RE: The Beast

Sorry for posting a new post altogether but for some reason I am not able to post a reply in the appropriate thread. I think Allison makes a very good observation when discussing the portrayal of the beast in Cocteau's film. I am reminded of what we talked about in class on Tuesday, when we discussed what actually makes a beast and is the beast really a beast? (besides his physical). In the Beaumont version, when the sisters' husbands are being described, one really can see that the so-called "beast" would be a better spouse than them. However, I feel that when the beast is made into an actual animal, some of the social commentary is lost. Just a thought...

The beast transforms

What I found most interesting is the beast.In the Beaumont story the Beast transforms into an unknown prince. In the Cocteau version is how they transformed the Beast. In the end the Beast has the same appearance as the friend of Beauty's brother. The Beast's true self is not revealed until the friend dies. I think that the friend and the Prince are versions of the same person and that the story suggests that a transformation of both the maid and groom are necessary for a happy marriage. In the Beaumont story only the maid is morally transformed or enlightened and that is all that is required to bring about the happy ending. Unlike the Pig prince Cocteau suggests that the happiness of the marriage lies on both parties willingness to be better people. The maid must get past what makes the groom repulsive and the groom has to learn to not be greedy, macho, conceited, impatient and etc. He must submit to the wife. It is only then that he can break the glass or mirrror(?) to reveal a better self. He can only prosper when he destroys the image of what others want him to be (witty, handsom, courtly). The story suggests that the best marriage is one in which the partners submit themselves to each other.

Cocteau vs Beaumont: Opening statements

When I began to watch Cocteau's version I was very caught off guard by how differing the relationships of characters were in the opening minutes, which set the tone of the whole film.  When reading Beaumont's version I envisioned Beauty as tender and mild, a girl of only seventeen.  As I watched Cocteau's version I was caught off guard by how old the actress playing Beauty was, as well as how sexual her interaction with the first suitor was.  In Beaumont's version I believed Beauty to be somewhat more reserved, and I felt as if she was flirting back with the suitor event though she was rejecting his marriage proposal in the video.

I was also surprised while watching the film that the father acknowledged that his daughters were rude and spoiled. In Beaumont's version, although the two elder daughters were mean and cruel to Beauty, it never came off to me that they were rude to their father.  The brothers also played a larger role in Cocteau's version.  I may be wrong, but I only briefly remember then being mention as present in the story, not as actually ever saying anything.

Cocteau v. Beaumont: The Narrative

The first thing I noticed while watching the Cocteau film was how there was not a narrator (except for the writing in the beginning). The film was presented using first person from each of the different characters' points of view. In Beaumont, the reader ventures through the story through the voice of the 3rd person narrator and is thus given a distinct point of view from which to create images of what the characters look like, namely the beast. The reader is also able to "hear the thoughts" of the characters in the story. While Beaumont provides a brief description of the beast as being "a hideous monster" with no intelligence, Cocteau's beast gives us a full image of what the beast "looks like" (whether we want to use our own imagination or not). But we cannot see (or read) what is actually going on in the characters' minds. The audience sees the beast when he is first introduced to the father and we hear his description only after we have seen him for ourselves. While this may merely be a result of making a film from a tale and thus not under the director's control, I felt as if the difference in narrative changed the way the characters were perceived.

Cocteau vs Beaumont: The First Impression of the Castle

I think it is very interesting how differently the father's interactions are in the castle in the two different versions of this story. In the Beaumont version, the father seems very pleased and satisfied. He thanks what he believes to be a benevolent fairy for saving him. However, the Cocteau version really makes the castle seem darker and more magical. The castle itself is alive! For example, you have the arms holding the candelabras and the busts smoking and watching him. (I find it funny that despite being obviously terrified he continues to travel deeper into the Beast's property. The thing about these two separate setups is that it they both have the same effect on the person viewing/reading the story...they both reinforce the idea that this is a world where magic/magical things are real and there occurrence is not necessarily out of the ordinary. I also really like the Cocteau's representation because it leads very nicely to the Disney version, which is my favorite.

Cocteau vs. Beaumont: The Beast

One thing that I noticed in Cocteau's “Beauty and the Beast” that is different than in Beaumont’s version is the way in which the Beast is presented. In Beaumont's version, the beast is described as having such a frightening appearance that it could cause a person to faint. The only characteristics in Beaumont's version that define a beast are his ugliness and his lack of intelligence/wit. In Cocteau's “Beauty and the Beast”, however, the beast is not only presented as being ugly and described as having no wit, but Cocteau also includes scenes and additional dialogue that are not included in Beaumont's version that suggest that the beast behaves more animal-like than human-like at times. For instance, Cocteau includes the scene in which Belle peers out the fence door and sees the Beast messily drinking from the pond like a parched wolf. Cocteau also includes the scene in which the Beast is distracted by a nearby, darting deer, as if he wants to spring at it and devour it. Lastly, Cocteau includes the scene where the Beast is creepily stationed outside of Belle’s room late at night covered in blood. Thus, Cocteau presents the Beast as more of an animal than Beaumont does. Even though the Beast is ugly and dumb in Beaumont’s version, he still always acts like a kind, civilized human being.

Assignment 6 - 10.March 2009

Hi Alex, Jasmine, Allison, Alexandria and Tim,

Here is your assignment for this week, with deadlines different from the usual.

Pick one scene or element from Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast, and compare it or contrast it with de Beaumont's version. You might pick something that interests you, that seems odd, or something that you missed in one version or the other, for example.

For those of you who didn't manage to, you have time to complete the reading and watch the film, which is available on OAK and also on Reserve in the Library.

Deadline for putting up your responses is 09.00 p.m. on Wednesday.

Deadline for comment on at least one post is 10.00 a.m. on Thursday.

Ann