GiveEmHellBill said:The biggest movie of the year not named Star Wars, and a theater chain in Alabama is refusing those sacks and sacks of cash?TCTTS said:
Alabama. For real.
Sometimes, morality sucks.
Biggest movie of the year? Man movies suck.
Beauty and the Beast trailer [Movie is out, spoilers in thread]
27,594 Views |
235 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by c-jags
Biggest movie of the year? Man movies suck.
You missed five pages of discussion on why this will be huge. Congratulations.Frok said:GiveEmHellBill said:The biggest movie of the year not named Star Wars, and a theater chain in Alabama is refusing those sacks and sacks of cash?TCTTS said:
Alabama. For real.
Sometimes, morality sucks.
Biggest movie of the year? Man movies suck.
Ariana appears to be walking straight in this video.
Still think they should have kept the original song
Meh....I had a problem with it until I found out what character it was going to be....
Think about it...they almost HAVE to make him gay in a full live action...it could even be funny. The guy was practically gay in the original (going WAAAAAAAAYYY past a bromance) and making him a live action character everyone would pretty much be thinking the same thing.
This is supposed to be a live action interpretation of an original and updating this particular character makes sense.....now if they go way over the top with it then I can see issues there, but I doubt they will.....this is a character trait of a minor character at that.
Now, those using the argument: how can you be ok with beastiality and not ok with a gay character....wow....you're missing the point of the whole movie. Belle fell in love with the inner beauty of the Beast thus freeing him of his curse....using that argument just demeans the great moral of the story being that you can't judge someone by their appearance.......hell, the movie BEGINS with that moral when the prince turns down the old woman who tries to give him a rose as a gift, then turns into a beautiful goddess before cursing him and the castle.
(In all fairness I believe most of those comments were on the Politics board about this....yeeesh both sides on that thread are painful)
My wife and I plan on seeing it without the kids, but we had planned on that already as a date night anyways.
Probably just another big fuss over nothing (lesbian couple in Finding Dory anyone?).
Think about it...they almost HAVE to make him gay in a full live action...it could even be funny. The guy was practically gay in the original (going WAAAAAAAAYYY past a bromance) and making him a live action character everyone would pretty much be thinking the same thing.
This is supposed to be a live action interpretation of an original and updating this particular character makes sense.....now if they go way over the top with it then I can see issues there, but I doubt they will.....this is a character trait of a minor character at that.
Now, those using the argument: how can you be ok with beastiality and not ok with a gay character....wow....you're missing the point of the whole movie. Belle fell in love with the inner beauty of the Beast thus freeing him of his curse....using that argument just demeans the great moral of the story being that you can't judge someone by their appearance.......hell, the movie BEGINS with that moral when the prince turns down the old woman who tries to give him a rose as a gift, then turns into a beautiful goddess before cursing him and the castle.
(In all fairness I believe most of those comments were on the Politics board about this....yeeesh both sides on that thread are painful)
My wife and I plan on seeing it without the kids, but we had planned on that already as a date night anyways.
Probably just another big fuss over nothing (lesbian couple in Finding Dory anyone?).
they could still keep the original for the movie and had this made for promotional purposes. Other films have done that with some of the songs in them....hopefully that's the case here because I'd like for the original to be in the film as well....wangus12 said:
Still think they should have kept the original song
Also in the original wasn't it the tea pot that was signing it and not done in the background? So if they stay true to that it should at least be close to the original.
I can't hear John Legend anymore without hearing this...
It's not different enough, Lana del Rey's song in Malificent was perfect.
Looking forward to seeing this, the only things I haven't liked from what I've seen so far is I wish mrs Potts and chip looked different and they would have cast Gaston as a bigger actor, he doesn't come off as larger than life in the trailers.
The Rock cannot be in every movie man
wangus12 said:
The Rock cannot be in every movie man
He sure as hell can
Way too much needless oooohinh and aahhhing and whatever. The greatness of that song is the simplicity,
AMW2010 said:
Looking forward to seeing this, the only things I haven't liked from what I've seen so far is I wish mrs Potts and chip looked different and they would have cast Gaston as a bigger actor, he doesn't come off as larger than life in the trailers.
They should have gone for cultural accuracy and cast the largest French actor they could find.
Gerard Depardieu
Godfather remake. The Rock as Michael Corleone.
the Rock as Gaston would have been damn hilarious....just a cocky grin, raise the eyebrow, and show the guns and BAM! end sceneSex Panther said:wangus12 said:
The Rock cannot be in every movie man
He sure as hell can
Oh! Seeing this tonight!
Well now I'm completely ruined for this movie wishing the Rock was playing Gaston....
Can't wait to see this movie this weekend! I watched the original on a plane last week - Ashman/Mencken's score is just fantastic.
Can't wait to see this movie this weekend! I watched the original on a plane last week - Ashman/Mencken's score is just fantastic.
Saw it last night with the missus as she's a huge fan. We really enjoyed it. Stayed extremely true to the original and the cast plays the characters perfectly. I think the whole Le Fou thing is way overblown as what happens at the end that's the "gay moment" is so trivial that you could miss it if you weren't paying attention.
Personally, I think the director should have kept his mouth shut and this probably would have never become an issue. Found it funny that I saw a quote from an interview where he's now tired of discussing it....well buddy, you were the one who brought it up in the first place and made it an item of discussion.
Only negative for me is that the John Legend/Ariana Grande remake is not a very good version. But yes, as someone mentioned, the scene during the movie is sung by Mrs Potts and it is very good.
Personally, I think the director should have kept his mouth shut and this probably would have never become an issue. Found it funny that I saw a quote from an interview where he's now tired of discussing it....well buddy, you were the one who brought it up in the first place and made it an item of discussion.
Only negative for me is that the John Legend/Ariana Grande remake is not a very good version. But yes, as someone mentioned, the scene during the movie is sung by Mrs Potts and it is very good.
It's probably somewhere on this thread but last night when I read that the original was 26 years old it made me feel REALLY old.
it is not your age so much as the 50,000 posts you have made....Vernada said:
It's probably somewhere on this thread but last night when I read that the original was 26 years old it made me feel REALLY old.
SeattleAgJr
Joined:
Jan 31, 2006
Posts:
30,680
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We saw it this morning. I think without the public comments regarding the LaFou character being gay, I likely would not have had any different perception of the character than I did in the original animated version. Nothing in-your-face about LaFou here, other than he is still that goofy Gaston-worshipper he was in the original. Although there are a couple of quick scenes where I can certainly see the gay issue popping up, but if you blink you probably miss those scenes.
We really enjoyed the movie. This is going to make a bazillion dollars I suspect. They did a great job of adapting their animated movie to the live screen. I liked the casting for the most part - did not recognize Obi-Wan Kenobi in there until I saw the final credits. The scene from the original cartoon where Gaston flexes his muscles is repeated here, but this actor just is not that imposing a specimen so the scene was actually kinda laughable. And I loved Emma Watson.
We really enjoyed the movie. This is going to make a bazillion dollars I suspect. They did a great job of adapting their animated movie to the live screen. I liked the casting for the most part - did not recognize Obi-Wan Kenobi in there until I saw the final credits. The scene from the original cartoon where Gaston flexes his muscles is repeated here, but this actor just is not that imposing a specimen so the scene was actually kinda laughable. And I loved Emma Watson.
Meh. I read some commentary that said there is no reason for a live action remake to exist, and discounted it as a fan of these remakes. Both The Jungle Book and Cinderella were tonally different re-tellings that enhanced their very aged originals.
The original BatB was probably 2nd behind The Lion King as as good it gets for Disney. It turns out there wasn't a lot of enhancement/modernization needed.
So the live action is basically a frame by frame remake. And while it's kinda cool for a little bit, it's not a remake that improves, like I'd say Jungle Book and Cinderella did.
For what is gained in "the Beast and the castle look really cool live and CGIed up", you lose in the castle characters' personalities not being animated. Adults who grew up as kids enchanted by the original will think "this is kinda cool", but young kids are gonna see the Lumiere and Cogsworth and Chip and not be as drawn in. Be Our Guest is underwhelming in live action. When you scale it back to make it "realish", it just seems meh.
The original is short (less than 90 mins), and its biggest flaw is that the transition from her being a scared prisoner to in love with him isn't developed enough. It doesn't feel earned or buyable. The original spends like 7 mins of film time with them talking about books, and that takes her from scared prisoner to in love. This is where the Stockholm Syndrome talk comes from- it's not not so much the situation as that the change is never earned from a plot/emotion perspective. The live action is targeted more toward adults (who grew up on the original) than kids. And it tacks about 5 mins of new plot on here to try to enhance it, but it's still not enough. The emotion of how she goes from terrified to in love doesn't feel real in the time/plot allotted for transition, especially for adults.
The movie is a good companion piece for those nostalgic about the original, but as a standalone piece, it's nothing special, and behind the other new Disney live actions. My young kids will be much more entertained/intrigued by the original than they will by this.
The original BatB was probably 2nd behind The Lion King as as good it gets for Disney. It turns out there wasn't a lot of enhancement/modernization needed.
So the live action is basically a frame by frame remake. And while it's kinda cool for a little bit, it's not a remake that improves, like I'd say Jungle Book and Cinderella did.
For what is gained in "the Beast and the castle look really cool live and CGIed up", you lose in the castle characters' personalities not being animated. Adults who grew up as kids enchanted by the original will think "this is kinda cool", but young kids are gonna see the Lumiere and Cogsworth and Chip and not be as drawn in. Be Our Guest is underwhelming in live action. When you scale it back to make it "realish", it just seems meh.
The original is short (less than 90 mins), and its biggest flaw is that the transition from her being a scared prisoner to in love with him isn't developed enough. It doesn't feel earned or buyable. The original spends like 7 mins of film time with them talking about books, and that takes her from scared prisoner to in love. This is where the Stockholm Syndrome talk comes from- it's not not so much the situation as that the change is never earned from a plot/emotion perspective. The live action is targeted more toward adults (who grew up on the original) than kids. And it tacks about 5 mins of new plot on here to try to enhance it, but it's still not enough. The emotion of how she goes from terrified to in love doesn't feel real in the time/plot allotted for transition, especially for adults.
The movie is a good companion piece for those nostalgic about the original, but as a standalone piece, it's nothing special, and behind the other new Disney live actions. My young kids will be much more entertained/intrigued by the original than they will by this.
Took my 3 and 6yr old today and they loved it. My 3r old daughter left the movie with a huge smile on her face and wants to see it again tomorrow.
I thought it was very well done as well.
I thought it was very well done as well.
I felt the cast was almost distractingly English, like it was made for the BBC
JJxvi said:
I felt the cast was almost distractingly English, like it was made for the BBC
Would you rather them be French like the actual story?
No, and obviously not every actor in it even was, it's just like a feeling I get, like things with lots of those actors switches me into a different tone or something
Luke Evans' performance mainly made me wish Gaston was played by Cary Elwes
Of all the actors you could name, that seems like kind of an odd choice.JJxvi said:
Luke Evans' performance mainly made me wish Gaston was played by Cary Elwes
Just got home and I absolutely loved it. The very deftly filled in a couple plot holes from the original and I thought the new songs mixed in well. The Mencken/Ashman score was just so good.
Audra McDonald as the wardrobe was amazing casting and when she started singing at the end...perfection.
The big numbers were really well done, particularly the opening number and Gaston's big number. Be our Guest was great, but hard to live up to Jerry Orbach.
Audra McDonald as the wardrobe was amazing casting and when she started singing at the end...perfection.
The big numbers were really well done, particularly the opening number and Gaston's big number. Be our Guest was great, but hard to live up to Jerry Orbach.
I thought McGregor and McKellan were excellent together. The additional scenes fit, although the backstory for Belle's mother seemed unnecessary. Fantastic cast.
WAY too much political gay crap hamfisted in. Was good otherwise.
Cromagnum said:
WAY too much political gay crap hamfisted in. Was good otherwise.
Really? 2 guys dancing for 3 seconds?
Yeah, month is superb for movie lovers like me. I have watch the two, Kong and Beauty and the Beast. I'm looking forward watching Power Rangers soon!
Featured Stories
See All
As A&M's QB1, Reed tasked with replicating QB production of the past
by Olin Buchanan
11:28
1h ago
601
44:36
3m ago
39
Reed Report: Donald Sloan remembers his iconic dunk on the Brazos
by Luke Evangelist
31:55
4h ago
594
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 17
by Matthew Dawson
Presenting Texas Aggies United's Aggies in Vegas Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
Legalize-It-Ags
State of Louisiana funneling money to NIL for LSU
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
142
TAMUHighlights
State of Louisiana funneling money to NIL for LSU
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
85