The classic 1946 French version of Beauty and the Beast (La Belle et la Bête) featured an opening epigraph that...

>The classic 1946 French version of Beauty and the Beast (La Belle et la Bête) featured an opening epigraph that explained the concept behind director Jean Cocteau’s live-action fairy tale: “Children believe what we tell them. They have complete faith in us.” That faith gets compromised in the new live-action musical Beauty and the Beast. Its attempt to sneakily indoctrinate children (and adults) into Disney Corporation banality recasts the nature of parent-child (and Hollywood-consumer) relations so that that bond is subsumed in state-sponsored political correctness. This new version — with its feminist Belle (Emma Watson), a crude, chauvinist-male Beast (Dan Stevens), and a “diverse” underclass of servants and objects-come-to-life (performed by Josh Gad, Audra McDonald, Emma Thompson, Ewan McGregor) — is a fairy tale that confuses liberal social engineering with “magic.”

>Viewers — particularly parents — who cannot discern the difference between entertainment and propaganda may have already been duped by Disney’s long-standing entertainment hegemony. It’s a mistake to think that such propaganda is innocent storytelling. This Millennial Beauty and the Beast becomes grim progressive silliness when it erases basic gender distinctions and politicizes the background and experience of the commoner Belle and the aristocratic Beast. It’s a blockbuster touting specious lessons in Occupy logic and “tolerance.”

As usual, Armond speaks the truth. He IS the best movie critic working today, and whoever says the opposite is a plebeian faggot. Or worse, a /r/movies user.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=f6qDPCh33fg
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Best Belle coming through

>He IS the best movie critic working today

She's a complete turbo slut though.

Fuck you. Rumbelle is end game

Yes. He is.

He's not wrong

I actually watched the criterion version, and it put me to sleep. Very pretty, but it didn't really grab me.
youtube.com/watch?v=f6qDPCh33fg
now this, this is masterful

>When she loses her memories and shatters the teacup

a mixture of emotions to be honest and none of them good

not reading all that. is this Sup Forums crying more about some shit i don't care about?

iktf

>a crude, chauvinist-male Beast

So par for the course?

TL;DR version

>WAAAH IT HAS A GAY AND BLACKS IN IT I'M SO TRIGGERED

Wew, maybe read the text before commenting. You cant refute anything he says.

No, this is the best Belle

That's not Lea Sedoux

...

I like Armond's negative reviews

>You cant refute anything he says.
How about the fact that this the only real difference between this version and the last disney version is that this is live action
If the live action version only just now compromises whatever sanctity this reviewer is deciding to defend, clearly this reviewer is only responding to a presence of politically forward thinking that has been present the entertainment industry for quite some time now.
tl;dr the person who wrote this is full of bullshit, the last disney version was just as politically correct in terms of gender distinctions and social class division

>the live action is just the same as the last Disney version
That's exactly what he's saying though, that Disney been pushing this for quite a long time.

>may have already been duped by disneys long standing entertainment hegemony

Anyone else here decided not to see this as soon you heard about it?

why would one see a live action adaption of the beauty and the beast
what do you hope to see that would actually be exciting and/or an improvement over the classic

seriously unless you're a child who wasn't around back then or the parent of one such child, what the fuck do you do with this movie

>DUDE I'VE NO FUCKING CLUE WHAT HES TALKING ABOUT (because its gibberish) BUT HE SAID DISNEY AND SOCIAL ENGINEERING AND THAT CONFIRMS MY DELUSIONS THERFEOFRE HES AWESOME LMAO

...

As soon as I heard that manface watson was belle yes

He literally just takes his ideas from Sup Forums and Sup Forums

terrible bait

>implying any of those boards features an original thought

Should I pay $21 for Imax tickets? I think it will make my gf want to fuck me.

It was literally written by a black, gay man.

...

>Sup Forums believes blacks are intelectually inferior unironically and call for a race war
>one of the few voices on the mainstream calling on the social justice bullshit is a black man

Being able to speak against it and remain mainstream is literally black privilege.

>should I give my shekels to (((Disney)))
No. However, I do want to see Pirates 5... so I'm torn.

If I was black, I wouldn't see the point of going against the social justice narrative. The other side literally want to kill me

Why does Emma Watson always look miserable, even when she smiles?

feminism

because she has been a millionaire since she was a child and therefore has never really had to worry about anything, meaning that it takes a lot to make her genuinely happy.

She's like a character in a Brett Easton Ellis or Douglas Copeland novel except she pretends to be a nice person.

young Rebecca De Mornay

No, it is Armond White (black film critic) saying the Jews are Jewing it up with no shame now.

Damn this man is really on point actually.

This is exactly it though. You can't be a true rebel or bohemian and support this technocratic state-sponsored social-engineering shit. It's so tepid, and even... EVEN if the values were good - which they aren't - the way they are implemented and the overall feel of it is unacceptable.

I would rather have some wildness that lets a lot of messy human nature to do its thing than some sickly, rationalistic, "functioning" social democratic technocracy.

Give me INTERESTING and VITAL.

liberals are truly the enemy of mankind

B A S E D
A
S
E
D

hell seeing the shitty 3D animation disney pumps out now is sad compared to how good Beauty and the Beast looks for a 26 year old film

>paying you gf for sex

that thumbnail really brings out her manface

He looks like Eddie Murphy dressing up to play a side character in one of his movies

> Tfw Armond White literally has been Eddie Murphy all along.

Just went on it, it blew me away. I reccomend it. You can jump on this meme wagon or take it for what it is.

First of all the plot is a lot better and fleshed out than in the original movie. We get extra songs to add to the old ones, the beasts past is touched upon and the most important one imo: Belle has a reason for staying in the castle and not 'exploring the world'. New enchanted object can basically teleport her whereever to complement the mirror which can show her anyone

To the visual design, I looooved. Shit. Like you can tell that the designer wanted that cold steel blue and golden yellow to clash so beautifully. It didn't feel like a kids movie with a crude blue and piss yellow. Every shot and its colors were carefully thought out to make the most of everything.

I liked the fashion of the era. The clothes are real interesting to see, and they are beautiful. The CGI is bit weird, but it didn't ruin the movie.

I already love musicals so that was just the icing on the cake.

To the actors, Emma is already making Stewart Kristen look like she is over performing. Not the main star of the movie.

Gaston, what a man. He's got the charm nailed down 100 % and looks like a fox in a mans skin. The way he walks, talks everything is perfect.

Lefou, I hated him in the original version, which I suppose was the role he was meant to fufill. But in this one you strt to get a feel for the sass that Lefou brings to the table. Was smiling most of the time when he was on stage.

Cons:
Annoying kid cup
annoying dog thing
made the triplets look ugly

The king of Sup Forums has spoken.

cont.

The evil sorceress got touched upon. Started to learn the reasons for why she basically doomed hundreds of people to slavery and then sudden death at the end of the curse. She is a poor spinster living in the village which everyone mistreats. However I suspect that over time the aristocrats treated her more poorly, which is why she focuses her rage on them, but still inadverting hurting the ones closest to the aristocrats: the towns people who look down on her. She gets revenge on everyone. Everyone loses their memory, which is why nobody notices that giant castle.

We get to see Belle making some cool stuff to wash laundry, I'll admit I wouldn't have thought of that. Maybe I should invest in a mule and a big ass tub to wash my clothes for cheap.

Lot of emphasis on roses, making the main enchanted rose more important, overall the movie is keeping its shit alot more together than the original one.

Only cringed once in the movie, when the Beast was eating its food with his face. The sounds he made were so fake and cartoony. Snapped me out of it for a moment.

fucking yes Lefou gets some at the end of the movie

This doesn't actually tell me anything about the movie itself

>mfw seeing THAT controversial gay scene

I seriously can't believe they went that far in a kids film. I'm glad I went alone to scout out the movie before taking my kids

kek

>gets some
some what? Dick?

>mfw half of Sup Forums is busy condemning grown men fucking each other in the ass while the other half is masturbating over children actors.

I thought he was wearing prison overalls for a second there.

Lefou deserves to get his dick wet...even if it has to be anal juices. He got cucked fucking hard in the original, now his character has more going for him than a sterotypical gay stalker. He actually got some balls, literally and figuratively at the end of the movie.

Well then obviously you've been brainwashed by the gay Jews who run Disney, the straight-white-male exterminating NWO enforcement agency.

>I have no idea what Sup Forums is like, but I'm going to describe it anyway...

>two males smile and dance with each other for one second in the movie
THE SCANDAL

>Sup Forums believes blacks are intelectually inferior unironically
That's an objective, scientific, empirical fact though...

What's next, uncensored anal fisting?
You know those Gays. Give them an inch and they take a mile of dick

>As usual, Armond speaks the truth.
TFW you're so starved for validation you pretend Armond White isn't a comedy performer and eat up whatever he shits on a page before even watching the movie.

So is Gaston even fucking in it, or what?

Gaston is the cake man, he's more of a main character than the beast is

lol

Sup Forums believes this based on the average. Nobody denies there are outliers

>grim progressive silliness
This phrase makes no sense. How can something be grim AND silly?

He was implying the complete opposite, retard.

I believe that different races have different behavioral traits based on genetics. I believe that blacks have a propensity for poorer critical thinking, snap judgment, and risk-reward analysis compared to other races.

However, just because they have an ingrained genetic propensity for those negative traits does not mean all africans exhibit them. Only a sith deals in absolutes.

Because it's a review, not a spoiler.

beauty and the beast is one of the most shit stories ever created, and disney's cartoon musical is among the worst movies in their catalog.

I'm surprised by how bad the poster is at concealing Emma Watson's unsuitability for the role. The way they've shooped her, she looks like, hmm.... Hume Cronyn.

>the criterion version

>thinking criterion is the fucking studio

>(Dan Stevens)

So they're ripping off Cocteau's idea of making the Beast look slightly effeminate once changed back to human form, eh?

No, we won the election, but cultural battle has been joined. Disney are peddling weirdy shit. People are pointing it out.

I used to think Armond White was risible, but he isn't really, he's just dissident in an unexpected direction.

Easily. Look at Rachel Maddow.

No we don't, CTR.

Her face is fat as fuck

1. There are, as someone's said, outliers.

2. That's kind of the point - even a darky-darky bongo chocolate dinge porch monkey can see through SJW shit, so whites have no excuse.

This is a brilliant insight. We need to save her, lads, we need to cheer her up.

very good post

It's the fact that it's a calculation that's the problem. I welcomed the obvious gayness of Road to El Dorado. Their making it into a selling-point is the issue.

Of course. "Joking" about wanting to gas or otherwise exterminate non-whites and Jews is just a normal method of disagreement.

>Its attempt to sneakily indoctrinate children (and adults) into Disney Corporation banality recasts the nature of parent-child (and Hollywood-consumer) relations so that that bond is subsumed in state-sponsored political correctness.

This is true.
Disney needs to stop shilling.

I don't really see what kind of point Armond White is supposed to be making here. Sort of vaguely making the common right-wing implication that [insert multiple parentheses around media/entertainment company] is trying to break down society by normalizing "degenerative" behavior, wrapped in more complex vocabulary to make his review seem more intelligent. And keep in mind that White himself is a personal proponent of boipuccy. I dunno, maybe this review would make sense if I ever decided to watch this new Emma Watson movie, which I will not.

>Emma Thompson

This is the horror, casting Richard Dawkins' lady clone to play "Belle" when you have a woman who in her day was an ultrafox and who many would still crawl a mile over broken glass to hear fart through a walkie-talkie to do voice acting.

Fuck off they're perfect

Fucking hell, you're a bit of a thick cunt, aren't you? They are clearly pushing leftist drivel in this film, we know because they've promoted it on that basis. Armond White being the kind of person its intended to pander to is exactly why he's so valuable - when a guy who could clean up from a scam warns you about it instead, that's a guy worth respecting.

This looks dreadful. Her face is not good, and the guy is weedy.

They seem to have given her liver spots.

>mfw talking to a pleb who doesn't like ouat

>“Children believe what we tell them. They have complete faith in us.” That faith gets compromised in the new live-action musical Beauty and the Beast. Its attempt to sneakily indoctrinate children (and adults)
a black man that sees no problem with indoctrinating our children to believe bestiality is normal and quite beautiful.
wow, who would've thunk

>If the live action version only just now compromises whatever sanctity this reviewer is deciding to defend
White hated the last Beauty and the Best too and has been writing against the same issues now for decades.

>remain mainstream
>National Review Online
The powers that be killed White's career for the things that he says. A few decades ago Pauline Kael wrote for The New York Times saying the exact same things but times have changed.

That's because OP is a stupid faggot who only took two paragraphs out of a long review because they were the most controversial.

gender-bending ala david bowie at least comes from a place of appreciation of either gender, gender-elimination always comes from a pure disdain for masculinity.

>a far right political insight into a children's movie
I don't necessarily agree with everything he says but his reviews are entertaining.

>Complains about Sup Forums on Sup Forums
>Later reports Sup Forums posts for being off topic even though he's the cuck that started the political talk
Typical liberal cuck

There's nothing wrong with seeing this flick as liberal propaganda(it probably is), but he never discussed the merits of the film at all. This review would hold a lot weight if he actually criticized the plot, the characters, the themes, the technical aspects, etc.. Atleast judge the film on its actual values, he's just unnecessarily injecting his political beliefs in this review.

I wrote something similar in another thread but I will say it again. Beauty and the Beast is not just a nonsense children movie with no message. The original is basically template story for how a young girl becomes a women. It is basically the archetypal hero story applied to the feminine.

The protagonist has to replace the masculine figure in her life, her father, with her husband. He is a beast, a symbol of the unknown. Over the course of the story she confronts the unknown and in the process he is transformed into a beautiful man.. It is the same thing when the hero goes to kill the dragon to rescue the treasure. It is basically telling a women how to live a complete life, what difficulty they will face, and if they confront the unknown, and make it known, they can find great reward. To subvert that message is to do damage to all those who watch it

>unnecessarily
Which parts of a review are necessary and why? Also did you read the whole review or just what OP posted?

I've seen Emma Watsons sad little tits.
She no longer has any power or sway over me whatsoever

Because she's British