Yes, I had some personal matters to attend to- sorry I didn't give you guys and gals a heads-up, but that's life for ya- sometimes it throws you a curve-ball you don't expect.
Anyway, I'm back, and hopefully without any significant down time for the foreseeable future. On the plus side, I saw a fair amount of movies in the meantime, including The Bad Batch, I Do Until I Don't, Amityville: The Awakening, Valerian and, at long last, Blade Runner 2049. I hope to write about each and every one for you, asap.
Of course, I will still continue to roll out my old reviews as appropriate- i.e. anytime I can tie them into a birthday or the like. Thanks for your patience in my absence!
In addition, I am considering doing a franchise review of some sort. Look out for a poll on my social media, but, for the record, the ones I am considering are as follows: Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, Amityville, Prom Night, Phantasm, Saw and Alien. If the interest is there for a specific franchise, I'll do it first, but otherwise, I'll just pick one randomly.
(Side Note: I will be doing the Halloween movies sometime in October, and possibly the Silent Night, Deadly Night franchise in December, so that's why I didn't include those.)
For now, here's my retro review of the day, in honor of birthday girl Elle Fanning, who turns 20 today! This review was originally published in UAB's Kaleidoscope on May 31st, 2014.
There are some iconic characters that, when you hear about the casting of the actor in the role, you’re like: “They hit the nail on the head with that one.” Think Patrick Stewart as Professor X, Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, Ian McKellen as Gandalf, Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix LeStrange in the Harry Potter movies... the list goes on.
You could certainly add Angelina Jolie to that list. It’s a sign of good casting when the mere presence of someone in a certain role makes you want to see a film. I was only mildly interested at best when I heard Disney was going to be remaking Sleeping Beauty in live-action form- until I heard it was going to be from the villainous viewpoint of Maleficent, and that Jolie was going to play her.
Then I was all in, and that’s despite the fact that Jolie hasn’t exactly been hitting them out of the park as of late. It’s not that the movies she’d been doing were bad, exactly. Just sort of meh on the whole.
The exception being In the Land of Blood & Honey, her directorial debut, which, while not a huge success by any means (and which she didn’t even act in) wasn’t an total embarrassment, either, and clearly a labor of love which might well point the way forward towards a new career for her.
With Maleficent, Jolie applies that love to a character that she freely admitted was a beloved childhood icon, and it shows in her most committed and affecting role in many a moon.
While preparing for the film, I went and re-watched the original Disney classic upon which it is partly based, Sleeping Beauty, and was pleasantly surprised how well it held up.
Coming at a time in which Disney films were seen as being a bit pat and frivolous, it was Walt Disney’s attempt to be taken seriously again, which he winningly achieved in the film by jettisoning much of the sillier elements and amping up the spectacle and action.
Notably in the eye-catching approach to the animation style, which remains one of Disney’s most singular achievements- and that’s saying something. Every frame looks like the true work of art it is, and if the film isn’t as fun as some of Disney’s more celebrated efforts, it looks amazing, and that final sequence with Maleficent running amok- at one point memorably shape-shifting into a massive dragon- is something to see.
Combine this with the lack of typical Disney moments- i.e. far less musical numbers, minimal slapstick- and Sleeping Beauty becomes kind of a Disney film for people that don’t normally like Disney films so much. You can totally see a young Jolie being wowed by this over the likes of Cinderella or Snow White.
You can also see where the notoriously wild child Jolie- who looked like the world’s sexiest Goth chick and was known for wearing vials of her lover’s blood around her neck and getting busy in the limo before attending an Oscar ceremony back in the day- would lean more towards the villain than the willowy blonde heroine, Princess Aurora.
Maleficent is bold, brassy, and take charge- when she doesn’t get invited to the party, by God- or the Devil, as the case may be- she’s gonna do something about it, and it ain’t gonna be something good. She’s a total bad-ass. Aurora…not so much.
The new Maleficent reflects that wonderfully, by positing a girl that was once a high-flying fairy that lived happily in the woods adjacent to the main kingdom, and who bridged the gap between species by falling for a mortal as a teenager.
Then adulthood sneaks in and love and power cause trouble in the neighboring kingdoms, as they are wont to do, when the mortal’s kingdom declares war on the fairy kingdom. Things don’t end well, the end result being a Maleficent gone bad, and her eventually bestowing the famous sleeping curse from the original fairy tale on the infant Aurora.
As you might have guessed, this is a complete overhaul of the material, and depending on how fanatical you are about your fairy tales, you might not like some of the changes at hand. I don’t want to give too much away, but you might have noticed that this take as described falls in line with the more recent attempt to revise old stories in different ways from unique perspectives, with varied results.
For instance, there’s the book and play, Wicked, as well as the Disney film OZ the Great & Powerful, which re-imagine the story of The Wizard of Oz from a more witch-heavy perspective. I liked the latter in particular- I’m actually not as familiar with the former, to be honest, having never read the book or seen the play- but I seem to have been in the minority on OZ, which got decidedly mixed reviews. People also had more understandably dubious feelings about the recent dueling Snow White movies, Snow White & the Huntsman and Mirror Mirror.
Still, you can’t blame Hollywood for wanting to mix it up a bit more, given how many times these stories have been told in the past. Though you could certainly make a case for them at least trying to create more original material, instead of retreading stuff they’ve already done a billion times before as it is.
For the most part, I respect what Disney was going for here. I like that they try to humanize the would-be villain, by making Maleficent’s plight both sympathetic and understandable, even if she acts a bit rashly at times. But they tread awfully close to making her almost too sympathetic, to the point where it’s actually the King that comes off as the bad guy.
Now don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with a bit of fake out, but both sides certainly have their faults, and the end glosses over a whole lot of things in order to facilitate the expected happy ending, and that’s almost too bad.
There’s also a considerable amount of changes happening here that might not go over so well with some, including the decision to make the raven able to shape-shift into a human (this actually makes sense, as it gives Maleficent someone to serve as a sounding board to, without resorting to the dreaded talking animal approach) and a big change to the ending, especially insofar as the dragon is concerned.
On the plus side, Jolie manages to give a surprisingly deep and resonant performance here, despite the whole Disney thing, which often can result in performances that are little, shall we say, ripe? You feel for Maleficent, who really gets a raw deal early on, and you certainly don’t blame her for being vindictive about it.
At the same time, you can see where a father might not care for his daughter being cursed and would do anything to stop or change it, so there’s a point where you’re not entirely sure who to root for, though it’s clearly meant to be Maleficent- it’s her movie, after all- so the movie has to try and tip the scales in her favor so you do.
That’s a bit of a cheat, and while I can certainly see why Disney would want the lead of their movie to be at least somewhat sympathetic, it also robs the character of some of the original film’s power, pathos and chill-inducing aspects. In Sleeping Beauty, Maleficent is a force to be reckoned with- in Maleficent, she’s... not so bad once you get to know her.
That said, this is one beautiful-looking movie. That’s one thing first-time director Robert Stromberg, a former visual effects artist who won an Oscar for his work on Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland and Avatar, gets unequivocally right.
The must-see 3D is on a par with that latter film in particular and especially shines as fairies and other woodland creatures zip in and out of the screen and in terms of the overall depth of field. This looks like a film you could step into, and what’s more, that you would want to.
I’d have to say that, overall, if this looks like your cup of tea, it probably is. If you’re one of those people that tend to prefer the originals to the remakes, though, this probably isn’t going to change your mind, but it’s still worth a look, if only for the visuals and Jolie’s magnetic and affecting performance.
The rest of the cast, I should mention, is also very well-placed, particularly Elle Fanning (Super 8), who already looks like a Disney princess at it is IRL, so is perfectly suited to play one. I'm also a big fan of the pixie-esque Juno Temple (Killer Joe), likewise perfection as one of the fairies.
Factor in the underrated Sharlto Copley (District 9) and Sam Riley (Control) and stalwart British actors Imelda Staunton (Mrs. Umbridge from the Harry Potter movies) and Lesley Manville (Topsy-Turvy), plus up-and-coming young actor Brenton Thwaites (Oculus, the upcoming adaption of the Y/A classic The Giver) and you've got a pretty rock-solid supporting cast.
I just wish the film had the courage of its convictions. In the end, it may not turn Maleficent into a milquetoast like Aurora by any stretch of the imagination, but it does end up selling her short a bit compared to the original.
For that reason, I can’t in good faith go higher than a B+ with this one, but neither was I up in arms about it. Maleficent has enough going for it to recommend- the visuals, Jolie, the solid supporting cast, that wonderfully woozy cover of “Once Upon A Dream” by Lana Del Rey that closes the film- but not enough to put it in the same class as its predecessor, even with its own set of flaws.
Warts and all, it’s hard to top classic Disney, but Maleficent at least doesn’t embarrass itself trying, and that’s saying something.
No comments:
Post a Comment