'Beauty And The Beast' Review: Original's Plot Holes Filled
Warning: Major "Beauty and the Beast" spoilers ahead. This disclaimer is a binding contract that forbids you from tweeting rude things to me when you're pissed that you found out new info from the reboot before you saw it.
MAKE YOUR BED. LIE IN IT.
A couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to see a press screening of the new "Beauty and the Beast." And let me tell you, this reboot lives up to the hype.
It's important for you to know I'm a huge Disney/film buff. I grew up basically memorizing all of the '90s classics. I can recite the entire script of "The Little Mermaid" by heart because I've watched it so many goddamn times.
I'M NOT PROUD OF IT, but it proves a point: I always paid extremely close attention to the tiny details in the Disney animated movies, and I still do.
So as these reboots have been released, I've made sure to see them right away so I could see for myself if Disney got the tiny details right. And with "Beauty and the Beast," they got it right.
The original "Beauty and the Beast" is pretty flawless. I mean, it was nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars before the Best Animated Feature category became a thing in 2001.
But I did say it was only "pretty" flawless, which means it has its share of mistakes and plot holes.
One of the most annoying plot holes in the original was that before the enchantress cast her curse, the Beast/Prince Adam was 1) a literal 11-year-old child, and 2) clearly the prince of something, yet all of the townspeople just FORGOT ABOUT HIM.
He was LITERALLY the future king of the kingdom Belle's village resided in. The castle, as Maurice's journey points out, is only a day's trip away.
So it's not like this place is some far-off land. If the town was modern and had a train system, you could probably get to the castle in, like, a couple of hours.
And the prologue says the rose's last petal would fall when the Beast was 21, which means the spell was only cast for 10 years by the time Belle showed up.
(Also, what kind of evil witch casts a spell on an 11-year-old for doing what literally every child should do and not talk to strangers??? Yeah, there's no love in HIS heart. OK. That adds up.)
We're led to believe the kingdom just forgot about the castle, the prince and everyone who worked there because so much time had passed, but 10 years is NOT enough time to actually forget about that. All these villagers were alive when the spell was cast. Belle and Maurice were definitely alive.
HOW IN THE ACTUAL HELL did the villagers just, like, forget they once had a ROYAL FAMILY????
And if Belle reads so much, how did she not read about the history of their village and be like, "Hmmm, we had a king once, but he disappeared. Yeah, that's normal. On to my fairy tales!!!"
A decade is not nearly enough time for them to completely forget the history of their kingdom, and it's definitely not enough time for generations upon generations of people to live and die, which is the only actual way they could have forgotten they once had a ruler.
This is the shit that keeps me up at night. COLOR ME CONFUSED, DISNEY.
When the news was announced that "Beauty and the Beast" would be the next Disney classic remake, I really freakin' hoped the creators would fill this plot hole (and all of the other ones, like the fact that Gaston was a total rape-y murderer and EVERYONE THOUGHT THAT MADE HIM COOL).
And they did. Thank the freakin' lord, they did.
This is actually the first plot hole the new movie addresses. In the prologue (which is a lot more haunting and darker than the original), the narrator says the spell turned the prince and everyone who worked in the castle into the Beast and enchanted household items. (Obviously.)
But the narrator then adds that all memory of the prince, the castle and their lives beforehand was wiped out of the minds of the kingdom's subjects as part of the curse. Voila, plot hole filled.
Disney actually hinted they were going to fill this plot hole, but you definitely missed it.
Remember when they released a clip from the song "Belle" back in February, and in the clip, Belle talks to a man who thinks he forgot something, but can't seem to recall what it was?
Good morning, Monsieur Jean. Have you lost something again?
I believe I have. The problem is, I can't remember what.
BOOM, right there. He's forgotten something important, but his memory is failing him.
The release of this clip was a creative way of dropping a really subtle hint that the whole memory plot hole would be filled, but they tricked you into thinking it was just a shout out to Emma Watson's "Harry Potter" days.
They also show the prince as a full-grown man in the prologue, which fixes the whole "this witch was way too hard on a little kid" thing by making his cold, greedy heart much more believable.
They even fix that part in the prologue where the Beast tears his claws across a portrait of himself that is years older than he was when the spell was cast by replacing that portrait with one of him as a child.
Exhibit A: total adult.
Exhibit B(east): total child.
So in the first five minutes of this new remake, Disney already answers the major questions the original film always leaves us asking. We asked, and they delivered.
There are a lot more filled plot holes in this movie than I'm letting on here, like the plot line with Belle's mother, for example.
But I'll let you guys see it for yourselves so I don't reveal too much before you grab your torches and pitchforks or come at me with whatever this thing was:
Enjoy the movie and all of the new music!!
(And also Gaston's singing omg guys his voice is literally so majestic does anyone have his number I just want to hear his singing voice always OK bye.)