Beauty and the Beast

Cinecolor==high quality look to it--mre blue and red than usual but cannot achieve yellow on banana and some other colors kid eating candy in badroom---fairytale character on wall comes to life and she is transported to dreamland.

IMDB has a nice explanation as to why the colors used in "Beauty and the Beast" are so unusual for a color cartoon. It seems that the new three-color process developed by Technicolor was licensed exclusively to Disney at this time, so other companies making cartoons would usually just make them in black & white. Occasionally (such as with the Fleischer Brothers' version of Cinderella as well as this cartoon), studios used the cheaper and inferior Cinecolor to make color-ish cartoons. Yes, they had colors but mostly variations on reddish-orange and blueish-green. Over time, these cartoons tend to degrade and the colors become very pink or orangy. Fortunately, the copies recently posted to HBOMax have been restored and look great for these sorts of primitive color films.

The story consists of a little girl going to bed and the Sandman comes off the wall and sprinkles fairy dust on her...and she falls asleep and ends up in a fairytale world. There, things are swell until a monster shows up and so it's up to the characters to come to the little girl's rescue.

Like so many Harmon-Ising directed cartoons of the era, the emphasis in this one is on being cute and singing...making it a bit insipid to watch today. Not terrible because the animation is so nice, but lacking the comedy of later Looney Tunes shorts.

Love animation, it was a big part of my life as a child, particularly Disney, Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry, and still love it whether it's film, television or cartoons. Actually appreciate it even more through young adults eyes, due to having more knowledge of it, various animation styles, studios, directors and how it all works.

'Beauty and the Beast' is not one of Friz Freleng's, a director who did many great cartoons and a director held in high admiration by me, best, not being one of his funniest, wittiest or freshest. For relatively early Freleng, 'Beauty and the Beast' is worth watching though he would do much better later. It is never what one would call properly hilarious (but is never unfunny), Freleng's later efforts show more evenness and confidence in directing and the story.

It is quite thin in terms of story and the structure is basically an excuse to string the events along. It is not terribly imaginative and occasionally momentum is not always there.

Not all the characters are given enough time or personality to properly shine.

However, many of the characters are fun, Humpty Dumpty in particular, and the protagonist is appealing.

The cartoon has a lot of very amusing moments, especially with Humpty Dumpty and the ducks, some variety and there is a good deal of liveliness. The conflict is nicely done and while there is a good deal of cuteness and charm the sentimentality doesn't kick in too much.

Animation is very good, it's fluid in movement, crisp in shading, vibrant and very meticulous in detail. The music is lovely on the ears, lushly orchestrated, full of lively energy and characterful in rhythm, not only adding to the action but also enhancing it.

Overall, worth watching. 7/10 Bethany Cox

There is some controversy in the world of Looney Tune & Merrie Melody fandom if the main character of this short, the little girl who enters The Land of Slumber, is indeed the long-running comic book character Mary Jane.

Sniffles the mouse was once described as "Chuck Jones' first star", but he only appeared in about a dozen Merrie Melodies and one Looney Tune in the 1930s and 1940s. He did have a cameo appearance in 1994's "Space Jam", but the fans who remember him at all generally remember his backup feature in the comic book "Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies" (later simply "Looney Tunes") that ran continuously from 1941 thru 1961, a run matched only by Bugs and Porky. The feature had him teamed up with a little girl named Mary Jane, and in fact after the first issue was re-titled "Sniffles and Mary Jane". (In the 1950s this was renamed "Mary Jane and Sniffles".)

So is the "Beauty" of "Beauty and the Beast" in fact Mary Jane? The evidence in its favor includes: 1) The little girl looks like Mary Jane as she was drawn in the very first comic books; 2) She enters Dreamland the same way in the short and the comics, by having magic sand sprinkled on her; 3) In her adventures, she shrinks to toy (or mouse) size; and 4) In her adventures, toys and dolls come to life. Furthermore, although she is not called (or credited as) "Mary Jane" in the short, she is not called any other name either, so the short does not rule out that she MIGHT be the Mary Jane of comic fame.

In fairness, the creator of Mary Jane for the comics, editor Chase Craig (who named the character after his wife) never claimed to have seen "Beauty and the Beast". (In fact, when he developed the series, only three "Sniffles" cartoons existed and he had only seen one of them!)

Officially, the similarity of "Beauty" to Mary Jane is considered a bit of a coincidence, nothing more. But fans will always wonder if perhaps, in the back of the creator's mind, the little girl with the late night snack became Sniffles' longstanding friend.

(For the record, both the little girl and her tin soldier friend from this short make a return appearance in "Those Beautiful Dames" later that same year.)