Michel Auclair

Casper 2022-01-12 08:01:11

Artist directors who do not love special effects, light and shadow are the best magicians. As one of the most outstanding fantasy films in movie history, what the 1946 version of "Beauty and the Beast" creates is not just a dream-like fairy tale, but a wonderful dream come true. The meticulous...

Elda 2022-01-12 08:01:11

At Cocteau's behest of retaining our childlike sympathy in the preamble, one should enter his surreal realm of this timeless fairy tale with a tabula rasa (purging the classic Disney animation and Bill Condon's 2017 extravaganza out of our system for a while), and for today's new audience, a...

Onie 2022-03-27 09:01:14

This is the real ugly beast, not just animals like other versions. This movie is based on the logic of fairy tales. It ignores the logic of adults and only shows you this level of performance. I prefer the castle part of the beast, the statues and candlesticks played by real people, which are weird and interesting. This method doesn't work either. Bella's acting skills are a bit bad, she played in the front in many reactions, which reduces the experience for fairy tale love.

Zelda 2022-03-27 09:01:14

1. Having made such a magical film as early as 1946, Cocteau is really an artistic genius. 2. The scene where the Beast and the heroine eat for the first time is very characteristic. Although the heroine did not see the Beast, her expression and some body language are sexually suggestive. 3. It is more like a fable or a fairy tale than a movie.