Maleficent

[Melamphoros]

This version has nothing about being snubbed at the princess's christening, it is about something that happened before that.  And the curse in this story is not corrected by the last angel/faerie, but stands a pronounced by Maleficent.  

Maleficent is justified in her actions and the curse she places on the child for, how it is removed as stated in Maleficent's curse is truly devastating, more so than the damage and destruction for the kingdom.    

Although the story is about Maleficent it is not her story.

 
Honestly?  I don't really care.  If anything, the more I find out about the plot of this movie, the less I wish to see it.  I can only compare it to the level of disgust fans of the Transformers cartoon have for the Michael Bay movies.

[Sage]

Just saw it.  Interesting take on the story (and it makes sense).

Angelina Jolie is very believable and I would like to see her do a version of the character geared for adults not children.

 
I was... whelmed. It wasn't a bad movie and I did enjoy parts of it but overall... meh.

Spoilers below!

I felt that everyone's motivations were way too unclear and weak to follow. Maleficent as a character was lovely (though I agree with Mel - this is not the Maleficent of the original movie but a full reimagining of the character). I liked Diaval, the raven familiar shapeshifter bro at Maleficent's side. Aurora was obnoxiously sweet, innocent, and bland. There was nothing to her! And the "twist" on true love's kiss was already taken by Frozen last year, so there wasn't any surprise to it.

After reading a review which points this out, I have to say I'm not comfortable with how they handled the loss of Maleficent's wings. It really does play out as a rape scene with Stephan drugging her, violating her when she's unconscious, and her waking up to complete horror at the loss of her limbs. Harrowing. But her response to that - wanting justice, becoming bitter and angry - is I think completely valid. Jesus, she just had the one human she ever trusted rip off parts of her body just so he could be king! (And what system of government is that, even? Did the old king not have a plan of succession?)

So yeah, I'm 100% agreeing that Maleficent seeking vengeance by cursing Aurora is uncool by human standards. Because she's played as more human than fae (if only because a truly fae character would be almost impossible for a human audience to sympathize with) I'm holding her up to human standards. Maleficent done messed up with that choice and she comes to regret it later when she tries to revoke the curse. Okay.

I'm not sold on the bond between Maleficent and Aurora over the years. Following the losing-wings-as-rape analogy it just... sits wrong in my gut to have Maleficent become maternal over Aurora. Plus it didn't feel realistic and this Aurora is flatter than her 2-D counterpart from last century. The pure and noble virgin girl, innocent from the evils of the world (and from boys) who melts the heart of the cruel anti-mother who only learns of true love by becoming an anti-anti-mother.

Sigh.

Plus, the end battle was really distressing. Here Maleficent is to confront her abuser and she's further abused. I don't know what the movie was trying to go with here.

It felt like a big jumbled mess, which is a shame because Jolie's performance was fabulous and the visuals were lovely and there was a sort of Fisher Queen scenario set up between Maleficent and the Moors and gosh how do you have an entire movie about faeries and have so little overall pagany feels attached to it?

6/10, would watch again but not pay for it.

[Nyktipolos]

Just saw it.  Interesting take on the story (and it makes sense).

Angelina Jolie is very believable and I would like to see her do a version of the character geared for adults not children.

 
I really enjoyed the story. I went in knowing it was a PG film and a re-imagining of the Disney version, so I didn't have expectations of adult content or a dark/gritty story (although I think it did have some elements). There were some things I hadn't thought of before (see Sage's review) that gives me new things to talk about.

Tbh, I don't view Maleficent becoming maternal over Aurora; I see her very much fitting the "godmother" role without wanting to be her mother? I also think one thing that didn't work in favour of their growing relationship was the lack of telling time lapses in the film. The only thing that really told time was Aurora literally growing, but I don't think that's enough for a film.

I was actually really glad the "true love's kiss" was for Maleficent's love for Aurora, because it was more than romantic love. (And Sage please don't take this as a diss against you or anything! I'm just seeing this pop up elsewhere!) I am kind of really tired of the comparison of non-romantic and familial love to Frozen, when Frozen was not the first to handle non-romantic love as the cornerstone of a film.

I also think Maleficent handles blended families really well (it's a weirdly blended family, but it's a family with multiple levels and I liked it).

I do wish Maleficent had been more brutal towards Stephan in the end, but going back to the PG thing, I think she was made to show at least some compassion, but also her trying to leave Stephan alive is a punishment of it's own kind (his kingdom cannot stand against her might, and his daughter stands with her, not him, because of his cruelty).

One thing I've read elsewhere is that quite a bit was cut from the film to make it under 2 hours (which I understand, considering it's meant to be a "kid's movie"). Some things that apparently got cut: there was actually a king and queen for the Moors and Maleficent was their niece, Stephan was half-fairy, and more time spent in the Moors at the beginning of the film. It was said they actually shot most of this stuff, so I'm kind of hoping it is in the DVD release under deleted scenes because I'd like to see what they had imagined when they actually made the movie.

[Melamphoros]

Plus it didn't feel realistic and this Aurora is flatter than her 2-D counterpart from last century.

 
How is that possible?  The animated Aurora was little more than a walking plot device...

[Sage]

How is that possible?  The animated Aurora was little more than a walking plot device...

 
It is astonishingly possible. There was nothing to this actress but ~sweet innocence~. It seemed like her only function was to provide Maleficent with a point of redemption. I mean, Maleficent's raven familiar felt more nuanced and complex than with narcoleptic goldilocks over here.

[Nyktipolos]

It is astonishingly possible. There was nothing to this actress but ~sweet innocence~. It seemed like her only function was to provide Maleficent with a point of redemption. I mean, Maleficent's raven familiar felt more nuanced and complex than with narcoleptic goldilocks over here.

Definitely possible. Aurora was more at the centre of the older Disney film than this one; this film is much more about Maleficent so what was Aurora's traits sans focus became more obvious in this film.

They could've done much more with her, tbh.

[mlr52]

Definitely possible. Aurora was more at the centre of the older Disney film than this one; this film is much more about Maleficent so what was Aurora's traits sans focus became more obvious in this film.

They could've done much more with her, tbh.

 
Remember she was the storyteller, not the story.