Disney's _Beauty and the Beast_ (2017)

Had there been a thread? Can't recall. Anyway, I just want to note this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/movies/beauty-and-the-beast-disneys-300-million-gamble.html

Specifically:

But the screenwriters Stephen Chbosky (“The Perks of Being a Wallflower”) and Evan Spiliotopoulos (“The Huntsman: Winter’s War”) added depth — what happened to Belle’s mother, more about why the prince got zapped — and a new household character, a touchy harpsichord (Stanley Tucci). Mr. Condon also pushed for modernizations, including making Chip (Nathan Mack), the teacup son of Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson), more of a skater dude.

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/6/65/The_Itchy_%26_Scratchy_%26_Poochie_Show_64.JPG/revision/latest?cb=20130820181448

But do we finally find out how the Beast became Spider-man?

Does whatever a Beast-guy can

 a touchy harpsichord (Stanley Tucci)

Wish that guy still posted.

that quote is like everything that's wrong w/ contemporary screenwriters

stanley touchy

I'm holding out for the animated remake.

I thought Disney couldn't get much lazier than their slew of movies based on theme park attractions, but, well

Has Disney ever released a good live action film?

Jungle Book was pretty great imo, though that was a lot of cgi

and Maleficent was dope

compoter wore tennis shoes come on

i'm on the fence until live action Fantasia

Before I knew of this latest remake, I had already been thinking of this after recently watching the first twenty or so minutes of the Lindsay Lohan remake of The Parent Trap with my nieces a month or two back. Offensively classist (a criticism that could be aimed towards some of their animated product), yes, but mostly just noisy and lazy. The studio knows that these films are filler that happen to strike gold every now and then, as with the Pirates movies, and now this latest round of remakes.

The live action Cinderella was fine.

yeah I liked Cinderella too.

'compoter' wore tennis shoes just made me lol bcz idk jam I guess

http://www.indiewire.com/2016/11/beauty-and-the-beast-angela-lansbury-comments-remake-doesnt-know-why-they-made-it-1201749941/

Duh, it's just the usual movie based on the broadway movie based on the cartoon based on the movie based on the movie based on the TV show based on the movie based on the ballet based on the movie based on the movie based on the story.

So this is a bit like Who Framed Roger Rabbit but instead of Toon Town Emma Watson goes to a castle inhabited by characters that escaped from a videogame? The townspeople try to save her from the menace of videogames and they set it in a really old fashioned place to emphasize how backwards they are for not understanding videogames don't have to be bad?

Anyway, just like Maleficent and Cinderella and recent fairy tale films in general, it's a real shame they've got all these nice costumes and decoration but can't really make a good looking film.

Has Disney ever released a good live action film?

― some sad trombone Twilight Zone shit (cryptosicko), Wednesday, March 8, 2017 8:48 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://i.imgur.com/fEaYF0m.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Flightofnavigatorpost.jpg

i remember liking something wicked this way comes. it may not be 100% true to bradbury, but it's pretty damn close.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Something_Wicked_This_Way_Comes_%281983_movie_poster%29.jpg

and

http://movieguy247.com/iMovies/images/Movies/horror/watcher_in_the_woods-poster.jpg

surprised no jokester has said "The Black Hole" yet

Surprised no one mentioned Mary Poppins, which is itself getting a remake starring Emily Blunt and Lin-Manuel Miranda.

more like Mary POOPins

Enjoy your fp

how dare u xp

compliance!!

plenty of great live-action disneys back in the 50s and early 60s -- treasure island, 20,000 leagues, swiss family robinson

bedknobs and broomsticks

The Black Hole is a dumb, miscast movie made watchable by incredible production design (Peter Ellenshaw!) and a terrific score (John Barry!!). And Maximillian Schell's hammy performance almost makes up for the other bad casting.

Also, great killer robot!

Watched treasure island a few months ago it's pretty lousy

This fucker tho:

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/disney/images/1/16/Country_Coyote_goes_Hollywood.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/185?cb=20131007014145

The Black Hole rules you jerks
Vincent and Bob!!!

Now we're talking.

Also, come on -- you can't handwave Disney, of all studios, ending a film where a character LITERALLY GOES TO HELL. And it's a pretty damn good hell.

Still . . . "Kids like Ernest Borgnine and Anthony Perkins, right? Are they available?"

(btw I love The Black Hole)

Charlie the Lonesome Cougar might be my favorite live action Disney movie. I'm kind of serious.

Somewhere there had to have been someone who said "I dunno guys, why don't we just call it FAUST IN SPACE? Badap, badap, badap, badap, badap, badadaaa!"

Anyway, from the article Ned linked

Disney’s live-action adaptations list now includes “Dumbo,” with Tim Burton directing; “Aladdin,” directed by Guy Ritchie; “The Lion King,” with Jon Favreau behind the camera; “Cruella,” starring Emma Stone; and “The Little Mermaid,” with Lin-Manuel Miranda coming aboard to write additional songs. The strategy, set by Alan Horn, Disney’s movie chairman, replicates what Disney-owned Marvel Studios has done with superhero films — take characters that have permeated popular culture and elevate them by bringing on top stars and serious filmmakers.

So maybe Edgar Wright can do, I don't know, Robin Hood?

Looking forward to Fincher's The Emperor's New Groove and the Haneke-helmed Chicken Little.

I find this shit super depressing for some reason.

It's like watching a well-fed and prosperous dude cutting off and eating pieces of himself. Like, what's even the point?

Lin-Manuel also in/involved with Mary Poppins remake/sequel/whatever. I loved "Hamilton" and liked "In the Heights" a lot, but I think it's hilarious that clearly the guy's end game was to be a Disney hack. "Moana," "Mary Poppins," "Little Mermaid" (a formative movie for him, iirc.)

Edgar Wright Robin Hood would be awesome.

I guess Disney has generally shown little regard for the source material they adapt so I don't know why they'd view their own material with any reverence.

It's all about the copyright.

A live-action Little Mermaid seems like it would be tricky to pull off.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/splash-remake-channing-tatum-jillian-bell-1201827697/

The only plus of that situation being that they managed to chase Sting away from working on the music. The downside being that they put me in the position of sympathizing with Sting.

http://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/movieposters/5539/p5539_p_v8_aa.jpg

but yeah i liked the Jungle Book (hte one last year). It was really cool.

is Mary Poppins not considered a live action film or what cuz that movie is amazing

also TRON

https://frinkiac.com/gif/S07E06/1101883/1106721.gif?b64lines=Tm8u

almost positive the 'jungle cruise' at disneyland is based on swiss family robinson.. I think it actually had a treehouse you could go up in..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Family_Treehouse

yup

"Two separate attractions," said Mr. Pedant.

the original swiss family treehouse at disneyland got upgraded to tarzan's treehouse, but the original version of the ride is still at WDW

that list of unproduced disney stuff is fascinating -- so weird to imagine a disney version of don quixote...

yeah Jungle Cruise had nothing to do with SFR

Sing along! (To the full soundtrack.)

http://www.youtube.com/user/DisneyMusicVEVO/videos

SFR treehouse is what you go on if there's a long line at Jungle Cruise or Pirates, iirc.

True, but then you lose your place in line. (At Disneyland specifically, the Indiana Jones ride is also there.)

that's what fast pass is for

Donald's problems are compounded when an experimental television monitor inside the tank is activated, and he confuses its telecast for scenes of the passing terrain. Straying across the French line, he spoils a surprise attack on Adolf Hitler's Panzer division.

I read this in Churchill's WWII history iirc

indiana jones was broken when we went a few weeks ago, and jungle cruise was being overhauled.

Production Budget: $160 million

first weekend:
Domestic: $170,000,000 48.6%
+ Foreign: $180,000,000 51.4%
= Worldwide: $350,000,000

be prepared for Disney to keep making live-action remakes forever

8-year-old automatons on the march

indiana jones was broken when we went a few weeks ago

indiana jones has been broken ever since crystal skull iirc

If you can find it on the interwebz, I highly recommend watching the now banned documentary about the making of The Emperor's New Groove if you want to see the process by which Disney completely perverts and sucks the life out of their projects.

except The Emperor's New Groove rules and Kingdom of the Sun seems like it would have been boring as hell

be prepared for Disney to keep making live-action remakes forever

hey kids! it's time for the all-singing, all-dancing copyright-extension theatre show!

Number None otm

dr. syn movie was on t.v. in the 60's but then they were kind enough to put it in theaters in the 70's so that they could scare the crap out of me.

http://i772.photobucket.com/albums/yy7/Preterite/Syn/boo.jpg

Walter Chaw:

The star of the show, other than nostalgia for an entire generation of twenty-somethings who wore out their VHS tapes of this thing at daycare, is the motion-capture phantom of Dan Stevens as the transmogrified Beast. He has moments of genuine, wounded pathos throughout. He saves the film single-handedly a time or two, but alas he only has two hands. The rest of it follows the motions of its animated predecessor lock-step (all the Menken/Ashman songs are there, plus a few new tunes exclusive to the film), yet the transition to live-action, despite a gargantuan budget, makes it all seem smaller somehow. Stagebound. Animation allows for the "Be Our Guest" sequence to telescope out--its spaces become non-linear and there's a certain grandeur to its presentation. With CGI and a decided unwillingness or inability to play with geography, this live-action version feels muted, creepy--a shitty amusement-park ride already past its sell-by date. Beauty and the Beast does try to address some of the problems of its source by making Belle a bit more feminist, and Gaston's death more a result of self-inflicted happenstance than of righteous murder. Ultimately, what's interesting about the film is that it's another girl hero-based narrative, this time addressing the cultural imbalance between the educated and the undereducated: the way that both can be manipulated by specific messages, and how mob mentalities create sharp, epoch-defining divides. That makes the picture's resolution uncomfortable, to say the least. I don't believe that we heal this easily from our schism, if at all. If there's anything the intervening twenty-six years have taught us, it's to abandon hope that those stupid, brutal fucks will ever read a book.

So I saw this, though it's not my thing at all (never saw the cartoon), and thought it was fine. But holy shit that story! He literally imprisons his love interest to make her fall in love with him. I don't know how you can write around that and make it acceptable for kids; at best it's a story about love spring from a gross power imbalance, and at worst it's a love story based on Stockholm syndrome.

Has that already been think-pieced to death (seems like an obvious gripe), or does the movie get a pass b/c it's based on an old fairy tale?

The original Disney animated one was criticized up and down for it.

(not incorrectly)

Gross gross gross gross gross.

Seems easy enough to write around, too. Find some plot device that incentivizes her to stay in the castle of her own volition. Doesn't solve all the problems w/ the messaging, but at least she's not falling in love with her captor anymore

Never saw the original, but seems like they tried to anticipate that by having her fall in love with him only after he sets her free, and he didn't imprison her with the intention of making her fall in love with him (he wanted to punish the dad for stealing the rose; the appliances had that in mind)... but yeah, it's still a gross aspect of the story, and it amazes me that Disney didn't change it.

Although I will say I liked it as a whole.

He literally imprisons his love interest to make her fall in love with him.

given the story's persistent appeal, i suppose we have to consider this a feature, not a bug

seems like they tried to anticipate that by having her fall in love with him only after he sets her free

yeah this is true, and also how my gf read things (she loved the movie). To me it seems just as problematic that his "redemption" arc involves letting her free, but it's something

"Tale as old as time/
That one eighties Sting hit."

and contenderizer otm, unfortunately.

Brian Stableford writes here about Madame De Villeneuve's original version of Beauty & The Beast, which is completely different than later better known versions. It rarely gets reprinted in English and his translation of it is coming out in June.

http://www.nyrsf.com/2017/02/brian-stableford-madame-de-villeneuve-and-the-origins-of-the-fantasy-novel.html

Did I fuckin hear correctly that there's a spell put on a fella in this that utterly alters his physical appearance causing him great social anxiety as well of course raising some serious habeus corpus issues

Hmmm I find much to disagree with in this reported fictional behaviour hmmmm

I shall review this utterly worthless production of shite in a bucket through this insightful lens hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

*strokes chin to orgasm*

My Movie Viewing With Darraghmac

ok I tried to read that Brian Stableford thing RAG linked to

If the last paragraph seems slightly convoluted, it is because the text throws up several difficulties of translation, some of them idiosyncratic. Firstly and most generally, there is the problem of translating the word “fée,” which most English translations render as “fairy” although a fée is, strictly speaking, an enchantress, and I prefer to translate it as “fay.” Secondly, most English translations of the Leprince de Beaumont version drop the definite article in “The Beauty” and use “Beauty” as if it were a nickname. In Madame de Villeneuve’s version, however, none of the key characters is given a name, even in the phase of the story where that becomes direly awkward because more than one character on stage simultaneously has to be described as “the Queen” and more than one as “the fay.” It is particularly pertinent with respect to the two leading players because there is a definite sense in which the heroine really does seem to be the Beauty and the problematic hero really is the Beast—which is why, when that character is a Beast, I elected in my translation always to refer to it as “it,” only switching back to “he” once the character is remetamorphosed.

great, thanks

lol

when you love someone, set them free (but make sure the curly cord goes no further than 100 feet)

I am somewhat surprised that with all the clickbait over Josh Gad's Lefou, I don't see anyone mention that Lefou and Gaston were both cribbed from the Cocteau film.

Sort of people who write clickbait don't spend a lot of time watching cocteau, i suspect

was it just me or did the beast's castle look like a dark souls level

Never having been a Harry Potter fan or a paedophile I have been proof against Emma Watson's charms until now. This movie did nothing to change that.

Nice

Enchanted is an excellent live action Disney btw thread

dmac otm, enchanted is grebt - amy adams and cyclops fae the x-men are fantastic in it

even a committed pottermaniac and paedophile like me must admit that emma watson is not very good in this. and her autotuned singing is kinda painful

The world doesn't need another Audrey Hepburn, it's true