Worthwhile Content
Boycott SuggestionWatch If Free
Overall Hollywood BS
Misandry
Affirmative Action

Click for rating system explanation.
「”Worthwhile Content”」 rates the redeeming aspects of the film.

「”Overall Hollywood BS”」 rates the total amount of liberal bias.

「”Anti-Patriotism”」 rates the amount of criticism towards nationalists/capitalists.

「”Misandry”」 rates the amount of disparaged manhood.

「”Affirmative Action”」 rates how much “diversity” is being pushed.

「”LGBTQrstuvwxyz”」 rates the amount of non-tradional sexuality depicted.

「”Anti-God Themes”」 rates the amount of slander towards Christian ethics.

»»————————————————–¤————————————————–««

• 0 = apolitical or conservative
‣‣‣ If the liberal theme(s) are non-existent or the theme(s) *gasp* lean right.
(E.g. The EPA depicted as bad guys v.s. the entrepreneur good guys in “Ghostbusters.”

• 1 = fitting
‣‣‣ If the liberal theme(s) seem realistic  and don’t feel forced.
(E.g. The homosexual/atheist aspects of “The Imitation Game” were based on a true story.)

• 3 = bit preachy
‣‣‣ If the liberal theme(s) are one-sided and take up a significant focus of the movie.
(E.g. The affirmative action aspects of “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.”)

• 5 = overwhelming
‣‣‣If the liberal theme(s) are too much to handle and ruin the movie.
(E.g. The pro gun control, anti-white aspects of “The Purge: Anarchy.”)

Review / Rant:

It’s weird, they seemed to have cast their version of Gaston based on Robbie Rotten (pictured above), and a La Fou based on Jack Black. But couldn’t afford the original actors. All things considered, those 2 personas were fitting choices for the live action adaptation. And speaking of La Fou, all the hype about him being gay made my expectations of this film very low, but it really wasn’t that bad. I was preparing for some intrusive gay rights crap added to the script, or at the very least some inappropriate Labyrinth type f■■gotry…


Which is why I was totally unprepared and sideswiped when bombarded with “diversity” in the first 20 seconds. I heard no fuss about the affirmative action in this one, so it came out of left field for me. Very over the top, though, so I couldn’t help but laugh. It’s like they had to cram in as much as they could right away to get SJW’s off their back. A few slight “Imma’ strong woman and don’t need no man” moments but nothing infuriating like Star Wars. Just brace yourselves and expect the first 30 minutes to be a bit frustrating.

Then come all of the redeeming qualities during the middle hour of the movie. It’s been a while since I’ve seen the ’91 version and I don’t enough care to rewatch it, but from what I remember it’s VERY similar to the original. Which is why it’s bittersweet. Yet another Hollywood reboot, capitalizing on our nostalgia while simultaneously ruining it with hidden agendas. Anyway, the elements that were kept are quite beautiful. The extended metaphor is absolutely fitting for the roles men and women play in real life. We need each other. Much like the prince before he was cursed, bachelors can lead a life of hedonism and simple pleasures. Becoming narcissistic, cold, selfish, and self-destructive. I’ve seen many guys get rescued from the downward spiral of drinking themselves into depression and playing video games all day at a dead end job, by meeting a sweet girl.


Likewise, I’ve seen countless cat lady spinsters who could really use a bit of structure and cold, sternness to get their lives in order. Not to mention the complete paradigm shift of the mind once a person has a child of their own. All those silly platitudes melt away as they harness their emotions for good: protecting their children’s future. (I’m lookin’ at you Merkel…) But even without kids, married couples rub off on each other, (pardon the pun), as the man learns to think more micro and the woman thinks more macro.

Statistics show this for both genders, too. Men tend to be motivated to work harder and get raises when they have a family to provide for. And women tend to find true happiness in interpersonal relationships and keeping their home as a castle. These are all great themes to teach your kids.

And it finds a good balance for the feminists – like Belle’s reinventor, Linda Woolverton, who apparently emphasized back in ’91 that Belle not just be a one dimensional damsel in distress, but rather a bookworm with other goals and aspirations aside from marriage. (Yep… Hollywood’s been pushing its revisionist history agenda for quite some time now, but in this instance it seems sensible IMHO.) I watched this with my girlfriend and I could see her get giddy whenever Belle was showered in decadent beauty. But unlike other Hollywood romances that appeal to a female’s desires to be worshipped for merely existing, Belle isn’t a gold digger, and she isn’t leading Gaston on in a love triangle like the thot in the Twilight series. Instead, she earns her keep and you see a very charming harmony grow between the main characters as they both learn to balance out their feminine/masculine elements. Normally, this lack of creativity in rehashing old stories would bug me, but I was won over because of how low my expectations were going in. If I had a daughter, I would be totally okay if she saw this movie with a friend, but I wouldn’t pay to see it. Maybe I’d just torrent it if my kid insisted, or better yet, rent the 90’s version. You can do as you please. ?

Similar to the Jungle Book, you don’t know how much affirmative action is shoved down your throat, because the majority is computer animation. (And just in case you’ve been living in a cave – spoiler alert – they don’t stay as inanimate objects forever.) So the last 30 minutes are frustrating. Maybe sneak a flask into the theater and play a drinking game: a shot for every mixed race couple you spot. And of course, they put an out of place looking black guy right up front in the mob. And wouldn’t ya know it? He’s the only one who seems unafraid of the beast when the rest of the stupid white people are outraged. ◔_◔ Also, there’s some jokes about La Fou being a gay and a crossdressing joke with other side characters. Don’t stress it, ‘cuz it’ll likely go over your kids’ heads, and if you were oblivious to Disney’s new management shoving cultural marxism progress down our throats, you’d let it slide too.

In fact, if the same gay jokes were in the original cartoon, you would just laugh at it, and SJW’s would be outraged. Context is everything, I guess. So try your best to ignore it. The diversity on the other hand, is impossible to ignore but at least it’s not anti-white, so you can take it lightheartedly. Yes, it’s a kids cartoon. But there have been many great kids cartoons that appeal to all age groups, and it’s an art that Disney and Pixar have mastered before. But sadly, they missed out on developing a deeper connection with the mature audience members this time. Imagine, you start to get lost in the rich 1700’s scenery, you put yourself in the shoes of the traumatized post Bubonic Plague generation, and you begin to forget you’re watching a cartoon as you analyze the subtle facial features of a duo in denial of their growing sexual tension… and right as you start to feel some faint, slight flickering of sentimentality– BAM!

Every. Frickin. Time. As soon as the fourth wall left your mind, they’d unintentionally SMASH it to pieces for PC’s sake. Nevertheless, this movie could have been worse. I say don’t support this film out of protest of the gay/diversity stuff they’re jammin’ into every Disney movie, even if in this instance it wasn’t so bad. As for Emma Watson? She tries to be an activist, but it’s all with good intentions and never as inflammatory as other actors. ¯_(ツ)_/¯ No big deal.

So, if you’re with people who are watching it, it’s worth sitting through. Just don’t pay.

REVIEW BY:





The post “Beauty and the Beast” appeared first on .

Proper Review
Jun 4th 2017
Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry