Apologies if this has been discussed here before. But I'm curious if anyone noticed this and can it be regarded as a goof.
When the enchantress places the curse on the prince, he is 11 years old. Yet after turning into a beast, he scratches his painting in which he looks like his 21 year old self. How is that possible? Shouldn't the painting be of the 11 year old prince and not his older self?
"I'm the dude, playing a dude that's disguised as another dude".
No, because it's never said the curse lasted 10 years. The servants simply say they haven't been able to entertain any guests for 10 years, which could've been years before the prince was cursed. He was a spoiled and selfish prince who didn't seem to like people and whom people probably didn't like either. And yes, it's been discussed many times before.
shareYes, it's been discussed before countless times and an answer is provided on the FAQ section.
There was never a ten-year curse. When Lumiere states "Ten years we've have rusting/Needing so much than rusting/Needing exercise a chance to use our skills", he is not referring to the curse. He is referring to ten years of how useless the palace servants have become, which included some years when they were all useless human servants. When the enchantress places the curse on the prince, the prince is not depicted on the portrait painting or the mural to resemble an 11 year old child; he looks more like a teenager.
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Only the post millennial gen looks pissed about this... Dorian Gray portrait runs in my minds, the portrait scratching runs on the night before the village marketplace opening, when Beast should be an adult boy.
shareThat is a good question, and that is one you should take to the folks at Disney animation as they are the ones that made the movie and not a group of strangers that are on the imdb.com boards. But you would think it would be as a 11 year old but maybe the Prince had a picture of what he hoped he look like at 21 years old,
shareI too, like many others, assumed Lumiere was referring to the number of years they had been cursed. But an above poster referenced the FAQ, which is the only sensible explanation I've seen. Prince Adam was a little a-hole that nobody wanted to be around...so the castle never had guests, and the servants had nothing to do for years before the curse was placed on them. If you think about it, the enchantress (being merciless as she was) might have placed the curse on him and the castle when he was 20 years old (giving him only one year to get his act together). I don't think that's the case, because there is an implication that a chunk of time passed before he "fell into despair". So this could have been the timeline:
1. Little s**t of a Prince gets his portrait done at 18 years old. He looks more like he's 30 to me but that's irrelevant. He could probably pass as 18. Anyway it's certainly more believable that he's 18 than 11.
2. Enchantress places curse on said little s**t and all of his servants hours after that portrait is painted. Or days after. Doesn't matter. He's still roughly 18.
3. Now a Beast, he mounts it on the wall in the West Wing. "My, this portrait is nice. Too bad I don't look like this anymore. I can't even ask Cogsworth to hang it for me because he's an effing clock." *sigh* Fabio > Beast
4. Almost 3 years later, as his 21st birthday draws near, he is understandably feeling angsty and sad. So he tears it.
5. Queue Belle.
So all these years we've been thinking it was a decade-long curse when it could've been less than half that time. It would have to be for him to look like that.
Leopard, that's actually a good point you brought up that he could have been 18 when he was cursed and tore it up after almost 3 years as a beast. :)
Drake is repetitive. He just raps the same thing over and over as if he is in an insane asylum!LOL:D
Yours sounds like a logical explanation to me! Plus, casting an evil spell on an 11 year old, just because he was spoiled and selfish, seems like an over the top, unreasonable way to teach him a lesson. At that age, the vast majority of kids have their moments of brattiness, capable of reaching extreme levels. I'd think that a child, growing up as royalty, would easily be, more likely than not, capable of acting incredibly spoiled, especially during the era depicted in the movie. The reasoning for casting the spell lacks logic when immaturity explains such behavior. Growing older and maturing cures such behavior, for the most part.
shareConsidering the enchantress is the same person who cursed his servants, their children, the animals, heck, even the forest just because of what the prince did to her (and it wasn't even close to necessary to curse the entire forest. It would be difficult enough for visitors to even attempt to stay at the castle due to the forboding appearance of it and... it's owner. She didn't need to go the extra mile to make the forest a virtual death trap), do you REALLY think that the enchantress would have cared about logic, even if we are to assume that she cursed him at 11 years of age (I personally believe this is the case, since Lumiere's comment makes absolutely no sense otherwise, not even under the metaphor of how people avoided him due to his bad actions since, 1., Gaston's as much of an ass as the Beast was, and was pretty much the town leader, yet the village still gets newcomers, and 2., they clearly forgot that they had tended to Maurice and even Belle a bit earlier, meaning their time to "put their skills to the test" would have been during Maurice's visit, NOT when Belle got dinner without Beast's say so. Honestly, that song should have gone to Maurice, since there, it actually WOULD make sense for them to act like it's the first time they had a guest. Thanks to that and Katzenberg's handling of the movie overall, it just... ugh, it just made things too confusing.).
shareThanks for the question and all the replies! I came here with the same concerns. The kid looked older than 11, and the curse was pretty bad for a man of 18 or 19 years, let alone 11--who ISN'T horrible at that age?
share