After watching this in my college French class, I have mixed feelings. Part of me wants to love it, because of the trippy, fantastical visuals, the fabulous costumes, and the surreal music. The other part of me rebels against the blatant over-acting, the cringe-worthy dialog, and the ridiculously cheesy and unbelievable ending...
To be fair to Cocteau, it's a beautiful film. The visuals and music are far ahead of their time. I'd never seen anything like the scene where la Belle runs through the castle in slow-mo, with the magic arms holding the candelabras guiding her way, and then seemingly floats down the hallway with the curtains billowing to some of the most other-worldly music I've ever heard in a movie score.
The special effects are not horrible for a film of its time. I love the sets, especially the house of la Belle and her family. And the costumes! I thought they were absolutely splendid, and very period-accurate (assuming it was supposed to be set in the 17th century)
Now for the bad... I really don't think a film being old and foreign is any excuse for clunky dialog. It's even worse if you understand French, because the English-speaking viewer might assume that the dialog seems odd thanks to bad translation in the subtitles. But the French dialog is just plain bad. Plus, the acting drives me absolutely crazy. I hate la Bête's voice. Every time he calls her "la Belle", I want to scream. The guy who plays the no-good brother was mildly amusing, and her b*itchy sisters were interesting. I almost wished the film had focused more on them than on the utterly dull Belle et Bête.
Besides all this, the ending was so ridiculous! I read somewhere that Cocteau did this purposely, so that the viewer would be left with a bad taste in their mouth and question the validity of so-called "happily-ever-after" endings. If this was his indeed his intent, he succeeded.
Overall, I think this is a question of style vs. substance. I felt the same way about Sofia Coppolla's Marie Antoinette--which had amazing costumes, music, cinematography and sets, but left me feeling empty and dissatisfied.
However, at least that film isn't called a classic. I understand all the reasons that this film gets recognized, as it is groundbreaking in many ways, but I don't think it deserves to be called a masterpiece.
To be fair to Cocteau, it's a beautiful film. The visuals and music are far ahead of their time. I'd never seen anything like the scene where la Belle runs through the castle in slow-mo, with the magic arms holding the candelabras guiding her way, and then seemingly floats down the hallway with the curtains billowing to some of the most other-worldly music I've ever heard in a movie score.
The special effects are not horrible for a film of its time. I love the sets, especially the house of la Belle and her family. And the costumes! I thought they were absolutely splendid, and very period-accurate (assuming it was supposed to be set in the 17th century)
Now for the bad... I really don't think a film being old and foreign is any excuse for clunky dialog. It's even worse if you understand French, because the English-speaking viewer might assume that the dialog seems odd thanks to bad translation in the subtitles. But the French dialog is just plain bad. Plus, the acting drives me absolutely crazy. I hate la Bête's voice. Every time he calls her "la Belle", I want to scream. The guy who plays the no-good brother was mildly amusing, and her b*itchy sisters were interesting. I almost wished the film had focused more on them than on the utterly dull Belle et Bête.
Besides all this, the ending was so ridiculous! I read somewhere that Cocteau did this purposely, so that the viewer would be left with a bad taste in their mouth and question the validity of so-called "happily-ever-after" endings. If this was his indeed his intent, he succeeded.
Overall, I think this is a question of style vs. substance. I felt the same way about Sofia Coppolla's Marie Antoinette--which had amazing costumes, music, cinematography and sets, but left me feeling empty and dissatisfied.
However, at least that film isn't called a classic. I understand all the reasons that this film gets recognized, as it is groundbreaking in many ways, but I don't think it deserves to be called a masterpiece.