DVDizzy.com

You guys can have the opinion she is more knowledgeable or "right", but to me Lindsay and Doug seem around the same. I also know Doug studied film in college. Did Lindsay?

_________________

She has a B.A. in Cinema Studies from New York University and M.A in Cinematography and Film/Video Production from the University of Southern California.

Doug seems to be stuck with recaping films while pointing out plot holes and interrupt the review with unfunny skits like a lot of beginners do. Lindsay has evovled from that since she dropped the Nostalgia Chick persona. Her video essays have much more depth than his.

I have actually seen both Doug and Lindsay's videos, and i think they are about much more than plot holes... it's about comparison to the original, analysis of the movie. All I know is, I thought the live action BATB was mediocre at best, and though I had my own ideas of why that was, both of their videos were able to make it clear why the movie FEELS off.
And I agree that Lindsay's analysis feels more academic...

Ah, so maybe Lindsay does know more (I don't know what the full extent of Doug's studying was). I like them both. I like how Doug goes through the whole movie scene by scene and talks about it. I know Doug may have done wrong but I need proof he did all he's accused of. And even if he did some bad, doesn't mean his opinions are all wrong either.

_________________

I've been endlessly googling this, but I still can't find an actual explanation for it .... what happened to the design of Belle's dress ? In the original promo images, the dress looks one way with frills / layers only at the bottom. The dolls reflect this, along with various other toys. Then the dress looks different in the film with the layers much much higher up. Some of the later - produced dolls reflected this change of dress.

I've seen rumours that it was due to Emma Watson changing the design ? This seems to collaborate with the costume designer distancing herself slightly from taking credit for the dress, citing Emma Watson as the driving force behind it having no corset etc.

If anyone knows of anything, would really appreciate it !

Well, first of all I would say thank God the dress changed because it looks better now than the earlier version.

Next, the dress was originally going to be very period-accurate for the 1740's like the rest of the costumes, and even Emma Watson was going to see how that went, but then both she and the costume designer agreed to change it. But Emma Watson was the one who really pushed for it to end up so different from the 1740's look. What I think happened, and yes, I don't know, I just think, is that the earlier version of the dress we saw with the layers down lower was still designed by Emma, but they changed it even further just because they were still developing it, and the dress in the finished film is just the final one. The two dresses are just too similar and there's no way the terrible first one was designed by the Academy Award-winning costume designer without any input from Emma. In fact, I know it wasn't because it doesn't look a lick like a 1740's dress.

_________________

So the dress that we see in the promo shots is the original dress, before Emma Watson changed it ? I had no idea she had that much power to have the entire thing changed, ruining promo images / toys etc ?!

I don't think I explained it well. No, the dress in the promos is the dress Emma changed it to (probably), because it does not look anything like a 1740's dress. The final dress we see in the film is just her and the costume designer changing it even further, to thankfully make it look a little better.

_________________

Ok, I have finally done something I've wanted to for a while. I don't know if any of you really know, but I have a love-hate relationship with Belle's yellow dress in the live-action Beauty and the Beast. I love how it's sort of like a 1940's (the chosen, and appropriate, setting of the film) gown, and I like the layers and movement. But I really more hate it than love it. I think it looks terrible when it's not moving. This is probably due to how the gown is structured. The costume designer for the film said their was part of a cage in the back (I think), but it's not a full hoop-skirt, you know? Because Emma Watson wanted freedom of movement with the gown. *Sigh* Anyway, I recently discovered that one of my favorite things they did to 1700's skirts is something called "retroussé". In French it means "to hike up". It is a draping of the overskirts to give them added beauty. And then I thought...that technique kind of mimicks the ripples in Belle's original animated yellow dress! So what if they had used that technique for the live-action version? Would it look better? I thought it might, so I drew designs I thought would look good, and I wonder what you guys think. In addition to making the skirt more 1740's accurate, I also made the sleeves more 1740's accurate.

Ok, well first here's the original animated dress, and to show how it might look in real life if there was an (almost) exact replica, I also included the live musical Disney Hollywood Studios version:


Here's the version they made for the live-action film, with the costume designer's sketch on the left and a film still on the right:


Here's that dress in movement. Notice it looks better that way?:


Now, here's what a 1700's style retroussé dress looks like:


And finally, my designs. The dress with no rococo filigree decoration on the overskirt is on the left, and the dress with the overskirt that does have that decoration, which I tried to make look like the live-action film's dress decoration, is on the right, just in case you guys like one better than the other. I based the retroussé overskirt on the back of the yellow retroussé dress I just posted above:


So, thoughts guys?

_________________

Lovely design! That's certainly an improvement over the movie version. I prefer the one on the right with the detailing on the skirt, because the left one is too plain for my taste. However, I'm not a fan of the crumpled look of the overskirt. Would prefer something more like the animated Belle's skirt, that resembles the Austrian curtains with that almost metallic ripple effect and the folds. I would also make her sleeves longer like they were in concept art for the live-action film back when they were going with the period dress.

Thanks for the kind feedback! Hm, that's interesting what you said, because the crumpled look is my favorite part. I guess people really do have very different views on what is beautiful. And the reason I gave her semi-historically accurate shorter sleeves is because her original animated sleeves were so short. But I don't remember seeing concept art of Belle's live-action yellow dress looking period accurate and with longer sleeves! Know where I can see that?!

_________________

I'm glad somebody likes the crumpled look then. I just don't see the appeal myself. Maybe in real life, but I don't see it translating well to animation. I guess your version was for the live-action version so I'm sure if the drawing was brought to life, I wouldn't mind as much.

I'd argue that she doesn't even have sleeves in the animated version. I consider it more a shoulder sash. However, she has long gloves that keep her arms from looking too bare and unadorned otherwise. This is the concept art I was referring too. The full picture is linked here. https://magazine.artstation.com/wp-cont ... ny-l-2.jpg

Oh, yes, I do remember that concept art now! We should have got that dress. Well, maybe with some retrousse in it too.

I guess the crumpled look was popular in the 1700's, so lots of people liked it then. If you Google retrousse dress you will see real life examples. Also, the fairy godmother's dress in Disney's live-action Cinderella had a "crumpled", retrousse dress.

We will have to disagree on what to call Belle's neck sash/sleeves/whatever on her original animated dress, lol. Maybe the right word is neckline, I dunno. You know, I didn't realize till very recently that Belle's original animated dres is probably based on a 1800's dress. I could provide a good picture, if you want. It finally explained to me why the Broadway version (which won best costumes!) gave Belle a yellow dress that looked the way it did. It looked ugly to me before, but now that I see it is also based on an 1800's dress, since she probably figured out that's what the animated one was based on, I like it.

_________________

Even the hair looks better in the concept art if you ask me.

I didn't realize that the Fairy Godmother's dress in the live-action film was also crumpled. I suppose it really does look better in real life.

I don't consider the top part of Belle's dress sleeves because Jasmine's two purple outfits from her film have something similar but she has "real" sleeves underneath it. Even Aurora's pointed collar type thing is similar to what Belle has in its placement on the body, but I wouldn't call that sleeves either. Yeah, Belle's dress has always resembled a Victorian gown or even an Antebellum dress. I'd love to see a picture if you have one.

I agree on the hair. Glad you like the fairy godmother's costume. I believe in Aurora's case that is a collar, but maybe it is actually just called the neckline, too. I'll post a picture of the 1800's dress when I get home from my friends'.

_________________

I'm glad we didn't get that dress. Funny how it sounds, but it looks too much like that time period. The style of the dress should stand out more since she is a "funny girl."

Ok here's the 1800's dress. I think it looks like Belle's.

_________________

That reminds me of how even Cinderella's animated ballgown is more early-mid Victorian compared to what her stepfamily wears. Lady Tremaine's outfit is more Edwardian while Anastasia and Drizella's bustle dresses come from the 1880s.


I can certainly see the similarities. It also reminds me a lot of the dress that the mice make for Cinderella, although some people also compare that dress to a rococo dress for some reason.

I think Belle would wear something different and not too restricting...but I feel she would still wear something closer to a 1700's dress like in that concept art. She could just wear it without a corset, without a cage, shorter sleeves...


I made a picture just in reply to what you said, lol. I've learned a lot about costumes and Cinderella, of course, and I actually feel Cinderella's silver dress look, with her hair atop her head, choker, cap sleeves, and yes, a bustle (I'm pretty sure that's what the puffy material at her waist is) would be more late Victorian (1880's?), like in the first picture in the image I provide (also with a woman looking a little like Lady Tremaine), and then I also included a Victorian dress that shows her pink mice dress is indeed still from the 1800's, the picture on the right:


Funnily enough I did try to provide a rococo picture on here for her pink dress when I was trying to say Cinderella was set in the rococo time period (Click here for that thread), but of course now I know it's not. However, as you and I agreed, the architecture is rococo, and Cinderella's hair, choker, and bustle actually do recall the rococo, they just happen to also connect with the Victorian.

_________________

Thanks for the pictures. I've heard some people refer to the poofy sections at the top of Cinderella's skirt as peplum. I definitely don't consider it a bustle though. It looks nothing like it, especially in comparison to Anastasia and Drizella who both actually do wear bustles. Cinderella's dress looks more like a hoopskirt or like she is wearing a crinoline under it. I mostly got the mid-Victorian, or 1860s, period from Shoomlah's design. https://www.deviantart.com/shoomlah/art ... -207356116

This is Cinderella with a bustle.
https://www.deviantart.com/foxy-lady-ja ... -116416000