Let's talk about the weird psychosexual energy in Beauty and the Beast

This movie is weird. Really, really weird.

Never would I have expected a live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast to work. The original 1991 animated film was way too weird ... especially when it comes to sexuality.

For one thing, the original was built around distortions of masculinity that are tough to replicate live — from a rakish talking candelabra to a literal sexy beast to a man who ate 48 eggs every morning to help him get large. It takes secondary sex characteristics to a truly troubling extreme, sexualizing feather dusters and repeatedly showcasing the contrast between tiny-waisted Belle and her giant-biceped muscle-suitors. It asks you to regard inter-species love as redemptive while begging you not to think too hard about it, and tricks you into kind of hating that redemption when the poor castle servants recover their former shapes. (I'm sorry, but human Mrs. Potts isn't half as charming without her teapot face, and human Chip can go hang.)

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up
Explore More
Lili Loofbourow

Lili Loofbourow is the culture critic at TheWeek.com. She's also a special correspondent for the Los Angeles Review of Books and an editor for Beyond Criticism, a Bloomsbury Academic series dedicated to formally experimental criticism. Her writing has appeared in a variety of venues including The Guardian, Salon, The New York Times Magazine, The New Republic, and Slate.