We all know that Angelina Jolie can work some box office magic. So in her latest film ‘Maleficent,’ did she cast a wicked spell or was ‘Maleficent’ a total snoozefest?
Angelina Jolie is sitting pretty on the throne of the box office since the release of Maleficent on May 30, but did critics feel the same way about Disney’s live-action Sleeping Beauty revamp? Read the reviews and find out if the critics fell under Angie’s spell!
‘Maleficent’ Reviews: A Mix Of Positive & Negative
Maleficent is a fantasy thriller about one of the most famous fairytale characters of all time. The film is based on the Sleeping Beauty classic, but told in full from Maleficent’s point of view. The movie shows that Maleficent wasn’t always so dark. Maleficent was just a normal girl until humans caused chaos and destruction throughout her land.
Maleficent was brave, but betrayal brought upon her ultimate evil and Angelina’s Maleficent placed a curse on her enemy’s daughter — Aurora. The movie also stars Elle Fanning, Sharlto Copley and Sam Riley. Angelina’s five-year-old daughter, Vivienne, also makes a highly-anticipated cameo in the film!
Reviewers ‘Don’t Quite Know’ What The Movie Is Trying To Be
While most critics have agreed that Angelina Jolie perfectly plays the dark, twisted and complex character of Maleficent, reviews are mixed when it comes to the plot line and progression of the story. Here’s a roundup of what key critics have to say:
“Consciously or not, coherently or not, Maleficent tells a new kind of story about how we live now, not once upon another time. And it does so by suggesting, among other things, that budding girls and older women are not natural foes, even if that’s what fairy tales, Hollywood and the world like to tell us.”
“In undercutting and reversing her villainy, Stromberg and screenwriter Linda Woolverton (who wrote both the wonderfulLion King and the ghastly Tim Burton version of Alice in Wonderland, by the way) do find an intriguing new way into the story. But they’re a bit too enamored of their revisionism, and they don’t quite know what to do with the rest of the tale.”
“As for its revisionist take on the travails of the iconic “Sleeping Beauty” villainess, however, it falls far short of something an imaginative fan-fiction scribe, let alone obvious role models John Gardner or Gregory Maguire, might have crafted from the material. Uncertain of tone, and bearing visible scarring from what one imagines were multiple rewrites, the film fails to probe the psychology of its subject or set up a satisfying alternate history, but it sure is nice to look at for 97 minutes.”
“The best thing about Maleficent is the actress playing the titular character. Angelina Jolie is captivating, funny, grounded yet appropriately theatrical, and entirely appealing as the dark and misunderstood fairy. Unfortunately, the world she inhabits in this film is inconsistent at best and frustratingly silly and manufactured at its worst.”
“Jolie does what she can in the title role, flashing wicked grins and sporting cheekbones so sharp and jutting that one could juice oranges on them. But the script (by Linda Woolverton) complicates Maleficent without deepening her. As a cameo, Jolie’s performance might have proven spectacular; but as a protagonist, she doesn’t give us enough to hold onto. For all her efforts, she remains yet another special effect, however spectacular.”
What do you think HollywoodLifers? Are you planning on seeing Maleficent despite the mixed bag of reviews? Let me know!
— Megan Ross