Remake of Beauty and the Beast: Yay or Nay

[Joel]

Anyone else hear any kids talking about the love they have for their dog last night after seeing the movie? :-ss

[kittycat51]

Anyone else hear any kids talking about the love they have for their dog last night after seeing the movie? :-ss

Thanks Joel for posting. The more I hear and the more I research, I am starting to wake up to the woes of Disney. I TAKE BACK my original statement at the start of this post of Walt Disney "rolling over in his grave". HE HAS been part of the conspiracy all along. It makes perfect sense. I should have listened to my gut years ago when Fantasia NEVER set right with me. I felt evil while watching it, and eventually banned my kids from watching it.

[iWriteStuff]

My wife went to the movie last weekend with a bunch of ladies from the ward. They downplayed the gay character such that there's no kiss, just two dudes dancing. So it wasn't quite as "in your face" as they originally indicated.

I had a better time at home with a book.

[Fiannan]

I should have listened to my gut years ago when Fantasia NEVER set right with me.

One who is familiar with the more occultic interpretations, and the apocryphal, of the flood would easily recognize the symbolism in the segment featuring the centaurs, the man on the donkey who starts eyeing the female centaur, and how the gods sent down a storm to teach the man (who gets drunk -- what prophet got drunk after the flood?) a lesson. Note too the rainbow that the angel (Snow White) drags across the heavens after everything has settled down.

[Sasquatch]

To be honest, I've been done with cinema since 35mm film was abandoned. At least a few years ago I could go to watch movies on a unique format. But now I would pay for a glorified bluray and overpriced, bland snacks, no thanks. Fortunately, the Hollywood Theatre in Portland is nearby. They occasionally show classics and newer movies like Interstellar on 70mm. Their 70mm showings sell out weeks in advance, by the way.

[EdGoble]

Before you parents run out to see the remake of Disney's Beauty and the Beast, I thought you should be aware...According to Matt Walsh, a popular blogger for The Blaze, who I think is usually SPOT ON, wrote this the other day: "The new “Beauty and the Beast” film will add a subplot that definitely was not in the original. Specifically, one of the male characters will “explore his sexuality” throughout the movie, leading to, as the director describes it, a “delicious payoff” where the character will engage in an “exclusively gay moment.”

Now, even before taking into consideration this character’s explicit homosexuality, it’s already deeply deranged and disgusting to include an exploration of repressed sexual urges in a kid’s movie about talking household utensils. The director says that the gay character, LeFou, develops a crush on another male character, leading to a dynamic where ” one day LeFou wants to be Gaston and on another day wants to kiss Gaston.” That’s weird and perverse on several levels."

I LOVED the original animated version. However I will not be seeing this one. Luckily with all boys and older at that, they could care less about this movie. (It's the daughter-in-laws and granddaughters I worry about.)

What are your thoughts? Does this bother you in the least? There is so much of this going on in TV land anyway, are we becoming complacent and numb to it's tentacles? Disney is really taking a huge step backwards in my eyes. Here you think it's all good and innocent for our young ones, (or us) because it comes from Walt Disney! I believe Walt is rolling over in his grave.

This kind of stuff is nothing that editing software can't fix. Not that I personally recommend or advocate breaking the law, but I say this as a fact that certain LDS people will do so in order to edit this down so they will have something they can actually watch. They basically have just driven the LDS audience underground to have to view edited versions of things, or to not watch them at all.

It's kind of like the fan edits of Star Wars episode 1 that came out, that make it a movie someone can actually watch. Because people can't count on the studios anymore to put out anything that is acceptable.

So, to keep the commandments, and the law of the land, LDS people basically have to just stop watching movies. The time has come where there is little choice.

[brianj]

I previously said that I would watch this movie when it is released on disk, but that opinion has changed. First, a few people I know and trust saw the movie and gave really bad reviews over a variety of issues. And second, the guys at Screen Junkies reminded me of just how twisted the original movie was.

[Sasquatch]

This kind of stuff is nothing that editing software can't fix. Not that I personally recommend or advocate breaking the law, but I say this as a fact that certain LDS people will do so in order to edit this down so they will have something they can actually watch. They basically have just driven the LDS audience underground to have to view edited versions of things, or to not watch them at all.

It's kind of like the fan edits of Star Wars episode 1 that came out, that make it a movie someone can actually watch. Because people can't count on the studios anymore to put out anything that is acceptable.

So, to keep the commandments, and the law of the land, LDS people basically have to just stop watching movies. The time has come where there is little choice.

As far as copywritten content is concerned, I think anything goes as long as you're not selling it or giving it to others as an alternative to buying a legitimate copy of a work. Producing and selling bootleg copies of a film is definitely wrong, but I wouldn't hesitate to edit my own copy of a film to suit my tastes. At it's most basic level, it's not very different than blacking out objectionable lines or obscuring risque images in a book. It's true that this probably violates the "laws of the land", but it's also true that there are hundreds of obscure laws that no one knows about, yet are still technically in force.

[Silver Pie]

That "honest trailer" was hilarious (and spot on). Now, I'm going to have to go look for more on YouTube.

I previously said that I would watch this movie when it is released on disk, but that opinion has changed. First, a few people I know and trust saw the movie and gave really bad reviews over a variety of issues. And second, the guys at Screen Junkies reminded me of just how twisted the original movie was.

[brianj]

That "honest trailer" was hilarious (and spot on). Now, I'm going to have to go look for more on YouTube.

I previously said that I would watch this movie when it is released on disk, but that opinion has changed. First, a few people I know and trust saw the movie and gave really bad reviews over a variety of issues. And second, the guys at Screen Junkies reminded me of just how twisted the original movie was.

Let me suggest you start with Peter Pan and Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

[EdGoble]

As far as copywritten content is concerned, I think anything goes as long as you're not selling it or giving it to others as an alternative to buying a legitimate copy of a work. Producing and selling bootleg copies of a film is definitely wrong, but I wouldn't hesitate to edit my own copy of a film to suit my tastes. At it's most basic level, it's not very different than blacking out objectionable lines or obscuring risque images in a book. It's true that this probably violates the "laws of the land", but it's also true that there are hundreds of obscure laws that no one knows about, yet are still technically in force.

I appreciate the intent of your comment.

You would think that this would be the intent of "fair use," but with the DCMA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), I have heard that just decrypting your own DVDs and Blu Rays makes you an offender. I'd like to hear it from the mouth of a lawyer that this is so or not so though. I have only "heard" regular people's opinions on the DCMA. If I could get the assurance from a lawyer that this is so, then that would be wonderful. But I bet that the movie studios would still try to get you thrown in jail for it or sue you for it, even if it is so.

In other words, yes, maybe its lawful to edit it if you own a copy. However, if this is true about the DCMA, they have obscured fair use by making it against the law to get the content of the DVD or Blu Ray into a state where you can edit it, or to make personal backup copies, even if you aren't distributing it.

I want to know what the law actually is on this matter from the mouth of someone that can interpret the law, who is an actual lawyer, that I know can do so with confidence.

[Finrock]

As far as copywritten content is concerned, I think anything goes as long as you're not selling it or giving it to others as an alternative to buying a legitimate copy of a work. Producing and selling bootleg copies of a film is definitely wrong, but I wouldn't hesitate to edit my own copy of a film to suit my tastes. At it's most basic level, it's not very different than blacking out objectionable lines or obscuring risque images in a book. It's true that this probably violates the "laws of the land", but it's also true that there are hundreds of obscure laws that no one knows about, yet are still technically in force.

I appreciate the intent of your comment.

You would think that this would be the intent of "fair use," but with the DCMA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), I have heard that just decrypting your own DVDs and Blu Rays makes you an offender. I'd like to hear it from the mouth of a lawyer that this is so or not so though. I have only "heard" regular people's opinions on the DCMA. If I could get the assurance from a lawyer that this is so, then that would be wonderful. But I bet that the movie studios would still try to get you thrown in jail for it or sue you for it, even if it is so.

In other words, yes, maybe its lawful to edit it if you own a copy. However, if this is true about the DCMA, they have obscured fair use by making it against the law to get the content of the DVD or Blu Ray into a state where you can edit it, or to make personal backup copies, even if you aren't distributing it.

I want to know what the law actually is on this matter from the mouth of someone that can interpret the law, who is an actual lawyer, that I know can do so with confidence.

This is a good site to get some information, examples, court cases, and actions regarding DMCA and other related issues:

https://www.eff.org/search/site/dmca

EDIT: Look up information on "Fair Use"
-Finrock

[AI2.0]

Before you parents run out to see the remake of Disney's Beauty and the Beast, I thought you should be aware...According to Matt Walsh, a popular blogger for The Blaze, who I think is usually SPOT ON, wrote this the other day: "The new “Beauty and the Beast” film will add a subplot that definitely was not in the original. Specifically, one of the male characters will “explore his sexuality” throughout the movie, leading to, as the director describes it, a “delicious payoff” where the character will engage in an “exclusively gay moment.”

Now, even before taking into consideration this character’s explicit homosexuality, it’s already deeply deranged and disgusting to include an exploration of repressed sexual urges in a kid’s movie about talking household utensils. The director says that the gay character, LeFou, develops a crush on another male character, leading to a dynamic where ” one day LeFou wants to be Gaston and on another day wants to kiss Gaston.” That’s weird and perverse on several levels."

I LOVED the original animated version. However I will not be seeing this one. Luckily with all boys and older at that, they could care less about this movie. (It's the daughter-in-laws and granddaughters I worry about.)

What are your thoughts? Does this bother you in the least? There is so much of this going on in TV land anyway, are we becoming complacent and numb to it's tentacles? Disney is really taking a huge step backwards in my eyes. Here you think it's all good and innocent for our young ones, (or us) because it comes from Walt Disney! I believe Walt is rolling over in his grave.

I saw it, it was subtle enough it will go over kid's heads. I enjoyed the movie.

I think it was blown out of proportion by Matt Walsh.

[Fiannan]

Thoughts? Perfect synthesis of LDS culture and Disney?

I previously said that I would watch this movie when it is released on disk, but that opinion has changed. First, a few people I know and trust saw the movie and gave really bad reviews over a variety of issues. And second, the guys at Screen Junkies reminded me of just how twisted the original movie was.

No desire to watch it. Sadly if it has Disney on it most Mormons think that makes it great entertainment.

It makes perfect sense. I should have listened to my gut years ago when Fantasia NEVER set right with me. I felt evil while watching it, and eventually banned my kids from watching it.

I wonder if the scene with the centaurs may represent the fall of Atlantis, and/or Noah's flood. I believe there is a deep message in several of the sub-plots of the movie.

[Benjamin_LK]

All I really see is that there is a remake here. Doesn't sound much different from Le Fou in the original version. But Disney has gotten away with violence in their moviesystem like impaling the evil woman on a stake or having numerous villains fall to their death, like Gaston. I am sick of remakes of movies.