Jean Cocteau's or Disney's.

Honestly both because both have been revolutionary for the film industry


Cocteau's version is because it shows the standards for great film making, the power of cinematography and the ability of filmmaking to be as much about making the film as close to visual art as possible whle still telling a compelling story. It's also a staple in European cinema that has helped to make it successful and accessible to the rest of the world. It's also one of the biggest in the gothic film genre.

The Disney version showed the beauty of animation, Disney's combination of the architecture of the palace the cg of the walls and stuff with Broadway esque musical numbers and fantastic characters took away the argument of animation being just for kiddies. It was the first animated film nominated for Best Picture and truly confirmed the comeback of Disney.

Both have a place in history both are different as apples and oranges and both are fantastic.


beauty freedom love truth

Both movies are good, definately worth the watch. But there are two distinct reasons I prefer Cocteau's version.

First, I dislike the way Disney made the beast act. He goes on a gentle loving-spree even before becoming a prince, gently touching little birds and whatnot, with those typical disney-eyes look in his face. In Cocteau's version, the beast is a WILD ANIMAL all the way to the end! And that is the way it should be! The beast shouldn't have to turn into a wussy in order to have a kind heart!

That, I think, is actually the biggest flaw in the Disney version, and that's why I "only" give it a 7/10 rating (which, of course, is still a pretty good rating). Cocteau's gets 8/10 from me. It might be 9/10 without the melodramatic over-acting, which was already a pretty out-dated style of acting back in 1946.

Second, Cocteau's version also has better humor and wittier dialogue ("what would church think of all this magic?" etc...)

Also Cocteau's visual imaginery is just cooler, darker, more twisted and gothic etc..., but I'll let that one pass since Disney's version is clearly targeted at a younger audience.

Jean Cocteau's or Disney's.

One is a musical version of the other. Both are great.

What we got here is... failure to communicate!

I've watched the Disney version a lot more simply because it came out when I was a kid and I don't speak French so it's a lot easier for me to sit down and watch the Disney version than to sit down and read subtitles.

Both versions are excellent movies in totally different ways. The Disney version was groundbreaking in a way that I honestly don't think the '46 version was. What I mean by that is that animated movies went from something for kids to something for adults with that movie. The '46 version is visually much more interesting and emotionally moving, imo. But neither are better or worse, just different.

Jean Cocteau's, no competition!

A bird sings and the mountain's silence deepens.

I don't hate the Disney version, but for some reason it always made me cringe. In my mind there is not much "extraordinary" about the Disney film, it is pretty much what you would expect a Disney version of the story to be like. I greatly prefer Cocteau's because of the imaginative set design and flawed characters.

If you save the world, We can do it in the *beep*
My top 100 http://www.imdb.com/li

Well hard to say, Disney version sure had great songs and is overall a good musical.