Is Beauty and the Beast About Stockholm Syndrome?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 มี.ค. 2017
- No. The answer is no.
And before you feel the urge to "SCREEN JUNKIES DID IT FIRST" - no, Screen Junkies did it, like, 40th. I'm merely 41st.
Disney.
Twitter: @thelindsayellis
Support us on Patreon: / lindsayellis - บันเทิง
If anyone in the movie has Stockholm Syndrome it's Lefou! Gaston does literally nothing but abuse him and yet he still remains loyal to him!
Huh... good point. Though that could also just be a case of the village punching bag kissing up to the popular guy either for protection or because he hopes to improve his own standing by association with the big shot.
In the new movie he’s in love with him. Legit Stockholm syndrome. Wow never thought of that before
Only thing is, he wasn't imprisoned or a captive of him...for all we know. But what if??
"You can go ANYWHERE in my tavern, drink all my beer, sit anywhere...EXCEPT my antler chair! It's FORBIDDEN!"
Lefou is actually the antagonist. He isn't a victim, he is a sycophant that manipulates Gaston. His power within the town is from how close he is to Gaston. For example, look at how he doesn't want Gaston to marry Belle, but then when she kicks him out, he starts playing the music AFTER he was dumped into the mud in order to mock him. Even the names are telling, main characters in the film have "descriptor" names Belle (beauty), Beast (enough said), Cogsworth (a clock), Mrs. Potts (a teapot), etc; on the villain side you have Gaston (no meaning/translation) and Lefou (literal translation=The Fool). Considering most of the movie is about seeing the truth behind a mask (belle seeing the beast as human, the prince's inability to see the fairy as a person) should not the villain be the same. Finally to see his true colors, look at the faces and expressions during the battle at the castle. Most of the villagers are motivated by fear into anger, Lefou however is the only one show pleasure as he tries to melt Lumiere.
Fenrir wow! Never thought of it that way but it seems very plausible now that you say it. He does seem smarter than Ghaston after all and yes he does have sadistic tendencies. There is not only the scene with Lumiere but the scene where Lefou and a few of the other men chase the footstool into the kitchen and corners it. I think we all know what would have happened if the oven hadn´t scared them off...
I can imagine that he was secretly hoping that Beast and Ghaston would both die in the fight so that he could have the castle and its riches to himself (as well as any possible magical artifacts such as the mirror).
Now that I think about it it really makes perfect sense that he didn´t want Ghaston to marry Belle (other than Ghaston possibly being a new laughing stock for associating with the "odd girl") . She is a very intelligent woman and would probably easily see through Lefou and his schemes and therefor be a threat to his influence over Ghaston.
Why does everyone assume that Belle abandons her wish to travel the world just because she marries the Prince? As an aristocrat she now belongs to the small group of people who actually have the time and means to travel extensively in the 18th century. And after being basically forced to stay inside his castle for who knows how many years the Prince probably doesn't need much convincing to go on a trip.
Yeah, seriously I bet that Belle and Beast travel. People saying her wanting adventure but instead being a homebody with a library just because the film ends with them in the castle doesn't mean they are shackled to castle life. In fact the implication would be the opposite, I mean Beast probably wants to leave the same place he was stuck in for years.
Right up until she and the beast get their heads lopped off in the French Revolution.
Also, I think Belle pretty clearly knew simply traveling on it's own wouldn't give her what she wanted. It's more the hope of unknown pastures being a place where she'd find what she wants.
Why does everyone just pay attention to the adventure line and thus misses what Belle actually wants, which is a place where she fits in and someone who understands her.
"For once it might be grand, to have someone understand, I want so much more than they got planned" :P
And yeah, no one says that the Beast wants to stay locked up after that. I think it's more likely the two take their own adventures in europe :P
AND End up in Paris around the time Frollo decides to go insane on Gypsy populations XP
In the same vein, Cinderella isn't a pushover. She is in an abusive family and stays kind. Her dream (in the Disney version) was to have a night off. She never went looking for a man, and certainly didn't go looking for a man to save her.
And people talk about how superior the modern princesses are. Strong women have been shown for decades. IIRC Anna's voice actress seriously said she won't let her kids watch the older princesses because their portrayal of women is supposedly unhealthy. SMH. What are these people on?
@@thunderbird1921 that was Keira Knightley. Not Kristen Bell.
@@mellemadswoestenburg1296 I thought BOTH of them said it.
@@thunderbird1921 No not really. Kristen said that she doesn't like the message of Snow White cause of stranger danger. But she still lets her children watch it and enjoy it. After that she tells them that it wasn't smart of Snow White to do that. And they completely agree. She doesn't think older princesses are bad. She lets them watch it but still lets her children know that Snow White made a mistake. Keira Knightley on the other hand just flat out doesn't let her children watch older princess movies cause she thinks the princesses are bad role models. Like Cinderella who "waited in her abusive household for a rich guy to get her out of there" even though that's not what happend AT ALL!
Exactly. Plus Cinderella was brainwashed as a child to be a servant to her stepmother and sisters, so there was an excuse of not going anywhere. Whereas the 2015 version, she could escape, but didn't want to because of the property and she hung out with friends.
not to mention...
The curse wouldn't have broken with stockholm syndrome. Am I the only one who sees this?
That's a very good point.
Why not exactly? just to play devils advocate the emotions of the syndrome are real and deep. They often need professional deprogrammers to fix them afterwards and get rid of those feelings. It's the same chemical reaction in the head.
Spartan155 but that's not love. The curse could only be broken if they truly love each other, not just having deep emotional feelings.
That's what the people who subscribe to the "Stockholm Syndrome Plothole" are arguing about, that the curse SHOULDN'T have broken because Belle did not really love the Beast. She was "suffering" from Stockholm Syndrome. You are right of course, it isn't Stockholm Syndrome which is why the curse ended. That's the whole point of the video, that most subscribers of the SSP don't really understand SS and so have mistakenly ascribed it to Belle's situation.
True love can happen from Stockholm Syndrome, just ask my wife. Hang on a sec; gonna go down and unlock her from the basement
"And he decides to improve himself of his own volition"
THANK YOU
Belle does not fix the beast, the beast fixes the beast.
...and Belle is there every step of the way, steering him in the right direction and making him hate himself a little less by showing interest in him. BELLE SHOWS HOW A SINGLE PERSON'S SUPPORT CAN CHANGE LIVES AND I LOVE HER FOR THAT AAAAAAAAAA
except for that one sequel
That was because of Forte though.
Fuck the sequels, they don't count!
Belle motivates him by just being there, but he is the agent of his own desire for self-improvement.
I object to the inclusion of Mulan in the Disney “this man is the answer to your need” trope. Mulan’s journey really has little to do with Shang. Her want is to save her father from going off to war, while her need is to accept herself and feel accepted by her family. Shang is a perk.
Not to mention she is the one saving shang's cute arse.
I was only listening to this video, and the comment of “this guy is the answer” made me realize why I love Mulan, because it so isn’t about that. Her character arc really is all about protecting her family and going off to war and dealing with gender roles.
Honestly, while I agree, the fact that Shang is a perk is a can of worms in and of itself. Everyone makes a big deal about how Shang is a bi-con, primarily because he falls in love with Mulan just a few hours after finding out her true identity (the most evidence pointing otherwise boils down to him looking at Mulan twice over the shoulder when she tries flirting with him). While I wouldn’t want to take that away from anyone, the truth of the matter is that Disney simply couldn’t muster having a story where the leads don’t get together at the end, even though two years earlier they DID do that and people were pretty happy with that. As much as I like Mulan, I also know a bad writing/studio decision when I see one.
"Shang is a perk" is a sentence I'd never heard before but now I don't know how I lived without knowing it for so many.
And what a perk that is! He so sexyyyyy. Sign me up for the next war!
"Your uninformed observation does not make you smarter than the media you consume-- it just means you're not paying attention."
What a great quote
Yes! I love it.
In other words, your not educating or doing your research on things you don't understand.
this quote eviscerated doug walker's entire career
I hear this in my head whenever somebody tries to say Adora kissing Catra means She-Ra was a story about loving your abuser. Say the same thing about how Vegeta ended up with Bulma in DBZ and they'll say "Yeah, but Vegeta changed!" They're so close...
@@TheNerdWithASuitTbf, calling shenanigans on Vegeta's relationship with Bulma is totally valid. I get what you're saying though and agree.
I like how adorable beast is. The west wing is his bedroom so he's like a little kid telling her not to go in his room. His tantrums are childish too. Gives credence to the 11 years old thing.
To be honest if a stranger walked into my room like that I would react the same way
That's pretty mych how my 7 y.o. nieces reacts when we do so.
tru he is adorable
To my knowledge he was cursed at 11 and never grew out of his ways makes sense
I read somewhere that the west wing was a metaphor , meaning "his heart". Look when he shows the mirror to her , they were in the west wing after all, so it means that once he opens his heart more ("the west wing") the more is close to Belle. He was scared at Belle's presence more than Belle at him and that's the sweetness of the Beast and of the movie in general!♥️
I don't care how many people cover a topic, I wanna hear Lindsay's take.
Spodumene We want that drunken film school background commentary man!
Spodumene Always.
Michael Travis I like the way you think. XD
Spodumene nice
Always yes, I love all the research and care taken on each and every subject. So much fun.
If people are so desperate to fit Disney stories into their edgy Stockholm Syndrome theories, I'd say that Hunchback of Notre Dame and Tangled have much better examples than Beauty and the Beast.
Both Quasimodo and Rapunzel have been locked up, manipulated, and groomed practically from birth throughout all of their lives to think that there was no real place for them in the real world, that their respective parental figures were their only salvation, and that the cold, condescending way they treated them was how love and affection worked.
I mean, both of them deviated from their captor's strict orders pretty early on in each movie, but, that's something that took years of pondering for them, and when they actually did it, they both felt very guilty about it, like they were betraying their captors' trust. It's only after a good chunk of each movie, and after a good while spent away from their parental figures and socializing with different people, that they realize how terrible their parental figures actually are and act on it. Before, is just... really creepy.
Thamires Torres Wow, I never thought about that before. I need to think more often :0
Thamires Torres this is called gas lighting. Convincing another person that what they think, feel or believe is not the truth, real, or based in reality. Although it does share some qualities with 'Stockholm syndrome '
Technically Pixar, but also Cars. Fucking Cars was a Stockholm Syndrome story, and in that one the protagonist succumbs to it and it's supposed to be a good thing.
well said
+
A thing people forget so often is the fact that Belle calls the beast out for bad behaviour when she’s helping heal his wounds… and he LISTENS
"That said I'm not convinced that The Beast didn't like slip those wolves a $20 under the table." 😂😂😂
Vignt livre ;)
That’s my favorite part too.
so it was all planned I KNEW IT!!!
😅😄😂 ( 10 minutes later...)
I knew there was something going on
The whole "west wing" thing could have been avoided if everyone had just been like, "it's the master' quarters, and it would be weird and inappropriate for you to just walk in there!"
- What's in the West Wing?
- Oh, that's just the place were we do laundry, so mostly the Master's dirty socks and used underpants.
- Alright, show me everywhere but there.
It drives me CRAZY that in both the Disney films Cogsworth just turns into a muttering idiot when "The master spends most of his time there, y'know, the angry beast man? Probably shouldn't bother him" would be totally suitable.
Or "that's where we keep the castles' own judgemental townspeople. They sure like judging people through the medium of song. You should probably stay away from there
That's where the Master spends all of his "private time". Lumiere saw it. Didn't speak for two hours, and he usually won't stop talking.
"It's where I keep my porn!"
"Your uninformed observation does not make you smarter than the media you consume. It just means you weren't paying attention." YES. I want to quote you on this in so many places. I'm so tired of people missing the point, and then insisting there wasn't one in the first place because they can't see it.
The Queen of Sevens It is this attitude exactly that made me stop watching Lindsay during her Nostalgia Chick days, and I'm very glad to see the change to her denouncing it and being better. Even when I disagree with her on art (which is becoming less and less) I'm seeing more wisdom and thoughtfulness. Plus she seems like a rad person.
She does do that too you know.
Omg, that sounds like something written specifically about Doug Walker.
Exactly. Those were the kids who thought it was boring to go see an Oscar Wilde play in a field trip when I was in high school, saying they "didn't get it".
EXACTLY and this is how I feel about some people's opinions on many other works as well. Just blatant misunderstanding of the material, because people don't actually want to pay attention.
I wouldnt put Mulan in the montage of "girls who just need the right guy". The guy is a bonus. The journey is entirely Mulan's. She wants to make her family proud and find herself, then when her father is called to war she wants to protect her family, thus making them proud. Along the way she becomes a warrior, saving her father from what would've been certain death for him in battle, and then saved FUCKING CHINA, while also teaching the chauvinist side characters that shes a badass, including the hot guy. Then comes home a war hero. More confident in herself and bringing honor and pride to her family. Along with the hot guy. Hes just kinda there. Like, he was super macho guy, then he met Mulan, found out Mulan was a girl and went " damn, shes hot AND kicks ass"..... also his dad died.
She went against the maipo tradition and brought "honour to us all" by honourably protecting a family member, dutifully training to be a true soldier, and, with honour and duty, performed her soldier's duty of defeating the huns, finding out "who (she was) inside"; an honourable, duty-bound warrior, who let nothing, not even her disapproving, outdated ancestors, keep her from doing what was originally asked of her, back when she first chose her path.
She stuck her landing, was graced with a wise emperor who let her live, despite the damages done to his palace, and who didn't force her into his back-palace (harem?), and, icing on the cake, the suitor her family mourned never seeing, having such a butch daughter and granddaughter who might scare off any insecure prospects, just wanders through the door one day, not only happy to find a butch wife, but himself being quite the worthy match!
The suitor's arrival at the end, after the beginning of the movie, just shows that you CAN be yourself and reach your own goals WITHOUT completely destroying your parent's hopes and dreams. It's just a matter of luck.
Basically a well-rounded movie, thamk you for speaking up. ❤
None of the princesess really needed the prince actually. (Snow was awakaned by the kiss , sure, but they only did that so the prince actually could do something useful since in the original is one of the dwarfs carrying the casket that trips and the movement makes her spit the poisoned apple piece, waking up. And in that moment the prince just shows up and snow is just like " aren't you the hottie from that time in my castle?") But, snow manages to earn the compassionnof the hunter on her own, the dwarfs.are the ones who chase the evil queen to ger death, so the prince was a bit of a bonus too.
In cinderella she just wanted to go to the castle, even with her song, she was mostly having romantic fantasies but in the end, the prince doesn't save her, is just that knowing he is looking for her gives cinderella de support net she needed to be able to confront her abusers and escape that situation on her own because she knows she has another place she can go. And as a bonus, she gets to marry a cute prince.
The sleeping beauty, is not her fault she was out most of her movie but to be fair more than love , she wanted autonomy. Her aunts( aka the fairies) were very restrictive and didn't allow her to talk with Anyone, aurora wanted to rebel a little and interact with somone her age, and she was pretty upset about finding out she was engaged to some prince before finding out the prince was the cute guy from the forest, the prince also would have not survived without the fairies.
Ariel wanted to explore the human world, the prince was an excuse, a bridge to see the world she always dreamed of. Same with rapunzel, she wanted out of that tower, flynn was the means to it. None of them were really out there looking for a man...they just found him along the way and in some cases that man helped them in what they wanted or needed, more or less directly, but it was always kinda a bonus. But the man was not what the princesses needed, he was just and extra that helped in what they needed.
Yeah I still refuse to believe he didn’t fall in love with Mulan before he found out the truth
@@nessyness5447 OMG THANK YOU
I read somewhere that Li shang becoming a romantic interest was a last minute idea from the producers, because the movie (or the original ballad) in itself was not going for romanticism
People who say this movie is about Stockholm Syndrome are at the same level of people saying "GaStOn WaS tHe GoOd GuY" (Yes that's a thing)
Neither paied enough attention to the story
It's really horrifying that people think of Gaston as anything more than a slightly lighthearted, not-social-outcast version of Eliot Rodger.
That's Insane, Gaston is an selfish, arrogant, violent, abusive asshole who treats Belle more like an object he thinks he's entitled to control. And Gaston constantly judges Belle for her whole interests and personality (like reading books, her relationship with her father) and tries to enforce his own rules on her (women shouldn't read books, Belle is supposed marry him, Belle shouldn't be with her father). Just like the Beast at beginning is also trying to enforce his rules on Belle. But Belle in both cases ignores their rules. And like in the Video said Belle just responds to the beast, she treats him fairly (she's mean, rejecting or leaving him when he's mean or aggressive, she's saving him when he saved her, she's kind when he's kind). And as an internal Motivation the beast changes himself for the better, regrets his huge mistake (when he had an emotional outburst) and later actually bonds with Belle by doing kind things for her (showing her the library). The Beast learns to put Belles needs before his. Gaston on the other hand never cares about anyone else but himself, he's an asshole, but he thinks he's the good guy. The whole point of the movie is that Gaston is ugly on the inside, but because he's pretty on the outside, he's getting adored and praised by society, so nobody is ever holding him accountable for his bad actions. While the beast is ugly on the outside, but pretty on the inside. The movie doesn't even make a secret about Gaston hidden ugliness: Belle literally calls Gaston out for being the actual monster.
Like Gaston is the Equivalent of an "Nice Guy" thinking he's entitled to relationship with women, so he refuses to take no for an answer/refuses to accept rejection and believes women or specifically Belles owes him s*x or relationship as reward, just because he gives her his attention.
There is people saying the stockholm syndrome thing unironically? I thought it was just a fandom joke..you know, because of the "incorrect movies's summaries" thing that was like " a girl under stockholm syndrome is into bestiality" for beauty and the beast or "rich girl takes advantage of poor inmigrant and then lets him drown"( titanic), " girl runs away to live with seven men" for snow white, etc.
And the ones maybe praysing 50 shadows of Grey
@@anni1348 Your first paragraph is on point, but I don't think "R/NiceGuy" is a good parallel for Gaston. "R/Nice Guy's" do feel entitled to women, but that doesn't define them entirely as there are other types of men who have that trait. What distinguishes them is they think being outwardly nice entitles them to the "object" of their affection.
Gaston doesn't even pretend to be nice, however. He's an asshole to women throughout the movie. He's more a hypermasculine "frat boy date rapist" for lack of a better label. They feel entitled to women too, just in their own way. (I was in a frat, so no shade to anyone who was in Greek Life. That's just a stereotype everyone can understand.)
Also, having just watched "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", I find it interesting that these two movies have similar themes of "monster vs. man" internally vs externally with Frollo vs. Quasimodo. One interesting difference is that Quasi doesn't "get the girl" and him being okay with that and still being friends with Esmeralda is part of what makes him a good guy (in complete opposition to "R/NiceGuys").
I also love that they have the seemingly Gaston-type guy (Phoebus) actually be a good guy, too. To me this shows that Gaston's hypermasculine appearance and charisma/confidence aren't what makes him bad, but rather his lack of empathy and seeing women as objects he is entitled to, is what does. This ties back to "R/NiceGuys" because they like to pit themselves against confident, hypermasculine looking guys ("Chads"), by thinking of themselves as the "nice ones" who deserve women instead. In reality, these "Chads" are grouped together using superficial characteristics that aren't inherently bad and the "R/NiceGuys" themselves are just as ugly on the inside as the types of "Chads" who have a Gaston-like attitude.
Lindsay, please tear into the new one how it "FIIIIIXXXXXXED" the new version. I do feel like it was written by the people who love to shout "I'M SMARTER THAN A 90'S DISNEY MOVIE!!!" PLEASE PLEASE DO
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Yea I'd love that too
I second this motion SO HARD. Please. PLEASE DO!
What exactly did the new Version to "fix" it?
Honestly, that's the video I've been waiting for from her and Nostalgia Critic. The new film added neat things in some areas but by god did the whole thing feel like it thought it knew better than the original.
Honestly, Belle has an adventure: the movie. She leaves home, lives in a castle with talking domestic objects, is gifted a library so huge it's its own adventure, and nearly gets eaten by wolves.
And even as a kid, I always assumed that they were going to travel on the Beast's money. Like, now she can arrange to keep her father in comfort and then go on freakin' safari or something. I don't really see her marriage as an end to adventures, which is nice.
Either way, you can't say someone is Stockholming when they don't give their captor the time of day until the captor's behavior changes for the better.
Jane Recluse Well Safari not likely cause it's pre revolutionary France and most of Africa was still uncharted but she could go all around Europe to Russia or to America Mexico Turkey Morocco Scotland ect.
That was my take on what happened to the film as well. It's a shame many folks take marriage as a conforming end to freedom as far as fairy tales and real modern life as well. Heck I'm even living my own childhood vision as I speak. I myself ran away from my parents at 18 to get married to my sweetheart and had a kid and spent the last 5 years going on scenic trips to canyons and beaches and more with the spouse. I feel society has become much too cynical over romance themes.
That sounds incredibly awesome!
And as royalty, they'd probably travel for business trips. Besides, who says that you and the love of your life won't have fun again now that you're married?
I mean, it's either believe that they went on adventures together and were conveniently not in France during the Revolution or they got guillontined.
No one seems to address the real question that should have been asked with Beauty and the Beast. Enchantress shows up, gets slighted, poof and servants are furniture and silverware. But there isn't an excess of furniture and silverware. There aren't two ovens in the kitchen, or two wardrobes in Belle's room. So what happened to the original, non-living furniture and stuff? The scene at the end of the movie where Belle and Beast (no human-name provided) are dancing has apparently no furniture in it..
Why won't anyone address the Enchantress con-woman who cursed a bratty ten-year-old prince in order to rob a huge castle of all of its wealth?
Chris B I like to think that she pulled a Robin Hood
I thought that the servants were combined with already existing household objects, and when they turned human, the objects- teapots and feather dusters and whatever else that fused w/them, went back to normal. I mean, at the end, Mrs. Potts is holding a teapot that looked just like her cursed form, and the dustmaid was holding that feather duster... I thought that’s what they meant by showing that.
@@nkbujvytcygvujno6006 that's a good theory, but the idea that the enchantress started the whole mess just to sack the castle is easily the funniest theory I've heard about this story.
@@DalekTheSupreme maybe she killed his parents too, I mean for ten years, they never returned.
@@matthewsantos8525 the original version of the story has an epic backstory at the end for both Belle and the Prince. Belle is revealed to be a fairy princess- literally. Her mother was a fairy that fell in love with a king and they had a child before the fairy council found out and removed her from human society. Her mother's sister secretly looked out for her and when Belle was kidnapped by assassins as a toddler hher fairy aunt transformed into a bear and mauled them to death, then faked Belle's death and left her with a merchant who had just lost his own youngest daughter.
On the other side of the story, the Prince's father, a king, died soon after he was born. His mother was left to rule the kingdom and was plunged into waging a 15 year war against invaders seeking to take advantage of the king's death. The prince was left with a hag of an old fairy as his nanny who raised him. The old fairy became jealous of the fairy that married the king in a nearby kingdom so she ratted her out to the fairy council and then travelled there trying to replace her by appearing as a beautiful young maiden. When the king rejected her she sent assassins to kill his daughter then returned to the prince to continue raising him until he grew into a strapping teenager. She then demanded that for all her efforts she should be allowed to marry the prince. The queen laughed and said there was no way that was ever going to happen, not only was he too young still, she was far too old, ugly and not of royal blood. Enraged the old fairy cursed the entire castle that the prince would become hideous and his staff would become part if the castle's wares that they never leave and vouch for the Prince's nobility. Forbidding the queen from ever revealing this 'beast' was her son by stating the only way the curse would lift is if he was loved by someone in truth for surely one could live in disgust with a beast should he be rich and offer royal status. Thus the queen as well had to abandon her son's side to preserve the secret of his identity.
How do these two tails further connect? Belle's aunt paid the queen a visit after finding out it was that fairy that had ratted her sister out. So she made a promise to help the queen break the curse, and then set about secretly guiding Belle's sensibility through her dreams and arranging her in the path of the cursed castle.
While I fully admit this is my own reading of the source material, and is probably not intended, I do think that Belle actually does have a character arc. And while Beast does play an active role in it, I would say that it's a bit more complicated than her finally being treated like a person. In her "I want" song, Belle talks about how she wants to go on an adventure, which is her obvious want, but her need is a little bit more subtle, and it's overshadowed by the grander theme of the dehumanizaton of women. Because the story leans so heavily into that theme, most people read that her need is to be treated as a human by society, but I think that's too broad, and not personal enough. She's not actually all that upset by the way people treat her, she's way past caring about that. She, like her papa, is very secure in her passions, even as weird as people might believe they are. I would argue that escaping that backwards criticism is more of a want, and less of a need.
I think the movie hints at something much more immediately personal, and banal. The other point that the movie seems to hammer in is that Belle is /bored/. She's read the same books over and over, the days are all a blur, and she can recite everyone's routine by rote. And then she goes on her very own adventure, and... it sucks. Her father is locked away by a monstrous beast, and she has to stay in the castle to save him. The castle is filled with enchanted objects, and she's allowed free roam, EXCEPT for one certain place. This is where her critical character flaw manifests, and her drive for adventure, curious nature, and blatant disregard for the rules of society get her into trouble. She's finally got the adventure she wants, and by god, she's going to take advantage of it. So, she goes to the forbidden wing, and is discovered by the beast. In her mind at this point, the beast is the villain of this story. He's the monster, the antagonist. And when he exhibits violent tendencies, she starts to see that while fictional danger is exciting to read about, there is nothing fun about an actual life-threatening situation. So, of course, like any sensible person, she runs away.... into even more danger. Which the so-called villain of the story then saves her from. And while Belle is obviously a very kind person, and that definitely contributed to the decision of saving him, I think it was also made in part because she realizes that maybe he isn't a villain after all. Maybe there's more to this story than she thought. She's at a point where she could choose to end the adventure. Given everything she's been through, she has every right to just walk away. But again, I think this decision is partly her curious nature getting the best of her.
The wound-dressing scene is the turning point in her character. She likely expected anger, but his protests to her treating the wound aren't angry, they're just... childish. She starts to see him for who - not what - he is. And that's when her attitude shifts. She doesn't put up with his shit anymore, she's not afraid. Because she recognizes his humanity. She starts to see that for all its fantastical dressings, her adventure is far more mundane than she first thought. The beast isn't a monster, he's a juvenile idiot. The castle isn't a prison to her anymore, and the servants are just like you would find at any other castle. It's not just that he treats her like a person in a way that only her father and maybe the book shop owner ever did. What she discovers is that as simple and banal as it is, life /is/ an adventure. There is adventure in having snowball fights, and dancing, and sharing your passions with the people close to you. There is adventure in small talk, and cracking jokes. When the beast and the servants change back, the adventure doesn't end just because the fantastical elements of the story have disappeared. Belle has learned to see past the artifice of the escapism that she indulged in, and learned to love the life she was already living for the adventure that it was. It's a very Disney message.
As I said, that's just my take on it, and I definitely think that other parts of the story overshadow that idea, but there are threads of it there, I think. And it makes for a more interesting watch than just assuming Belle has no agency in the story, because in truth, Belle is a very active protagonist.
If you actually read all that, thanks I guess.
THANK YOU! I 100% agree with what you said, not to mention all the times they try to hammer home this point. Like when she first sees him, and is "shocked", or when he spies on her and she calls him a monster. And then there's that whole "something there" song, which is spelling out that there have been a change, and a change in perspective. I know one of the composers of disney said that song was a way to convey what the characters were feeling/thinking, and as such they shouldn't just be thrown to the side.
But I think most people don't like the idea that you can go from wanting "great adventure" to enjoy the opposite, and they want "big" changes and not "smaller ones". Like Belle started out kind, just like certain characters start out "strong" or such, doesn't mean that's the thing that changes in the character arc, but she def' has one, and I enjoyed your take a lot, and support it 100%.
i agree with your take! it's all about acceptance and appreciation.
@@tabassumshaik509 worth the read
This is genius
GODDD I AGREE WITH THIS SO MUCH THANK YOUUUU
Uhg, I absolutely despise how many internet videos and articles are like "Gaston is the good guy?!" because it's like... how did so many people miss the point so bad? It's pretended to be some eye opener and yet is ... more of an eye closer than anything.
I know Gaston is not the point of this video but it's a similar topic of "Is this straight forward Disney movie actually the complete oposite?" (insert Game Theory/Film Theory joke)
+Iggni “IggniFyre” Fyre I agree 100%. People have a fetish for defiling children movies and turning them into sick movies for screw headed teenagers. This is for people who don't know what a real interpretation is.
Gaston was forcing himself on Belle. The beast did force her to live with him, but he wasn't trying to force her to love him even if he really needed her to. But then again he probably knew that love can't be forced. Ok both are equally bad. I think Gaston and the beast are actually pretty much alike, it's just that the beast ended up knowing better while Gaston didn't
I think most people would call Gaston's "disgrace" a pity party. Also, it's not like Gaston had any actual respect for Belle, he clearly just wanted to marry her because she was hot and when she says no, he resorts to some pretty scummy things almost immediately under the calculated guise of doing it for Belle's best interests.
Nobody actually said that? What I have heard is that Gaston in any other movie would be the good guy. He is strong, he is masculine and he is the one that upon watching a Beast, a big and potentially dangerous beast, he wants to kill it because "think of the children!" To the towns people he is an hero and the Beast thing was just another facet of his heroic nature. Even when he locks up Belle and her father is to "protect them" and help them because they were being unreasonable.
Also, yeah, the only reason Gaston gives a fuck about Belle is because she is hot. "I am the best, don´t I deserve the best?" He doesn´t care about her character or what she wants, what she thinks or even who she is. As long as she is pretty is a prey worth persuing. Later, when Belle reject them, THEN it becomes personal because how dare she reject him, HIM, GASTON? When on top of that Gaston see the way Belle prefers a Beast before him, then he goes over the board and go in a murder wannabe spree.
For the other hand, Beast tries to relate to Belle on a personal level. He never tries to manipulate her using the curse to his benefit (See, there is thing and I need you to love me so it can be broke and I can be hot again!), something that Gaston no doubt would do, he never invade her privacy even though she did his and get a lot more calmer when he see that growling and fighting is not how they are going to get anywhere. Like the video said, Belle doesn´t take his shit so he decides to cool down on his own so THEN she at least can be comfortable in his presence. Not to mention he knows about her interest and indulge her on them, letting her have her own library and such.
See, that's MY rant about people's take on Disney. Everyone is all "Belle wants adventure in the great wide somewhere, but then settles on marrying a rich dude."
::eye twitch::
Please explain to me... how being a guest in an enchanted! castle! is NOT an adventure?! I mean, it's EXACTLY what she wanted, even if she wasn't sure how to phrase it. she had been reading jack and the beanstalk when she went into town, her favorite story had a prince in disguise. Both these stories tell you that she enjoys fantasy/fairy tale stories and what's more fantastical than an enchanted castle, even if the master is a bit of an ass? Hell, she even knew enough from reading fairytales that if she goes poking around, she'll find even more wondrous things (which she did with the rose). She got the adventure she wanted by just being there (and then a prince and a ton of friends to boot!)
I give the same argument when people complain that "Ariel physically changed herself just for a man!" No!...absolutely no, she did not! Eric may have been the pushing point, but a 16 year old girl had a literal secret grotto filled with human things, she dragged her best friend into dangerous sunken ships to fill up her grotto with her nerdy human collection, she befriended a bird despite Scuttle living above the sea (and the risk she had to take to see him) and she went out of her way to learn everything she could about humans. Her "I want" song flat out stated she wanted to walk on the beach and learn to dance (on feet!). This was all before she even knew Eric existed. She very much wanted to be human before she met a guy and all Eric was, was a push to take a very huge, scary leap from the world she knew to the world she wanted to know.
It's like no one even bothered paying attention to the movie!
ok, rant over.
love your rant!
The thing with the beast in the enchanted castle --- I thought it was obvious that was the "adventure" she had been longing for. Her life went from boring and mundane to crazy and adventurous overnight. People actually missed that? It also mirrors the whole "here's where she meets prince charming, but she doesn't recognize it's him till chapter three..." I'm preaching to the choir here, I know. But she wanted faraway mystical lands, princes, enchantment, excitement...and she got that. It was a change from just people baking bread at 8 a.m. every morning or whatever, all the boring stuff in her current life lol
Ok your little mermaid rant actually kinda changed my opinion on that movie a bit, I'm impressed!
THANK. YOU. I'm so tired of hearing people misunderstanding Belle and Ariel.
Just a sidenote, maybe you'll find it interesting. Actually, original "little mermaid" fairytale has a underlying lgbtq+ theme. It's was a love letter from Anderson to his crush, written when he learned that this man decided to marry. Taking into account the original sad ending it makes the story even deeper and more dramatic.
"And for once it might be grand to have someone understand"
I'm not saying you are wrong. But why does everyone ignore THIS line which is highlighted by being sung slower and softer than the others? She wants adventure yes but Belle is also very lonely.
She actually gets everything she specifically asked for... and if that ain't magical, then I don't care. ❤
Astute observation!
Yessss that’s why it was heartbreaking when beast was dying and she said “don’t leave me.” Like she finally found someone that accepts her unlike the rest of the town.
Never thought Disney would turn a relatable character into a autotune singing, lifeless robot in the remake. When she sings in the remake, I can't take her seriously because of how awkwardly static and expressionless Belle looked when she sings.
yeah, I agree. I liked it when I was a super young kid but I think that's just cause I like Emma Watson. But damn did they butcher her.
Emma Watson may have played a great book worm with Hermoine, but with Belle, sorry Disney you struck out despite the big financial win.
Good video, but I can't help but take issue with you putting Mulan in the same category as Ariel, Jasmine and Belle in terms of what her want vs. need is. At the beginning of the movie, Mulan is struggling to understand her identity and her purpose, but her main goal is to bring honour to her family. Unlike Ariel and Jasmine, who rebel against their families and want to go their own way, Mulan actually wants to conform and hates herself for not being able to. When she realises she can't be the perfect bride she's supposed to be, she decides she will bring honour to her family by pretending to be someone else and saving her father's life. Throughout the film she learns that she needs to stop conforming, and only then will she be able to save China. At the end she honours her family by being herself and defeating the Huns. While the romantic element is there, it differs from previous Disney movies by not being a pivotal element (in fact, it never affects the plot). It's probably the first Disney Renaissance movie that doesn't prioritise romance. I don't think it's a coincidence that the film doesn't end with a sweeping romantic kiss but with Mulan asking Shang if he wants to stay for dinner (and only after her story arc is complete).
I was just going to mention that, I'm glad somebody else did xD Shang is at most a bonus for Mulan, definitely not what she needed.
Olivia Smith Don't forget Pocahontas, a Disney princess who has vague notions of what she wants her life to be, inadvertently falls in love with a man from outside her culture and community, and ends up staying with her PEOPLE instead of going with the guy.
Yeah, I was about to make that same sort of comment. Mulan's relationship with Shang was one of the least overt couple pairings in the Disney Renaissance since they don't do anything really romantic and Mulan's story is really about becoming the woman she wants to be. When she's home after everything and she asks him out on a first date and it's pretty low-key and not something that she was seeking out. You could remove the date part and the movie would actually retain everything about Mulan's character growth entirely.
You could even argue that Shang wanting to be with Mulan after seeing the real her is actually a lot more like Belle realizing that she loved Beast, rather than Mulan being the Belle in the scenario.
Olivia Smith Well, said. I don't understand why people get on Mulan so much for prioritizing her family. It's not her barely a love interest she puts ahead of everyone else, it's her father, mother, and grandmother, and her family name. Sure, she didn't accept an influential job that she might not have the aptitude for or ever showed any interest in, but why does that have to be such an awful choice? She's not giving her happiness up for her loved ones-- she's making her own choice because it is what she wanted to do and what she set out to do.
THANK YOU on Mulan.
14:25 There's a funny thing about Jasmine being trapped in that hourglass. The writers, Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio, wanted Jasmine to free herself from it with the tiara on her head so she would have an opportunity to save herself but they were shot down. They wanted to give her more agency however, that wasn't allowed and they considered a victory when they had Jasmine say "if I marry" instead of "when I marry."
Yes, so said the voices from on high. The writers also wanted Jasmine to leave the castle to help her father because she realized something was up with him, being controlled by Jafar. So she originally had a goal beyond wanting to get away from her confining life.
Ted and Terry also wrote Shrek. I image Fiona was cathartic for them to write.
Absolutly! It's a pity, this scene isn't there.
But on the other hand, in the beginning Jasmin should have had another Song to introduced her. There, she sings about how she loves being rich and live in the castle. That would have been really awfull, if they let this in.
Maybe, maybe not in that case because Jasmine could have had an arc about learning to be less naive and spoiled. It all depends on how it would have been handled. In the animated series Jasmine turns into a rat and learns about the poor people of her city. She starts out naive and proclaiming she has knowledge she doesn't about the world and then she learns a lesson at the end.
watch avpm twisted
I don't know; while Lindsay has a fair point about Beauty and the Beast and the Little Mermaid, 'Aladdin' was never Jasmines story, and they never tried to make it seem like it was. It's about Aladdin's arc. The movie is called Aladdin!
"The castle is your home, so you can go anywhere you want--except the West Wing."
"What's in the West Wing?"
"My bedroom."
"Ah, got it. Thanks."
Yes, Belle did get married, but she also had adventure. Saving her father from prison, surviving a wolf attack, and seeing everyone in the castle saved from the spell DEFINITELY qualifies as adventure. And she can still have adventures and travel even though she is married. She never changed what she wanted, she just found something else to enjoy as well.
"this is a pretty sexless relationship" thANK GOD
one title... just one.
Wolf Children
@@PoochieCollins It's a great film tho.
@@PoochieCollins He was in human form when they had children.
@@PoochieCollins Because their father was a werewolf and turned into one occasionally. The kids also turn into wolves occasionally. The story is about how this little family (and especially their not-supernatural mom) deal with this kind of existence.
@@PoochieCollins You're kinda close-minded. I hate to hear what you'd think of Pink Flamingos.
Nobody seems to bring up the idea that the Beast could have said, "What do you mean, 'take you *instead?*' You trespassed, too. Take the next cell to the right!"
I think the whole idea was that he was taken aback by the fact that she was willing to sacrifice herself.
Yeah, he was loosing his humanity. seeing her make such a sacrifice to save another person must have been a little shocking for him
it's an interesting idea, but picturing it in my head made me laugh 😂
like, the Beast says that and then they roll the credits lol
@@valeria_flores somebody should make a parody of that ahahha
Because she's a girl!
Wait a second, isn't that a nice arc for Belle though? Belle starts out in a place that mocks her for her ideas and interests. She wants to have 'adventure in the great wide somewhere' because where she is now makes her feel trapped. She's an outcast in her own home. And for a while she feels just as trapped while with the Beast. But as the Beast calms down and becomes a decent person, she stays of her own free will. Beast gives her the library, and she's like 'wow, this dude doesn't care I'm a bookworm? He even encourages it's?!' And thus she stays because now there is someone who appreciates and accepts who she is, instead of trying to mold her into something they want.
And there we have the 'want' and 'need' again. Belle WANTS to escape people because they want to change her for themselves, but she just NEEDS to be loved and appreciated for all she is to find a place where she feels home.
In a way, it's kind of a similar story as Beast. (though he needed to change and calm the f*ck down, though his own aggression and self image might have been molded by the society of rich @$$holes he was surrounded by. He did calm down rather quickly after all after Belle showed it wasn't his imperfections that made her run. And also after his staff stopped poking him over 'sitting upright' and 'smiling'.)
The reasoning behind Belle's lack of character arc is because she never changed/grew as a person, she remained the same and just found a place that accepted her (she didn't change to fit her surroundings rather her surroundings changed to fit her)
Wolfy100 because she didn’t need to change
@@katiebayliss9887 Hence, not a character arc
Jennifer Mirra She does actually belong to the flat character arc, which isn’t a bad thing. The flat arc is more about changing the world around you and others for the better, because you don’t really need to change yourself that much.
@@katiebayliss9887 well yeah, but that lack of change means she doesn't have an arc. Yeah, she didn't need to change but she still doesn't have an arc
16:28 "Your uninformed observation does not make you smarter than the media you consume. It just means you're not paying attention."
TRUTH 💣💥
You know, people always harp on the "adventure in the great wide somewhere", but why isn't finding in an enchanted castle, striking a deal with a hideous beast, getting attacked by wolves, running to save said beast from an angry mob and breaking a magical curse considered an adventure? Plus, as the rest of the song establishes, what Belle really wanted was freedom from life in a town where no one understood or respected her, and she ended up in a community of people who loved and appreciated her for who she is.
Exactly! In her town, a chauvinistic man tries way too hard to get her to marry him & tries to force her to by threatening her father. And the town is fine with this. A bunch of villagers are at the impromptu "wedding" in her front yard. What's more, it's not that the town hates books & adventure; it's that they disapprove of women doing those things. The librarian is a man and no one has a problem with him. Gaston hunts & certainly goes on adventures, and the town loves him for it. But Belle has her nose stuck in a book and should just be bearing children for Gaston.
The Beast isn't just OK with her reading: he gives her a library! And he respects and listens to women just as much as men. Mrs. Potts advises him just as much as Lumiere and Cogsworth. The Beast gives Belle what her village & society at large couldn't give her.
Who knew she only had to move like 10 miles away? Ha
You win :)
Honestly, as someone who lives in a small-minded town, I kind of get it. Like, I'm outspoken, liberal, have a dry sense of humor, bisexual, and find other people's personal lives to be kind of boring. In my town, people think I'm strange. But less than 50 miles away from me is Portland, where people cannot be arsed to give a shit about anyone else. So, like, I kind of relate to Belle's desire for something "more".
In fact, I think Belle is basically the embodiment of every teenager in a small town who swears that they'll get out of this dumb place, you'll see.
Also the prince is loaded and they can travel wherever they want now. There's a direct-to-video sequel idea for you, Disney
Only if the story is really badly told-people tend to forget that the Beast is pretty much a petulant teenager who was cursed for being well, a petulant teenager. Disney pretty much told the best version in their 90s cartoon where the Beast sacrifices himself to protect her, lets her use the palace, and eventually lets her go. Sure, you could do the same actions for selfish reasons, but that's not the Beasts' character. He's a kid growing up and learning maturity-guy doesn't have ulterior motives.
And it's not even in my list of favorite Disney movies. It's a great movie, but I don't like it as much as others.
For me, the remake was a case of a very good cast with very good material being wrecked by bad new songs, direction, and art design.
And again, thank you for the whole "I can change him" thing being misapplied here. Belle doesn't see any good in him until he, you know, gets mauled by wolves to protect her.
Contrary to what misogynists say, women go for bad boys because that's what society tells them works aka toxic people validating themselves by dictating what is expected, not "women being women" . You want to get the Belle, my brothers? You stop acting like a Beast.
Really? Those WEREN'T songs from the stage play?
Ah, that's why they sucked.
The new song they gave Beast "Evermore" was actually pretty good. It's not as moving as "If I Can't Love Her" but it did hit the mark rather well. I just like "If I Can't Love Her" more. And Maurice and Belle's new song was alright, but I do have to say I think that the song he sang to her in the stage musical was more touching because they both sing about how they have each other and can aways count on each other.
I do however think "Days in the Sun" wasn't a good choice at all. The servants needed a song that made their struggle mean something, "Days" just come off as a melody about being past your prime and not having the glory days. "Human Again" would have really sold the objects more as characters since it's just a fun over-the-top number about how much they can't wait to do things they miss doing as humans.
I always thought Belle got totally cheated at the end, though: she fell in love with a badass monster and ended up with a bland-looking prince!
That first look of (disappointed) confusion at his new form... the hesitation behind that touch...!
Belle was a bit into bestiality, XD tbh that's is the most difficult part to deny, unless she was a romantic asexual.
@@nessyness5447 Let's face it Belle's village is run by idiots. I think Belle would rather be with Beast and cool library instead.
@@nessyness5447 or alternatively, she just liked monsters, like a lot of people do
@@BrynjaHjartans did you miss the part were i said she was either ace or into bestiality?
I always thought her whole experience with the beast _was_ her adventure, especially since she got to have her own story. She got to experience magic and enchantment, face dangers, find love etc. and now she will have her prince with whom she can go on to have more adventures. She might even have learned to appreciate getting to have a normal life that she took for granted and was bored with, which the people in the castle were craving, and that while adventures are great, life doesn't always have to be full of thrills and chills.
Of the examples in this video, I'd say Mulan is the one heroine who stated a want and actually got it in the end instead of just having a boyfriend turn out to be what she really needed. She wanted to earn her own honor and prove her worth to herself and others. And she does so by saving her whole country and earning the respect of the freakin' emperor. She does get a boyfriend too, but that just wound up happening in the process.
You know...except for the part when her only options after saving all of China are to be the Emperor's Concubine or commit suicide...and she does commit suicide if I recall. Oh wait, that wasn't in the disney version
She explicitly said ''Maybe I didn't go for my father. Maybe what I really wanted was to prove I could do things right, so when I looked in the mirror, I'd see someone worthwhile.'' The movie makes it very clear from the beginning that she DID want to prove herself to others, at least to the extent of making her family proud. It certainly never took priority over protecting her father from going to war and doing her part to save China, which is good, and I think your main point about her finding her own role is still true.
We know that they are just a disney animation with no commitment to the true stories.
Bella never wanted to travel the world, Mulan decided to fight in the war to protect her father and ended alone because she was too old to marry. The war lasted 10 years.
When mulan returned from the war, he was no longer old enough to marry.
It was a later version that Mulan had an arranged marriage and his suitor expected her to return from the war.
The beauty and the beast was based on the story of Pedro Gonzalez and Catherine, she had nothing to do with the bella of the film.
Never had any marriage between pocahontas and john smith, she goes to europe and home with another.
They're just fiction for entertainment, I shouldn't take it so seriously.
I'd argue Belle does have an arc: She wants a grand fantasy adventure with swordfights and princes in disguise.
She gets exactly that and quickly learns that she is completely unprepared for it.
I guess that is technically an "arc", but it's a pretty weak one, not really the kind of thing you can build a good screenplay on. If anything this strengthens the point that this is really Beast's story because Belle's minor arc only really exists to service his much larger story.
That’s a story arc not a character arc.
People love to pick apart Disney movies to basically be, well, 'edgy'. "Oh look at me! I'm shitting all over your childhood! Herp derpa derpa!" ...as if that's supposed to be impressive in some way???
Yes! And this is even foreshadowed in the song. When she's talking about her favorite part of the book which is "When she meets the prince but doesn't realize he's the prince until chapter three!" (I'm paraphrasing) but the point is that she actually liked the idea and she got just that and didn't really care for it!
I feel like this issue is beautifully addressed in the Broadway show with the song "A Change in Me" in which Belle explains "For now I'm who and where I want to be" and that she feels she doesn't need her childhood dreams to be happy, which is a very realistic and true to life arc.
I had to do a whole paper on beauty and the beast and how it represented misogyny, sexism and SS. I remember losing marks for NOT agreeing with the prompt, that suggested Belle fell in love with the beast BECAUSE of SS. I agree that by the climax of the movie belle cautiously can differentiate her emotions for the beast and that’s validated when she returns after being freed. It was so baffling that a professor and my entire class would be so head strong in thinking that belles love is a product of Stockholm syndrome
My response to the subscribers of the "Belle has Stockholm Syndrome" argument: "You keep using that term. I do not think it means what you think it means."
It's like a written law, if there's something good and precious in our life, we need to look for a way to make it darker than it needs to be. Even if it's not necessarily true. That's Disney!
The current wave of shallow pseudo-criticism is the worst, and unfortunately Disney kind of unintentionally invites it by being the biggest thing in the entertainment universe. They are FAR from being a perfect company on the up and up, but when you're the biggest dog in the race it's pretty easy to "critique" them without being held to an actual standard.
Yeah just like how people accuse of Walt Disney being a bigot.
And at most Disney would be a product of his era, but I doubt that he was okay with people being linch mobs or murder happy with minorities. Even if he wasn't the biggest in that regard, he's likely not THAT Bad.
Look at the source material of all of Disney's movies. Those fairy tales are usually 10x darker and violent. Disney's giving you the G version.
If nobody has any legitimate ways to shit on something popular than a way will be created no matter how little sense it makes. The only difference between this and more recent popular media is that the weak non-problem of "it's overhyped" hadn't been created yet when the film came out.
Lindsay Ellis, on behalf of the internet, thank you for #BEASTZONED
It's actually amazing how Belle was so perfect to begin with and nobody bat an eye.
The movie became about how the Beast gets the girl, rather than the girl gets the Prince.
In stockholm syndrome, the captive falls in love with the captor.
In beauty and the beast, the captor falls in love with the captive.
Lima syndrome.
not so much love, as it is a need to conform to the captor in order to not get killed!!
@@lazer_kat_4673 thank goodness it's literally been the opposite
@@monabohamad2242 wat?
Lol, whenever I hear 'Stockholm Syndrome' I'm thankful I'm from Östersund.
Östersund Syndrome is pretty much falling in love with a moose or polar bear, maybe Belle had that.
SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE
@@emilyfisher2052
whats worse is soylent is a brand of drink
DiScuStanG
Re: Belle "settling" (in a word)
Who says they're staying in the castle for their happily ever after? She wants adventure, he's been cooped up in the castle for 10 years. I bet they got married, enjoyed a homebound honeymoon, then hit the road.
(Also, she said in the first 3 minutes of the movie that she fantasized about a prince in disguise, magic spells, and sword fights. Her favorite part of her favorite book is when the heroine "meets prince charming, but she won't find out that it's him" until later. She lives her fantasies, marries the only male other than her father who ever treated her like a person, then they go chase their adventure.)
Quick thought: Jaycee Lee Dugard (2:34) actually hates it when people claim she had stockholm syndrome when she was still with her rapist. She didn't like him and was actually scared of what would happen if he found out she might be trying to escape. That was the level of fear he had enforced upon her. She only went along with his demands due to her will to survive and that was it. It wasn't because she admired him whatsoever. Just wanted to point this out because I don't want someone to mistake her actions as stockholm syndrome.
Hey, yeah I read her story. I definitely see your point.
It’s gross that people thought she was in love with her captor ngl, it shows Stockholm syndrome may not be as prevalent as people think
Here's my take on their relationship:
Belle and the Beast were both outcasts because of their looks. Belle was an outcast because she was beautiful, but would rather focus on her brain power rather than looks. The Beast was an outcast because he was, well, a beast. He looked like a monster. Once he lowered his defenses and controlled his temper, they both saw the humanity in each other. The Beast was the first one to ever be fascinated by Belle's love of reading, and even encouraged it. Belle was touched by his actions of trying to change himself just to make her more comfortable around him. They were outcasts that bonded over their mutual problems. If you remember, Belle even sang, "For once it might be grand to have someone understand." And she found that in the Beast. That's why she fell in love him.
I would love to see Lindsay take apart the whole "Quasimodo and Esmeralda should've gotten together in Hunchback!!!1" argument. That's another one I'm sick of hearing.
??? It's been a while since I read the book, but I'm pretty sure Esmeralda and Quasi weren't siblings. Esme was stolen from her home, and the people who took her left Quasi in her place.
It's okay, I thought it was me for a sec. To be honest, the idea of them being siblings would be a better plot point. And I must say I agree with you with Victor Hugo being a bit overrated. The main thing I remember about reading the book was that he seemed to go off on tangents sometimes.Though that might just be the way I remember it, I do seem to remember at least ten pages dedicated to describing the architecture and history of Paris (even though it didn't serve much purpose to his story) a couple of chapters in.
It's just that they built it up so much, and Phebous in the film was just so obnoxious and out of place....it'd be alright if they had a healthy friendship, but the Disney version didn't do that, either.
Annie Chess Why is it better for Esmeralda to be with Phoebus?
The fact that people think Hunchback is about romantic love at all is a bit concerning.
I think the "dad lost all his money and we're broke" part of the original story would've helped explain Belle's willingness to stay if adapted for the new story. It makes it less of a hostage situation for Belle and more of a "this suck but dems the breaks 'cause I need to eat" scenario.
me when i get kidnapped by jeff bozo and decide to make him my sugar daddy
I remember this feminist speaker at my college earnestly lecturing on this hot-take. I was taking abnormal psychology at the time and we had just covered the fact that Stockholm syndrome was not a recognized diagnosis....she did not enjoy having this pointed out.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I always forget that the Beast was turned into a beast when he was a kid, so he would have more childlike behavior. The Beast is scary because he's literally a beast, but his aggressive outbursts are less malicious if they're seen as a child throwing a temper tantrum.
The fact that Belle, Maurice and The Beast are not accepted by society, but Gaston is, is just cruel!
Always has been; I think that's the real lesson the original was trying to impart.
I feel like belle did gain something by being with the beast. Having a man appreciate you doesn’t sound like much, but having someone like you for your qualities and encourage your hobbies (ie beast giving her the library) is a lot. She didn’t have someone like that at the village outside of her father, so she does gain something emotionally in the relationship
"Beauty and beast erotic fanfiction"
"Lumiere x cogworth"
for-shame Lindsay, for-shame
I always wonder why Bella is accused of having Stockholm syndrome while Rapunzel and Quasimodo are ignored.
because Rapunzel and quassimodo don't end up with the people that quote and unquote abused them and kidnap them
where bella end up with beast and so people dig at it for no reason beacuse people are dumb
Quasimodo pushed Frollo to his death off Notre Dame as in revenge for murdering Esmeralda.
ryan bell But they still cared about their abusive parental figure
Rapunzel and Quasimodo don't have Stockholm Syndrome, they're victims of gaslighting.
ChronoShenron Both that and that the writers of these articles were coming out of childhood at the time those films were released. Give it a few years for Tangled and I reckon a similar theory will emerge.
I disagree with you. Belle does have an arc and I think most people miss it. What she thinks she wants is adventure. She doesn't - the adventurous parts actually end up NOT appealing to her. What she thinks she wants is to not deal with these people, she wants to go have an adventure and oh it'll be wonderful when I meet a prince who I don't even know is a prince and it's going to be exciting and wonderful and it'll be so much better than this shitty town which is, for all intents and purposes, a kinda normal place.
Like Gaston personally is a big douche who wants to put her in a box to fit in his life, and there are people who think she's weird for not being into him - but the majority of the town was like 'hey she's odd because she's just always in her books, she isn't interacting with us a lot, she doesn't seem to have a part of or want a part of this normal life we're having'. The biggest issue for her is the town is ordinary and provincial and it's a settled life of doing things and having a job and interacting with these people who have no idea about her interests or passions or desires - and none of them care, she talks to SHEEP because no one wants to hear about what she's reading. She doesn't like a normal life - and she doesn't like following the normal rules the Beast puts out for her either.
What she ends up finding is a prince in disguise, adventure, daring battles, just like she wanted annnnnnnd...that stuff is stressful and upsetting and really sucks a lot. What ends up making her happy is positive interaction with someone who cares about her passions and is willing to encourage them, listen to her and interact with her on a level as equals. Belle grows to enjoy interactions with this person and having a friendship with him. Like because it's a Disney movie and a Disney movie of that time period, that had to end in romance, but overall what Belle wanted and needed and what her arc was about was finding someone she could have interactions with and care about. A place she could feel at home, people she could be ok having a life around.
Her character arc is not given near enough focus, but it's there and it's important. Finding what you actually want and need is someone you can care about who cares about you, even on a friend level, is a really good character journey and a lot of that gets lost in discussions of this movie. Belle was living in a time period where she couldn't go to an internet forum and find people to talk about her interests with, unfortunately so had to go on an adventure to find that and it became a worthy journey lol.
"What she thinks she wants is adventure. She doesn't - the adventurous parts actually end up NOT appealing to her." ~ So she's a hobbit?
It's almost like what she really wants is "someone who understands that I want so much more than they've got planned." Like you said, deep down, Belle needs a friend. She wants an adventure, but she needs a friend. And as a kid who didn't have many friends and struggled to connect to the people around her, boy, did I identify with Belle.
as someone who suffered bulling and spent many years without a single friend, i agree %1000 with what you wrote here! this is why this is my favorite Disney movie♥
@@Spartan155 SHE IS NOW. PUT SOME HAIR ON YOUR FEET, AND START GETTING SHORTER, PRINCESS!
I did too. As a kid, I loved the orginal BAB, and I connected not only with Belle's desire for adventure, but also a friend. Growing up, I had been bullied, and had a string of bad relationships, and each time, I felt used and worthless. Like someone had taken what I loved, my hopes and dreams, and dashed them all away.
But my life is getting better, and I have some online friends, who share their interests and conversations, and they've helped me express my bisexuality to my parents, who have accepted me.
What I'm trying to say, is that we all feel like "Is this the life I really want? Is this it?" But as long as you have good people in your life, don't be afraid to express who you are, and remember that, always know you are loved.
"If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. But sad or merry, I must leave it now. Farewell" -Thorin Oakenshield.
Bye!
Oh god, just thank you. My diploma claims me to be a psychologist. This or just that stupid trend from 2015 is still bringing some of my friends to me with a delightful piece of news: Belle has Stocholm syndrome. And boy oh boy, I know this cartoon by heart. I know all the weird/stupid/outmoded stuff happening there. But from no sane point of view this sthyndroamm can be found in Belle. Ah, I feel some better....
The biggest issue I have is that a lot of the common examples of Stockholm Syndrome didn't have it... Elizabeth Smart wasn't attached to her kidnappers. The people in the Stockholm bank robbery were sympathetic toward the one robber because he wasn't actually the robber and treated them better than the police were (listen to the episode of Criminal on this subject).
Could you argue that the arc for female characters is about maturity, with marriage standing in for adulthood? Not that being married makes you an adult but in the simplified Disney narrative it seems to mean that.
That's actually the theme for the original fairy tale.
craisins95 That's why I first thought that the fact that Anna in Frozen has already a finance when her journey begins may have potential. Well, it doesn't development in an interessting way.
eh...fiance.
Thanks Lindsay! It always pisses me off when people say Belle has Stockholm Syndrome even though they know nothing about it.
It always pisses me off when people say anything.
There are three types of people in this world...
watch the video
You got Zucced and now my comment makes no sense. :/
♞ Go Fuck Yourself ♞ Yeees, it does 😂
When people assumed Belle from Beauty and the Beast to develop Stockholm Syndrome as she developed an emotional bond with a Beast, in my response, that's like saying Ann Darrow from Peter Jackson's King Kong had 'Stockholm Syndrome' just because of how she developed an emotional bond with a giant primate that held her captive, never mind the fact he played with her while she entertained him and never mind the fact he saved her from a trio of Vastatosaurus Rexes given for the fact she saw him as more than a monster, just like how Belle saw the Beast as a victim rather than a monster.
There's a way bigger argument to be made that Luke Skywalker and Aang have Stockholm Syndrome moreso than Belle! Keep on trying to save the abusive father who has tried to kill you multiple times and killed your adoptive parents AND also become good friends with the agent of a genocidal regime that tried to kidnap you and held your friends hostage!
"not in the service of satan anymore" couldn't stop loling at that one
I like thinking of Beauty and the Beast as the story of two outcasts who find each other. And of how society just generally treats people who are different. The Gaston/Beast dichotomy (which they borrowed from the Cocteau film) really helps this along. Honestly, the whole "let's make this beloved kid's movie/show more dark and adult" is a rather irritating trend.
Etana Edelman The director deliberately avoided watching that version so it *wouldn't* influence her version. Gaston was based on her ex lovers so the similarities, while strong, are actually coincidental.
I know that. But the idea of a rival for Belle's affection came from the 1946 film. In the Cocteau film Belle has a suitor named Avenant who attempts to kill the Beast. They were both played by the same actor, so when the Beast transforms, he looks like Avenant. Gaston's characterization may have been original, but his conception was not.
Yes, just yes to the whole video. Reminds me of the "smart" takes on Romeo & Juliet that make the rounds, like "It's about how teenage love is stupid & gets people killed." No, it's about the stupidity of holding grudges, of feuding, of old men ruling the lives of the young for "family honor" based on a decades old non-issue. No one died Because of love, they died because of the Feud, because they were taught to hate each other, & it tore their lives apart. It's about how young love is pure, & unkillable, because even though it meant death, they refused to stop loving each other.
I kinda disagree on that last part. I think that, whether intentionally or not, it's about 2 idiots who think that they're in eternal love without realizing that they don't actually know each other that much. I always interpreted it as lust from both of them that neither of therm are capable of dealing with, so the end result is that when their prospects of this are shattered, they both foolishly kill themselves because they have no self awareness and can't realize the flaws in their rationale. I'm guessing this was unintentional, because it's only subtext at best.
Well that's certainly a valid interpretation, it just depends on your views on love & lust. Shakespeare had a few different views on love depending on which writing you're looking at, sometimes being quite cynical, so I could certainly understand that interpretation.
BlueRoseFaery My opinion on it comes from how little development the two are given, so we know nothing about their personalities and they presumably know just as little. Since this romance therefore needs another basis, the only thing left is physical attraction, which makes for a pretty badly justified love story. So the way I see it, it's about how two stupid people who place far too much emphasis on something they know nothing about and take unnecessarily drastic action as a result end up paying the ultimate price for their rashness.
+Servo Augusta That's not relevant. Shakespeare wasn't interested in going over how sudden their love for each other was, he just expects you to follow with it as the real story of the family war unfolds.
Also, I wouldn't trust Doug Walker to have clear analysis when his response to Mad Max: Fury Road was "DUR WOMEN ONLY LIKE IT BECAUSE THEY LOVE TOM HARDY"
From the documentary "Waking Sleeping Beauty", it seems that Howard Ashman had a big influence on making the Beast's character arc more central... the guy who had plenty of firsthand personal experience about how society hates what is considered different. People need to look at the whole context
I love that smirk Beast makes at 8:30. He looks so sure of himself and that clashing with Belle being 100% right makes this scene.
"And for once it might be grand to have someone understand" Belle gets everything she wants when she saves the Beast. She gets her adventure (and more to come from the amount of money the Prince looks like he has) and she gets to be around people who respect and like her for who she is. If that's "problematic" then I wish I had more problems!
It's only the nature of the hooking up that's potentially problematic; as much as I love it, Beauty & the Beast is parttially indirectly responsible for the Draco in Leather Pants phenomenon, where people like characters they really shouldn't because of some appealing trait they possess (i.e. Gaston is fifty shades of dickitry but he's HANDSOME so he can get away with it). The fact that the movie deconstructs it isn't really helped by the Beast's attitude towards Belle during their initial encounters.
Kidnapping a girl is always problematic, that's. . . I mean. . .that should be obvious.
yeah, but the beast never kidnaps belle--like lindsey points out she makes an agreement, which she doesn't have to keep if the beast is gonna be an asshole; look at when she runs away because he's doing just that and then she calls him out on it during their argument. belle makes it very clear that if he threatens her life she's booking it home
@@sosha20 but It wasn’t a happy consensual agreement on bell’s part. She only accepted that agreement because she feared for her father’s life.
Yessssss. You are magnificent Lindsay.
I would like to add, to any people spouting crap about the Enchantress' curse being petty and vindictive, it should be pointed out, she cursed the Prince for denying hospitality in the freezing winter. In a time where being left outside in the cold was kind of a matter of life and death.
And this ties into that theme of othering those who are different too. The Prince left her in the cold because she was ugly, when he has an entire damn castle full of servants. He would never have to see her if that's what he wanted. So no, the enchantress was not a petty bitch, she was enforcing the morality of the time, the standards to which the wealthy ought to be held.
KrazyKelor Film Theory, (please don't kill me internet)
Made a pretty good video about how Beast was just a little kid with no parents home when The Enchantress knocked on his door. If you were a little kid, would you let a possibly dangerous stranger into your house, no matter how cold or wet it is outside?
Matt Scott Just because his parents weren't home, doesn't mean there were no adults and he was in danger. He had plenty of adults with him and he wouldn't have ever been alone with her. Also, he is royalty so he probably had a lot of guards to protect him. He could have helped her without ever being in danger but he didn't.
Jones6192 especially if he’s in the monarchy. I know this is made up but given it’s set in France during the baroque period we’re to assume that the French people aren’t too happy with their spoiled monarchy and the bourgeoisie. The royal and wealthy were selfish dicks who prioritized their own comfort to everyone’s basic necessities.
If I was an enchantress, I’d curse the shithead too if I was coming off as a little old lady in the cold.
@Alexandre Phaneuf élève Unfortunately that _isn't_ the case in the live-action version where they decided for some reason to make it so that her curse also condemns the servants, Chip, the Opera singer, her husband and the freaking _dog_ to death when the last petal falls all because none of them decided it was now their job to raise their boss' kid, but there's a reason that movie doesn't matter in this discussion.
first of all, he was 9 years old, they don't have a mindset like that. If he had servants, why didn't they answer the door? I get it for plot, but it was still cruel. In the live action, he was an adult, I can see it.
"See there are layers to this discussion."
layers, like onions, like ogres
I actually have this theory that my dad and I developed about the disney princess archetype and how they are not actually usually the protagonist of their stories, but the role model set up for other characters to live up to. They have character growth, usually guardian self realization in some form, but the main change in the story is another character who changes because of their kindness or example. The Little Mermaid is far more about Triton and Sebastian than Ariel, and Mushu changes, while Mulan only comes to realize that she was worth something all along. Nothing wrong with this, but it changes the way you see these characters if you look at them with it in mind. Belle doesn't have to change because she's not the protagonist at all: she's the sun shining light down on the people around her. Some of them accept that light and are eventually rewarded for their change, but others reject her example and fall to their deaths.
"I understand a Disney movie can sometimes be too subtle for you."
Ooooh, ouch. Gonna need to apply some cream to that burn.
Man this video is like a tall glass of ice tea on a hot day. Refreshing. I was getting SO SICK of every other movie review channel, (Honest trailers, Cinemasins, Doug, ect) Making the same like four points over and over like they were sooooo clever. This might be my new fav video about Beauty and the Beast!
Neala Ernswa Knott’s m
While I agree with what you're saying about how this is refreshing, if your looking for an actual good movie review, in the case of CinamaSins and Honest Trailers, those aren't film review channels - they are mocking entertainment for our benefit. They aren't looking through the film objectively to see the thematic through line.
Beauty And The Beast is not a story about Stockholm Syndrome, it took the beast to realize that he’s been a jerk to Belle and begins to change for the better. Here’s the reasons
-Belle runs away from the Beast and out of the castle
-She talks back to the beast
-Actively disobeys him
-Actively fights back with him
And
-She even takes what he does and isn’t afraid to talk back to him
Thank you for this!!!! I always hated people for crapping on Belle because she fell in love with the guy who actually changed instead of Gaston, who is not only misogynistic but also selfish and inconsiderate.
Wait who is making that argument? I feel like everyone hates Gaston lol
@@remytherat2929 if you knew, half of the Internet seems to defend Gaston with claws and theets (ans the inability of undertand the film)
@@ClaudetteVioletta ah I’m not in the Disney fandom so I don’t really know the discourse but this seems to be about right given how a lot of other characters who are practically the same as him get similar treatment across many other fandoms. I truly don’t get the appeal though
That bit you talked about at the end about the women in Renaissance Disney movies not having character arcs is fascinating; I'd love to hear more about it someday.
I would watch the hell out of that Loose Canon.
loose canon on disney princesses and their evolution
I know, it sounds so interesting! Granted, I could probably watch a three hour video on the history of cement if she produced it.
"beauty and the beast is a story about two men who view the same woman as a shiny object to be controlled, and where one of them learns to see her humanity, the other falls to his death".
fucking brilliant!!
4:27 how dare you call out my 9th grade experience lol
WOW.
Belle did gain something from this, other than getting married to a rich dude, the rich dude had a massive library, and she's a major bibliophile.
You think she lets the old dude at the bookshop come over to read/borrow whatever books he wants, since he was basically the only one besides her father who was nice to her?
Headcanon: ACCEPTED.
+Gwedolyn Stata I think it mostly depends on whether he was wielding a pitchfork alongside Gaston, but maybe. On the other hand, If she was already at basement dwelling netizen levels of bookloving though, she wouldn't let anyone else touch them....
Boy, if I got a dollar for everytime I got Beastzoned....
Then stop peeing on the damn carpet!
j/k
Oh hey, Farel~ :D
Fancy seeing you here, lol!
It is NOT stockholm syndrome. From beginning to end of this movie Belle remains the same character, she does not have an arc even. When she encounters the Beast and lives with him, she changes HIM, not the other way around.
Stockholm Syndrome is when a captive begins to ideologically and emotionally support their captor. Belle refuses both of these until the Beast becomes a different man FOR her. This would be comparable to a person being kidnapped by ISIS and that person only joining their captor AFTER they have renounced ISIS.
In the god awful James Bond movie "The World is not Enough" we see Stockholm Syndrome at play. A woman is kidnapped and becomes like her kidnapper and schemes to work with him. That is a close approximation of the effect. Although she eventually takes over so it's not completely accurate but close enough.
THANK YOU
ANOTHER THANK YOU - the number of people who still don't know what Stockholm syndrome actually is or isn't makes me go all Oslo,....
16:28- “your uninformed observation does not make you smarter than the media you consume; it just means you’re not paying attention.”
-chef’s kiss- perfect.
I don't entirely agree that Belle stayed of her own volition. She does seem to initiate the deal, yes. But it's still fairly under duress, with her father being held prisoner and all, and the Beast does use Maurice as leverage to get her to stay forever when she says she'll stay. So I don't think the Beast entirely gets off the hook for this one. Yes, the Beast didn't kidnap Belle, but she's still there under duress. Doesn't mean she has Stockholm syndrome. She doesn't. But her getting there is still kind of an issue.
Yeah, that was the weakest part of her argument. In fact, that part of her argument just outright fails. If we start accepting agreements made under extreme duress as legitimate and consensual, that opens all sorts of unpleasant doors.
It's definitely at a point in the story where the Beast is still supposed to be the bad guy, so his actions aren't truly virtuous or without fault, however Belle was the one to offer to stay in her father's place when, for all we know, the Beast might have kicked Maurice out once the former had cooled down. So many things happen in such a short space of time, that it blurs things a little.
I think the Beast's outburst followed by his visible regret, and him eventually catching up to Belle and saving her from the pack of wolves, at great injury to himself, when he didn't have to at all, showed to Belle, and the audience, that there was some good in him. He had potential to improve, and somehow being around Belle triggered that desire in him.
Sometimes bad situations can ultimately lead to good outcomes.
But she doesn't stay there foever. She leaves at the first glance of unpleassently behaviour towards her and there is nothing to stop her.
@@tatianaesquerra7271 She does, yes. But I still don't think that really changes the fact that Belle initially offers to stay as a prisoner in her father's place. She does initally stay of her own free will, but her initial offer was definitely not free of duress.
@@moonflower813 I'm sorry. I just don't think it makes any sence. The Beast had absolutely nothing to do with her desicion to take Mourice's place. He never even consider it and you can see his surprised reaction when she offers it. And on top of it all, he doesn't trear her (at all) as a prisioner. He does state his rules (wich is perfectly normal in any house) but she is NEVER a prisioner. The only confussion is because BELLE doesn't know this. She doesn't know his true intentions as to try and make her fall in love with him. She THINKS she is a prisioner because that was the deal. But she is simply NOT a prisioner.
Thank you so much Lindsay!! Beauty and the Beast is one of my favorite Disney films and definitely my favorite European folk tale in general but I never had a good response to the Stockholm argumet except "No it's NOT! Shut Up you guys!" So thank you.
The "he's my friend" bit killed me.
For a real example of the Stockholm Syndrome in fiction, see 365 days on Netflix. It's only a paradox for me to say that because I do not want people watching it and encouraging it, and yet I want to talk about it... is that stockholm syndrome too?
@@yidan8749 Fair enough
@@yidan8749 she was kidnapped till she "fell in love" with him. It pretty much seems Stockholm syndrome.
But how does the man seem unstable?
Nitpick, and arguably off-topic, but: Beauty and the Beast was the FIRST animated film to be nominated for Best Picture. Not ONLY. "Up" in 2010, "Toy Story 3" in 2011.
"like he is just a kid who has no idea what he is doing".. YES! He IS a KID! "a young prince lived in a shining castle. Although he had everything his heart desired, the prince was spoiled, selfish, and unkind.".. he was 10 or 11 when he was cursed.. having no parents and no tutor he never grew up. He was alone 9-11 years (with his servants).. who could have tought him manners and to think. Sure, he is 20 or 21 yeards old (according to the curse and timing of things happening) but his mind is still very close to young teenager.
At the start of Belle and the Beast's relationship, Belle did not take any bullshit from him. She did not respond with kindness and compassion in all of the instances where the Beast was disrespectful and rude to her, like when he aggressively tried to invite her to dinner. Belle was not a pushover, she knew her worth and stood up for herself, like after she took the Beast back to the castle. She did not hesitate to retaliate to the Beast when he screamed that it was her fault that he got hurt.
And that is why Beauty and the Beast is not about stockholm syndrome.
I always saw Bell as having a simple adventure story with a reward fitting of some of the books she read. She seeks out to be her own and her father's hero. She stands up to the entire town as a voice of reason.
Working for the Mouse, I've seen a ridiculously high number of couples dressed as Belle and Gaston. It's so surreal, to me.
It's easier to make Gaston's costume than Beast's [so many fake fur to buy and tailor @.@"].
"Working for the Mouse?" So _South Park_ got it right? :P
ebmosier1 omg people really ship it?! Ew
@@RunyaEithelNar They could just dress up as his human form.
@@RunyaEithelNar Which is why you can dress up as HIS HUMAN'S FORM! :U
"The heroine states a want like legs, adventure in the great wide somewhere, a love marriage, not to be in the service of Satan anymore". One of these things is not like the other
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Murder, arson and jaywalking
Yeah, I mean, who the heck wants LEGS?
That's just weird.
I also like how for once she's a confident heroine. Most female characters who are confident are looked down upon. Granted that makes them more relatable but it reinforces the idea you don't have any self worth unless someone (usually a guy) sees it in you. We really need more female characters like Belle who's confidence is a good thing.
What, when? Who? What princess looks for self worth in a guy?
- Cinderella: Using kindness and dreaming as a coping mechanism to survive her ABUSERS, and goes to the castle to finally have a night off from said abusers. Her "I want song" is "A dream is a wish your heart make" where she just dreams of escaping them. No prince whatsoever.
- Sleeping Beauty: Respects and nurtures the animals and people around her. She objects to them leaving when she meets a guy she likes, but instead of "running away with him", she chooses to follow her duty, and not spit in the face of her parents and the people who raised her, by running off with said guy. Though most of the movie has her asleep, it's very clear that she herself is very dutiful, and tries to abide by the rules of those she wish to recipocate her love to, wanting more to help them (the fairies). This is perhaps the only princess who you may argue would be delighted in a man, but it is originally to her animal companions she sings the song, who dressed up as a guy, so it may just as much be a jest to them, because she does care and enjoy talking with them.
But I don't really understand with what you mean by "confident". Do you mean they're sassy? that they like who they are? that they go against rules and wishes of others, and does whatever they want? Because in my eyes, they're all confident, but just in different ways. But they're all kind, a trait which is extremely undervalued.
Also his outburst is self contained. He tells her to get out. She was never in any danger unless she stayed, which he told her not to do. Sometimes people loose control (in real life, of their temper, in this movie, of their beast-ness) but he seemed like he was trying to protect her from himself in that moment, by telling her to leave. There’s nothing wrong with having an outburst alone in your room, especially if you struggle with control. It’s not his fault she wouldn’t gtfo
The idea that Belle "agrees" to stay is misleading at best. Yeah, she agrees to stay, but I think that's a decision most people make if it saves their loved ones. The Stockholm Syndrome stuff is boring internet edginess, though.
yeah that's one of the points I heavily disagree with Lindsay. I agree that dismissing the themes of the movie as just being about Stockholm Syndrome is dumb, but Belle is coerced into staying. She wouldn't have done it out of her own volition. Not to take this down the obvious path, but it's the difference between enthusiastic consent and dubious consent (or even consent under pressure). Just because you "technically" said yes doesn't mean an abuser didn't use manipulative or destructive tactics to get you there, which is on par with physically forcing you.
Rebeca A. While someone can abuse/manipulate a person into making a decision without direct force, I do not think that was the Beast's (at least, initial) tactic when he first confronts Belle. In the original story he knew Maurice had a daughter so maybe he could've plotted to end up with one in his capture, but I'm assuming the Beast was unaware of that when he found Maurice in his easy chair. I'll have to rewatch the entire first exchange between belle and the beast, but suffice it to say I do not believe he considered the option of Belle staying, let alone creating a scenario that would lead her to make a difficult self-sacrificing proposition. Suffice it to say, she put he offer on the table before Beast saw Maurice as a point of leverage.
I think what she means is that Belle wasn't kidnapped and did have at least some say in her status as a prisoner
+LostStarzOfTheSky Would do you think, from Belle's point of view, that would have happened if Belle had said "I wanna leave" after his "little temper tantrum"?
Did the Beast have grounds to say "you gave me your word" and decline? Would the Beast be entitled to taking her father back, or even forcibly restraining her to stay? I mean, the deal was for her to stay. Either he should be entitled to enforce the deal, or take back his part, right?
The Beast would have punished her when she left because she broke her agreement to stay, if this was a captor situation. But the Beast saves her from wolves instead.
Beauty and the beast was originally told by a woman with the aim to prepare young girls from the nobility and aristocracy on the next step, shipped off to an older wealthy man to be their wife and brood mare. The idea of learning to love the one you marry even though you have little choice
Selina Moses seems to me a profound and wise advice for girls
Source?
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Beauty_and_the_Beast
I want to read the Villeneuve, as in the original version, there's fairies and Beauty is the daughter of a king and a fairy
There's a deeper message too, though, about being the kind of woman who will inspire men to change their beastly nature and become good. Basically, it teaches girls that their feminine allure is the antidote to toxic masculinity because men will hold themselves to higher standards in order to win their favor.
“Beauty and the Beast” is not “Stockholm Syndrome: the Musical”
“Seven Brides for Seven Brothers” has FIRMLY claimed that title, thank you very much! Lol 😜😆
The look on his face at 8:31 shows that he's just like "ohhh!! Got her! She has no argument!!"