Yeah, it's a pretty good film, Enchanted Christmas, and I'd even argue that it's superior to the original.
I will mention this much though: Other than Beast and possibly Chip, how exactly were ANY of the characters in the original film actually complex? Last I checked, they were largely stereotypes (Lumiere being a French womanizer, the featherduster being a French maid, Belle being a brainy brunette with a dash of 1960s feminism, the triplets being... well, they were supposed to be dumb blondes, but I can't say I see them as that, Gaston's a Jerk Jock Dumb Muscle, Maurice's a mad scientist, Cogsworth is the grouchy British majordomo, Mrs. Potts is the grandmotherly British maid.). To be honest, the sequel characters actually DID come across as being complex.
And as far as Belle, personally, I thought Belle was far better handled in this film than in the original (since quite frankly, thanks to Katzenberg and Woolverton's insistence on pushing a feminist agenda that didn't even have any direct relation to the moral of the tale of true beauty coming from within, Belle came across as actually being far closer to Belle's wicked sisters from the original tale in terms of demeanor, her love for her dad aside, than she did the actual Belle from the original tale, and it doesn't help that those triplets came far closer in demeanor to actually MATCHING the intended moral despite being her foils), at least she's actually SHOWN to be pure of heart. Granted, she still doesn't have a foil for the sake of that moral, but beggars can't be choosers after all so I'll take what I can get.
As far as Forte, I personally thought he was a FAR better written villain than Gaston, since unlike Gaston, he actually DID keep his plans to himself and only divulged them to those he knew he can trust, and even THEN, he made SURE to bribe him to ensure he went along with it, thus use pragmatism to ensure his ends, and he actually came far closer to actually succeeding in his goal than Gaston ever did. In fact, many times, I wish HE was the main villain of the original tale instead of Gaston. And Forte actually has a very understandable motivation. Compare that with Gaston, whose motive for going for Belle was extremely poor, even by shallowness standards (he wanted the most beautiful woman in the village, yet he ignores those triplets who are far closer to the mark regarding title than Belle?), he stupidly divulged his plan to everyone and their neighbor in the Gaston Reprise and ended up being rooted for it in a clear instance of very bad writing in the film, and then when it comes around, the second he mentioned the proposal to Belle, she immediately deduced Gaston's part in Maurice getting arrested.
I will agree with you on ONE thing besides TEC being a good film, though: It's certainly better than Belle's Magical World (though that being said, I did think Fifi's Folly was better than how Marvel Comics treated the triplets, because at least with Fifi or whoever that featherduster's name is, we never saw her reaction to Lumiere's womanizing OR his kissing Belle's hand in a flirtatious manner, so we can plausibly assume she could be jealous of Belle. The triplets in the Marvel Comics, however, were depicted as spiteful and jealous shrews regarding Belle, obviously because she was chosen over themselves by Gaston, despite the fact that not only does the film not indicate that they had even a slight amount of jealousy towards Belle, it actually implied the exact opposite: That they accepted Belle was going to be Gaston's fiancé and willing to let her have him even if it meant he doesn't marry one of them, and if anything, they were actually more shocked and upset that Belle refused Gaston than being actually jealous).
reply
share