‘Beauty And The Beast’ Selling Out Showtimes From North To South; Poised To Whip [tr]

It sounds as though the retards infesting our country love watching a couple of males swapping spit and will even pay to see it. Sickos.

It’s a beautiful movie, and I can’t wait to see it. I do NOT believe all of the “gay” rumors. I’ll let you know after I’ve seen it a few times!

It’s most likely there, but it probably very innocuous like two men dancing together during gaston’s song or swooning over his manliness.

Badger, there is a single character that is a gay character. That doesn’t make it a “fag film”. That makes it a film with a gay character.

Unfortunately, you are so intent on blasting the lark of it being a film with a gay character, you missed that literally it’s a film about bestiality. So, the reality is, it’s a fairy tale.

Have you noticed Disney’s ABC-TV schedule?

Practically every TV show has at least one ‘gay’ character.............

When we lived near Hollywood one of the theaters in our town was where movies were shown to test audiences before the final movie came together. Then we had to stay for a data dump session giving opinions of music, possible alternative endings, characters, etc.

It was fun, but we got tired of being bombarded with homosexual crap, demonic stuff, etc. They told you nothing about the movie when tickets were handed out so you couldn’t make a decision of whether to go or not. We’ve walked out in the middle of many showings. When the monitor people caught us at the door we’d tell them why.

We finally just stopped going. Too much gay.

This is very much front loaded. I took my daughters (15 and 20) to this movie. The reason they wanted to go so much was the actress (Emma Watson) and the much hyped singers (Ariana Grande and John Legend). And of course they liked the original cartoon version. The theater had start times every half hour with a student discount. So the high school and college kids get in for $5. At my theater, the first showing at 7 pm was 90% full. And the lobby was pretty full for a Thursday when the movie was over so, the other showings must have had some audience.

The girls liked this more than I did. This version is very PC. In the original version, Belle was bored of her little town and wanted some adventure. In this version, she is a snob and the townspeople are literally illiterate. They make that point several times. There are only two types of people in this movie. Black and white. And they are proud to put black people all over, especially in the “smart roles” like librarian. And of course there are many mixed couples. Though its hyped, there is a gay character. But you really don’t understand that he is gay until the end. And even that is a “funny” brief one second clip.

The point of this movie is, that small town means small minds. They actually say it. Belle is a snob who rejects everyone in the town because they can’t read. The town stops her from teaching a small girl to read. But the town is not just illiterate they are evil too. In this version, Gaston ties up Belles father and leaves him to be eaten by the wolves.

Outside of the millennial star power this movie is simply not as good as the original. The PC additions to the script are obnoxious. It’s clear that the writers who adapted this are globalists. They think very little of the working class. It’s odd that there are now three races black, white, and gay. But the prince in the end looks very Nordic. You can’t disappoint those young girls who have come to see their Disney princess get a really good looking prince.

I was also annoyed by several close shots that looked like a hotel sales photo. You could not see how big something was. You were always seeing a small section of the scene. Also there was a lot of playing with the focus. Things you were not supposed to see where out of focus. Forcing you to look only at the important item in a scene. And some scenes had a drone camera experience that literally made me nauseous. You were flying around like you were a drone in the scene. I assume this was all part of the 3D experience going on in the theater next door. I hate when they ruin the regular version of a movie to support the 3D version.

The ethics here are disturbing. Disney always has a bit of a problem with ethics. They are way too concerned with whatever is PC at the time. To see a more ethical account of a similar theme, see Shrek. The movie pokes fun at Disney all over the place. But the important moral point comes at the end of Shrek, when the two main characters prefer to remain ogres and choose not to turn into a beautiful prince and princess as in a Disney movie.

Belle was always a snob who rejected everyone in the village for not meeting her standards, even in the 1991 version. Or do I have to remind you that the opening song literally had Belle dismissing the town as being full of "little people" or yelling twice in the song "There must be more than this provincial life!" (emphasis mine). And the town being illiterate and evil was also in the 1991 film as well, or at least, it's pretty clearly implied that they didn't exactly support Belle's literacy (namely, during the same opening song, the lyrics make it very clear that one of the reasons why they considered Belle an outcast was because she "had her nose stuck in a book", and don't get me started with Gaston's objection to Belle reading. As far as the villagers being evil, I might as well point out that in the original film, we get the Gaston reprise shortly after Gaston kicks Maurice out of the tavern where he comes up with the plan to try and have Maurice locked up in the nuthouse as blackmail to ensure Belle's marriage, a plan, BTW, he actually manages to publicly divulge key details of during that reprise, with the villagers actually cheering him on. If anything, from what I gather, the villagers were NICER in this than in the 1991 film, as aside from that frankly unnecessary and stupid reprise being cut, the villagers actually show hesitance with the plan when Gaston tries to convince them to lock up Maurice).

With all of that said, I do fully agree with you, it's just a PC remake that tries to push a left-wing agenda even further than the original 1991 film (I will still maintain, however, that Emma Watson, despite being feminist, is practically a moderate compared to Linda Woolverton, the lady who wrote the 1991 Beauty and the Beast film and is more than a little responsible for that movie's feminist agenda being in the forefront.).

So far as Shrek, I'm pretty sure that Fiona was actually BORN human and the Ogre form was the result of a curse, so technically, only Shrek actually remained an ogre.

Yes, Fiona was born Human. Shrek was born an ogre. But with the choice at the end of the movie, they prefer the ogre. Its a big difference from a Disney movie. Here, in Beauty and the Beast, they end with two beautiful Harlequin Romance cover models.

The point is that Disney sets a standard outside of real life. The character that the girl audience identifies with, ends up rich and beautiful. That’s happy ever after. What we never really notice is that our real lives are the ogre’s swamp, or towns people. There is never happiness being normal in a Disney movie. I can’t think of what the Disney people must think of A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Life is Beautiful, or My Left Foot. Disney gives little value to actual life, and the struggles we all deal with throughout our lives.

Eh, suit yourself. Personally, having Ariel remain a mermaid and Beast remain... well, a beast would destroy the intended points of their respective stories, especially when Beast regaining his humanity was meant to showcase his redemption, and as far as Ariel, she wanted to live among humans first and foremost (Eric didn’t even factor into her desires until AFTER saving him). Pulling the Shrek model would not have worked in those cases.

Besides, I honestly think the Shrek model’s been used with Jean-Paul Marat (who deliberately left himself extremely unkempt in order to “live under the precepts of Jean-Jacques Rousseau), Bertholt Brecht, and Jean-Paul Sartre (the last regarding the girls he philandered despite his ugly looks and even uglier character), and that if anything ended disastrously, the epitome of the left-wing, as a matter of fact.

I was talking to a really good christian family who homeschool and are church goers weekly. I snarked about Beauty and the Beast last night on the phone with them and they said oh they can’t wait to see it on Saturday. I was stunned and asked about the homosexuality in the movie and they said, Oh it’s just a closed mouthed kiss. I was a bit taken aback by that statement.

The problem isn’t the kiss. It is the infiltration of homosexuality to our kids a little bit at a time. This time is just a kiss but what is next time? Waking up in bed together?

That is my main problem with the movie and why my kids are not going. My daughter 8 hates me right now. But sorry too bad. Maybe if they do one of those Pure flix additions for the movie, we can see it. Otherwise I am the a$$hole father.

Beauty and the Beast will likely have one solid weekend and then plummet.

Yeah but to make 160 million in one weekend is not to shabby. Even if that is all they make, it is a success.

Let’s not flip out over two minutes of an inanimate object flirting with a male.

Let’s wait til the first Disney trans princess with size 13 feet who doesn’t fit into the usual Barbie shoes. (Or the Barbie glued on panties)