La Belle et la Bête

This is what true movie-making is about. There is no CGI, no pop culture jokes, no stupid sex scenes. This IS what love stories are made of.

The classic fairy tale is given remarkable treatment by Jean Cocteau as he tells the tale of a beautiful girl who falls in the love with a tortured but charming Beast (played by Jean Maris in a stunning performance). This movie just seems to have it all: it's visuals are very impressive, the romance is very charming and not at all phoned in, the story is engaging and surprisingly tense, and the acting is just superb. Although there are no big movie names, you won't care for a second as this talented group will win you completely over.

Not only is this fantasy at it's very best, it often comes off more as a poem rather than a movie but you won't care. It's one of the most visually dazzling poems ever put on film.

This famed Jean Cocteau film of the 1940s plays like a poem, moving across the screen. In a triple role (Avenant, a friend of Beauty's brother; The Beast; and the Prince) Jean Marais is curiously flat as a human – it is as the sensual, passionate, sensitive, and complex Beast that he really shines. Josette Day is little more than adequate as Beauty, but good enough for the role that has been written for her.

The tale is one of awakening, of desires, and of strange surroundings. Living statues and disembodied arms holding candles aloft populate the twilight world of the Beast's castle, where the fate of a young girl turns on the plucking of a rose. Ghostly voices, choral and otherwise, shadows and softness accompany Beauty as she walks into the kingdom which first repels and then entrances her.

I have to agree with the view that the great Greta Garbo took of this movie, though: ‘give me back my Beast'. The transformation from powerful feline seducer to run-of-the-mill Prince is a disappointment. It is during the scenes where Beauty and the Beast play out their fantasy that this film has its most potency.

I first saw this when about 10 years old, it made little impression on me then, probably because I couldn't hope to appreciate it or understand it all when so young. Next time I was 25 and was bowled over by its imagery, and as I've got older come to appreciate it more and more.

So much for watching it through a child's eyes and accepting the fantasy at face value! At the beginning Cocteau states "Once upon a time...", but really for discerning adult cineastes (and/or poets) to drop their guards and enjoy it for what it was - a magical filmic fantasy. It's uniformly marvellous in all departments, direction, photography, acting, music, design, and Cocteau trotted out all his favourite cinematic tricks - just part of the sequence between Blood of a Poet in '30 and Testament of Orphee in '61. The script was suitably steeped in non sequiteurs and puzzles to add to the heaviness of it all. Er, not that it matters but what happened to Ludovic?

The wonderful dark brooding smoky atmosphere is the most important aspect though - there are few films I've seen with such a powerful cinematic atmosphere, Reinhardt's Midsummer Night's Dream is one and Dead of Night another etc. But the romantic melancholic atmosphere here was something ... incredible. It was only possible with black and white nitrate film stock to capture such gleaming, glistening and time- and place-evoking moving images - it hasn't been quite the same since 1950 with safety film in use.

If you're an adult about to give it your first (let yourself) go, I envy thee! All in all a lovely inconsequential fantasy, make what erudite and informative allegorical allusions you will.

Based on the classic French fairy tale of the same name, Jean Cocteau's fantastical fantasy masterpiece is as grand and lavish as it is thought provoking and beautiful. Through a haunting and mystical atmosphere, French director Jean Cocteau creates a fairy tale world that completely lives and breathes on it's own. This world is complimented by an assortment of characters that all have their own unique charm, along with serving relevance to the poetic tale itself. The story follows a man that gets lost in the woods and happens upon an enchanted castle. While there, he takes a rose on the request of his youngest daughter, Belle. However, the castle is owned by a half man, half beast that likes to be called, simply, 'The Beast'. The Beast tells the man that the penalty for taking his beloved roses is death, but offers him a chance to get out of it, in exchange for one of his daughters...an offer which Belle accepts.

Most people will know this classic story as the Disney animated film from the early 1990's. That one wasn't bad for Disney, but I think most will agree that this largely ignored version is a far superior telling of the tale. The Beauty and the Beast works because underneath it's fairytale setting; it's a tender love story. It's a story of how love can transcend superficial boundaries. The Beast is, obviously an ugly character on the outside, albeit one with a heart of gold on the inside, thus allowing Belle to fall in love with him and the audience to feel for the character in spite of his physical affliction. This story has become legend, in both cinema and literature and several stories have taken influence from it since - from soft-core bestiality porn flick, 'The Beast', to the classic 'King Kong'; The Beauty and the Beast is one of the most important stories ever written, and Jean Cocteau has more than done it justice with this film.

This is my first taste of Jean Cocteau. I've heard many a good thing about the man (including that he inspired the majestic 'Eyes Without a Face'), and judging by this film alone; they would appear to be true. The way that Cocteau creates the atmosphere in the movie is superb, and also very subtle. There's no real macabre imagery on display, and Cocteau relies on smoke and the lavish Gothic settings to do it for him. It's true that the beast itself looks a little rubbish; but it still looks a damn sight better than a lot of the CGI incarnations that we see all too much of today. If what I've heard is right; Cocteau is responsible for much of what cinema has come to rely on, but even if it isn't true; this film is a must see.

You can venture into this hypnotic domain and dive as deeply into its myriad of meaning and interpretation as you care - whether in the deeps or the shallows or somewhere in between, you'll find a mesmerising presentation of true originality from a legendary pioneer. The scenery, the costumes, the performances, the imagination and the innovation are all supremely wound around a tale few would not have encountered before, albeit through the animation of a slightly differing yarn. If that is what brought you here I hope you have not been disappointed, that it unlocks a door to so many treasures of cinema past, to diverse worlds and continents and by legends occasionally mightier than those found here.