)
about their Home in Paris, in the beginning you saw her father making the music which that base off her old home with them in it, and I believe she knows the address of the building.
Obviously in the new movie the backstory had change, her mother died when she was baby instead of 5 years old.
Well she didn't transfer back into memory in the film, she actually went to Paris... which is why she could retrieve the baby rattle. And the remake probably just change that part of the movie and make her mum die when she was a baby.
Chrysoula I’m confused why they went to Paris even though they were all French
I really liked that they emphasized how the books took her to new places, going as far as to have an enchanted book that allowed them to travel. In Disney's cartoon version she sings about a life of adventure and travel and then settles for staying in a castle with Beast as if her dreams were replaced with... matrimony. Instead, it makes sense that in living with Beast she is actually open to more adventures... more books = more adventures in her mind. So in the live action remake she really does fulfill her wish for travel and adventure, all through books! A GREAT message for kids, and people of all ages :)
Rachel Schlesinger Well, there's nothing wrong with marriage. Marrying someone you love completes one set of adventures and then opens up a whole new one.
Why is marriage looked at in such a bad light these days? Isn't it a positive thing?
true, remember how in "UP" film, Ellie and Carl greatest adventure was their life together? Also, Belle HAD her adventure. She went to the castle, found a beast and broke the spell. Is not anything you do everyday
Not sure if someone addressed this, but during the fight when beast was bit by the wolf, he was bit on his right shoulder, but Bell nurses his left while he lies in his bed