Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login

'Beauty and the Brat' isn't a good film title.

Journal Entry: Wed Feb 19, 2014, 12:55 PM

Hello everyone!

I meant to come say hi on Valentine’s Day… sorry. I LOVE YOU!! Did everyone have a good day? Mine was great – Tom took me to see ‘Dallas Buyers Club’, which was so brilliant. I won’t say anything about it in case anyone hasn’t seen it yet and wants to (i.e. my parents), but I just loved it. It also meant that I got to tick off one of the things of my own personal bucket list – I finally got to see Jared Leto, in a film, on a cinema screen! Boo yah!

The other big thing in my life right now is that my Dad and I have been busy redecorating my room… Well, taking the wall paper off ready to redecorate anyways. It’s meant that the contents of my room are now scattered everywhere else in the house. My sketchbook is buried under a pile of the rest of my shiz in the corner of the room, and I can’t get to it without putting my back out right now. Which I think I have done. It hasn’t stopped hurting today. But I’m glad, because my room hasn’t been decorated since I started high school and even I have got to the point where I’m sick of it.

And big news flash of today is that my Mum thinks Ronnie Radke is “a bit alright.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

Right, now to what the title of this journal is actually about. I’ve rekindled my love for our old VhS tapes, and seeing as my bedroom TV is the only one that can play videos anymore, I’m taking advantage of this. Last night I decided to watch Disney’s ‘Beauty and the Beast’, because I’ve seriously been craving it for aggggges. It wasn’t ever one of my favourites when I was younger and there were bits that used to scare me, but I can appreciate how beautiful it is now. But that’s not really the point. My point mainly concerns this part, the opening scene and the Beast's backstory: www.youtube.com/watch?v=__x8CY…

While watching I started to do some math and realised something that blew my mind. At the beginning when the story of the Enchantress coming and turning the prince into the Beast, it’s said that the rose will wilt in the Beast’s 21st year, and the rose is wilting through the film which puts him at 21. BUT in the song ‘Be Our Guest’ Lumierre says “10 years we’ve been rusting”; the servants having been enchanted at the same time as the prince. This puts the prince’s age when he’s transformed into the Beast at… 11 YEARS OLD.

Seriously.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot today.

Knowing that, it puts the start of that film into a totally different perspective.

Firstly, he was probably just a little kid being a bit bratty. All 11 year old boys are. If we punished all little boys for being rude by turning them into beasts, this whole planet would be overrun. Did the Enchantress not see that he was just a cheeky little boy? Why did she assume that he’s the owner of the castle? In fact, while on this point, where are Beast’s parents? Is he meant to be ruling alone already? Why didn’t she ask to speak to a responsible adult?

Suddenly her turning him into a beast as punishment doesn’t weigh up against what he’s actually done wrong.

Secondly, the Enchantress’ terms are totally unfair. Here’s why –

She tells him real beauty is found within and when he’s still rude tells him that from this she can see no love in his heart. That’s a really heavy thing to tell an 11 year old.

Her spell will be broken when he learns to love and be loved, but surely that’s stacking the odds against him already. 11 year olds, particularly boys, (mostly) have a very simple understanding of what love, most specifically romantic love, is. They aren’t interested in girls yet. She’s telling the Beast to learn to do something that he has very little ground knowledge of. If she wasn’t so easily offended by his rudeness, he’d probably go on to grow up a bit, reach puberty, find out what romantic love is and then fall in love naturally. But she robs him of the chance and skills to do this, by turning him into this thing that isolates him from real people.

It seems to me that she’s setting him a task that she knows he won’t be able to complete. It’s almost like she wants it this way.

And lastly, the prince isn’t ever going to care about a rose, even an enchanted rose. He’d want sweets or a racing car or something.

So, in short; the Enchantress has cast a spell on a little 11 year old boy, for being rude to her ONCE. She’s almost comparable to how Maleficent curses Sleeping Beauty after she’s snubbed an invitation to the baby shower. No wonder the Beast is so damaged to begin with! The seemingly innocent old lady who asks for shelter actually isn’t that innocent. She does a whole lot of damage. In fact, she’s the 1st villain in the film, really. She’s the one who’s cruel. She’s the one who wrecks his formative years and comes away from it without any personal distress whatsoever.

I’d understand her reasoning if the Prince was older at the time; say he was in his early 20s. He would have had chance to experience love, or the lack of it, and any sign of real cruelty in him would be evident by that point. In that case, turning him into a Beast would be more justified. In the original fairy tale there’s no mention of his age, and in later versions the Enchantress only changes him when he spurns her affections as an adult. AN ADULT.

WTF YOU PLAYING AT, DISNEY?!

 

... Either that or I'm seriously overthinking this. Probably the later. :giggle:

 





Background by Shimaira
  • Listening to: 'I'm Not a Vampire' - Falling in Reverse
  • Reading: The Dirt by Motley Crue
  • Eating: orange and lemon christmas sweets
  • Drinking: cherry stuff
Skin by Shimaira (modified by erondagirl)
Add a Comment:
 
:iconerondagirl:
erondagirl Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014   General Artist
:(
Reply
:iconbeccalupin:
BeccaLupin Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014
:iconbrokenheartplz:
Reply
:iconchocoreaper:
Chocoreaper Featured By Owner Feb 21, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
My mind is blown away by that theory/analysis you came up with, holy crap. Guess I must've missed out that Lumiere said '10 years' in the song and pretty much thought everyone were adults in this film, cuz most of us watched it when we're all very young.

I felt like facepalming. How can an old lady curse a little kid just cuz he was being rude to her once? That's a jerkwad move, and yeah, you have a point when you say she's comparable to Maleficent.
Reply
:iconerondagirl:
erondagirl Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014   General Artist
I think a lot of the Disney characters are made to look older than they actually are. For instance Sleep Beauty is meant to be 16 but has always looked older to me. I wonder why they do that. :shrug: I'd like to look it up sometime though.
I love analysing things like this - my degree skills haven't left me after all! :dance: :giggle:
Reply
:iconchocoreaper:
Chocoreaper Featured By Owner Mar 30, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
maybe it's the reference they used to draw these characters. maybe they didnt have 16-year-old volunteers to model sleeping beauty or other characters, and they're stuck with 20-something year olds.
Reply
:iconerondagirl:
erondagirl Featured By Owner Mar 31, 2014   General Artist
That is a good point. I think that technique is called Rotoscoping...
Reply
:iconbvb95:
BVB95 Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2014  Student Artist
I love you too! XD I never looked at beauty and the beast that way. 
:D
Reply
:iconerondagirl:
erondagirl Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014   General Artist
:glomp:
Reply
:iconbeccalupin:
BeccaLupin Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2014
So there's a theory behind a disney movie.
Reply
:iconerondagirl:
erondagirl Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014   General Artist
yep! it's my theory. It goes alongside my theory about dinosaurs being thin at one end, thicker in the middle, and then thin at the other end.
Reply
:iconbeccalupin:
BeccaLupin Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2014
Fascinating.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:iconerondagirl: More from erondagirl


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
February 19, 2014
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
1,326 (2 today)
Favourites
1 (who?)
Comments
12