FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • In the lyrics of a song, these symbols <poem> </poem> under Source Mode need to be put there to make the lyrics look more perfect and less choppy than adding <br> at the end of every line.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    A comment on the message talk for Belle's sisters by Kimberly AJ made me wonder, did the art book ever supply individual names for Belle's sisters? Won't surprise me if it didn't, but I figured I might as well ask, since AJ did mention they should have gotten individual names.

      Loading editor
    • No, it doesn't give their names.

        Loading editor
    • Eh, figured as much. It was a deleted story draft anyways. I'm a bit surprised that they didn't give names since they at least seemed to complete enough of the draft to have a full plotline and ending, which is more to say than the 1989 draft. Oh well. At least we know their fate for the most part. We don't even know Marguerite's fate.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    I wonder with the new knowledge that the original tale was going to be straight-up adapted in 1988 if we should create an article on Belle's sisters? The plot summary seemed nearly complete, which means they might have some characterizations we might use.

    Also, is there any concept artwork of her sisters, either on here or not on here?

    I hope the enchantress was decent enough to transform them and Belle's suitors when they returned home, because if she transformed them while they were still in the woods, I have a very bad feeling about their future (two words, "dinner time."). I wonder what kind of animals they were turned into, though.

      Loading editor
    • View all 7 replies
    • Weedle McHairybug wrote:
      I wonder what kind of animals they were turned into, though.

      The book doesn't give a complete list of the animals that the villains got turned into. 

      Here is the direct passage in the book on that:

      "At the moment Belle's kiss transforms the Beast into a prince, the sisters and suitors turn into animals that reflect their faults: a pig for greed, a peacock for vanity and so on."

        Loading editor
    • DisneyTriviaBuff wrote:

      Weedle McHairybug wrote:
      I wonder what kind of animals they were turned into, though.

      The book doesn't give a complete list of the animals that the villains got turned into. 

      Here is the direct passage in the book on that:

      "At the moment Belle's kiss transforms the Beast into a prince, the sisters and suitors turn into animals that reflect their faults: a pig for greed, a peacock for vanity and so on."

      Hmm... well I sure hope that the peacock is for one of the suitors, because if it's one of Belle's sisters who got turned into that... let's just say that it would be implied that the Enchantress did more than just change her form if you know what I mean (since the colorful display that peacocks are infamous for are strictly for the males of that species, as females are actually fairly modest/dull in appearance).

      Either way, like I said, I hope they at least got home safely BEFORE the curse went into effect, considering that if they were still in the woods when this happened, their likely fate is going to be very nasty.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I'm sorry for having to ask, but it's been roughly a month since your estimate of when the book will arrive. Has it arrived yet? I think I remember you mentioning you can't track it at one point. If it hasn't arrived, can you try to order it from a store that actually DOES track its delivery progress, like Amazon?

      Loading editor
    • I did in fact order it from Amazon. I meant to tell you that I e-mailed the seller and they said that it most likely got lost in the mail. They said they'd send me another copy if they had one but they didn't. However, they said were very sorry and issued me a full refund. I've been meaning to buy the same book from another seller but just haven't got around to it.

        Loading editor
    • Eh, okay. I know how that's like. Mom ordered Beauty and the Beast so we could rewatch it so I could confront some "inner demons" regarding my suspicions of the film, but it never came in, and unlike you, we didn't use Amazon (not that we had much of a choice to not use it, since they barely carried it beyond bluray).

      Though I must ask you, do you live in New York? I'm only asking because I think I've managed to find another place that sells it, Barnes and Noble, and the copy they're selling is from New York: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/tale-as-old-as-time-charles-solomon/1110898532?ean=9781423124818 You could also try finding sellers on Amazon (I think Amazon does tracking of its shipments) or eBay who are close to your area to minimize the risk of the shipment getting lost.

        Loading editor
    • I'm actually from Canada. Right after I saw your message, I went to Amazon and found another copy which ships from the same province that I live in. So I ordered it and they say it should come next week. I'll let you know as soon as it does.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    It's been two weeks, so I'm wondering if your book has come in yet.

      Loading editor
    • Nope, not yet. They said it would come on April 14th which is this Tuesday, so it should be coming soon. I promise I'll let you know as soon as it comes

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    Since you've probably gotten the Art and Making of Beauty and the Beast by now, I was wondering, is there any new information about the original screenplay that needs to be added in? You were pretty interested in adding in any new information on it, so I was wondering how that went, especially regarding Marguerite.

      Loading editor
    • I haven't gotten the book yet. They say it won't come for another week yet. However, I'll let you know as soon as I get it. I'll also be able to upload any new pieces of concept art that the book contains because I have a scanner.

        Loading editor
    • DisneyTriviaBuff wrote: I haven't gotten the book yet. They say it won't come for another week yet. However, I'll let you know as soon as I get it. I'll also be able to upload any new pieces of concept art that the book contains because I have a scanner.

      Let me guess? Tornado warnings the cause of the delay?

      And ehh, I'll continue to wait. I just thought that you said it would be coming in by this week, and since you uploaded four BATB-related concept arts for the original screenplay page, I thought you might have gotten it by now.

      Speaking of uploading stuff, if those four artworks you uploaded weren't from the book, where were they from?

        Loading editor
    • Weedle McHairybug wrote:

      Speaking of uploading stuff, if those four artworks you uploaded weren't from the book, where were they from?

      They were from various blogs around the Internet. 

      One was from the same blog that I directed you to last time and the others were from the following blog: 

      http://jimhillmedia.com/

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    Hate to ask again, but I never really got a response back, so:

    Have you gotten Art and Making of Beauty and the Beast yet? I still need to know if there was anything relating to the Bimbettes in there at all, development, why they were made more beautiful than Belle, any indication on their personalities that weren't already apparent in the film, etc., etc.

    Was the artworks for LeFou you posted from that book also, assuming you did get it?

      Loading editor
    • View all 10 replies
    • Weedle McHairybug wrote:

      Yeah, agreed, especially when removing Marguerite was a huge mistake that if anything hurt the film more than helped it. I can kinda understand the rationale for removing Belle's sisters, even if I don't really agree with it (Disney had no problem reusing characters in their fairytales, like how The Evil Queen was somewhat reused with Lady Tremaine and Maleficent, not to mention Aurora suffered a similar fate to Snow White. And besides, they technically reused Vanessa with the Featherduster's human form), but removing someone would have been perfect as a foil for Belle for the purposes of the moral was inexcusable, especially when thanks to Woolverton's insistence on trying to base Belle on the women's movement, she came across as pretty ugly in her character, almost as bad as Woody in the Black Friday reel (which ironically was also Jeffrey Katzenberg's fault).

      I never understood why it needed to be rewritten. The whole "dark, dramatic and somber" element doesn't seem to cut it because, quite frankly, Snow White and even Cinderella were about as dark as if not darker than that draft (not to mention the final film came across as extremely cynical as a result). Not to mention, Katzenberg tried to do to Toy Story what he decried Beauty and the Beast as being.

      No kidding! However, that isn't to say that there weren't some things that the final film did improve on. For example, the idea of the Enchanted Objects having individual personalities instead of being mute, as was originally intended was a fantastic idea as watching them perform repetative pantomime routines would've got boring. Also, Purdum never intended to have songs in his film and while I can't say wether or not that could've worked, the score by Howard Ashman and Alan Menken was awesome! The pacing in the initial storyreels is also pretty bad, as Belle gets the least amount of screentime, the Beast has not yet appeared by the end and lots of unessacary, random gags, such as the prostitute accosting Maurice are thrown in. Although, with that said, I've always felt that instead of completely scrapping Purdum's screenplay, which is what made him quit, Katzenberg could've asked Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise to co-direct with him and compormise on their ideas.

      With that said, I've always felt that there were several things Purdum did that worked a lot better than the choices they made with the final film. For example, the 17th century costumes and architecture would've been absolutely breathtaking to see, much more so than the somewhat generic-looking 19th century ones of the final film. Second, I like Gaston's original characterization much more as the strong, pushy guy that everyone loves because he's strong has been seen in plenty of other Disney Movies (Kay in The Sword in the Stone, Brom Bones in The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.) Thirdly, I absolutely love the fact that with the original Maurice, we would've had a Disney father that wasn't an old, jolly guy for once but instead a handsome, middle-aged man and am appalled that they went back to that cliche with his final design.        .

        

        Loading editor
    • DisneyTriviaBuff wrote:

      Weedle McHairybug wrote:

      Yeah, agreed, especially when removing Marguerite was a huge mistake that if anything hurt the film more than helped it. I can kinda understand the rationale for removing Belle's sisters, even if I don't really agree with it (Disney had no problem reusing characters in their fairytales, like how The Evil Queen was somewhat reused with Lady Tremaine and Maleficent, not to mention Aurora suffered a similar fate to Snow White. And besides, they technically reused Vanessa with the Featherduster's human form), but removing someone would have been perfect as a foil for Belle for the purposes of the moral was inexcusable, especially when thanks to Woolverton's insistence on trying to base Belle on the women's movement, she came across as pretty ugly in her character, almost as bad as Woody in the Black Friday reel (which ironically was also Jeffrey Katzenberg's fault).

      I never understood why it needed to be rewritten. The whole "dark, dramatic and somber" element doesn't seem to cut it because, quite frankly, Snow White and even Cinderella were about as dark as if not darker than that draft (not to mention the final film came across as extremely cynical as a result). Not to mention, Katzenberg tried to do to Toy Story what he decried Beauty and the Beast as being.

      No kidding! However, that isn't to say that there weren't some things that the final film did improve on. For example, the idea of the Enchanted Objects having individual personalities instead of being mute, as was originally intended was a fantastic idea as watching them perform repetative pantomime routines would've got boring. Also, Purdum never intended to have songs in his film and while I can't say wether or not that could've worked, the score by Howard Ashman and Alan Menken was awesome! The pacing in the initial storyreels is also pretty bad, as Belle gets the least amount of screentime, the Beast has not yet appeared by the end and lots of unessacary, random gags, such as the prostitute accosting Maurice are thrown in. Although, with that said, I've always felt that instead of completely scrapping Purdum's screenplay, which is what made him quit, Katzenberg could've asked Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise to co-direct with him and compormise on their ideas.

      With that said, I've always felt that there were several things Purdum did that worked a lot better than the choices they made with the final film. For example, the 17th century costumes and architecture would've been absolutely breathtaking to see, much more so than the somewhat generic-looking 19th century ones of the final film. Second, I like Gaston's original characterization much more as the strong, pushy guy that everyone loves because he's strong has been seen in plenty of other Disney Movies (Kay in The Sword in the Stone, Brom Bones in The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.) Thirdly, I absolutely love the fact that with the original Maurice, we would've had a Disney father that wasn't an old, jolly guy for once but instead a handsome, middle-aged man and am appalled that they went back to that cliche with his final design.        .

        

      I guess you have a point regarding the enchanted objects (though I do think they should have still made sure the objects are just animated objects instead of transfigured servants even if they do talk, since that at least wouldn't have the Enchantress coming across as a monster as a result of the implications of her cursing children for something they were completely innocent of), and Belle getting somewhat shafted. Also the prostitute angle as well (that would probably be something not necessary, though at least she's actually shown to be one, unlike the Bimbettes where it's never even made clear whether they've even lost their virginity at all in the film, and in fact their overall nature makes it extremely unlikely they were hookers). On the other hand, though, I'm not so sure about the songs. Be Our Guest, Something There, and Beauty and the Beast were fine, and as long as The Mob Song, contrary to what that idiot Dan Rather claimed, is not meant to be a pro-homosexual agenda song, I'll be fine with that. However, they definitely should have axed the Gaston reprise since it painted the village in a needlessly negative light and basically had any realism Gaston may have had gone down the drain by his openly gloating his plan like a James Bond villain (which is the worst way to plot). I actually wonder if they only inserted the Gaston reprise because the writers felt cynical about the kids' intelligence and ability to deduce Gaston as being an actual bad guy. And the opening song really needs to be reworked in order to actually show how Belle's life at the village was terrible (despite all intentions, the song only succeeded in showing her to be an arrogant jerk due to complaining about it being provincial, which unfortunately as I pointed out broke the moral on her end.).

      And yeah, I also prefer Marquis Gaston to the final version. At least HE has an actual reason for going after Belle (quite frankly, his motives for going for Belle in the final film made absolutely no sense whatsoever. Come on, those triplets far outrank Belle in terms of at least Outer Beauty if Dead or Alive and how it's female cast were infamously designed are anything to go by, not to mention they pretty much match what Gaston wants in a wife, anyways.), and at least he doesn't demonize an entire settlement by openly gloating his evil plan and then being cheered on for reasons that can only be guessed as the songwriters being particularly cynical about the audience's intelligence. Plus, considering he actually resembles Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the father of the French Revolution and thus has a lot of Christian and French blood on his hands (to say little of Communism's massacres being indirectly inspired by him as well), that's also a major plus as well. As far as old jolly guy for a father, I see your point, but I'm not sure King Triton was really all that jolly in the original Little Mermaid film, and I'm not even sure if he's even that old, though I do agree regarding Maurice. I think the intended setting was late 18th century, going by what Glen Keane stated in the commentary, though that being said, I also wish they actually HAD Belle being discerning of her literature considering future events after that time. If Belle ends up joining the Jacobins just because she "drunk the Kool-Aid" regarding some of the various Philosophes' writings, things are gonna get very ugly regarding Belle and Adam's future, especially given that the French Revolution's likely going to be just on their doorstep.

      And there's also Marguerite. As noted above, she was perfect for a foil of Belle. In the final film, the closest we've got to actual foils for Belle are those blonde triplets, and there's literally nothing indicating they even had inner ugliness at all aside from crushing on Gaston, and in fact they ironically came across as being more pure of heart and internally beautiful than Belle despite their crush on Gaston, meaning they were terrible foils for the sake of the moral (it also doesn't help that the failed wedding scene implies that they viewed Belle as a friend since they were setting it up without even knowing that Gaston was going to be the groom). Probably the closest we've got to them actually being ugly in character was in the Marvel Comics serial, which ironically conflicted heavily with their film characterizations besides crushing on Gaston.

      EDIT: On a slightly unrelated note, I think the unused concept art for Fifi's human form actually fit her better than the final design, as in the final film, she really doesn't seem to retain any of her characteristics besides possibly her eyes (I know her wide goofy grin was not retained at all in her human form, with her mouth being very small by comparison).

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    Since you seem to have a lot of knowledge on that art and making of Beauty and the Beast, likely owning it, does it mention ANYTHING about The Bimbettes in there at all? Artwork, reasons for writing, development, who they are based on, anything? I figured we might need to note any information on them that's available, especially when there's little to indicate of their development (To be honest, I'm a bit surprised the writers didn't give them any signs of internal ugliness in their characterizations in the final film when they are pretty much the closest we've got to foils to Belle, not to mention thanks to some stupid things Linda Woolverton and Jeff Katzenberg did with the film the closest we've got to Belle's wicked sisters, which in a way really ruined the moral on Belle's end.).

    EDIT: Oh, and making them more physically beautiful than Belle (I'm not kidding, they have the kind of bods you would expect from the Dead or Alive franchise, which is rather infamous for how its female cast is designed to be really busty and petite. In fact, they actually resemble Helena Douglas from that game) was a pretty big mistake especially considering it came at odds with the opening song's statements and Gaston's motives, so we're definitely going to need a huge explanation for that as well.

      Loading editor
    • I don't actually own the book. As I said in my last message, my knowlege of the sedan chair being an enchanted one came from a book preveiw  video that someone had posted on-line because one of the pictures in the book clearly showed Belle climbing aboard it. However, I'd certainly like to own a copy of the book, but it's not cheap. The cheapest price people are asking for it is $200. However, there is appearently a whole chapter that covers the 1989 screenplay, so I'll most likely buy it when I get my next paycheck.  

        Loading editor
    • Okay. Good luck trying to get it and getting your next paycheck.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you

        Loading editor
    • So it's been, what, almost two weeks give or take a couple of days? Have you managed to get the book? And if so, does it mention anything about the bimbettes at all, also why they were depicted as being more beautiful than Belle for absolutely no reason at all?

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Thank you for contributing all the images to the article on the Gryphon and Mock Turtle. 

    I was curious on who drew the final two images of Alice dancing the Mock Turtle.  While the other images are attributed Mary Blair and David Hall, the final two images don't list their artist.

    Also, is the final image of Alice, Mock Turtles, and baby turtles meant to be part of the scene the song "Lobster Quadrille" would have been part of?

      Loading editor
    • I'm not sure who to attribute those last two images to because I found them on somebody's blog and he did not know who drew them. However, yes, the final image is meant to be of the afformentioned "Lobster Quadrille" scene.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi.

    I managed to create an article detailing the original opening for TLMIII (what would eventually be called Ariel's Beginning). I'd appreciate it if you can add in any information about it. I've got down the basic details of the plotline from that scene, though not much of the development, I'm afraid.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message