La Belle et la Bete (1946)

 "May the Devil himself splatter you with dung!"

I'm not kneejerk anti-Disney- I have a seven year old daughter; I'm not allowed to be- but there are Disney fairytales and there are real fairytales, invariably much darker, from an ahe when it was understood that tales for children needed a certain amount of darkness.

This is, basically, not the Disney version. Barring a few sensible adjudstments (Belle hasn't got eleven siblings, just a mere three), this is pretty much the original tale by (deep breath) Gabrielle-SuzanneBarbot de Villeneuve, no relation, I assume, to the Canadian racing drivers. She wrote the tale in 1740, but the costumes here reflect the reign of Henri IV, with the men all having very long hair, like mine, and stovepipe hats.

Story-wise, this is the proper fairy tale, with a couple of artistic twists towards the end. The acting is superb. But this is not the point: it's the 1940s. Realism rules.Yet Jean Cocteau, no slave to convention and apparently having a very proper appreciation of the Greek myths,is a bloodyt genius diredtor. The various disembodied hands within the Beast's home are magnificently weird, as are the moving statues. This is the type of fantasy cinema that would go on to influence much, including Pan's Labyrinth.The imagery, as well as the storytelling, are iconic, yes, but that ois insufficient praise. This is a mouls to be used by so much fantasy cinema, yet it's more than that. This is fairytale cinema done seriously and beautifully.