No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
When Beauty and the Beast premiered in 1991, its self-assured protagonist was a deliberate departure from the earlier Disney princess narratives. With time, however, the film has been lumped in with the other princess films as regressive, in part because the fairy tale itself is fundamentally flawed. The decision to remake the film as a live-action spectacle opens Disney and the text to the familiar critiques, which the 2017 film alternately addresses and suppresses. This article focuses on three efforts Disney made to skirt the long-standing feminist critiques on Beauty and the Beast: the casting of Emma Watson, including an “exclusively gay” moment, and framing Beauty as an AIDS allegory. In the process, it becomes clear that the remake is a deferential companion piece designed for cross-generational appeal, both for children today and of 1991, to sustain the highly profitable Disney Princess franchise. By exploring how paratextual and textual strategies were employed to address potential critiques, I assess the extent to which Disney faltered in its efforts to offer a more socially conscious film.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.