Beauty and the Beast : So he was only a beast for a couple years? I guess I was misremembering

Re: So he was only a beast for a couple years? I guess I was misremember


No, just pouring a cup of tea does not unrust your skills. Their skills are much more than something ANYONE can do. A retired marathon runner doesn't unrust his skills either by taking a walk with his dog. And you don't have to completely screw up for your skills to be rusted. But whatever Lumiere and Mrs. Potts did, certainly doesn't unrust the skills of all the other servants Lumiere was speaking for.


The marathon runner is a very bad example because a marathon runner isn't expected to simply walk. That's completely different regarding the servant's duties, of which the job description for most if not all servants do entail EXACTLY the basic kinds of stuff you dismissed, such pouring a cup of tea for someone, or guiding them to a chair, among other stuff (and besides, Mrs. Potts also needed to prepare the tea in the first place and make sure it was fresh, so she still had to do a lot of work just to prepare that for Maurice, and under short notice as well). Becoming a servant is not exactly something akin to running a marathon, though that being said, it does also require a significant amount of loyalty. And yes, in this particular case, you DO have to particularly screw up big time in order to actually rust in those areas, precisely BECAUSE most stuff servants or waitresses do ARE in fact basic stuff many people could do. Now, I will acknowledge that in the case of the chef, preparing a sumptuous meal actually would require a lot of hard work and most certainly would be put to the test right then and there (and I will acknowledge that in THAT particular case, he definitely was put to the test when Belle actually had dinner, though to be fair, he also was put to the test when he prepared that earlier dinner before Belle's refusal to come down forced Beast to cancel it), he would be the closest to a marathon runner in this case. However, the others definitely did very well regarding their intended functions.


No, you haven't actually.

And no, I haven' t put anyone down just for having a different opinion. I've simply disagreed with them, explained why and asked them to explain themselves, like I did just now with louiseculmer. Ofcourse, YOU have to come in and jump on me again.

Now stop deflecting and actually discuss the issue at hand.


Yes, actually, I have, I explained that with the villagers, if the village was in close proximity to the castle as both the Mob Song and the prologue implied, they'd at least be familiar with it rather than completely unaware about it. Not to mention the forest was definitely cursed as well if the prologue's stained glass windows were to be believed, meaning they would have noticed a change there as well.

I also pointed out how if they were truly self-isolated as you claimed, they wouldn't have raccoon skin caps, they wouldn't have tobacco (and yes, they do in fact sell tobacco due to their being a storefront that had a smoking pipe as their sign) since that's not even native to France, let alone that village, and in fact, Gaston himself would be just as much of an outcast precisely BECAUSE he left the village to hunt abroad.

And your post to Louise also demonstrated your jumping down on it. She gave some fairly reasonable points and you dismissed them. Louise doesn't agree with me entirely, but at least she does it in a gentle manner, same with furienna.

And as far as the issue at hand, I still say that Maurice should have gotten the Be Our Guest musical number, because at least there, it would have been VERY clear especially under figurative measures that the servants were definitely put to the test with their first ever visitor/guest. Belle, if anything, was closer to the second guest (and please don't claim that Maurice doesn't count because he "trespassed". 1. The servants let him in, and he even asked for permission to stay for the night, 2., Belle is hardly a guest since, at least officially, she is considered a prisoner, and 3., if the servants went behind Beast's back to let him in without his permission, don't you think he would have killed them for disobedience?). And quite frankly, they should have omitted the 10 years remark specifically to AVOID any confusion. At least the musical did away with that unnecessary bit. And when the confusion is bad enough that the remake actually has Adam being explicitly shown as a child when the curse took place, you know the writers screwed up big time. And quite frankly, one of the reasons why the whole "he was so nasty he never had any guests come over" made zero sense is because Gaston was just as much of a jerk as he was if not even more so, yet that had absolutely no impact on the village receiving visitors or newcomers based on Belle and Maurice arriving at the village, and no one was moving the heck out of there.

Re: So he was only a beast for a couple years? I guess I was misremember

The skills of servants aren't simple either, otherwise anyone could do it. Again, pouring a cup of tea and guiding someone to a chair does not "put someone to the test" nor does it unrust your skills to entertain guests, and certainly not the skills of the complete staff, for which Lumiere was speaking.

No, you've not explained yourself as to why the villagers should know about the prince having turned into a beast. I never claimed they were isolated, I said they don't care for the outside world. That doesn't mean they don't care for civilization, it simply means they like to keep to themselves and don't care about interacting with a prince living a few hours away.

No, I didn't jump on louise, I simply disagreed and asked her to explain her arguments. The only way for you to say I don't jump on her is if I say that's she's completely right. Sorry, not going to do that, because I don't agree. You keep jumping on me, though. But just keep deflecting by making personal attacks, it just proves you have no arguments.

The Be Our Guest scene could've made sense with Maurice, but it still makes sense with Belle.

The villagers were not acquaintances of the prince, now were they? The people whom the prince associated with may have been completely different.

Re: So he was only a beast for a couple years? I guess I was misremember

That would be stupid as hell if he was cursed as a young boy. A lot of kids are selfish and unkind, doesn't mean he will always be like that. Seems a bit harsh to place a curse that could possibly last forever on a child who doesn't know any better. Plus that painting of him looked nothing like a young boy or even a teenager for that matter. I wish they never included the "...on his 21st year" line, because that either means he has only been a beast for a couple years or since he was a boy, both of which would be dumb and take away from the story.

My Reviews: https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbYVmhjEJi9UAB4pZqseAGM9CSmMooF0n
Top