God this was fucking terrible. And of course kosher tomatoes are washing disney's balls in their mouth

God this was fucking terrible. And of course kosher tomatoes are washing disney's balls in their mouth.

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/tfsr5
youtube.com/watch?v=S1ZAhAoUGFM
livescience.com/7476-gunpowder-changed-world.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

What all went wrong?

What a shocker. It was doomed to fail on the casting alone. Emma Watson was a terrible voice and a terrible actress to pick for Belle. She looks like Bieber in drag. Beast looks cool. Gaston was horribly miscast as well. And that fucking dwarf got turned into a branching faggot.

*prancing

Allahu wills this is gonna underperform and stop the trend. Afaik this was their avengers - if it flops the entire project goes down the pipe.

I pray and hope with my heart that will be the case. I highly doubt it though. Disney is a cash cow with everything nowadays. Normies will flock to almost anything and everything they shit out.

It's still not Certified Fresh®

they are acting like it is, as fucking always

They actually are at a disadvantage here because for the first time they're actually meddling with a beloved classic that many hold in high esteem. They should have stuck with remaking all the ancient films nobody really gives much of a fuck about but they were too greedy and went straight for one of their greatest achievement.

And managed to fuck it all up somehow while trying to recreate it almost exactly at least aesthetically. It looks like it should've been a stage play. It would be slightly more forgivable if it was.

There already was a musical. I remember it was advertised fucking everywhere back in the day.

wait a day

where's the beauty?

...

Haven't and won't see it. The first Disney version and the 1940's French movie are godly compared to this just based on the trailer and casting choices alone.

Watson looks like Obama

That's my biggest problem with the movie right there. The beast is supposed to be ugly and beastly and shit, but he looks like he's straight off the cover of some shitty romance novel. He looks like a normal guy, but he's got a full-face fashion beard and fangs that I didn't even notice until about the 5th time I looked over that picture. He doesn't have a snout, or the jutting underbite of the beast from the animated film. Does he even have the sort of hunched back or digitgrade legs of animated beast?

Kinda takes away from the whole "he's hideous on the outside, but beautiful on the inside and that's what counts" plot when they keep prettying him up like this. And even the animated version was prettied up compared to how he was portrayed back in the old days

Yeah it's a much less grizzly version of the animated film. This movie fails in every aspect to capture the characters.

I don't know about what went wrong, but here's what I didn't like.

There's probably more, but I got most of it.

If you didn't know Rotten Tomatoes was shit after the Cisbusters debacle, you're an idiot

This pisses me off more than anything. Was talking to my mum earlier and she seems to think there were black people all over Medieval Europe. There was this movie or TV show about the Vikings and they had black Vikings and when I pointed out how stupid that was she actually tried to argue that there could have been black Vikings and we just didn't hear about them because history is racist or some other nonsense.

Supposedly, Watson had way too much control on the costuming department, and the fugly dress she came up with for the movie is so goddamned bad that people fear that she may have just destroyed the head costume designer's career.

I think most people know that that's not how things were back then, but would rather force things like this into movies so they don't look racist or because they think they can 'fix' history. I might be giving people too much credit, though.

Definitely too much credit. My mum genuinely believes there were black Vikings.

There was exactly one black somewhat brown guy that hung out with the Vikings. Ahmad ibn Fadlan.

Wasn't he an arab though?

do not doubt this watson is a giant cunt

I had a feeling it would be pretty bad cause life action lel.
but holy shit that is some forced bullshit topping off with ruining Solid points from the animated version

Get a better mom user

Would if I could

did I fucking praise it you dumb fuck?

That's where I had to stop alredy thanks to my sides hurting too much.
I knew that it'll have some progressive smear on it, but they really went off the deep end.

There's a bit in the beginning of the movie where she's watching her dad fix something he made and every time he's about to ask her for a tool, she already has it in her hand, as if she instantly knew as soon as she saw the thing the exact tools it needed. It came off so forced, like they didn't think the animated Belle was 'stronk womyn' enough so they had to give her an interest in inventing.

Can we just kill all non-whites already? They want to destroy everything.

...

Sounds absolutely dreadful!

Why would you give a shit about historical realism in a fictional world with magical curses turning people into pseudo werewolves?
And more impotrtantly, how shiity can be an education system for people end up getting their views on history from fictional works.

Sword in the stone would have been a safer remaster, or black cauldron.

They also had a live action series where belle read stories to children, and she looked more belle than emma. and so would that girl from dr who who is the current sidekick.

Shitskins don't belong in European culture, fuck off cuck.

so in other words he got the full hollyjew treatment?

anymore art of old beast, that second pic is cool

Disgusting, at least the frenchs did a much better revision of the fairy tale.

That last one with the random enchantress sounds the worst, honestly.

These are all problems the Jungle Book had, too. Why did that one get a pass?

Jungle Book wasn't anyone's favorite Disney movie unless you were a hypno fetishist.

This shit was so bad even Doug Walker hated it.
Not linking his review here because fuck webm'ing 30 minutes-long vid and I don't want to give him views, but here was his initial reaction on FB.

kek

I wonder who's behind this post.

I can't with media anymore anons

Look away user. They never cared for you anyway.

More like "Memma Watson", amirite?

Two reasons:
A) propaganda
B) verisimilitude

what are you, a misogynistic cis scum?

...

That dress is fucking terrible. Why would she have any control over anything tho? She's a fucking child actor from Harry Potter. That's fucking it.

holy fuck the original was utter shite, how did they balls it up worse?

Scarlett Johansen as the fetish bait snake. A new plotline about the evil men and their fire or "red flower". Oh and elephants being forest gods. It had some fucking metal scenes here and there though. Like the fights with Shere Khan are awesome. There's a particularly fucked scene where he kills Mowgli's wolf dad and throws him off a cliff. It's not really a bad movie. Just gets really weak when they force in the fire plot and the law of jungle shit which results in terribly cheesy moments unfit for the rest of the film.

...

>>>/out/

Who the fuck wrote this?

Yes, hence the "brown."

I think I heard that Emma Watson actually made quite a few demands, so it's actually not that surprising. I didn't think Gaston would obviously be so mustache-twirling evil, though.

Because nobody saw Jungle Book. At best maybe that one time on TV or that one time your parents put it on. Nobody gives a flying fuck about it so they were able to get away with any bullshit.
Beauty and the Beast is the quintessential Disney movie that most people saw in theaters and/or rewatched on vhs every single day as kids. Even tasteless libcuck autists like Douge aren't taking this remake's shit for this very reason. If it was the same movie but made in 1969 be sure nobody would gave a fuck as well.

I get people of African descent (probably North African) in southern Europe after the collapse of Rome. That makes sense. But sub Saharan Africans in frigging Norway and Denmark? Yeah fucking right.

Because it's based in a real period of time in a real place.

When you have decisions like these made in fiction it leads some people to thinking it's accurate. There are actually people now who think black people were commonplace in medieval Europe because of moves like this.

The one thing that bugged me a bit was how Mowgli didn't go back to the man village. Wasn't the whole point of the story that he doesn't belong in the Jungle?

...

Yep. He should've gone back and it was stupid to have him stay to run with the wolves.

Oh I forgot to also mention this weird subplot of Mowgli being berated by Bagehra or whatever the fuck for…. inventing tools to survive.


It was so fucking stupid. That dragged the film down more than anything for me. Especially when he calls them 'tricks' instead of tools or inventions.

It gets even worse later on when Le Fou turns on the other villagers because he gets stuck under a harpsichord and Gaston leaves him so he can go kill Beast. Once he gets out, he grabs Mrs. Potts and starts beating people with her while she says something like, 'You were too good for him, anyway.'


Like I said before, Gaston wasn't so bad to Belle in the beginning. He states that he likes Belle because she's smart and more dignified than the other town girls, who all just throw themselves at him when he walks by. They could've had a good love triangle if they hadn't made him so stupidly evil later on.

All these remakes are just nothing but retarded filler subplots. Same with Cinderella, same with Maleficent. "Hey, we can write a better movie than those cartoons for kids lol". No, no you can't.

Moors from North Africa did cross over to the Iberian peninsula and conquer parts of Spain from about the 8th century to the 15th century after which a few of them dispersed into the rest of Europe. But that was after the Medieval period had ended. Anybody who insists there were tons of black people around the majority of the European continent during the Medieval period is probably an idiot, especially if they insist they came from deepest Africa. The Africans never even built sea worthy boats. Most of them didn't go anywhere until slavery.

Exactly. They're trying to remake the originals while completely butchering them with new stuff at the same time. They can't have their cake and eat it too here. It just comes out a mess.

They're basically the Live Action equivalents of those shitty DTV sequels Disney used to put out

I've actually watched them recently (don't ask why…) and few of those were pretty decent and much better than this shit.

From what little I remember of any of them I can say I remember them all being rather humble compared to the theatrical releases, which is the way to go if you ask me.

I've watched a few recently also. The good ones should have been big budget films. They'd never do anything like that today, shit out a crappy direct-to-video sequel to a big blockbuster movie when they can spend tons on a big budget sequel and guarantee a return on their investment.

The terrible ones are really just the same principle as these live action remakes. Capitalise on a property whilst putting in as little effort as possible to make a quality product. At least with the DTV sequels they actually wrote semi-original material instead of just remaking the same old material but with real people instead.

Does the concept of DTV sequel even exist nowadays? It seems everything goes to theater.

MY EARS

Bitch can't even decide on an accent.

She's completely tone deaf and can't sing for shit. In half of Disney films they had a speaking voice and singing voice to avoid this very problem. What's wrong with doing that when your main actress is void of any singing talent? I guess because this is her vehicle movie.

It's Emma Watson. Every movie with her has to paint her in a positive light.

What every movie? What has she done besides HP?

That shitty comedy movie about the end of the world. And recently in a movie with Tom Hanks. She's been in a lot of shit movies that never get attention.

A few others I guess? She had a cameo in This is the End. She's going to be in this movie called the Circle which is about some silicon valley type of company spreading its reaches across the world and may be evil. I only know of that movie because of the trailers when I go to see movies.

Never heard about any of that. But those are coming out anyway, right? So she hasn't led a single AAA movie. Why the fuck is she a "star" and has demands? Because autists like Harry Potter so much?

Honestly, I can't think of any recent DTV sequels to any big films. It seems to be a trend that died out around 2005

Pretty much. That's why people think she's hot too. She's vastly overrated in every respect.

The Tom Hanks one is coming out soon. The other one came out a long time ago. I think she was also in an indie movie with that fag playing Flash in Justice League.

Because feminism and Harry Potter cred.

If the movie was called 6/10 and the Beast she'd be a perfect cast.

...

Six is a bit generous. She's more like a four. Especially now that we've seen her body

archive.is/tfsr5

>and HOLLYFUCKHELL and new Lion King

That was a good movie, it had boobs.

Don't worry, the race war is going to start this year and then we can just lynch everyone involved with those projects.

I eagerly await this

That doesn't make sense though they Hyenas were Scar's underlings. Unless they make Scar like George Soros and the Hyenas like BLM and have Soros co-opt them and force a war between the Hyenas and lions.

give the hyenas Russian accents and I'm sure some Hollywood airhead will think it's genius.

Why even watch a copy of the original? I mean, it even has the friggin music numbers copied.

Jungle Book at least did some original stuff.

To be fair I hate saying that about this adaptation, god, it's bad, they did add some songs. Beast gets a song, there's a song before everyone gets cursed by the enchantress, and I think the song the villagers sing when they're heading to the castle is new.
But to really answer your question, people don't want to admit they thought an animated film was good so their answer to that 'problem' is to remake it in live action so they can say it's a mature version for adults.

Because it's a win for them either way. Either this overshadows the original and they have a new cashcow or it tanks and interest in the original gets a surge. Disney hasn't legitimately lost any money in a really long time.

...

As did this. And all of it is terrible.

...

She has heavy editing on her voice. I noticed the same thing happened with The Rock's voice in Moana when he sang "Your Welcome."

Rock's voice at least wasn't meant to be the centerpiece of the film worth 15 million.

Ironically the movie itself is pretty decent and they could have profited on it easily if the promotion wasn't god awful.

So any info on how the movie is doing financially?

Not too bad

If it doesn't die today it might catch logan which had an 88 million opening.
Mostly the competition is weak.

Not impressed based on it being such a beloved property, no doubt bolstered by all the lib mothers taking their daughters as a duty…to a Stockholm syndrome story.

Emma Watson's voice kills any cuteness factor she has. The problem is that she was cast as hermione not because she could act, that's just how she is.

bit cringy in all ways, but its an example of her total lack of charisma
youtube.com/watch?v=S1ZAhAoUGFM

What?
And to think, I let someone convince me that "maybe they went back to the source source material and then took a few liberties." Even if the original had a really shitty ending or whatever, I don't think it had "everyone goes batshit crazy, the end."
So he admits he likes her for her personality, and that… Makes him go psycho when he gets rejected?

So looks like it's underperforming compared to Jungle Book and Cinderella. Good.

It's not as crazy as I made it sound- I forgot to add that he turns on the villagers while they're assaulting the castle. I still think it's stupid, but it isn't as though he just decided to beat all the villagers randomly.
The movie tries to establish the idea that Gaston has anger issues when he snaps at Belle's father while they're trying to find the road to the castle in the woods. Anger problems apparently result in people tying their crush's father to a tree so wolves will eat him, according to the writers of this.

If by "underperforming" you mean "making about as much as both of the other two combined", then I guess it is.

Shlomo pls, shouldn't your kind be good with money? It played in more theaters, signifying that they had higher expectations for it, yet it couldn't even double the average of Jungle Book.

Proof?

you're not "reimagining" hard enough. The hyenas are a species of peace, and they only act out because Scar antagonizes them. Carnivorous and opportunistic cretins would clearly be tolerant of other cultures if only Lions would cease their imperial rule over the Savannah.


but why?

To be fair, its easy to forget this movie's existence because it was released in the same year as the Avengers came out. Whatever loss John Carter might have caused was wiped away by the Avengers' success.

...

You should stop bieng racist

Whatever might be your opinion on the movie itself, you cannot argue with its financial success.

Can confirm. I work in a theater with the most generic run of the mill tastes you can imagine. It did leagues better than the jungle book. It did way more than Moana, or really any other kids movie but maybe Finding Dory.

RT has always been shit.

Estimates updated into actuals, $174,750,616 for the weekend now and 6th-biggest weekend now, ahead of Iron Man 3. Finding Dory's opening weekend was only $135,060,273.

I also work in a theater, albeit one that's still getting people to come watch Moonlight despite the fact it's been on home video for a while now.

...

IKTF, I still get angry black people and overly liberal old ladies that bitch and whine about not only it but also Birth of a Nation. It's worse than christian movies. We had it twice and still I don't think we ever sold more than 10 tickets in a single day

It takes true authority and expertise to look up numbers on an internet.

Or, the "work in a theater" part is referring to anecdotes about who's showing up in a given day and auditorium.

>>>/auschwitz/

Nigga, you crazy. The lions are obviously the superior black man, while the Hyena is the white man, perfectly befitting his parasitic nature. Scar will obviously be an allegory for Yakub and then will be killed by his own minions because whyte pepo can't be trusted. Did I forget to mention we wuz kangz a da beasts n shiet.

a little surprised but I guess I shouldn't be, the field was wide open, no real competition, it coasted to a big box office based on the good will of the original.

Now to see if it drops quickly, people went in blind.

The 13th warrior?

seems like only one tone, and its nasally as fuck

>>>/4chan/
>>>/reddit/
>>>/tumblr/
All of these are more your speed.

damn bro, you're hardcore. you really told that git off

fuck, really?

...

Yep. Ibn Fadlan was an actual Persian ambassador to the Volga Vikings that the 13th Warrior/Eaters of the Dead was based on.
Presumably without the whole fighting a pack of angry Grendels part.

I prefer the 1946 version

I like this.

Hellboy Beast was BEST BEAST.

Why the fuck are movie still making money.

Like I get that they jacked up ticket prices so much that now every year the records are broken, but how the fuck are movies still this popular?

Howl's Moving Castle is better anyway

Book or movie?
Book is superior.

More than anything I'm disappointed in someone like Billy Herrington not being cast as Gaston but it's true what you say about the core plot of the movie being ruined by having the beast's appearance not be adequately grotesque. There's an awful look of creative legroom here that could've been put to use to create a monster that would've been appropriate for the role, and that's just if you stayed within the constraints of the original concept art for the animated feature and didn't branch out into even more weird shit like body horror (imagine the beast as a child of nurgle if you will).

that would be retarded. it's called "Beauty and the Beast" not "Beauty and the Monster" for a reason.

The movie would've been better without emma watson
its bieber in drag who sings worse than justin bieber

thepunchlineismachismo had some shit about how a guy who wears so much leather like mad max shouldn't have such a problem with gays

and then this monday

Got the ugly mannish face right at least

Yes to both of these

He looks autistic

They use their enormous cocks as propellers, they just sway their hips and their dongs rotate at incredible speeds allowing them, to fly for miles, this is the way black migrated in ancient times.

AYO HOL' UP

So something like this?

Actually that made perfect sense. You millennials wouldn't know, but home video used to bring more money than theatrical releases.

what the fuck, that art is terrible

DELETE THIS

Not by themselves. If you do a direct-to-video film you've only got one revenue stream. This is why direct-to-video films are so cheap. Whereas if you release a film theatrically you've got initial ticket sales and then you've got home video sales. It's why most films these days never outright flop, studios always eventually make back their investment.

horseface and the beast
Five-head and the beast
'she's got a great personality' and the beast

yes, by themselves

Back up your claim, faggot

When?
And how wouldn't millenials know? Even if you're conservative about who you're considering millenials, you're barking up the wrong bush, because Disney went crazy with that shit during the late 90s and early to mid 2000s. As in, they'd remember direct-to-video more than anyone else.

But seriously, user, are you gonna tell me that Mulan 2 gave Disney more of a profit than the $214.3 million profit they got with Mulan in the theaters alone? Or the Lion King's theatrical profit of $923.5 million?

It's more of a matter of it being quick, easy, safe cash than it bringing in more money.

There it is Homer. The cleverest thing you'll ever say and nobody heard it

Well. In my defense, it's 2am.
Regardless, though. What faggot thinks that they were pulling in hundreds of millions with those shitty straight-to-dvd releases?

these fucking millennials, just end it all

Millennials can include people who are nearly 30, you know, user.
Can you stop being a faggot and just back up your own claim instead of trying to make others? The burden of proof is on you to prove they were pulling in hundreds of millions.

I don't hear any backing up of claims, faggot

Not the user you were talking to but how does one determine the age range of millenials? I guess I count as one but it always confused me how they determined that.

Generations are usually around 20 years in length. They determine these things by social circumstances. Millennials would include anyone born from about 1980 to about 2000. They're known as the Peter Pan generation, they're characterised by delayed rites of passage. For example, most millennials, due to crippling college debt and the state of the job market, often go back to living with their parents once they've completed their higher education. They often get married later and have children later than their parents would have.

So basically, if any of the above describes you (or contemporary friends) you're a millennial

Thanks fam it was helpful. Though I thought Gen X was characterized as being kind of like manchildren?

Where do the Y fit in this?

I suppose they kind of are. There's some overlap between generations

Millennials are Y

This was by far mediocre as fuck. The only thing anyone seems to be discussing about it at the moment is how much they loved that the dwarf is now gay. Seriously, is that all it takes to make a shit movie get praise from critics and normalfags?

Severely unbeasty overall.

This pissed me off the most. All this talk of diversity bullshit that these preachy fuckers keep babbling about yet they never bother to feature any ugly shits, ugly aliens or literal monsters as main characters anymore.

I fucking can't with kikematoes anymore

bump

Then don't.

...

It's frustrating as fuck with ANY review site, anymore. Eventually they all get threatened and/or paid off until they're orgasming about the latest Amy Schumer picture.

Ron Perlman…the only actor on earth who's actually better looking IN monster makeup.

Why would they put Emma Watson as Belle, Belle's supposed to be a beautiful young woman with the body that a villages top guy longs for among all others
Emma isn't sexy at all, look at that weird twisted neck man

to what, stare at the books all day and not read any of them?
Maybe he's hoping someone will read them to him
Also it's not a fucking library if there's only 8 books, that's like a collection, if not then I own a damn library right in my room

It was pretty mediocre, but it did have some potential.


That's post-Renaissance in France. That was around the time that Protestants and Catholics went to war with one another iirc. It would explain Gaston's intro in the movie. Having said that, Haiti was colonized by France around that time, so it isn't too far fetched to see blacks. However, they really do stand out among the French in a European village.

Having said that, the original story was written as a fairy tale and can be placed at any period in time. It could take place back in medieval France, Renaissance in France, or post-Renaissance in France.

That was a bit odd as it never went anywhere. I think the movie's writers should have either made it relevant to later scenes or dropped it entirely. It doesn't work if you just toss it in "just because".

It looked like he was suffering from some sort of ptsd. He kept referring back to a war and his mood swings usually coincided with that. Honestly, Gaston going after Emma Watson as Belle didn't make a lot of sense in this movie. It worked in the animated movie, because Belle was drawn as the most attractive woman in the village, but that doesn't work in live action. Showing us Paris didn't help matters either. Gaston easily could have found better women there, but I suppose it goes back to the townsfolk babying him rather than telling to fuck off every once in a while.


I think half of the songs could have been cut. It would have helped the ones that remained to stand out better. It would have helped streamline the movie a bit more at the very least. It did tend to drag on at parts.

I took it as extra crap that got tossed in "just because". They don't add to the story and only act as filler.

They should have just used a time skip. You place Beast's intro well into the past and then let the villagers forget about it after centuries of neglect. You could use one of the many civil wars in France as a backdrop as well. That way the townspeople have other things to worry about than some dilapidated castle.

It was rushed and made little sense with how Gaston was being built at that point in the story. He saw Belle as something to be conquered for his own personal achievement. Earlier in the story when she told him to fuck off, he immediately went with the 3 sisters. He didn't try and force himself on Belle, because she said no. Turning him into some psycho made no sense later on. Having said that, it did look he had some ptsd and that could have been the driving force to set him up against the Beast. However, the writers didn't build up on that very much and it only showed a little bit here and there.

That magic book didn't make much sense in this story. She easily could have used it to free her father and bring him to the castle without using the mirror. She did bring back a toy from her old home in Paris, so things can travel back through the book. It wouldn't be hard to stretch it to people being able to travel back through the book. However, couldn't the Beast have used that book to bring women back to his castle? Why wait for someone to wander into his home when he could have gone anywhere in the world?

I don't think this story was in medieval France. The author was alive around the time that France was colonizing the New World and Haiti in particular. It's still a stretch to see them in some small French village rather than Paris where they can paraded around a bit.

That part was so fucking bad. It was something out of a tv movie with how cringey it was.


She was pretty bad.


>livescience.com/7476-gunpowder-changed-world.html

From what I've been able to quickly gather, gunpowder wasn't widely used in France until the 14th century. That's a hundred years before the Renaissance reached France in the 15th century. Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve didn't publish Beauty and the Beast until the 18th century. France was well into the slave trade at that time and it didn't get abolished until the end of the 18th century.

Having said that, Beauty and the Beast takes place in a fantasy world and trying to tie it to any one period is a bit silly. Blacks can be stretched into the story if you try and use what was happening in the real world at the time to support it. The movie was pretty mediocre regardless and an all white cast wouldn't have saved it with Watson as Belle, the character inconsistencies and with all of the crap they padded the story with.


If you aren't Gen X and weren't born in the 2000s then you're a millennial. We're already at Gen Z with kids born in the 2000s. Those kids will soon be legal adults btw. It won't be that much longer after that before the next generation shows up either.


It depends on what time period you're referring to. Back when scribes used to make and copy books, they were all more or less the Bible. It wasn't until Johannes Gutenberg made the printing press in the 15th century that people started to become more literate. The biggest reason for this was cost. Having some monk copy a book for you was insanely expensive. Thus, you really can't compare what some backwater town's library had several hundred years ago to what we have now.

At least the toys are accurate.

Because "famous" is more important than "fitting"

...