Is Beast too handsome in the live-action version? Should they

File: anigif_enhanced-buzz-5205-1389209668-19_preview.gif (62KB, 500x328px)

62KB, 500x328px

>>90746841
HE IS A SEXY BEAST!

>>90746841
My big problem is they gave Gaston a WHINY VOICE! If Gaston isn't a prettier fellow than the Beast, wtf is the point of the story?

>>90747727
snarky revisionist bullshit, thats the point

you saw Maleficent, right? Disney is very comfortable shitting all over its original stories for the sake of a modern "twist"

File: Change-Back-beast-6933557-300-225.jpg (16KB, 300x225px)

16KB, 300x225px

>>90746841

>>90746841
I think the real news here is that Emma Watson is a filthy fucking furry

>>90747767
>snarky revisionist bullshit
This is the Disney version of every fairy/folktale they use for "inspiration" and end up completely bastardizing. But doing the exact same process a second time makes it the worst thing ever, somehow.

>>90746841
Yes, he's too handsome. They forgot that the basic premise of the tale is falling in love with someone despite their hideous appearance. They've gone full Twilight.

Yeah, he's just a hairy Handsome Squidward

>>90746841
Beast in the original was pretty good-looking, too. It's not that he was suppose to be ugly like Shrek, it's that he was suppose to be scary. And I can't imagine this guy roaring at me being any more scary than just a big guy yelling at me. The level of fear Beast would instill in you was suppose to be like a Grizzly Bear roaring in my fucking face. Who could ever love someone harsh and fierce (a beast), not ugly and repulsive (Hunchback Notre Dame).

>>90748572
That makes senses seeing how it his asshole behavior that got him to turn into a beast. speaking of that they better not get rid of that.