User Reviews

Disney has now made straight-to-video sequels to a good bunch of their many animated features. Two of these were made for their 1991 classic, "Beauty and the Beast". Well, these ones aren't really sequels, as they are both set in between the events of the first film. The first of these two straight-to-video films was "Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas", which seems to be disliked by quite a few fans of its theatrical predecessor, but I think that can usually be expected with sequels. However, this second one, "Belle's Magical World", is definitely inferior.

The film features three short stories, all of which take place while Belle is in the castle, and the place is under the spell of the enchantress. The first is "The Perfect Word", where a misunderstanding at the table between Belle and the Beast leads to trouble, and neither wants to be the first to apologize. The next story is "Fifi's Folly", where Fifi and Lumiere's fifth anniversary is coming up, and Lumiere is unprepared, so Belle helps him. However, Fifi sees Lumiere practicing romance with Belle, and thinks they're actually in love. The film ends with "The Broken Wing". In this story, Belle takes care of a bird with a broken wing, but a bird in the castle will probably mean trouble if the Beast finds out, as he hates birds!

The plot description I gave is for the original VHS version of Disney's third "Beauty and the Beast" movie. Apparently, in the DVD version, there is another story added called "Mrs. Potts's Party", but I've only seen the original version. However, since I highly doubt that one story would stand out as a classic over the rest, I see no point in watching the special edition. Anyway, the first thing I will say about "Belle's Magical World" is that the animation is very 2-dimensional compared to what we're used to from Disney, which would obviously disappoint many people. I didn't like "Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas" that much, but you certainly can't say the same about its animation. I'm sure the stories in "Belle's Magical World" could entertain many kids (mostly younger ones, I think), and each story has a moral, so they could also teach them some valuable lessons. However, for adults, the film really doesn't have a lot. I personally didn't find any good humour in it, found that the constant conflict between Belle and the Beast got tiring, and the stories did not impress me too much at all in any way (they're not very well written). In "The Perfect Word", the way Belle says to the Beast, "You're acting rude... and foolish!" is a bit cheesy, and I think there are quite a few other cheesy moments in these stories.

By the time this straight-to-video movie first came out, I was around eleven or twelve years old. I don't know what I would have thought of it at the time, as I had lost interest in Disney by then, and it would be years before I would gain any of that interest back. Even when this movie was first released, I think I was a bit past the age group it was aimed at. I never saw "Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas" until a couple months ago, but unlike that film, I never even heard of this one until recently, I think just after seeing the first sequel to Disney's 1991 hit. Well, as much as I like the theatrical original, I wouldn't have been missing much if I never became aware of this film's existence. For little kids, I'm sure "Belle's Magical World" can be highly entertaining, and probably somewhat educational with its morals, but I do not recommend it for adult Disney fans.

The original is a masterpiece, and The Enchanted Christmas is actually not that bad at all. This film is alright, but a lot of the animation is shoddy, and the songs are instantly forgettable. At least Enchanted Christmas did more than adequately in those two aspects. The storyline was merely a series of vignettes, like the sequel to Cinderella. If I had a preference to which I prefer, storyline-wise, this one raises the bar. Lumiere (though less elegant and debonair) and Cogsworth are funny here thanks to the brilliant voice overs of Jerry Orbach and David Ogden Stiers, but why was Belle changed? She did very little, other than preach to the characters. As for Mrs Potts, the reason why she was ruined, was because Angela Lansbury didn't voice her. The stories are okay with nice ideas, with a bit of humour from Lumiere particularly, but the essence of the original was lost. The best was "Fifi's Folly" but all three stories had problems of their own. The message was laid on way too thick, and in general the writing was uninspiring. And there were some bits about Beast's character that was unnecessary, like him hating birds. I can swear that wasn't mentioned in the original! Though I will admit that the bird was really cute. I will give this a 6/10, in respect to the voice actors. Bethany Cox.

The first Beauty and the Beast film is for me one of the best Disney films ever and while the second(the enchanted Christmas)was perhaps not as strong it still maintained all the warmth and humour of the first instalment.

This film again has all of these traits but while The enchanted Christmas would not have looked out of place as a cinema release Belles' magical world does looks and feels like the straight to video film that it is.

The short stories feel like chapters from a fairy story and the links in between are sweet with some classic Disney songs included. Interestingly for a third sequel most of the original cast return and this I think is what raises this film above other straight to video films in terms of quality.

Overall this is a worthy part of the classic Disney series.

Yeah... not great, that!

I'm not gonna lie, 'Belle's Magical World' is rather painful to watch. It's an anthology film, which is a negative straight off the bat. They cobble together three stories to fill 92 minutes, all of which should be left to being 7-10 minute short stories.

Much of the original cast pleasantly remain, with the exception of Angela Lansbury who ran for the mountains I assume - don't blame her! The voices all do fine jobs to be fair. It's the writing which is severely lacking here, with all three premises being entirely predictable and hard to watch.

The only thing this third 'Beauty and the Beast' production achieves is that it makes the Beast even more unlikeable, who knew that was possible? At this point, I shudder to think how the third follow-up, 'Belle's Tales of Friendship', is - though it isn't available to watch on Disney+, which is probably a blessing on my part.

The core target audience may have an OK time, but Disney really should've tried harder with these sequels/prequels.

This movie was probably one of the worst I've ever seen. I kept watching out of sheer morbid curiosity. The plots were bad. The animation was bad. The songs were bad. There were some places that the animation was so bad that I literally laughed out loud. It's boring as snot otherwise. If you had any respect for any of the characters before it goes out the window completely with this movie. The beast is a GIANT violent control freak and Belle always blames herself for stuff that's not her fault. The only reason anyone would ever want to watch this more than once besides masochism would be if they wanted to remember their parents domestic abuse toward each other as some kind of dismal nostalgia.

When I started reviewing on IMDb, I began to watch all the Disney direct to video sequels. It was almost torture for me to watch all of them (I have seen 6 of them at the moment I wrote this review), but this one I only could watch 10 minutes of it before I turned of the PC and have to watch the first Beauty and the Beast to remind me that it was one of my favorite Disney films.

THIS THING IS A DISCRASE TO THE ORIGINAL ONE!!! The story is the bland, predictable plots of 3 failed episodes from a failed attempt of a TV- series (that is exactly what this is, and they ask $19.48 for it at eBay!!!!), the animation is just cheap and awful, the characters are nothing from what they were in the original (especially the beast), and the songs make Howard Ashman roll in his grave.

This is one of the WORST Disney DTV sequel I have ever seen (the worst one being Hunchback of Notre Dame II). Skip this movie, PLEASE!!!!!

Very cute, the three stories, the first cutest, with the grumpy Beast, the second cute, but not very endearing... The three stories, the first cutest, with the grumpy Beast, the second cute, but not very endearing...

Uninteresting plots, bad dialogue, forgettable songs, and ugly animation. It's not only the worst direct to video Disney sequel, but also one of the worst Disney movies overall.

I watched "Belle's Magical World" five days ago on YouTube, and I thought it was a very cute and funny midquel. This film is enriched with gentle lessons, which I do not mind at all, and two original songs that seamlessly fold one tale into the next. I don't think they are as cheesy as everyone thinks, and besides, I think the animation is swell. Overall, this film and "The Enchanted Christmas" are both great D. T. V.s. And since the film is divided into three adventures presented like chapters in a storybook, my favourite "story" is "Fifi's Folly."

You know, a lot of people have been giving negative reviews because they are comparing it to the original film and also because of the time consumption, like, How long did Belle stay at the castle? And what about her dad? And was Lefou still guarding the house? Well, my theory is that the two films begin with the library scene in the first film. So she spent the winter in the castle, and her dad (having no sense of direction) searched all winter for the castle. And as to the last question, well, even a lackey like Lefou can "bend" his orders-for food and warmth I mean.

That's right! Under 9 on average, but maybe under 12s for some others! I was 11 when I originally saw this on video and at such youth I wasn't able to notice the shoddy cartoon-quality or the fact that those classic characters we have all grown to love are Not the same or as good to see. Just about everything is so 2D here! Belle is, I'll agree, not even beautiful but just a plain-looking woman with tinted skin, she wears the same bright blue dress all the way through with not one glamorous dress on, Wardrobe is to say the Least, annoying - my ears may bleed if I had to listen to her everyday! Lumiere, in both the original and the Christmas edition was suave and elegant, but here he is a womanizing, unfunny twit! Cogsworth, despite being the no-nonsense housekeeper he is famous for, is a complete sh-t and the most insufferable character I'd say! He always seems to find shutting that unbearably grating pie-hole of his very difficult in this one and whose clock face should really have been used for turning back in time to the unforgettable two film in this series! Poor, poor Mrs Potts was not brought to life by Angela Lansbury (one of my favourite classic actresses) but by Anne Rogers who captured none of Mrs Potts' character, no offence to her! Not if she did her best! When the beast roars it sounds so horrifically fake with clearly no additional roars, snarls or growls by a microphone. I am aware that this is only a third feature following two other films so of course it wouldn't be as good but I'm sure that more of a contribution wouldn't have hurt the Disney artists who, indeed, have achieved such remarkable styles of animation over the years. It's alright, I guess, and I do watch it sometimes though only when it suits me. It's quite difficult to make a recommendation for you reading this because it depends on how old you are but remember this will not at all be what you may expect following the earlier spectacular movies! And to think that on my video of it the text on the back cover said "boasting brilliant animation"! It's a nice little flick but for one thing it's also highly poor and, for another, those 3 words ought to have been saved for the next re-release of the original!

If it is not fit for television, it is not fit for anything!

It was just such a painful experience to watch the most real and believable characters from one of the greatest animated movies ever created being torn apart with every word they uttered.

There is simply no magic at all in this shameless effort to cash in on the first animated movie nominated for an Oscar for best picture. The animation is cheap and the dialogue is stupid.

They should have called it "Belle and Beast's Endless Arguments", because there is no other way to describe it! Beast does something mean, Belle talks him out of it, that's it. It is so stupid!

The first follow-up, The Enchanted Christmas, was at least passable with a good Tim Curry performance, but now with this stupid script and also the absence of Angela Lansbury, this poor excuse for a "movie" should have never existed.

I started watching this with my 7-year-old daughter, who loves the original, so this seemed like an easy bet...she couldn't make it through the first segment. Now I'm a 34-year-old, straight, cisgender male who watched Belle's Magical World by himself. So no...I'm not OK.

I've just watched this with my daughter to begin to introduce her to the characters of the fantastic film. I found myself having to check back to the original film, did I remember the original with such rose tinted glasses? was the animation this poor?, were the songs so terrible?,were the characters so sappy? No, they weren't the original was a master piece this is a half hearted attempt by Disney to make money off the franchise. Who allows such poor work to get released. Disney, what are you thinking? Don't ruin a wonderful franchise with second rate material. Hopefully my daughter hasn't noticed and will love the original as much as I do.

Having just rewatched the original film, this straight to video sequel (of sorts) is a jarring plummet in quality. Despite a largely returning voice cast, the animation is terrible, and the stories are worse.

Setting itself as a midquel, the film consists of three stories that take place during the time that Belle (Paige O'Hara) is becoming friends with the Beast (Robby Benson) but before Gaston's assault on the castle. In the first, Belle and the Beast fall out, and an attempt by the staff to reconcile them only makes it worse. In the second, on their anniversary, Fifi (Kimmy Robertson) comes to believe that Lumiere (Jerry Orbach) has eyes for Belle, rather than her. Finally, an injured bird teaches the Beast about forgiveness and letting go of the things he loves.

There is apparently a fourth story on certain DVD releases, but the Disney plus version only has these three that made up the phenomenally successful VHS release in the aftermath of the beloved originals success. As became a frequent feature of these sequels, it's actually three episodes of a failed spin-off show crudely pasted together and passed off as a film. They didn't even have the grace to animate some new wraparound bits this time.

Despite the return of Paige O'Hara and Robby Benson, and Jerry Orbach and David Ogden Stiers Belle's Magical World is up there (... down there?) as one of the worst, cheapest looking and most boring garbage fires that I've seen on this alphabetical run through Disney Plus. The stories are nonsensical, and the characters feel inconsistent with the ones we met in the actual film.

It's sad that the success of this video encourages Disney into a decade long cycle of cheap, lazy sequels rather than either maintaining the sanctity of their classics, or producing proper returns to their magical worlds.

Belle's Magical World is a cute & funny collection of shorts. Most of them are really entertaining, although I found some to not actually keep me interested the whole time. 8/10!

This is the worst movie from the Beauty And The Beast franchise that movie broke the camel's back, the animation is very awful and cheap, the characters with the exception of the new ones are completely annoying and bad the two characters Belle and Beast have suffered the word flanderization as Belle became more whiny, passive and annoying house wife while The Beast suffered the worst flanderization as he became a huge jerk to everyone the worst is when he said i will never apologize and he was being so rash to the poor bird by yelling at him and i prefer the original movie than this garbage.

Hardly any returning actors. That's a red flag. Thin storylines strung together to create what barely resembles a narrative. Easily the inferior sequel/prequel...whatever. Enchanted Christmas is actually my favorite, because of Tim Curry. Watch that one instead.

This a movie with a couple bad written shorts. The animation is bad, the stories are bad and the characters are very bad written. Belle is just a crybaby, the Beast is more annoying than usual and the side characters are doing boring things. There's almost no connection with the previous two movies. Besides it just didn't fit with the timeline, we don't need it. It doesn't add something to the story. I also don't like it how they just add more and more new characters. First of all it doesn't make sense, but it's weird the new characters from the second movies do not have a role.

I miss angela lansbury being mrs. potts. I loved her in the original! This one definitely isn't as good as the original, but I still liked it nonetheless. But, I'm a huge BATB fan! The major problem for me is the way they are drawn in this, they look like they are in some kind of cheap Saturday morning cartoon show, and they definitely don't look like the original. It's still OK though.

I don't know what the writers were thinking when they wrote this, the stories are kinda bad. It makes me sad that they messed this up so much.

Kinda disappointing, but you can obviously tell it's made more for the younger crowd like children