Maleficent — Page 3

This was one of the worst films I've seen in recent years.

The story was paper thin. I don't mind the change is focus or even that it takes liberties with where the story goes....it was just so BORING. The script, in written form, could not have more that 20 pages. The pacing was awful, and so was the CGI....I felt like I was watching effects from 10 years ago; clunky and unrealistic. Every character was two dimensional, no one had motivation. If there was another close up of Jolie simply staring, I thought I might scream.

**Possible SPOILER**
This basically had the same "true love's kiss" twist as Frozen -- and it was ten thousand times more effective in Frozen. Even my kids saw it coming a mile away.


In case others' comments weren't enough: SAVE YOUR MONEY!

---

I found the whole thing about her having wings to be bizarre and out of place. They could have chosen a far more logical story, such as her being feared and pursued by the King for her incredible magical powers.

But one question: didn't anyone involved even think about her name? That someone they're portraying as basically good has a name that inherently means evil?

I've wondered the same thing. Maleficent is an actual word, and the definition in Merriam-Webster is "working or productive of harm or evil." They should've just renamed her Benevolent, which means "marked by or suggestive of goodwill."

I think this atrocity is akin to when they made Tinker Bell speak in those recent direct-to-DVD movie series. It made her lose her mystique.

---

Thank you JG2 for that much needed laugh.

Its a pity this wasn't made by another studio, Jolie was wonderful.

---

I must say I was glad of the heads up as far as those trios of pixies were concerned. Seriously traitors to their species. AND the utter illogical entrusting them w the raising of the child? I suppose they were to be comic relief but most of the Three Stooges bits they did fell very flat. Whoever said Linda Woolverton should not be allowed near a script again was spot on.
That being said, Angelina Jolie was truly magnificent. Even when she did soften up as she follows the Beastie (OOOO shout out to Pirates of the Caribbean Linda!) She never lost that detached otherworldly essence of the character. Bettyboy is correct- she really commands the christening scene but of course that was one of the scenes almost recreated from the animation. See what can happen when the wurds air gud? Jolie did what she could with other scenes but the pickings were definitely slim.

I will say (credit where it is due) the creation of Diaval as her confidant was an nice bit. The ultimate anthropomorphism as it were!

I have heard complaints about the "fake English accent" Jolie uses. No doubt the Lil' Maleficent(s) do have them but Jolie's hauteur and cold contempt in the christening scene are being expressed thru a very careful clipped almost over enunciation - reminiscent of the original animation.

I agree- when you think what COULD have been done.... sigh.

It was cheesy, the story thin, but I loved this film. I'm a huge fan of the original, and Jolie's acting was great, even if the material she was working with wasn't up to par. I actually thought the CGI was well done.

Mind you - I saw it in 2D. 3D and Imax gives me a headache.

SPOILERS AHEAD--- i felt vey conflicted through the whole film. since basically Birth, i have been a HUGE fan or both Maleficent and her voice- Eleanor Audley. So when i heard this was being made, i was extremely excited. but what i got, was not what i expected. They, in my eyes, de-villianized her and made her into the good guy. in fact, everything she does is justifiable and she is not mean at all. She tries to save Aurora, even watches her all through the princess's live and makes sure she is safe and cared for. they completely ruined the character. Maleficent was pure evil in the original film, and that's why i loved her. she was much too nice and good.
Jolie gives a great performance, but she does not have the power or presence in voice that Eleanor Audley possessed. During the scene in which she casts the spell- her evilness felt really forced. But she was great playing THIS version of Maleficent- a hero. The film does drag on a little and i must say i wasn't thrilled with it. but i am most angry at Disney for making her a Hero. So my question now is will they make Maleficent a hero in Disney themed things from now on- since this is supposed to be the true version of the story.
another thing that i wished they had done was have Mary Costa (The Original Voice of Sleeping Beauty) provided the voice of the Narrator- who was supposed to be older Aurora. The narrator they had was very boring and basic and this was a huge missed opportunity.

Also the three good fairies were completely useless and complete Idiots.

---

Updated On: 6/6/14 at 01:48 AM

Woolverton needs to stick with animated films. Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King are two of my favorites.

Disney's doing a live-action version of Beauty and the Beast to be directed by Bill Condon. I wonder if she'll have a hand in that since she wrote the screenplay for the animated film.

---

I guess I'm one of the rare ones who have really liked it for what it was. Acting and visuals were great (not to mention that the final battle was insane in a entertaining way) and I thought that Linda Woolverton's writing here was actually a suprising type of good compared to the sleep-inducing travesty that was Alice in Wonderland.

Woolverton is currently working on pitching for a television series she describes as "earthbound" compared to her previous work.

It practically writes itself!

Updated On: 6/27/14 at 06:47 PM