Maleficent (Live-Action)

[nomad2010]

Just got back from seeing it. Here's my spoiler free thoughts.

It wasn't bad. I've gotten over the revisionist take and that's fine. But the problem here is two fold, the script and Jolie. The script is just simply lazy. It doesn't give anything any real development and tells instead of shows. The biggest issue for me is the relationship between Aurora and Maleficent. It's just not shown at all. I wished for more Phillip and more time in every scene honestly. Everything felt so rushed. The end was nice, the beginning was nice, but everything inbetween was so poorly under scripted and lacking that I wasn't even sure what I was watching. Jolie knew she wasn't evil. She did revel in it enough. And you could just tell she knew that deep down she was good. There was no moment I truly felt she was a villain. She was simply hurt.

It was bland and honestly, at least Alice had a fully fleshed plot and had an distinctive mood. This was just all over the place. It's just very clear the director had never done this before. But, there wasn't much more he could do with the script he was given. Poor guy.

[Victurtle]

Being a huge fan of the original Sleeping Beauty (my favourite DAC of all time) didn't hinder my enjoyment at all. The stories simply share the same character names, and only barely at that (Maleficent, Aurora (not Briar Rose), Stephan and Philip). The characters and plot are so different they barely cross paths to the point that you don't consider them in the same universe. The narration even suggests as much "It's two different stories".

I agree with the negative comparison to Wicked. I loved how all the major plot points of TWOZ (MGM version) still occurred in Wicked - it was brilliant, and best of all convincing. Linda set out to find a back-story to Maleficent, but ended up writing a completely new 'front-story' as well to justify her back-story.

Still, the story was enjoyable Just not her expression.

[DancingCrab]

6.5 out of 10 stars for me.

First things first, a rumor that someone posted (I can't remember who, and it's not important enough to look for the post) that Mary Costa is the narrator is false. I can't remember the actress' name now during the credits, but was disappointed that it wasn't her, as that post got my hopes up.

As for the movie...I was relieved that I didn't hate it, but still very well aware that it has it's issues, both of which fall blame to Linda Wolverton (mostly) and director Robert Stromberg, My main gripe is that Wolverton took the easy way out and solved the issue of Maleficent being misunderstood by making the 1959 film's good protagonists either evil or completely stupid. There wasn't enough challenge to her development since they just switched the sides of the other characters to people, or fairies, that you don't like. By all means change things around, but you better offer up something just as good if you're going to do that. Some of those changes worked really well, and others felt like zero effort was put into them.

Still, with that said, this is going to become a cult classic with a very loyal following, and I'm sure my own criticisms will lesson in time as it settles in. I thought it was LIGHT YEARS better than Oz or Alice though, so that's a good start.

[taei]

So I just got back from the movie.
And I did fulfill my promise to Musical Master, I tried my best to ignore that it's "based" on sleeping beauty.
But I was shocked.
And not shocked that the movie was good, but because it was bad.

The reason why I didn't like it, is simply because it wasn't a good movie.
I was laughing on my way back because all this time, I was sure that my opinion of the classic would affect my opinion of this in some way, but nope... This movie was just plain awful.

I have bolded the tings that are non-spoiler but the spoiler stuff are not. SO venture at your own risk.

Things I didn't like:
-The first and last third: The movie started out quickly and uneven with a very unnecessary narration. The entire first third was rushed. That battle was pointless and we could have just heard about it instead of seeing it. The last third was also, pointless. It didn't do anything to further the story or end it, instead we got a very rushed ending :S
-The script: The story was very clunky. It's like a guy came in and said "I have a story where maleficent was in love with Stefan and he betrayed her for power and she basically cursed his child and then regrets it." and the big men told him "Nice! Let's throw in a rape metaphor, a pointless war, 3 funny characters, some creatures to attract little ones.. and also give her wings!". Also, a lot of the dialogue was horrible. It was very clear that 2 people wrote the script because there were parts that had good dialogue, and others that are so bad. There was barely any character development. Aurora's character was a bumbling idiot, except 2 yr old aurora. The fairies were completely unnecessary. It just didn't flow well. The scenes were written separately and then the writers used cheap glue to paste them together.
-The director: Really no presence whatsoever. He was just a puppet, while the producers were the puppeteers.
-The CGI: Very uneven. There were some scenes that looked so so fake. Half the time, maleficent wings were very unrealistic, and at other times they'd be realistic. One shot that really bothered me was when Maleficent attacked the guards, when she jumps at them. She was clearly CGI and they didn't do a good job at it.
-Jolie: She did really good in the middle.. But was horrible in the beginning. Especially when she was shouting at guards. It was just horrible. Her reaction to the wings was also off. It wasn't as emotional as I thought it was gonna be.
-Copley as Stefan: His accent was... just... hard to understand. His pronunciation of "Maleficent" was really distracting. He was barely in the movie to warrant mentioning lol. You'd think he'd be in it more, but the scenes he was in were unnecessary and stupid.
And last not least...
-Cat woman Maleficent. That was soo stupid. I almost laughed out loud. It would have been better if she turned into a dragon when Stefan refused to let her go. In fact, the entire climax would have been better if she had turned into a dragon so that she can escape. Oh, and the dragon is barely in the movie. Doesn't really do much.
There were other things that I didn't like, but i can't remember them right now.

Now, let's talk about the good things.
-Some of the shots: There were shots in this movie that were breathtaking. Like the first time we see Phillip. It was beautiful. The cinematography was good at places, but at others was just horrible.
-The music: while not the best out there, it sounds much much better out of the movie. In the movie, I didn't really notice it. :S
-The designs were interesting.

It seemed like pretty much everyone in my movie theater loved the movie.
I think that the audience will love this movie and the critics will not.

Should you go see it in a movie theater? Not really.

Also, the 3D was horrible. I don't understand why the trailer had better 3D -_-"
So don't waste your money on 3D.

4/10 for me. :/

[Atlantica]

I thought it was LIGHT YEARS better than Oz or Alice though, so that's a good start.

I couldn't agree more, honestly.

[WillytheDino]

Jolie is getting a lot of praise for her portrayal of Maleficent, but the special effects and the lack of character development are being criticized.

Review roundup

I think I can agree on most of their arguments.

[DisneyJedi]

Okay, while I liked the movie, I do think it could have been better. For one, they shouldn't have made so obvious that we're supposed to root for Maleficent by default.

[estefan]

Here is my full spoiler-free review of "Maleficent"

To summarise, I didn't hate it, I was just unimpressed. I just found the whole thing felt like fan-fiction with little to no character development. It felt lacking in its exploration on how Maleficent became evil (well, evil for about three minutes. It doesn't take long for her to become good again) and why King Stefan betrayed her (yes, he wanted to be king, but it still felt under developed). However, based on the run time, I get the feeling a number of important things were cut.

I did like the portrayal of Aurora in this film, though. Her getting upset at the fairies after they explain her true heritage was better handled and more understandable in this film than the animated feature.

[justcuttinhair]

Hmm........where do I begin?

Well, I ventured out to a late night premiere screening in Durham, NC last night. Overall, I would give the movie a 6 ( on a scale from 1-10). There were some things I liked, and some things I didn't. In comparison to Alice in Wonderland or Oz-The Great and Powerful...I preferred this, and Alice about the same (Oz is utter poo in my opinion). The basic premise for this film, sounds good on paper, but, translating it to the screen, may not have panned out as well...as it could have been.

Basic opinions:

Angelina Jolie...does an amazing job as Maleficent. Eleanor Audley's original voice portrayal...is iconic, and attempting to fill those shoes had to be a bit intimidating, but, Jolie does well. She definitely studied the Christening scene, because, it is dead on...perhaps...the most dramatic and intense scene in the film..no lie...it does not disappoint. However, as someone else mentioned...she gets over her grudge rather quickly and I think that it would have been better to have had her grow to "love" Aurora, much slower than what eventually happened on film.

The visual look of the film is pretty...it looks like a fairy tale, and the Renaissance/Gothic feel that inspired so much of the animated film, has been acknowledged in this adaptation. There are moments whenever the CGI shows it's "fakeness" and it can be a bit disjointed...but, it is so commonplace in films today..I can not really gripe too much about it. The "pixies" were very cartoonish looking, and I understand why there is a desire for them to seem/appear that way...I actually preferred them, when they were "human size" versus their original form.

The portrayal of the "pixies" was a let-down...I mean..in the animated film...they are basically the main protagonists...it is told from their point of view. I believe their characterizations are much better in the original animated film, than here. During the "gifts" scene, I wish that they had included one of the fairies "softening" the effects of Maleficent's curse, as it was in the original film.

Prince Phillip.............what a waste of an actor and a role. His screen time was basically 10 mins? There were a few characters who I felt, lacked sufficient time on screen, and their portrayals could have been so much better. Diaval was another, who I felt was a wasted opportunity to add some meat to the story...his character was very one dimensional. I think it would have made a better story, to have had him be the one who watches over Aurora, and over time, it is he, who brings the two of them together.


Those are just some brief/minor opinions...overall, it was an okay movie....not something that I think is going to go in the Disney History books by no means.

[Victurtle]

I didn't have much of a problem with Maleficent growing to love Aurora so quickly. First of all, Maleficent naturally is full of love, so it came natural to her. Secondly, Aurora was blessed with the gift that all who meet her shall love her (reconfirmed by Maleficent in her curse). Maleficent was hurt, but I don't feel she ever got mad. Her first instinct was not revenge, however when she was given the opportunity, she took it. As there was no real hatred to overcome (but rather sorrow), falling in love with Aurora was easy.

[Tristy]

OK. I got back from seeing. And I will say it's not horrible. But what really prevents my complete enjoyment of the film is that I'm watching one of the great villains (who used to give me nightmares) portrayed in a more innocent light. I mean seriously, it was just weird seeing her flying around at the beginning as a little girl greeting everyone in a chipper voice. King Stefan is neither sympathetic nor evil enough to even be called a character. Also, the three faeries are FREAKING ANNOYING as Hell. Not only do their computer generated forms seem straight from Robert Zemeckis's motion capture unit, but their personalities were really grating! They were like a mixture of the witches from Hocus Pocus and well...



Even those guys weren't that annoying.

And there were times where they were really overplaying the camp factor. You have Maleficent begging Stefan to grovel and as she's saying this, you have that somewhat disco-sounding music while the flames are going up. The music score is overall fine but that was just silly. Also what was up with her Catwoman getup in the end? She looked more a Marvel superhero especially with the wings.

For the good. It is visually beautiful to look at. A lot of it really does look like a storybook come to life especially the scenes at the beginning and whenever there are scenes in the forest where Aurora is kept hidden. I thought Jolie did a good job especially during the scenes where we see the more evil side of Maleficent and she even manages to be funny at times. While Aurora is still pretty passive, they do give her a bit more to do here and Elle Fanning did capture the fairy tale princess personality quite well. And as I said, James Newton Howard's score is overall pretty good but more when he goes ethereal.

So overall, I'm glad I saw it. It does have its pluses, but due to some character issues and the fact that I'm watching a movie that paints one of the great antagonists from my childhood, it is kind of hard to watch. So, thanks but no thanks.

[TsWade2]

I have one thing to say to those critics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAT9nkGZa08

[Musical Master]

I just got back from seeing it tonight with my older sister and we both agreed that Linda Woolverton's writing here is MUCH better than Alice in Wonderland, but she had some problems, while I on the other hand, while aware of some flaws, really loved it. So far, this movie is the summer movie to beat. Here's my pros and cons.

PROS:

Angelina Jolie is the best part of the entire thing and her character as a hurt woman wanting revenge and learning to love again is really nice and it's been given the best development out of everybody. Elle, Sharlto, Sam and everyone else did very good with the stuff they have been given.

The visuals as noted are great, I did like some of the creature designs and it felt natural to the story compared to Snow White and the Huntsman.

The final battle scene is without a doubt, the reason to see this movie on the big screen, the Diaval dragon, fire all around, and Stefan fighting Maleficent is really fantastic, reminds me a bit of a more epic version of Beauty and the Beast. Speaking of Stefan...I liked his new character. Someone who had many emotions running in his cracked mind: greed, paranoia, weakness, and at one moment of the movie caring (the scene where they put Aurora in the bed and Stefan looks like he's ready to snap even more than he already did because now he has lost everything he could ever hope for in his Kingdom).

The three pixies are not as bad as I thought they were going to be, they remind me a bit of a female version of The Three Stooges.

I will be in the minority on this but I did like the pacing of the film because it didn't feel pointlessly bloated and boring like Snow White and the Huntsman and they get the point of the story/characters better. Plus James Newton Howard's score in the film is beautiful and I own the soundtrack.

CONS: (they are minor ones)

King Henry, out of everyone was the one who needed more development. I mean, what was he really after? I know that he wanted the Moor's treasure but why was it important to him? We got no answer for that and it bugged me a bit.

The outfit that Maleficent wears when Stefan rips her robe off, what are you doing here Catwoman?? Her costumes were really good untill that.....Thankfully, she wears a better outfit in the ending.

More scenes with Aurora and the Moors would've been nice.

Other than that, my expectations were exceded very much so and I hope families will get to see it for not only is the light/dark tone well balanced but the moral is really well done. Go see this in theatres I say!

[mariadny]

Really bad movie.
As Disney fan, big Disney fan, I feel insulted.
Walt Disney himself would cry with this terrible film.

Sorry, but no.
You can't do this to my childhood. You can't, Disney.

And even as a "independent" movie, it's awful. Where is the plot?
But if you think about Sleeping Beauty (1959), oh, M-Y G-O-D

With all my respect, but I don't understand Disney fans who defend this movie. I try, I swear, but I can't.

[Vlad]

I enjoyed it! I found it interesting that they changed the idea of true love's kiss in the movie.

[DC Fan]

Just watched it.

Not going to get into the pros and cons because at this point we all know what they are.

My biggest question is: why?

Couldn´t Disney make a movie worthy of Maleficent in the veins of the atmosphere of Snow White and the Huntsman? I think they could have gotten away with this not to change the character entirely.

Especially painful was the way the movie itself almost throws away the original in the form of the narration.

I guess in the end Disney is Disney and they will not make anything that isn´t family friendly.

...after all, that´s how the Marvel movies are being done.

[DisneyJedi]

Hey. At least the Marvel films do their best to be superhero movies.

[Musical Master]

Hey. At least the Marvel films do their best to be superhero movies.

And they do a great job with it. After seeing Maleficent, this is the best "re-interpetation fairy tale" film thus far. Alice, SWatH, Oz, Jack and the others just stink in comparison.

Here's an article about what Linda Woolverton wants to do after she's done with Through The Looking Glass.

http://www.thewrap.com/maleficent-write ... een-movie/

[estefan]

After seeing Maleficent, this is the best "re-interpetation fairy tale" film thus far. Alice, SWatH, Oz, Jack and the others just stink in comparison.

I haven't seen Snow White and Jack the Giant Slayer, so I don't have an opinion of those. But I disagree that Alice and Oz stink. I like those a lot more than Maleficent. I thought Oz was an imaginative trip to Oz and I liked how it expanded on the Wizard and especially the witches and I thought Finley and the China Girl were great secondary characters. Unlike Maleficent, I didn't get a fan-fiction vibe from "Oz: The Great and Powerful." Ditto Alice in Wonderland, which while it could have been more nonsensical, I still felt Tim Burton gave it his usual creative touch and I liked following Alice's journey.

You're free to prefer Maleficent, but "stink" isn't what comes to mind when I think of Oz and Alice. I think Maleficent could have used Burton or Raimi's guidance, although Robert Stromberg probably tried his hardest. I get the sense a lot was cut out to make Maleficent 90 minutes, which is odd considering Disney seemed to have no problem with Oz and Alice totalling over two hours. Though maybe they did and I guess being a first-time director, Stromberg was easier to push around than Raimi and Burton.

[Musical Master]

After seeing Maleficent, this is the best "re-interpetation fairy tale" film thus far. Alice, SWatH, Oz, Jack and the others just stink in comparison.

I haven't seen Snow White and Jack the Giant Slayer, so I don't have an opinion of those. But I disagree that Alice and Oz stink. I like those a lot more than Maleficent. I thought Oz was an imaginative trip to Oz and I liked how it expanded on the Wizard and especially the witches and I thought Finley and the China Girl were great secondary characters. Unlike Maleficent, I didn't get a fan-fiction vibe from "Oz: The Great and Powerful." Ditto Alice in Wonderland, which while it could have been more nonsensical, I still felt Tim Burton gave it his usual creative touch and I liked following Alice's journey.

You're free to prefer Maleficent, but "stink" isn't what comes to mind when I think of Oz and Alice. I think Maleficent could have used Burton or Raimi's guidance, although Robert Stromberg probably tried his hardest. I get the sense a lot was cut out to make Maleficent 90 minutes, which is odd considering Disney seemed to have no problem with Oz and Alice totalling over two hours. Though maybe they did and I guess being a first-time director, Stromberg was easier to push around than Raimi and Burton.

I guess it's only a matter of taste and observation but to me, Woolverton's screenplay and Stromberg's direction just makes this the better movie. As much as I do enjoy Oz: The Great and Powerful, the acting (especially Franco and Kunis) and the blah screenplay and direction left something to be desired and Alice in Wonderland is just a big cliche pile of meh, but it's becoming a little bit of a guilty pleasure for me.