Beauty and the Beast
Tags: fantasy

Plot synopsis:
A widower merchant lives in a mansion with his six children, three sons and three daughters. All his daughters are very beautiful, but the youngest, Beauty, is the most lovely, as well as kind, well-read, and pure of heart; while the two elder sisters, in contrast, are wicked, selfish, vain, and spoiled. They secretly taunt Beauty and treat her more like a servant than a sister. The merchant eventually loses all of his wealth in a tempest at sea which sinks most of his merchant fleet. He and his children are consequently forced to live in a small farmhouse and work for their living.
Some years later, the merchant hears that one of the trade ships he had sent off has arrived back in port, having escaped the destruction of its compatriots. Before leaving, he asks his children if they wish for him to bring any gifts back for them. The sons ask for weaponry and horses to hunt with, whereas his oldest daughters ask for clothing, jewels, and the finest dresses possible as they think his wealth has returned. Beauty is satisfied with the promise of a rose as none grow in their part of the country. The merchant, to his dismay, finds that his ship's cargo has been seized to pay his debts, leaving him penniless and unable to buy his children's presents.
During his return, the merchant becomes lost during a storm. Seeking shelter, he enters a dazzling palace. A hidden figure opens the giant doors and silently invites him in. The merchant finds tables inside laden with food and drink, which seem to have been left for him by the palace's invisible owner. The merchant accepts this gift and spends the night there. The next morning, as the merchant is about to leave, he sees a rose garden and recalls that Beauty had desired a rose. Upon picking the loveliest rose he can find, the merchant is confronted by a hideous "Beast" which tells him that for taking his most precious possession after accepting his hospitality, the merchant must die. The merchant begs to be set free, arguing that he had only picked the rose as a gift for his youngest daughter. The Beast agrees to let him give the rose to Beauty, but only if the merchant or one of his daughters will return.
The merchant is upset but accepts this condition. The Beast sends him on his way, with wealth, jewels and fine clothes for his sons and daughters, and stresses that Beauty must never know about his deal. The merchant, upon arriving home, tries to hide the secret from Beauty, but she pries it from him. Her brothers say they will go to the castle and fight the Beast, but the merchant dissuades them, saying they will stand no chance against the monster. Beauty then agrees to go to the Beast's castle. The Beast receives her graciously and informs her that she is now mistress of the castle, and he is her servant. He gives her lavish clothing and food and carries on lengthy conversations with her. Every night, the Beast asks Beauty to marry him, only to be refused each time. After each refusal, Beauty dreams of a handsome prince who pleads with her to answer why she keeps refusing him, to which she replies that she cannot marry the Beast because she loves him only as a friend. Beauty does not make the connection between the handsome prince and the Beast and becomes convinced that the Beast is holding the prince captive somewhere in the castle. She searches and discovers multiple enchanted rooms, but never the prince from her dreams.
For several months, Beauty lives a life of luxury at the Beast's palace, having every whim catered to by invisible servants, with no end of riches to amuse her and an endless supply of exquisite finery to wear. Eventually, she becomes homesick and begs the Beast to allow her to go see her family. He allows it on the condition that she returns exactly a week later. Beauty agrees to this and sets off for home with an enchanted mirror and ring. The mirror allows her to see what is going on back at the Beast's castle, and the ring allows her to return to the castle in an instant when turned three times around her finger. Her older sisters are surprised to find her well fed and dressed in finery. Beauty tries to share the magnificent gowns and jewels the Beast gave her with her sisters, but they turn into rags at her sisters' touch, and are restored to their splendour when returned to Beauty, as the Beast meant them only for her. Her sisters are envious when they hear of her happy life at the castle, and, hearing that she must return to the Beast on a certain day, beg her to stay another day, even putting onion in their eyes to make it appear as though they are weeping. They hope that the Beast will be angry with Beauty for breaking her promise and eat her alive. Beauty's heart is moved by her sisters' false show of love, and she agrees to stay.
Beauty begins to feel guilty about breaking her promise to the Beast and uses the mirror to see him back at the castle. She is horrified to discover that the Beast is lying half-dead from heartbreak near the rose bushes from which her father plucked the rose, and she immediately uses the ring to return to the Beast.
Beauty weeps over the Beast, saying that she loves him. When her tears strike him, the Beast is transformed into the handsome prince from Beauty's dreams. The Prince informs her that long ago a fairy turned him into a hideous beast after he refused to let her in from the rain and that only by finding true love, despite his ugliness, could the curse be broken. He and Beauty are married and they live happily ever after together.

Review: Not the classic story.
I remember seeing this movie as a child.
Even then, I was expecting the story that I grew up with, but I didn't find it here.
The entirely new adaptation, suggested by the classic fairy tale has Lady Althea (Joyce Taylor) journeying with her father, (Dayton Lummis) to the land of the prince to whom she is betrothed.
What she does not know, is that Prince Eduardo (Mark Taylor) suffers from a curse which transforms him into a beast every night.
Meanwhile, his evil cousin, Prince Bruno (Michael Pate) and his wife, Princess Sybil (Merry Anders) are waiting for a chance to seize the throne, with the help of a spy, Grimaldi (Walter Burke).
Although Althea eventually discovers Eduardo's horrifying secret, she remains loyal to him.
Both Taylor and Damon are a handsome heroine and hero, and play their parts with feeling.The rest of the cast follows suit.
The film looks very attractive for a B-picture (it was the last movie from prolific director Edward Cahn) and the moral from the original story has been retained.
If you don't expect the classic fairy tale, it can be enjoyed on it's own terms..
Fun Costume Picture.
I think that this film is unfairly maligned.
It does not purport to be an adaptation of the original story, the most famous version of which was written by Madame Le Prince de Beaumont and published in 1756.
This film is admittedly not as haunting as the version starring George C.
Scott, which was made for TV in 1976 and stuck quite close (as did Jean Cocteau's artistic masterpiece) to the original French fairy tale.
It should, however, be appreciated for what it is: a glossy Technicolor fantasy from the producer who brought us the excellent fantasy film "Jack the Giant Killer," which was released in the same year and features some of the same actors.
It has the same evocative opening, which shows a story-book opening up and inviting the viewer into its magical world.
The same opening is found in Disney's "Snow White," "Cinderella," and "Sleeping Beauty." I cannot fathom why some viewers say that the sets are "cardboard"; I personally feel that the castle sets are quite convincing and solid-looking.
The costumes are also lovely.
Granted, Joyce Taylor is not a great actress and not really as pretty to look at as Mark Damon, who plays the duke/beast.
I think he delivers a solid performance, although the script hardly gives him the opportunity to show how well he can act, which he most certainly did two years earlier in Roger Corman's horror masterpiece, "House of Usher." There is a great cast of character actors: the ever-slimy Michael Pate and the little-known and under-appreciated Walter Burke, who plays the part of the villain's henchman to creepy perfection.
Another asset is the beast make-up created by the legendary Jack P.
Pierce, who was the artist behind the monster make-up for the Frankenstein monster and the Wolf Man (the curse on Eduardo, Mark Damon's character, is actually like that of the one imposed upon Lon Chaney Jr.'s character in the latter film).
Finally, we have the requisite happy ending.
This is a good family film.
Don't expect high art.
I am sure the makers of the movie did not set out with that aim in mind..
Unimportant and pretty boring period picture....
BEAUTY AND THE BEAST was the last movie by experienced Hollywood director Edward L.Cahn who died in 1963.
He was a real workhorse and directed some 100 films in 30 years, among them such B-Picture classics as THE CREATURE WITH THE ATOM BRAIN, ZOMBIES OF MORA-TAU, INVASION OF THE SAUCER MEN, IT!-THE TERROR FROM BRYOND SPACE and THE FOUR SKULLS OF JONATHAN DRAKE.BEAUTY AND THE BEAST is an unimportant and pretty boring period picture with well done art direction, but that is all it has to offer.
The naive story moves along at a snail's pace without any highpoint and there is no action at all.
Although Mark Damon looks like a werewolf after he turns into the beast, this is not a horror film, because Damon is a very tame "werewolf", who does no harm to anyone.
Anyway, with or without make-up: Damons acting ability is not very impressive and it was a wise move by him, to give up acting and become a movie producer a few years later..
Calling Lon Chaney!.
Little-seen American-made rewrite of the classic fable is an awesomely awful 'family film' set in Italy.
The beautiful daughter of the Count of Sardi is all set to marry a vacuous Prince Charming, but he has inherited an ancient curse which turns him into a werewolf every nightfall.
Bad films can be a lot of fun, but this one is just sad.
Paltry production values, pitiful make-up effects, amateurish cast including Joyce Taylor, Mark Damon and Edward Franz, terrible script and direction.
Stick with the 1946 French version by Jean Cocteau.
Heck, even Disney's animated bombast is preferable to this!
NO STARS from ****.
Horrible.
Talyor the Beauty and Damon the Beast in this terrible ripoff.
It would be better off if this film was not filmed at all, or if it was flushed down the can.
Mark Damon's acting was horrible, and the soundtrack sounded like a chainsaw.
But I'll give it 1(half)out of 10, because I feel sorry for it..
Beauty And The Werewolf: A Different Version Of A Beloved Classic.
Beauty And The Beast (1962): Mark Damon, Joyce Taylor, Eduard Franz, Michael Pate, Merry Anders, Walter Burke, Dayton Lummis, Alexander Lockwood, Meg Wyllie, Charles Wagenheim, Herman Rudin, Jon Silo...Director Edward L.
Cahn, Screenplay George Bruce, Orville H.
Hampton.Director Edward Cahn's 1962 "Beauty and the Beast" is not the familiar fairy tale classic, despite the misleading title and the opening of the film, which shows, in a Disney-like fashion, an illustrated fairy tale book opening up.
This is instead a very different version, part-romance, part Gothic horror mystery.
This is a film that is very much a product of its time and also targeting an adult audience, not children.
Mark Damon stars as Prince Eduardo, set to rule a provincial area in Italy during the 1600's.
As the film opens, he has just become engaged to the beautiful Althea (Joyce Taylor) of a nearby province, but little does she know of his dark secret.
Eduardo has been cursed by a late sorcerer.
He's doomed to live as a normal human man during the day but at night he is transformed into a wolf.
The scenes in which he is transformed into a werewolf as soon as the sun sets, the wicked sorcerer's curse and plotting villains as well as the eerie and foreboding atmosphere of the castle with its many chambers and dungeons are all components of what was a typical horror film for 1962.
But rather than focusing on intense horror or violence, the film instead tries to re-tell the romantic Beauty and the Beast story in a different light.
For some, this film is lousy B movie stuff.
But it's in beautiful color and the cinematography is clearly not in the level of standard B films.
Likewise, the costumes by Jerry Bos and Sabine Manela are exquisite, authentic to the late Renaissance period and very "Beauty and the Beast", as are the sets by Morris Hoffman.
These sets are studio sets and may not be truly impressive but they are not lousy either.
The music provided by Hugo Friedhofer is also lovely.
As with any Beauty and the Beast film, there's the romantic aspect.
A woman's sincere love breaks the spell over the Beast.
But the reason I give this film a number 8 rating is that, despite the good parts, there are some things that are visibly flawed, such as the bad script (stilted language from everyone, our Beauty provides an angry, torch-bearing mob with a speech on how they ought to love the man inside the Beast).
But if you're a fan of Beauty and the Beast in its many forms, this is a film you may just want to check out..
Lovely movie!.
How an earth can such a charming movie suffer from that bad IMDb rating?
Probably because Beauty and the Beast (1962), little Hollywood B-picture, offers gorgeous dresses, lush colours and atmospheric Gothic settings instead of exploitation filth.
Set in Renessance Italy, this is charming retelling of the fairytale, with the newlywed Althea (Joyce Taylor) finding out that her husband (Mark Damon) is cursed to be a werewolf at night.
Michael Pate is villain and Merry Anders his evil but beautiful wife.
With script by George Bruce and B-movie veteran Orville H.
Hampton, costume design by Sabine Manela and Jerry Bos, music by Hugo Friedhofer and werewolf make-up from Hollywood legend Jack P.
Pierce..
As suggested by the Ancient Legend.
Edward L.
Cahn's last film was also his only Technicolor production, indistinguishable from countless other such glossy trifles from the early 60s, with much candlelit stalking along musty corridors.
It passes the time agreeably enough until a tiresome subplot involving the machinations of dastardly Prince Bruno (Michael Pate) to usurp the throne from handsome Prince Eduardo (Mark Damon) eventually intrudes into centre stage, complete with villagers carrying torches as if in an old Universal horror film.
The comparison is apt, as this marked the final film of veteran makeup artist Jack Pierce, and the Beast is plainly the Wolf Man makeup he created twenty years earlier with longer hair.The presence of Michael Pate also stirs memories of William Cameron Menzies' 'The Maze' (1953), in which he had had a sympathetic role as the reluctant guardian of a similar Dark Secret in another palatial residence to the one depicted here..
This isn't exactly "Beauty and the Beast"--it's more like they merged it with "I was a Teenage Werewolf" and "Shrek"!!.
This is a very, very different version of "Beauty and the Beast"--as so much of what I remembered about the story has changed.
In this film it's set in Italy and the curse on the young Duke was caused by a long-dead sorcerer.
And now the curse man must contend with a jerk that will stop at nothing to steal his throne.
But it's the nature of the curse that is so different from what I expected--even more so than this silly political posturing and subterfuge.
While the man DID become a beast, it only happened at night--like Princess Fiona from "Shrek"!
And how does the film remind me of "I Was a Teenage Werewolf"?
Well, the makeup looks like a third-rate version of this second-rate film.
This certainly seemed nothing like the versions of the story from Jean Cocteau (1946), Hallmark (with George C.
Scott in 1976) or the Disney version!
Sadly, what also is different about this version is that it was very low energy--and way too dull considering how interesting the story should have been.If the weirdness of the story were all, I could still have given this movie a decent score.
After all, it is an old folk tale and there is no one definitive version.
However, what's new is bad--not just the dullness of the story but the writing overall.
There are too many scenes involving long exposition--a sign of very bad writing.
This is when people talk not so much to each other but instead it's like a little speech only intended, clumsily, to explain the back story!
In addition, again and again, the film never gets interesting or takes advantage of the plot.
For example, if you do see the film, what if at the end the curse had not only left the Duke but then attached itself to the evil usurper?
All in all, a film that kids will be bored to tears over and others won't particularly enjoy either.
My advice is see the brilliant Cocteau and Disney versions....the George C.
Scott one, unfortunately, is not available anywhere.