Beauty and the Beast (1946)

Mike Di Benedetto, 12/12/11, Beauty and the Beast (La Belle et la Bete), French, 1947, Jean Cocteau, 93 minutes.

            Beauty and the Beast is a fine example of just how well a film can detach the viewer from reality with its use of visuals and theme.  Cocteau was a poet first, and it certainly shows; whereas words on paper would provide his audience with imagery in a poem, lighting, effects and the gothic surrealism provide it here – making each frame a standalone work of art.  Perhaps the most astounding fact about Beauty and the Beast is that it accomplishes so much visually that one can’t help but forget it was made over 60 years ago.  In relation to other films we have viewed, it definitely stands out in its ability to sweep the viewer off his/her feet and plant him/her right in the midst of all the magic happening on screen.  I will be analyzing this film from a visual perspective. 

            The first article I read was a review by Roger Ebert for the Chicago Sun-Times.  Ebert begins with the simple truth that most of us are familiar with Disney’s Beauty and the Beast, and most of us may not have even known that the 1946 version exists.  He then assures the ready that, although there are some major similarities between both films, the tones, visually and emotionally, drastically differ.  Ebert summarizes the plot a bit before delving into perhaps the film’s best quality – the visuals.  He notes on how the “outdoor realism” of the town and Belle’s house contrasts with the “indoor fantasy” of Beast’s castle and surrounding area. Ebert also mentions the use of effects and trickery, such as the smoke surrounding Beast, the moving statues inside the castle and the iPad-esque mirror.  Ebert ends his review on the acknowledgment that although a poet, Cocteau wanted to appeal to his audience through images rather than words.

            The second article I looked at was by David Galef, entitled “A Sense of Magic: Reality and Illusion in Cocteau’s Beauty and the Beast.”  Galef discusses the techniques used by Cocteau by use of visuals and effects.  He describes specific scenes and praises the film for its mystifying and intoxicating capabilities.  Galef also talks about how much works went into set design as well as costume designs.  He recalls a testimonial by the actor who plays Beast who said his costume was so elaborate that it was actually difficult for him to stand and walk. 

            Both these articles describe just how visually stunning Beauty and the Beast is.  Both authors write about specific scenes that impacted them on a personal and emotional level.  Ebert mentions the contrast between realism and fantasy – how one minute you’re witnessing Belle’s real-world tribulations in dealing with her uppity sisters and her father’s imminent trial conviction – the next minute you’re submerged in a fantastical world decorated in magical nuances and gothic imagery.  This ongoing contrast makes for a surreal and captivating adventure.

            I personally enjoyed this film on many levels.  The story is timeless and beautiful, the characters are psychologically, brilliantly done, and the acting is emotionally resonant.  However, by far, my favorite aspect of this film was its visuals – both haunting and magical, and the article I read gave me more insight into the techniques and hard work behind this superb imagery.  In conclusion, Beauty and the Beast is not a film that is to just be watched but one that must also be experienced.

References

Ebert, J. (December 26 1999). Beauty and the Beast (1946).  Chicago Sun-Times.  http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19991226/REVIEWS08/912260301/1023

Galef, D. (1984). A sense of magic: reality and illusion in Cocteau's beauty and the beast. Literature Film Quarterly, 12(2), 96.