First of all, I was dubious about this live action (2017) remake of a Disney cartoon classic, but once I saw the trailer I was excited, the singing and acting looked great. And after seeing it, I think it is a good adaptation. I was also encouraged by the comments by Emma Watson refusing to wear a corset. However it remains just as (if not) more problematic than the Disney cartoon version (1991). I will delve into the origins of this fairy tale and also it's depiction of the role of women.
Most people haven't heard of the fairytale of "Bluebeard". There are many similarities such as the French setting/ origins and also the "forbidden" rooms. Both tales are about abusive men and the concept of temptation and secrets. "Bluebeard" tells a story about a room with a key that the new wife must not open. Of course, she does and the key becomes stained with blood after discovering the room is full of the wives dead bodies. She cannot wash the stain of blood on the key. This is symbolic of virginity and the spoiling of women once they are married (and or adultery) and they are the husband's property. In effect the wife is punished for disobeying the husband, she falls into the trap/ temptation. In some versions she is saved in time by her brothers and in others she is murdered by her husband. The major link or comparison to the film versions is the "west wing" concept where the Beast hides the rose.
Another fairytale that links to Beauty and the Beast (1991 & 2017) is Snow White and Rose Red. This has much more similarity with Beauty and the Beast than it does with the Disney Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (in my opinion). The basic similarity is a man is magically changed into a bear by a wicked dwarf and the bear begs for shelter from the sisters. Once the dwarf is dead the bear changes back into a King/ Prince and marries Snow White. The sisters are rewarded for their kindness of a "beast". (Also check out this similarity with one story from The Storyteller by Jim Henson called "Hans my hedgehog")
But what is the problem with this modern fairytale? In both the 1991 and 2017 versions there is a semblance of women being strong, independent, self sufficient and educated (she reads a book while walking she must be smart right?!). Also it follows the notion that women can "change" men quite literally in this case. This might seem a trifle obvious considering most rom-coms, but it has a darker edge. The beast is characterised as sympathetic despite his harsh, aggressive behaviour, because he saves her life from the wolves. Ok, so that's pretty stereotyped, but what is it teaching children? That men can treat you terribly, but if they "save" you then it's ok? That men are uncouth, but taught etiquette and "manners" by women (see the soup slurping scene)?
On the surface this fairytale is a love story about "true love" that breaks a spell. But instead it is about "teaching" or "learning" to love an abusive man (also the beast has no defining characteristics except that he's an asshole) and in doing so he rewards her with books and a mansion and physical safety. *sigh*
Another theme I love about these films is the idea of reflection and artifice. But once again it is women who accommodate "ugly" men or "beasts". But maybe that seems a positive thing? She despises Gaston because he's uneducated (he puts his muddy boots on the open pages of her books) and a slob, he has an "ugliness" to his personality, but then again so does the Beast. I find it terribly disappointing that the Beast transforms into a handsome prince at the end since this is Belle's "reward" for true love. But this idea of ugliness into beauty is pretty common in fairtytales. And of course there's the mirror (something also in Snow White) which is pivotal in the plot, but brings up the problem of "reality" vs. "simulation" through reflection, but I won't get into that here.
Something that was changed and an added strange back story for in the new film (2017) is Belle's father. From the "mad" inventor "crazy old Maurice" into a toymaker and reveals the story about Belle's mother. Don't get me started on the weird time travel elements that they inserted into the new film, I choose to ignore them! But there's so much time wasted with the side plot of Gaston and Maurice wandering around and then get to the off to the asylum anyway. The 1990's version was a lot neater in terms of plot and pacing.
Ok, so now onto costuming! I applaud Emma Watson standing her ground around not wearing a corset for her costume and it aligns with the 1990s version. Although I couldn't help thinking Emma Watson had forgotten to pull her skirt hem down after going to the bathroom, but it makes more sense since she's walking through mud all the time. Other than that all the costuming is quite prudish and in alignment with the 1990's version. Although there's some weird continuity of wearing a cardigan in one scene and not the other and back again, but lets let bygones be bygones.
One strong theme is of difference versus "madness". Belle is viewed as "odd" because she can read and is educated and not interested in marriage. Her father is also "odd" or "crazy" more so in the 1990's version where he's depicted as the "mad scientist" and the village labels him as "crazy" at Gaston's behest because he wants him out of the way so he can marry Belle. In the new version (2017) he's much more realistic and depicted as quiet and grief-stricken and merely labelled in order for Belle to be married to Gaston.
Homophobia in the new version? So there's supposed controversy around LeFou's character. When I watched it I was quite irritated by the directorial and acting choices around his character. Playing the "man-servant" as gay isn't itself problematic, except where you make LGBT people the villains. I thought his performances was over-wrought and way too on the nose. To be clear I don't have ANY problem with any characters in the film being portrayed as "gay identified". It was just so facile and he was such a sleazy slimy character. Why did they have to depict the supposedly one gay identified character as negative? Is that the best that Disney can do? Also it's just a shot at the end with LeFou dancing with another man dressed as a woman, as Ewan McGregor said in an interview "it's 2017". I'm still waiting for the openly gay Disney prince or princess!
No comments:
Post a Comment