- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Beauty and the Beast thoughts and discussions
Posted on 3/19/17 at 7:26 am to LSUZombie
Posted on 3/19/17 at 7:26 am to LSUZombie
quote:
Yeah, frick all that "backstory" and "character development."
The backstory stuff was ok. The extra songs were largely garbage.
It wasn't a great film. Sorry for you folks who are obviously invested in it being one.
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 7:28 am
1
Posted on 3/19/17 at 7:29 am to djsdawg
quote:
That take of yours was always a dumb one.
Not my take. That's the impression they were giving. I'm not supposed to believe the director on the content of his film? I mean, you're kind of making my point for me if this is your stance. If I were to take their public comments as a guide, then my kids would not have seen the film. My own good judgment is why my girls did see it.
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 7:55 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 8:08 am to imjustafatkid
Now that it has settled a little bit, I have another gripe about it.
I don't like how the beast gave Belle his library as an afterthought in this one. In the original it was his Grand gesture gift to Belle. In the new one he was just "oh, you like it? You can have it I guess"
I don't like how the beast gave Belle his library as an afterthought in this one. In the original it was his Grand gesture gift to Belle. In the new one he was just "oh, you like it? You can have it I guess"
Posted on 3/19/17 at 8:08 am to imjustafatkid
So you thought the directors comments made the movie inappropriate for your children? Sounds like your daughters will be naive as hell
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 8:09 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 8:22 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
My wife, daughter and niece saw it Friday afternoon. They loved it.
My wife, who constantly makes fun of my son and me for seeing movies repeatedly in the theater said she would pay to see it again in the theater.
They all thought Watson did well singing and the gay moment was so subtle you would only notice it if you were looking for it (and knew when to be looking for it).
My wife, who constantly makes fun of my son and me for seeing movies repeatedly in the theater said she would pay to see it again in the theater.
They all thought Watson did well singing and the gay moment was so subtle you would only notice it if you were looking for it (and knew when to be looking for it).
Posted on 3/19/17 at 9:19 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
So you thought the directors comments made the movie inappropriate for your children?
Are you dense? The guy said it was an "exclusively" gay moment. He's the director. Who else am I supposed to believe about the film?
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 9:35 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 9:23 am to udtiger
quote:
They all thought Watson did well singing
She did ok, but it seemed like they cut some of her singing short, for lack of a better term. Like notes that should have been held longer just weren't. The only reason I can think to do that is due to her own vocal abilities.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 9:39 am to imjustafatkid
Are people really still arguing about whether this movie was "appropriate" for kids?
There was nothing inappropriate at all in the whole movie IMO.
The "gay scenes" were all done for comedic effect and most kids probably wouldn't even have caught them.
Honesty I thought people would be up in arms about the guy who was happy wearing the dress, I found that hilarious
There was nothing inappropriate at all in the whole movie IMO.
The "gay scenes" were all done for comedic effect and most kids probably wouldn't even have caught them.
Honesty I thought people would be up in arms about the guy who was happy wearing the dress, I found that hilarious
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 9:41 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 9:39 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Not my take. That's the impression they were giving.
No, It was the impression that you and no one else took.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:17 am to Displaced
Went Friday night. I'm a huge Disney fan and so is the rest of the family. I thought movie was really well done. It's amazing what they can do with CGI!
I don't have an issue with Emma Watson as Belle. Yes, they could have found someone with a bit more singing chops, and I always thought Belle was not meant to be so stick-thin... but I thought she did a great job. Her facial expressions and her timing were spot on. And yes I know she's acting, but still.
As far as Le Fou... he was flaming as all get-out and very stalker-ish. But that's kind of what you might expect from a right-hand friend. I could see some of Johnny Football's hangers-on acting the same way. The only thing even approaching open gayness was the dance at the end which showed two guys dancing for about a 1/3 of a second, and that was nothing more than a follow up to the earlier scnee where the one guy likes how he is dressed.
Remember this is a movie and a story primarily for kids. I don't think any kid walked away from that movie thinking Le Fou liked the pole and Belle liked bestiality.
I don't have an issue with Emma Watson as Belle. Yes, they could have found someone with a bit more singing chops, and I always thought Belle was not meant to be so stick-thin... but I thought she did a great job. Her facial expressions and her timing were spot on. And yes I know she's acting, but still.
As far as Le Fou... he was flaming as all get-out and very stalker-ish. But that's kind of what you might expect from a right-hand friend. I could see some of Johnny Football's hangers-on acting the same way. The only thing even approaching open gayness was the dance at the end which showed two guys dancing for about a 1/3 of a second, and that was nothing more than a follow up to the earlier scnee where the one guy likes how he is dressed.
Remember this is a movie and a story primarily for kids. I don't think any kid walked away from that movie thinking Le Fou liked the pole and Belle liked bestiality.
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 10:21 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:26 am to imjustafatkid
....It's ...Disney.
If it were one of their other studios they own, like touchstone or Weinstein, yeah screen it. But anything Disney makes, I'd trust is okay for kids.
If it were one of their other studios they own, like touchstone or Weinstein, yeah screen it. But anything Disney makes, I'd trust is okay for kids.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:29 am to JabarkusRussell
The cruel father makes it easier to forgive Adam for being such a dick. It was a total scapegoat.
I actually liked the enchantress being a part of the story and always in the background.
I actually liked the enchantress being a part of the story and always in the background.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:29 am to Tiger1242
They say damn and damnation
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:29 am to imjustafatkid
Touchstone is not Disney. Try again.
This post was edited on 3/19/17 at 10:53 am
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:31 am to Tiger1242
A guy wearing a dress and liking it has always been funny and used in countless movies. However, saying he is a gay character cause an uproar.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:36 am to Napoleon
Touchstone doesn't exist anymore.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:46 am to Displaced
Taking my daughter to see it today. She's really excited. I have muted hopes.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:47 am to Breesus
What I thought was interesting was the power of the enchantress. While she was shown as a good entity. She is basically the most powerful Disney villian ever shown.
First she turns dozens of people into household objects with a finite amount of time before certain death. Then erases the seat of an entire fiefdom. All these towns; quiet provincial towns, with no prince or landlord. No protection from invaders. The whole system erased. Then the enchantress erases the minds of the town's people. Makes them forget family, wives, husbands, children. All of these people have their lives ruined because one douchebag royal won't let a crone stay in his castle? How many castles do you think would let in a stranger? You think Prince charming's dad would have let that lady into his son's get laid party? Hell no.
So that lady, was ready to kill a hundred people, over a trivial matter?
One that she set up from the beginning.
Powerful witchcraft, and a very questionable person for sure. Could easily be seen as a villain.
First she turns dozens of people into household objects with a finite amount of time before certain death. Then erases the seat of an entire fiefdom. All these towns; quiet provincial towns, with no prince or landlord. No protection from invaders. The whole system erased. Then the enchantress erases the minds of the town's people. Makes them forget family, wives, husbands, children. All of these people have their lives ruined because one douchebag royal won't let a crone stay in his castle? How many castles do you think would let in a stranger? You think Prince charming's dad would have let that lady into his son's get laid party? Hell no.
So that lady, was ready to kill a hundred people, over a trivial matter?
One that she set up from the beginning.
Powerful witchcraft, and a very questionable person for sure. Could easily be seen as a villain.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:47 am to imjustafatkid
There was an article where she mentioned that she took singing lessons before they made the movie. I will try to find it again.
Posted on 3/19/17 at 10:48 am to LucasP
Clever dichotomy in your post.
Bravo!
Bravo!
Page 7 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News