>"I HATE THE BEAUTY AND THE BEAST REMAKE" "Oh

>>91012574
Is it better then that extremely shitty remake from a few years ago?

>>91012574
It might be a solid movie, but I dislike the principle behind it and thus refuse to see it. I think that the mechanisms behind its creation are creatively devoid and part of why major Hollywood features are such a wasteland right now.

>>91012714
You do realize not every adaption of Beauty and the Beast is a remake of the Disney movie, right?

I don't like the animated Beauty and the Beast because it's a creepy stockholm syndrome romance.
I don't like Disney live action because they're all shit.
I very much doubt I'd like live action Beauty and the Beast.

Most of the songs were bad, especially if they involved Belle.

They added stuff that didn't really add to the plot and they took out things like making beast seem likable at all.

Pirated it though.

Question. Was there weird fart noises in the scene where he's talking to her before she runs off to her dad or was that the cam rip I saw?

>>91013808
The camrip.

>>91012574
yeah wasn't interested before i heard the music in a book store and i left the book store because of it.

not going to see it

I'll tell you what.

"Gaston" and "Be Our Guest" are pretty good, and thats all i ask from this movie.

I'm not going to watch it though

Heard the sound track in a BN too. I loved the movie and the songs. But then the animated movie was the first movie I ever saw in theaters.

>>91013874
Damn I was almost hoping it was actually in there.

>>91012799
>t. Doesn't know what Stockholm syndrome is

they cut human again even though it was technically written for the original film and not an invention of the Broadway show (which was bs anyway because they used an instrumental version of Home as a leitmotif and used lyrics from the stage version of Gaston anyway)

0/10

>>91014022
>Belle being captured by the beast and is essentially his prisoner
>Begins to fall in love with her captor.

It's pretty Stockholmy.

>>91014064
>chooses to stay there
>doesn't spend much time with the beast
>goes out of her way to piss him off, something people with SS don't do because it's rooted in survival instinct
>only starts to warm up to him once he stops being a rude piece of shit, not because she sympathizes with the reason for his negative behavior
>leaves intending to never come back and only returns to stop him from being murdered
Oh and here's the kicker
>She explicitly doesn't fall in love with him until after he releases her

If anything, it's Lima syndrome on the beast's behalf.

>>91012727
>but I dislike the principle behind it and thus refuse to see it.

This. I'm of the exact same perspective.

It would be like remaking The Godfather. There's absolutely no need as the original is already pretty great.

If you're going to remake stuff remake things which were really good the first time, remake stuff which had good ideas but for some reason didn't quite succeed.

it was mostly good but the ballroom scene is a disgrace... also ignoring all the le fou gay stuff, why was he so sinister?? Like he fondles Gaston while he's sleeping?

File: BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGE.gif (84KB, 600x543px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 600x543px

>>91012574
>another live-action Disney remake
>with a crappy Gaston
>that's not even roughly the size of a BAAAAARGE
Go shill your crap elsewhere

>>91012574
DUDE REBOOTS LMAO
DUDE REMAKE IT IN LIVE ACTION BECAUSE ANIMATION IS FOR KIDS LMAO

I watched the original yesterday.
IT's better than what some people remember it as afaik. Gaston is more evil than most people think. Beast is more sympathetic. It's not really stockholm syndrom. The songs are fucking great as well.

Point being, it really didn't need a remake, especially not with Emma "Just feminist my shit up" Watson. There was enough of a feminist message in the original. Hell, you could make a case that the movie portrays men bad.
>Main bad guy is just a dude who wants to fuck her
>Beelle changes her main love interest so much he doesnt resemble his original personality anymore teaching women if you don't like your man, change him so much to fit your idea of the perfect man more
but im reaching here. All I'm saying is you could say this stuff too. The movie is way deeper than anyone gives it credit for. It just didnt fucking need this movie

>>91012574
I'm not going to watch it because of the gay

>>91014733
I wouldn't even mind if they went somewhere different with it, if the art design was different, if they tried telling the story from a different angle, but it's practically the same as the animated film, just in live-action. It's such a cynical cash-grab; I know most Hollywood features are, but they could at least attempt to do something creative with it instead of just 'THING YOU LIKED BEFORE BUT WITH REAL PEOPLE'.

It's honestly kind of insulting.

>>91015597
Gays are evil.

>>91014733
>remake stuff which had good ideas but for some reason didn't quite succeed.
Exactly why Pete's Dragon imo is the best remake. Even though the original was good, they improved upon the story and changed a lot to make it a worthwhile sequel.

File: unknown.png (543KB, 884x587px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 884x587px

>>91016113
I went to watch it being a huge fan of the original animation and felt that they improved it.
Belle and her father are given far more depth.
Beast is different from the original in that he's very clearly still a prince with the education to match, and the romance between him and Belle is far more believable in this one with multiple added scenes.
Days in the Sun and Evermore might just be my favourite songs even if they're new additions.

I was incredibly upset that Beast didn't roar as Belle left the castle though.

I'm surprised you guys hate this movie so much given the amount of crap you guys usually eat with a huge smile on your face.

Steven Universe, Capeshit movies, Pixar films, anything with singing animals....

>>91012574
Emma was a terrible Belle and all the CGI faces were super uncanny valley.

The good parts were the parts almost straight from the film. The bad parts were the almost entirely new parts.

Evans was probably the best part of the movie.

>>91012574
>>"I never went to see that pile of shit!"
I did and it was a piece shit, shill for better movies bruh

I like the movie because it's every girls' dream to be locked in a dungeon by a monster. They all have stockholm syndrome. They love it.

>>91012574
No one will remember it in like 2 years. The original will probably last for all of animation history.

>>91012574
Join the boycott campagn here:
https://lifepetitions.com/petition/disney-includes-exclusively-gay-moment-in-beauty-and-the-beast-sign-the-boycott?utm_source=lifesitenews&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=callout

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/beauty-and-the-beast-boycott-petition-reaches-100000-and-continues-to-climb

>>91012574
>no lumberjack mecha

It's shit.

File: 1432183419989.jpg (31KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 569x428px

>>91012574
Well you don't have to eat shit to know that you shouldn't.

I personally have nothing against the live action Beauty and the Beast per se but it's not the type of movie I catch in theaters. Maybe when it's on Netflix or something.

>>91016113
Underrated post!

>>91016113
Yeah I hate that cunt Emma Watson too.

I don't see why I should see it. Don't give two shits about Emma Watson and her being a feminist, or them making Lefou gay or whatever, but I don't see why they felt the need to remake it.

Btw, does anybody know if the Pete's Dragon remake was any good?

>>91012714
Are you talking shit about Beastly?

It is pretty much the same thing as the animated film, plus some added fluff that adds nothing to the story and some new songs that are immediately forgettable

I'd only recommend it to the easily amused types that want to watch the exactly same movie but with live action actors giving half assed performances and weaker versions of the original sons. Everyone else should just save their money and go watch the original animated movie

>>91021071
I think it's the only Disney remake that makes a decent case for doing them in the first place.

>>91012574
I went in expecting it to be bad lime I thought the jungle book remake was. It was a lot better than thlli thought it would be. The added stuff was pretty weak and unnecessary though, and the fight scenes were pretty awful (especially the one with the furniture). Emma was not great either. I enjoyed it though, so I was happy.

File: tmp_14865-14807991388181014260262.png (456KB, 574x532px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 574x532px

>>91020778
>>91016301
/pol/ was a mistake

>>91020778
>Not realizing that guy was so gay for Gaston in the original
>All these "shoehorning" complaints
wew

I do hate it, and I don't plan on seeing it. Does that trigger you? Deal with it. Buy twenty tickets out of spite, if you must. I just don't care.

>>91012799

>Doesn't like Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang

>>91012574
> dont have money to see it.
> Give it a benifit of a doubt.
> dress gets re-designed by emma because 'ETS NAUT FEMINUZT ENUFF'
> She potentialy ruins original dress designers job over this abombination of a dress in the film.
> Dont give a fuck about Lefou being gay (For Gaston, seriously who wouldent be?)
> Give Gaston a more sympethetic backstory of being a captian and being in a war for his actions.
This only makes me like this version of Gaston more.

>>91023563
>Anytime someone breaks my gay hugbox it's a /pol/ nazi conspiracy
This is more aggravating than the gay shit itself, /co/ is so fucking sensitive.

I only watch romantic movies if they're animated, I won't go watch a random romantic movie just because disney made it, fucking 3DPD

If I liked the 2D one I will just rewatch the 2D one, why waste my money for this shit?

>>91024316
When did I say it's a nazi conspiracy? I just don't like sharing a website with scum that are anti-human rights.

>>91012574
It was fun to play Where's Waldo with the black people, because if there were villagers on screen, there was a black one somewhere.

I did see it

It has this very creepy uncanny valley effect, despite all of it being real people. The outfits and too clean and everybody singing ramrod stiff just comes off as weird. Gaston and the Beast weren't intimidating due to designs that don't transition well into realism.

>>91014733
>If you're going to remake stuff remake things which were really good the first time, remake stuff which had good ideas but for some reason didn't quite succeed.

Ultimately from a creative standpoint that's absolutely true, and should be the sole reason to remake or reboot a franchise or pre-existing property. Remaking something that was well done and appreciated the first time around just leaves you with the burden of trying to distinct yourself from the original, forcing a writer to add unnecesary and underwritten shit to an already complete story just to try and identify it and justify remaking it. It implies a flaw that simply wasn't there.

But from a corporate standpoint, there's no point in remaking something that initially failed. "It had its chance" is basically the corporate mantra. The point of remakes, in the entertainment industry, is that the original has a built in audience that you can guarantee ticket prices from--unlike, say, remaking the Tank Girl movie where most people will just scoff, remember how bad the original was, and completely dismiss it. While people will dismiss remakes for their frivolous existence, it isn't nearly as much dismissal that remakes will get if the original sucked too.

tl;dr blame corporate and prepare your anus for Mary Poppins Returns.

>>91012799
>because it's a creepy stockholm syndrome romance.

You are one creepy motherfucker fo saying that.
Some 25 years old fatty emo or something near from that.

I don't really want to support any of these live-action remakes. I want Disney to make new shit, preferably animated shit.

>>91012574
t. Disney live action shill

I refuse to see it because all of the previous live action adaptation of their classics were crap and they did nothing to convince me this will be any different.

Why even make a live action version of something that's already a great animated movie? There's no fucking way you can make it better.

>>91016559
Atleast those are new.

>Stockholm syndrome
The story is a product of it's time. Fathers gave away their daughters to well-off gentlemen. The girl found herself in the power of a man she barely knew and completely dependent on his good will. Stockholm syndrome kicking in was the substitute for love.

>>91016559
1) If you don't like any of those things, why are you even here, nigger, to troll?

2) None of those things are an inferior live action version of an already existing excellent animated movie.

>>91020969
It's sad how she went from a childhood idol to crazy feminazi.

>>91021197
I'm kinda amazed they went with a sequel instead of a remake for Tron. I love Tron but I will never claim it's a well-made film.

>>91027466
it was obvious joke fag

>>91028449

it is actually weird and creepy and I dont know why its trying to be a feminist thing now adays

>>91028145
>Gets sold into slavery by her father
>Gets kept imprisoned in a castle by a man prone to fits of rage
>Eventually falls in love with him
How is that not creepy?

>>91012799
>stockholm syndrome
How do you even misinterpret a children's movie this hard?

>>91028075
By that metric your best option would be to remake films that did decent to good, or are simply cult classics, but are recognized as flawed. That way you have the built-in audience and room to improve the narrative.

>>91028691
Yeah, Tron is a franchise that's never fully reached its potential at any point in time. Nobody seems to be too attached to any particular characters or lore from Tron as much as the concept, designs and music. The original film could've even been kept intact and a soft reboot could've featured completely unrelated characters and everything.

I know there's plans for a soft reboot starring Jared Leto. Which sounds like Disney is actively trying to kill the franchise, because I can't imagine that sort of move makes sense even to out-of-touch execs. But I hope they do right by the franchise and its fans and even reboot it properly or finish the trilogy.

>terrible cgi
>gay propaganda scene
>wooden actors
>unnecessary remake

Well, OP? What reason is there to see it in the first place?

>Beast looks worse
>All the animated objects look worse
>Emma Watson acts like a bitch in every movie she is in
>Gaston wasn't as fun

>>91028793
There's what it should be: the old female fantay of a woman changing a beast into a prince with her love. And then there's what it is: father delivers his daughter into captivity with a literal monster who's only good quality that she manages to bring out is NOT acting violent.

You'd think even an idiot would realize that the way you make someone like you is act nice, but the Beast actually has to have character development to come to this conclusion.

>>91028794
Yeah, but corporations aren't known for taking risks. 'Decent' is a risk; 'seminal classic' is a guaranteed money in the bag even if everyone hates it. Everyone deplored the 2014 Annie but surprise surprise, it was a box office success. It happens often enough that they stop caring about critical reception over box office numbers.

>>91028713
I WAS JUST PRETENDING LEL
PathaticSkinner.jpg

>>91012574

I already saw it. 20 years ago. In animated form. It was pretty good, you should check it out instead of getting mad.

>>91029162
But you can't regurgitate the same shit endlessly. Not if you want sustainable success. They own Pixar now, but even that has been doing shitty sequels and 5/10 movies lately. There ARE alternatives still, even if they think they've got everything under wraps. People will start going to Laika and foreign animated films if all they get from Disney is the same shit they've seen before.

>>91012574
Dude, I'll see it when I'm able to see it for free. I'm not giving my money to something that I expect to hate.

>>91016195
I always thought they'd eventually do a remake so they could put some of the songs from the stage show on screen. Me, If I Can't Love Her, and Home are all great. This shit didn't even have Human Again.

>>91012574
"Hi! I represent OP. I am smart. I composedly state my views. They are correct."
>"I OPPOSE OP'S VIEWS WITH MY ENTIRE BEING! I AM NEUROTIC AND TOTALLY ILLOGICAL!"

>>91029162
Annie only made slightly more than double it's budget, it was a minor success.

>>91012574
Forget voting with my wallet, better watch every movie that comes out regardless of the trailer so that anon respects my opinion.

>>91012574
I'm not watching a fucking movie that literally played the gay card to get positive reviews after their test audience and critic selection only have them middling reviews. The before and after timelines on the reviews are really staggering.

>Prior to announcement, the general consensus was that it was 'meh", just another spring release
>After the announcement suddenly critics are gushing.

Yeah, not doing this shit, yo.

>>91023724
He also drooled over the triplets.

Bi Erasure?

File: beauty and the beast dress.jpg (310KB, 523x1974px) Image search: [Google]

310KB, 523x1974px

Disney live action remakes that are worse than the original cartoons will be remembered as fondly as Avatar.

>>91027466
Human rights of forcing everybody to like a shitty cashgrab movie?

File: exceptional success.png (521KB, 720x541px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 720x541px

>>91016559

"People keep coming up with new ways to celebrate mediocrity, but if someone is genuinely exceptional..."

>>91032366
costume autism is delightful

>>91032465
What? No, I mean not boycotting Disney because they are okay with a group of people existing you retard. The movie could be shit for all I know.

>>91032366
I have no idea what the fuck they're talking about with the entire bottom half of that image, but is there a comparison shot of some kind of dress they had ready before Watson decided she needed to make her own? I think I heard that they had one ready or something but she didn't like it so they made another one.

>>91034640
I'm gonna get woke here for a second and say I'm almost sure gay Lefou is nothing more than an economic publicity stunt. Gays are represented so much in media these days that there isn't any real "progressive" or "controversial" statement to it like there would've been ten or fifteen years ago.

It's inconsequential to the ultimate plot and wasn't advertised. It doesn't "mean" anything other than word-of-mouth marketing that this new movie has some kind of new twist, some edge to convince people it's new enough to warrant seeing. A way of letting you know Disney's "still with it."

>>91035852
Hold on, what? It isn't shocking to have gay characters anymore but they were doing it for shock value? You realize that gay characters are still underrepresented in media, right?

File: 320x240_14.jpg (12KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x240px

>>91028760
>>Gets sold into slavery by her father
Jesus fucking Christ, you didn't even watch the movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKiR81olE6I
>Take me instead.
>No, Belle! I won't let you do this
>I'm old, I've lived a full life.

>watching a live action beauty and the beast movie
>when you could be doing better things with your time and money
>like (unironically) shitposting on a cambodian linguistics support blog

File: The_Bimbettes_Fawning.jpg (197KB, 746x988px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 746x988px

Haven't seen it yet...did they have the Bimbettes?

File: ebaa687f6dbe494a8aa1b1ac0865aae8.jpg (3MB, 2320x3000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2320x3000px

Reminder that the CWs Beauty And The Underwear Model is still the worst version of Beauty And The Beast.

Disney remake movie was fun though. My parents enjoyed it, particularly Be Our Guest.

File: angry dad.jpg (52KB, 465x498px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 465x498px

Remaking a film just to sell it again is a really fucking loathsome business practice and should not be supported.
If you go see this you are directly responsible for every coming Spiderman reboot that will ever exist.

>>91012574
>>"I HATE EATING HUMAN SHIT"
>"Oh when did you taste shit?"
>>"I never tasted that pile of shit!"
>"Well maybe you should taste it before saying you hate it. It really doesn't make sense to say you hate something you haven't experienced"
>"I REFUSE"

Disney shills should be shot in the streets.

You just described most people on this site when attempting to criticize any movie/game/comic.

>>91037103

Yeah, but they weren't blonde.

>>91029162
I blame black people for this

Enma Watson never stopped being Emma Waston pretending to be Belle.

>>91012574
it's called dedication. your unnamed opposite did the right thing.

File: 1480521132815a.jpg (420KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1536x2048px

>>91012574
>>91013808
Saw it in theaters day one during the morning to avoid the afternoon crowd. It's ok. Not as good as the cartoon. [Spoilers] Lots of black people that felt out of place. Two gay moments. Mrs. Potts didn't bring the heart the cartoon version did. CGI beast was hit or miss from scene to scene. Emma be pushing Muh Femonizam left, and right.

Gaston doesn't sing the line "And every last inch of me is covered with hair" because hes a cold blooded pretty boy now.

They try forcing a Toy Story 3 type death scene at the end where the enchanted objects almost die.
Also had some interacial scenes between white men and black females.

Also people moving around in leather seat cushions can sometimes sound like farting noses.

>>91014733
>It would be like remaking The Godfather
Tom Hagen would probably now be an adopted black kid.

>>91012574
Literally who on god's green earth could you possibly be quoting?

>>91013970
>the animated movie was the first movie I ever saw in theaters.
You too?

File: 3ceb2194bef5072516c0bb726943de4f.jpg (1MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x3264px

>>91014048
They stuffed some new generic shit songs in the new film when they could have just used the Broadway song do to Disney greed. They are trying to win a best original song Oscar. The new Beast song which he sings after Belle leaves is a watered down version of the Broadway version.

>>91036283
>underrepresented in media
That's an outright lie.

File: 1475306295712jb.jpg (791KB, 2061x1957px) Image search: [Google]

791KB, 2061x1957px

>>91016544
>Beast is different from the original
Thats one of the many problems. Instead of giving us an actual Beast they gave us a handsome Twilight Edward Cullens looking beast whos education, refined, and has a british accent. A beast designed to make the female viewers fall in love/get wet over.

I actually made this observation, and image long before I even knew who the director was. I guess I kinda hit it on the nose.

>>91037921
That's because CW makes the worst version of everything then slaps on a few pounds of drama to pander to people who like CW stuff.

>>91046185
I can name hundreds of straight characters and basically no gay characters from anything. Why is that?

>>91046614

I believe even the general CW audience hated it.

Instead its fanbase was made up of 40+ housewives who lust after the beast and spend all day tweeting about it.

They followed him to his new show and were outraged when it was cancelled after 1 season.

File: 1488763167700.jpg (166KB, 746x861px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 746x861px

>>91016113
>it really didn't need a remake, especially not with Emma "Just feminist my shit up" Watson. There was enough of a feminist message in the original.

Agreed. Even Angela Lansbury (the original voice of Mr Potts) saw Emma Watsons remake as nothing more than an unnecessary cash grab.


>“I was a bit taken aback, naturally. I thought, ‘Why? Why are we doing this over again?’”
>“I don’t know why they’re doing it. But they are.
>“I can’t understand what they’re going to do with it that will be better than what we’ve already done.”
>I don’t blame them for doing it, but, I’m sorry, they’re not really on our territory."

>>91046344
The thing about that is that if you truly wanted beast to be a monster then the Prince at the end of the movie is not who Belle fell in love with. In the original Beast couldn't even READ. It's even hard to believe that he knew how to waltz.

In this version he's consistently the same Character, and the beastly aspects are focused into his bitterness, anger and spite, with the beastly behaviour largely due to his curse such as not being able to use cutlery.

File: Capturea.jpg (539KB, 1720x1170px) Image search: [Google]

539KB, 1720x1170px

>>91047587
You can say what you wish about his personality, but there is absolutely no excuse for making him a handsome Beast other than trying to make an attractive monster that older female viewers could say "You know hes not so bad looking. I could work with that".
Pandering to that demographic killed what could have been an awesome Beast design.

>>91033254
Isn't it just? Costumers ain't nothin' to fuck with.

>>91046949
Angela Lansbury is still alive?

>>91029322
>They own Pixar now, but even that has been doing shitty sequels and 5/10 movies lately.
And yet, Finding Dory still made a billion dollars, Toy Story 4 will call in a limo for the entire Pixar staff to ride on the way to the bank, and original films like Inside Out are still enough to give Pixar some credibility.

>>91029122
>There's what it should be: the old female fantay of a woman changing a beast into a prince with her love. And then there's what it is: father delivers his daughter into captivity with a literal monster who's only good quality that she manages to bring out is NOT acting violent.

Try again autist.
>>91036329

File: Angela Best girl 1.jpg (93KB, 1398x416px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1398x416px

>>91048966
Yes, and still very much active.

>>91028075
Anon at the start of the comment chain, this is what I mean.

In general, I think that the only thing corporations really offer art is higher budgets and the opportunity for distribution. I think executives meddle in the process far too much, and that's the issue.

>>91028518
>1) If you don't like any of those things, why are you even here, nigger, to troll?

Not that anon, but the guy could have an interest in independent animation and comic books.

I'm not one to shit on people's tastes but he's right in that most people on /co/ have a steady diet of corporate entertainment designed primarily to mollify children. Which, fine, I enjoy SpongeBob when I'm high too, but that's what it is at the end of the day.

>>91032366
>Bitch you are you? Can you sew? You can't even act?

Holy shit, fashion Tumblr sounds catty as fuck, maybe I should actually check a Tumblr blog out lmao.

>>91045198
I will never understand people's obsession with black representation with period pieces. Beauty and the Beast takes place what, mid 1700s 1800s France? Why would there be so many black people? Same with Frozen. There is even less reason for there to be black people in Norway and yet people still complain.

Fucking movie can be placed in Poland and people will still bitch about the lack of POC representation.

>>91036283
There are different types of marketing--word of mouth is how Pokemon Go got so fucking huge last summer. By making an inconsequential character openly gay and not advertising it they're trying to let word of mouth get them a special interest audience without alienating their core audience (families and moms) as well. It isn't "sneaking past censors" like the shit you see on kids cartoons, they have entire teams of writers and marketers who know damn fucking well what they're doing.

>>91051174
This anon's got it.

Representation of minority groups is a good thing, but a lot of entertainment companies use the promise of it to get activists interested in content they'd otherwise have no reason to purchase a copy of or by a ticket for.

It's basically a ruse to take advantage of slacktivism, unfortunately.

It's what that one season of South Park was basically about. It's advantageous for these companies when you don't know what's genuinely a creative choice
>Your species took PC and twisted it for evil purposes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYP7BW1XYeo

File: bugsB.jpg (101KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 900x900px

>>91012574
>give disney money or your opinions aren't valid

STFU shill