Maleficent 2014 Review

On Monday the 2nd of June, myself and my friend took ourselves down to our local Cineworld to watch the new movie 'Maleficient' starring Angelina Jolie and Elle Fanning. We were blown away by the extravagance of it, feeling a sense of nostalgia as the film opened, reminding us of the Disney we grew up with when we were children. The film offers an alternative telling to the well known 'Sleeping Beauty,' making the villain, Maleficent, the titular character. Critics have likened it to the musical 'Wicked', both giving an insight into the villains back story. However, 'Maleficent' portrays, not only a backstory, but a tale coinciding with the original tale, interpreting it in an entirely different way. So, with a Starbucks in hand, I sat back in my seat and enjoyed the film.

The first thing that struck me was the vast and extremely beautiful scenery. The camera pans to give the viewer a sense of flight, fitting as we discover Maleficent herself is a fairy. It begins with the introduction of a younger Maleficent, with a narration being provided by an elder Sleeping Beauty (only revealed at the very end), being played by Isobelle Molloy. Molloy does a fantastic job at carrying the rather large wings costume have provided her with, without it managing to look clunky or clumsy. After a flying segment (which did not look particularly spectacular), and a view of the magical world Maleficent resides in, she meets the young Stefan, a poor orphan boy who lives in the human world, portrayed by actor Michael Higgins. Higgins and Molloy bounce off each other well, with Higgins sporting a strong Scottish accent in contrast to Molloy's quaint English tone.

As the two grow in age, they begin to fall in love, professing it at the age of sixteen (yes, the wise old age of sixteen). However, Stefan's dreams overcome him and he deserts Maleficent for the aspiration of someday ruling the kingdom. When I was watching, I was convinced that alone would be her motivation, but to my extensive relief, there was more.

FINALLY, we see the gorgeous Angeline Jolie sweep in on her fabulously splendid wings and steal the rest of the movie. Seriously, this woman is my new lady crush. I had never seen her in any movies prior to this, so I had no expectations nor judgement of her as an actress which would not cloud my judgement. But my goodness, I was blown away. Firstly, I was not expecting such a well formed British accent, knowing she's an American I was impressed beyond belief. Whenever I hear an American will be attempting an English accent I have a horrible fear they will turn out like Anne Hathaway in 'One Day' (DON'T GET ME STARTED.)

The plot continues with an altercation between Maleficent and the current King, who vows revenge and, without an heir, decides that whoever kills Maleficent will take the crown. Now, here comes her motivation. Stefan, now played as an adult by Sharlto Copley, revisits Maleficent once more, entices her, makes her fall in love with him again and whilst she sleeps, cuts off her wings with iron (PLOT POINT: Iron burns fairies). She awakes alone, wingless and scorned.
Personally, I felt a sudden pang as she cried out, even if it felt slightly forced. You don't only feel her physical pain, but her emotional pain as well. From here on, she vows to destroy Stefan and her motivation was born, creating a darker magical world and rules over as she creeps more and more into a world of evil.

 Now, we don't actually see the iconic costume that made Maleficent well known until the christening of baby Aurora, were we are introduced to the Queen, played, quite transparently by Hannah New, who, granted does have more lines than the original, who only had one in the entire film!
This is the first scene in which we see both the transformed Stefan and Maleficent, with Copley spending the majority of his scenes wedged uncomfortably in a chair in a costume that is clearly too big for him. Jolie on the other hand has all the grace and elegance of a ballerina as she glides into the castle (with the help of a wooden staff), with a deliciously malicious grin on her face and a gleam in her eye.
It is also in this scene which we are introduced to the three fairies (seen earlier in the opening), who were massive plot features in the original telling. In this version however they have been dumbed down dramatically, being mere tools to aggravate, annoy and anger viewers. Plus, their character design was weird.

 Played by Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville and Juno Temple, they attempt to create somewhat of a comedy trio, but fail miserably. By the second act of the film I wrote them off as irritants who cared little in there duty to care for baby Aurora, which opens the ground for Maleficent to come to save her from falling off a cliff in one scene.

Whilst not necesarrily likeable in the original 1959, it was evident they cared for the girl and had a genuine interest in both her and her upbringing, whereas they cast her off as a hassle in the new. Plus, the original's character design was by far better.




A character that was created for the movie was that of Diaval, Maleficent's black raven that acts as her spy as she can no longer walk, proclaiming "I need you to be my wings." Regularly transforming him into a human, played wonderfully by English actor, Sam Riley, provides a compelling sidekick to Jolie's Maleficent, the two sharing both tender and comedic moments, subtle and interesting. Their onscreen chemistry is enticing, and highlighted in every scene shared together. Riley even looks slightly like the Raven, the make up and costume departments dressing him in black, slicking his hair back and adding prosthetic dashes to his neck and face. He also provides the voice of reason for a lot of Maleficent's thoughts. It was refreshing to see Maleficent have a kind of company, proving that she is

not entirely alone in her wait for revenge.

Now, to one of the my biggest peeves with this film. Elle Fanning as Aurora.
As soon as she started speaking, my friend and I both turned to one another and we could tell we were thinking the same thing. Which idiot cast her?

I had never really seen Fanning act, only once in the film 'Super 8', but I was not really paying much attention. I can not express enough how awful she is in this film. Granted, she is young, but she's also been acting since she was about three years of age, so should have plenty of experience. Her accent is very like her sisters attempt in film 'Now is Good'; wooden, blunt and heavy. Being considered one of Hollywood's best talents truly baffles me. She was boring, irritating and when she fell asleep, I prayed she wouldn't wake up.

Another moment in the film was the one interaction between Prince Phillip, played by American actor Brendan Thwaites, was around a minute long and startlingly absent in chemistry between Aurora and Phillip, something easily evident in the original, if not a little rapey. However, this did slightly reinforce how this was not the story as we knew it and the focus was meant to be primarily on Maleficent. Despite this, it did slightly feel that Disney were going back to their traditional structure of a boy and girl meeting and then falling in love within minutes of knowing one another. At least there was a dance in the other. It is also contrasting to Maleficent falling in love with Stefan, growing up together, taking years to fall in love with one another, taking time to develop.

Toward the end, in an interesting, yet slightly predictable twist, Maleficent herself actually comes to care for Aurora, and does everything in her power to prevent the curse coming to be. In fact, the story completely rules out Prince Phillip as being the true love, his kiss unable to awaken Aurora from her slumber. Instead, Maleficent is in fact the "true love", who has provided Aurora with the maternal love that had been absent from her childhood, and is ultimately the one that wakens her with a kiss to the forehead (BRAVO DISNEY). The real climax is not Aurora succumbing to the curse, but in the form of a battle between Stefan and Maleficent.

It's a relatively short battle, but completely epic. It is as if Jolie is fighting for every girl that's ever been hurt by a man. All in a tight leather catsuit. As a viewer you find yourself rooting for the supposed villain and watch in glee as the hero falls to his death.

With both parents dead (the mum died years ago, it wasn't a massive plot point and no one really cared), Aurora goes to live with the newly transformed magical moors with Maleficent, being crowned the queen of something or other and everyone is very happy blah blah. Prince Phillip even makes an appearence, despite a brief one, but it was enough to appreciate Thwaites' beautifully formed face.

So, summery. I loved loved loved this film and it one hundred percent deserves to go down as one of Disney's newly formed classics (along with Frozen). It is ridiculously enticing, with every single moment required to develop the narrative, which was very strong. The negatives are easily brushed over and the real hero of the film, Angelina Jolie, deserves praise for such an eloquent, sarcastic, funny, scary, beautifully strong performance, I am ready to go watch over and over again!

xxx

Tinker Bell (How Disney Destroyed Her)

Tinker Bell (2008)

When Disney announced a string of Tinker Bell movies, exploring how the mythical accomplice of much loved character, Peter Pan came to be, being a snarky twelve year old I was, found this ridiculous. I didn't actually watch the first film until I was about 14 - on a day I was ill and my resources of entertainment were very limited. My goodness, did I think that was the biggest pile of crap I had ever watched, but bearing in mind I wasn't actually watching it to review it. I mainly hated it because that was to be expected of a fourteen year old. 

However, the other day, I had a whole day off and needed something that didn't require much intelligence nor concentration to play in the background as I caught up on homework/housework/uni stuff. 

The basic plot: We see a baby in a crib and a sudden spark erupts, the viewer quickly learning that fairies are born out of a child's laughter. We are then taken to Never Land, which has been transformed from two dimensional sketchy drawings of the early 1950s Disney concept of the fantasy island, into quite aesthetically pleasing CGI display. If I was looking at it from a younger persons point of view then I would have loved it, but being someone that was raised on the older style of Disney films, it did tug a nerve. 

It is then revealed that when a new fairy is created, she or he has to discover their specific skill or "talents". These skills range from the slightly normal to the obscenely bizarre; Garden, Water, Animal, Ice, Dust, Confectioner (no I am not making that up) and of course Tinker (thus the creation of the name). There are at least 112 talents but they slowly become more and more ridiculous. 

The now dubbed "Tinker Bell" is seen settling into life as a tinker fairy, making her fellow tinkers drool as she fashions a leaf into the iconic figure hugging, crotch length dress and creating inventions that fail to work. Then comes the main plot; she discovers she can't go to the mainland to turn winter into spring (yes, weather has nothing to do with it, it's fairies).

The rest of the film is essentially her wining about how she can't travel with the rest of the fairies, complaining about her talent, insulting her fellow tinkers, trying and failing to be somebody she isn't and ruining months of hard work for everyone in about fifteen seconds. 

So, what is wrong with this film?

Firstly, what do we learn? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Another Disney movie I could compare it to is Ariel; complaining brat that throws a strop, puts main plot point in jeopardy, but is still rewarded regardless. There is no message. If there was and I just missed it, what was it supposed to be? "If you don't get what you want throw a strop and your actions will be rewarded?" No Disney. No. 

(1953)

(2008)

Secondly, and this is probably one of my main niggles with this film, and it happens about three minutes in. TINKER BELL TALKS. "Excuse me?" I hear you say. Unfortunately you read correctly. I have to admit, a whole movie where the titular character doesn't talk would have been a stretch, but why take a character as iconic as Tinker Bell and ruin her like that. She is infamous for not speaking, with all her expression, emotions and thoughts coming through by her facial expressions and body language, which was Disney animation at its finest.  

And finally, the main thing I find myself hating with so much passion is the character of Tinker Bell. First and foremost, Tinker Bell is a bit of a bitch, driven by jealousy and topped off with one hell of a sassy attitude, almost like a Disney version of Betty Boop. She even concocted a plan to kill Wendy in the 1953 film, yet in this one you see her delivering the child version a lost music box? Why movie? Why? If a child had had that much significance on you as a younger fairy, why would you want them to die a few years later? The logic is one hundred percent absent. 

1953

1953

I understand they would want to make it more suitable for a younger audience but why take an already established character and change her to such an extent it causes so much continuity issues. Tinker Bell is someone everyone can relate some aspects of their personality to; She got jealous, she got insecure, she was sad, and her main story line was her unrequited love for someone she can never have but will always desire to. In no way did she possess the typical traits to qualify as a Disney princess, nor a Disney protagonist (apart from the climax of the movie where she saved Peters by sacrificing her own), but that worked so well for her, being so wonderfully contrasting to Wendy. The way they have changed her personality she might as well be Wendy. It almost takes away the credibility from those who originally worked on the 1953 film, those who took time to explore and develop to create this much adored character, giving her these individual traits that are rarely found in Disney films. 

Fellow "Talent" Fairies

Admittedly, it was nice to see the new take on the design, as well as seeing other fairies, delving into deeper detail of that side of Never Land that had never been explored before. It was even nice to see Tinker Bell have friends and, like I said, if I had never watched the original film, I wouldn't have anything to compare it to, and frankly, if this version of Tinker Bell was a new character, it would have been less irritable and more tolerable (only slightly). If you need something to watch whilst revising or to fall to sleep to or to keep your child entertained for seventy minutes, this would be perfect. 

*brushes hatred off*

This is my first EVER review so if you have any suggestions then please let me know :) 

xxx

Good Afternoon

And I welcome myself back to the blogging universe!