Best and Worst of 'Maleficent': Angelina Jolie, Sam Riley, Fairies...and? #Maleficent http://t.co/VrPnsQHt8K
— HitFix (@HitFix) May 31, 2014
What works and what doesn't work in Angelina Jolie's new take on 'Sleeping Beauty'
Critics weren't necessarily impressed, but based on "Maleficent's" strong debut this weekend audiences are. Moviegoers have already scored the film an "A" Cinemascore rating and its destroyed Seth MacFarlane's "A Million Ways to Die in the Old West" at the box office. Chalk up the success to Angelina Jolie's enduring star power and audiences craving a fantastical escape that doesn't involve superheroes.
The live action re-telling of the classic "Sleeping Beauty" story features Jolie as the title character, a villain who may not be as evil as we all have previously been led to believe. Jolie has earned raves, but her co-stars and director Robert Stromberg? That's up for debate.
Check out HitFix's best and worst of "Maleficent" (with photos) in the gallery at the site
Write-ups only below
Worst: What's up with Maleficent's powers?
Was I the only one with no clue what Maleficent could or
couldn't do with her magic? I get the flying thing and then she was able
to take down whole armies by controlling the trees and bushes and all
of that. And everybody was terrified of her, because she seemed capable
of conquering the whole world. Then she gets de-winged and it limits her
ability to fly, but apparently nothing else? And then we find out that
iron can hurt her. But how much, exactly, does it hurt her? Like it
burns a little, but doesn't hold her back? Because what's the point of
trapping her in an iron net if she can still turn her useless sidekick
into a FREAKING DRAGON? And what's the point of making a freaking
dragon, if he's such a piddly little dragon?
- Daniel Fienberg
- Daniel Fienberg
Best: Angelina Jolie as reluctant mother bear
While plenty of people are fixating in the de-winging of
Maleficent, I walked out of the theater with a much lighter takeaway. To
me, this was really a love story about an open-hearted little kid
wearing down a crusty, hate-filled villain and the mother-child
relationship, though not biological, that blossoms between them. It
could have played sappy sweet, but Jolie never once rolled her eyes or
sighed dramatically before showing her mushy underbelly -- it's a more
subtle wearing down of the rock that has become her heart, and when she
finally realizes the horror of what she's done, her heartbreak is
crushing. Yes, we could see the kiss coming from a mile away -- but that
didn't make it any less moving.
- Liane Bonin Starr
- Liane Bonin Starr
Worst: Fairy Underemployment
You hate to see a fantastic Oscar nominee go underutilized,
particularly in a splashy watercolor blockbuster like "Maleficent."
Imelda Staunton, who gave perhaps the best losing Best Actress-nominated
performance of the past decade in "Vera Drake," is reduced to a few
moments of sputtering alongside fellow fairies Juno Temple and Lesley
Manville here. Though the fairies are tasked with raising Aurora, their
incompetence is so obvious that the movie quickly discards them in favor
of Maleficent's maternal arc. We deserved more of Staunton's slightly
daffy quaintness -- in this movie and at most other times too.
- Louis Virtel
- Louis Virtel
Worst: Shartlo Copley’s complete miscasting as King Stefan
To be fair, it’s not just Copley’s Stefan, Michael Higgins,
who plays Young Stefan, also seems to struggle with his poorly written
part. There is not one moment when Copley, best known for his role in
“District 9,” is believable as a fairytale prince or a vicious villain.
It’s partly because the South African affects the world’s worst and
distracting accent: sometimes he sounds Irish, other times British.
Plus, he and Jolie have zero chemistry. So little, in fact, that while
we can understand her wrath after he clips her wings, any thought that
her actions come from being a woman scorned in love seem laughable.
- Melinda Newman
- Melinda Newman
Best: The Raven
I might have been the only person rooting for Diaval to turn
back into a raven, but one of the more charming performances from the
secondary characters came from an animated little bird. As befits a
Disney property, the animals are always watchable, and this raven
creation coos, puffs its chest, looks reasonably like a real bird and
does possibly a better acting job than poor Sam Riley. We know the Raven
has fallen for Aurora before the human version ever clues us in, for
better or for worse.
- Liane Bonin Starr
- Liane Bonin Starr
Worst: What were Diaval and Sam Riley adding, exactly?
In "Sleeping Beauty," Diablo is Maleficent's wicked sidekick,
an unquestioning force of raven-shaped evil. In "Maleficent," Diablo has
become Diaval and he is... What, exactly? He can become a dragon and
several other creatures. But is he good? Evil? Does he have any
motivations at all? And what, exactly, is Riley portraying here? Is it
just a man who finds it annoying and boring to be a man rather than a
raven? Riley's a decent actor. Somebody needed to give Diaval some
characteristics. He needs to be funnier. Or more heroic. Or to have even
the tiniest of character arcs? Anything, really.
- Daniel Fienberg
- Daniel Fienberg
Best: The handsome prince really doesn't matter, thank God
Sure, Prince Phillip is cute as a button and shows up when we
expect him to show up, but ultimately, he doesn't matter much -- and
that's more than fine. While Aurora is a bit more of a plot device than a
real character, she also demonstrates some moxie in freeing
Maleficent's wings so that her "fairy godmother" can be her true,
powerful self. Just as she's never had a mother -- those ridiculous
fairies don't count -- Maleficent has never had a daughter, and once the
lies are stripped away this is a relationship that warrants more time
and nurturing. Aurora is just sixteen, so let her have some time to
frolic in the moors and play with the weird little creatures she finds
there. Phillip can wait. Or not.
- Liane Bonin Starr
- Liane Bonin Starr
Best: It's a bracing antidote to princess mythology
Any mother of little girls knows the heartbreak of the
relatively recent trend toward all things princess. Before they're old
enough to see the movies, little girls are buying into the trappings of
Disney princesses -- the tiaras, the gowns, the overly-embellished
shoes. It's the very stuff that limits girls in the way it limited real
princesses and corseted women of eras past -- they don't want to get
dirty, climb trees, or explore for fear or tearing their precious
finery. It's a gold mine for Disney but horrifying to mothers who don't
want their kids to mindlessly sing about wishing for their prince to
come, who want their girls to stick up for themselves and not be passive
within their own lives. Recent years have seen a reversal, yes, but
it's going to take a lot of revisionist movies about powerful women like
this one to grab little girls' attention away from what's certainly the
most toxic messaging little girls can get, and one that we've become so
used to seeing we hardly notice it anymore -- that a woman's life is
meaningless without a man to save or love them.
- Liane Bonin Starr
- Liane Bonin Starr
Worst: Maleficient’s rise to power in leather pants
As Maleficent rises victorious from her epic battle with
Stefan and his minions and regains her wings, she arises clad in tight
black leather pants, silhouetted so that her thigh gap is beautifully
illuminated. Nowhere in the movie’s preceding 90 minutes has she won
leather pants— an awesome leather cape, yes— but it feels like all of a
sudden Lara Croft showed up to save the day. Maybe Disney felt it needed
to throw in a reward to all the dads who were sitting through the movie
with their kids.
- Melinda Newman
- Melinda Newman
Worst: The sub-"Frozen" kiss twist
It's always a good idea to shake up the nauseating
prince/damsel trope, but "Maleficent"s climactic twist on the "Sleeping
Beauty" kiss -- where it's Maleficent's kiss, not the prince's, that
boasts the true love necessary to wake Aurora -- is telegraphed so early
on that it feels obligatory by the time we get to it. One problem is
that our prince is a cipher (with gorgeous Kristy McNichol hair, to be
fair) in a minor role. We just aren't betting on him to save anybody.
But worse, the kiss happens to be the same twist from "Frozen" and,
earlier, "Once Upon a Time." I can appreciate the empowering sentiment,
but as a thrilling climax it doesn't deliver. And did I mention that
Aurora is only asleep for about six minutes?
- Louis Virtel
- Louis Virtel
Best: Lack of annoying comic relief
Yes, the fairy godmothers are a bit bumbling and meandering
and other than Juno Temple Fairy's somewhat disturbing June
Temple-implied sexiness, they don't provide much of anything. But at
least their presence isn't overbearing. And it's notable that for all of
the potentially marketable woodland creatures in the Moors, none of
them especially overstay their welcome or are there only to sell
creatures at the Disney Store. So none of them burp. None of them fart.
None of them clown around like Olaf in "Frozen" like rejects from some
sort of Sidekicks Minstrel Show. Of course, for some viewers, that'll be
a "worst." If you want to spend time with belching, flatulating ogres
and dwarfs and pixies, "Maleficent" isn't the movie for you.
- Daniel Fienberg
- Daniel Fienberg
Worst: Darkness, darkness everywhere
For unfathomable reasons, film descends into such darkness
(literal, not figuratively) that during the 3D screening I attended, it
was almost impossible to make out what was happening on screen,
especially during the final battle for Sleeping Beauty. As Maleficent
and her dragon and Stefan and his footmen battle it out, it’s so dark in
the castle that following the action is futile. Conversely, director
Robert Stromberg, who is also a production designer, creates a detailed,
magical fantasy world for Maleficent and her fellow fairies in The
Moors.
- Melinda Newman
- Melinda Newman
Maleficent did pretty well at the box office this past
weekend, bringing in $69.4 million: one of the best openings of the
year, and Angelina Jolie's biggest opening weekend ever. A great start,
then … but is it a great movie? Opinions differ: Audiences were enamored
enough to give the movie a Cinemascore grade of A, but critics were
more mixed, as evidenced by Maleficent's 52 percent fresh
rating at Rotten Tomatoes. No matter how you feel about the movie,
though, can we all agree that these six things might have improved it?
(Spoilers follow, so get out now if you've yet to see the film.)
A longer slumber
Aurora's doomed sleep is the thing the entire movie has been building towards, a fate she cannot escape sprung from a curse that even the regretful Maleficent is unable to break. It ought to carry more weight than anything in the movie … and yet, it lasts about as long as a cat nap. The notion that Maleficent's kiss is the one to break Aurora's spell is a clever one — albeit a twist that Frozen got to first — but Maleficent's guilt would have been a whole lot more resonant if Aurora had slept longer than the length of a scene. Why the rush to wake her up?
Aurora's doomed sleep is the thing the entire movie has been building towards, a fate she cannot escape sprung from a curse that even the regretful Maleficent is unable to break. It ought to carry more weight than anything in the movie … and yet, it lasts about as long as a cat nap. The notion that Maleficent's kiss is the one to break Aurora's spell is a clever one — albeit a twist that Frozen got to first — but Maleficent's guilt would have been a whole lot more resonant if Aurora had slept longer than the length of a scene. Why the rush to wake her up?
Smarter lines
Maleficent cuts a striking figure with those dramatic horns and sharp cheekbones, but once she opens her mouth, the spell is broken. This is through no fault of Angelina Jolie's, an actress who can imbue any line reading with verve and passion, and should have been given better things to say by writer Linda Woolverton. Can you recall a single piece of dialogue from the film other than Jolie's juicy reading of "Well, well," which became the cornerstone of the film's marketing campaign? Here, for example, is the banal exchange Maleficent has with Aurora when the two women finally meet:
Maleficent cuts a striking figure with those dramatic horns and sharp cheekbones, but once she opens her mouth, the spell is broken. This is through no fault of Angelina Jolie's, an actress who can imbue any line reading with verve and passion, and should have been given better things to say by writer Linda Woolverton. Can you recall a single piece of dialogue from the film other than Jolie's juicy reading of "Well, well," which became the cornerstone of the film's marketing campaign? Here, for example, is the banal exchange Maleficent has with Aurora when the two women finally meet:
Aurora: Don't be afraid.
Maleficent: I'm not afraid.
Aurora: Then come out.
Maleficent: Then you'll be afraid.
Maleficent: I'm not afraid.
Aurora: Then come out.
Maleficent: Then you'll be afraid.
Shakespeare, it ain't.
More malevolence from Maleficent
We understand that this is a revisionist retelling, and that Disney isn't going to spend upwards of $200 million on a movie whose protagonist remains a murderous representation of pure evil. Still, couldn't Maleficent's villainess phase have lasted longer? She gets one scene of pure wickedness — the baby-cursing scene in the castle, yanked straight from the original animated film — and otherwise spends most of her screen time compromised by doubt and an all-too-apparent heart. To borrow a turn of phrase from Mae West: When Angelina Jolie is good, she's very good, but when she's bad, she's better. Let her be wicked, full stop!
We understand that this is a revisionist retelling, and that Disney isn't going to spend upwards of $200 million on a movie whose protagonist remains a murderous representation of pure evil. Still, couldn't Maleficent's villainess phase have lasted longer? She gets one scene of pure wickedness — the baby-cursing scene in the castle, yanked straight from the original animated film — and otherwise spends most of her screen time compromised by doubt and an all-too-apparent heart. To borrow a turn of phrase from Mae West: When Angelina Jolie is good, she's very good, but when she's bad, she's better. Let her be wicked, full stop!
A different king
District 9 star Sharlto Copley is talented and a little bit unhinged, but from the moment he first speaks in Maleficent — and that reedy, high-pitched voice comes out — it's clear that he's been miscast as King Stefan. To be fair, it's not easy to cast a man who can stand up to Angelina Jolie onscreen, but Copley comes off like he's looking for the exits. The two of them together just didn't work.
District 9 star Sharlto Copley is talented and a little bit unhinged, but from the moment he first speaks in Maleficent — and that reedy, high-pitched voice comes out — it's clear that he's been miscast as King Stefan. To be fair, it's not easy to cast a man who can stand up to Angelina Jolie onscreen, but Copley comes off like he's looking for the exits. The two of them together just didn't work.
A stronger visual sensibility
A lot of money was spent on Maleficent's look, but first-time director Robert Stromberg never managed to frame his shots in an interesting way, often just plopping Jolie in the center of the frame and shooting the whole big endeavor in close-up. Snow White and the Huntsman was not much better than this film — and it, too, was helmed by a first-time director — but there's no knocking its striking images. Stromberg got this gig because of his visual-effects background, so it's surprising that Maleficent's visuals feel so indifferently composed.
A lot of money was spent on Maleficent's look, but first-time director Robert Stromberg never managed to frame his shots in an interesting way, often just plopping Jolie in the center of the frame and shooting the whole big endeavor in close-up. Snow White and the Huntsman was not much better than this film — and it, too, was helmed by a first-time director — but there's no knocking its striking images. Stromberg got this gig because of his visual-effects background, so it's surprising that Maleficent's visuals feel so indifferently composed.
Better fairies
Whaaaaat was up with those freaking fairies? Stromberg hired three of the best British actresses around — Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville, and Juno Temple — but gave them nothing to play besides idiocy. It's bad enough that they spend most of the film flying around with super-deformed motion-capture bodies, but it's worse that the fairies' biggest moment comes when they get in a flour fight, a sequence that has none of the ingenuity of the fairies' big montage in Sleeping Beauty. What does it say when your movie is more juvenile than the animated film that inspired it?
Whaaaaat was up with those freaking fairies? Stromberg hired three of the best British actresses around — Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville, and Juno Temple — but gave them nothing to play besides idiocy. It's bad enough that they spend most of the film flying around with super-deformed motion-capture bodies, but it's worse that the fairies' biggest moment comes when they get in a flour fight, a sequence that has none of the ingenuity of the fairies' big montage in Sleeping Beauty. What does it say when your movie is more juvenile than the animated film that inspired it?
