La Belle et la Bête

Greetings again from the darkness. If you are looking for dancing tea cups or singing candelabras, you've come to the wrong movie. If you are looking for the Gothic approach to the dark psychological analysis of the original story … again, you've come to the wrong movie. Director Christophe Gans (Silent Hill, 2006) offers up a version that is neither animated Disney (1991) nor Jean Cocteau (1946), though his film does have a visual flair that will likely keep audiences (it's not for very young kids) engaged throughout.

The familiar story was first written by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villenueve in 1740, however, it's the revised version from Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont in 1756 that provides the fairy tale/fable that has been filmed so many times since. The story's genealogy based in France instills a bit more hope and responsibility in a project starring Vincent Cassel, Lea Seydoux and Andre Dussolier, and directed by the Frenchman Gans.

Ms. Seydoux is an admirable Belle, and her grace and beauty make for quite the contrast to her needy and entitled sisters. Her time in the castle with the Beast is limited, and therein is the film's biggest weakness. We never really see the transformation of the Beast to a man who repents, turns over a new leaf, and is worthy of love … it all just kind of happens thanks to the beautiful dresses. Mr. Gans and Sandra Vo-Anh co-wrote the script, and this misstep deflates the core of the story. We are on our own to interpret the messages of class warfare, greed, and judging others by looks. The focus instead is on the visual presentation, which at times is spectacular.

The set design and costumes are especially impressive and elaborate, and though the look of the Beast may not be precisely to your imagination, the film isn't shy about putting him front and center with the camera. Vincent Cassel's time as the Prince is pretty well done, and the CGI and explanation of the gold doe, nymph of the forest, magic healing water, pack of beagles and the curse are enough to move the story along … even if some details are lacking.

A bedtime story being read to two young kids is the framing device and might explain why the fantasy world is emphasized over the dark psychological undertones (more prevalent in the Cocteau version). While some might view the ending as somewhat mawkish, it's really nice to see happily-ever-after is not twisted into some contemporary take on independence.

I enjoyed this French version of "Beauty and The Beast" for the most part. The cinematography and character designs are beautiful. I liked the fantasy atmosphere and sense of exploration in the first half of the film. I also liked the mystery of the Beast's origin.

I appreciate the fact that it is more accurate to the fairy tale than previous adaptations. That being said, the second half deviates from the original story in a few respects and I found it sluggish in some parts. I found the final action sequence a bit too fantastical and left unexplained except via Deus Ex Machina. However, it certainly looks impressive.

Ultimately, the film isn't perfect. The story has been done many times before and this rendition is sluggish at times. Never-the-less, I recommend watching the film for its stunning beauty alone.

The story "Beauty and the Beast" is a classic. However, there is no one definitive version. Instead, it's a folk tale that's been passed down for generations until a very popular version was written by a couple women well over two centuries ago. And, since then, other versions have also been written. I mention this because if you watch ANY version of the story, you must accept that they will be different. This version is very different from the two most famous versions, Disney's and "Belle et Bête" (1946) by Jean Cocteau...and that's okay with me.

This new French version is different from many other versions because it concentrates much more on the family's back story and how awful Belle's siblings are. This is a highly dysfunctional family and the father seems oblivious to the monsters he's helped to create. All are monsters, except for Belle. And eventually, you learn that the father isn't all that wonderful either. When he's lost in the forest in the cold, he seeks shelter in what looks like an abandoned castle. However, after eating like a pig from the sumptuous dining table, the guy begins stealing stuff from the place. He says it's because it's abandoned...but the food was warm and obviously the guy was just a thief. On the way out, he stops to pick a single rose for his sweet daughter--and that is when the beast appears and tells him of his punishment. He will be allowed to return home to put his things in order, but he MUST return to be the creature's prisoner. But, when Belle learns of this, she bolts to the castle--offering up herself instead. As for the rest of the tale, it's NOT what you'd expect. There is a story involving Belle's crappy brother and some money-lenders as well as the creature's back story. Unlike most versions, this one slowly reveals bits and pieces of this sad tale and exactly why he's been turned into a beast is quite strange. But again, since there is not one version of the story, such license is understandable.

So was this film worth seeing? Well, yes and no. It's far from the best version I've seen but it is worth your time. Major pluses are how beautiful the film is in many places as well as a few changes to the generally accepted story. I appreciate how Belle's father really DID deserve to be punished, whereas in other versions Beast just seems mean and unfair in punishing the old guy. But, what didn't thrill me was the amount of extra story. With all the subplots and back story, so much of the romance between Belle and Beast is missing--and her falling for him seems to make far less sense. Plus, while some will love all the CG, I think after a while it was just too much--such as the HUGE creatures that appear at the end and start stomping on everyone as well as the bizarre crazy-eyed puppy creatures! I prefer a simpler version that is a bit smaller in scope and less intense. Call me a romantic at heart, but a bit less would have delivered so much more.

By the way, the version I saw DID have English subtitles, but they were not very good in places. Once in particular, I would have misunderstood an important part of the film had I not understood what they were actually saying in French.

I don't want to get you bored with long texts. My personal opinion is that 2 very good actors (Bella and Cassel) are wasted in a film with slow and uninteresting plot.

The same thing goes for the director. The special effects are great, the backgrounds and the places are awesome but it's just that.

PS. I saw it with French audio + subtitles so I may have missed a lot of important details. Sorry about that.

This is an almost perfect version of this well known story but my problem is that we do not feel the growing love of Belle for the beast too much. She's seeing in dreams who was the beast before, so we understand she can fall in love for who he was, but not too much for who he really is. If that makes sens. But all in all it's a very well made movie for all the family. The tone is a bit dark for little kids but always beautiful, as it's usually the case with Gans's movies. The use of CGI is obvious on the creatures, but it's done with good taste, IMO. It's a shame gans does not make more movies, I love his style. It's just that, after all this time waiting for a new movie of him, I wanted a little more substance.