MovieChat Forums > Maleficent (2014) Discussion > Does anyone see this film as an insult t...

Does anyone see this film as an insult to the original animated classic?

posted 10 years ago by doc-ahmad-almaiman
87 replies | jump to latest

In my opinion, I think this movie is somewhat entertaining to an extent. Angelina's performance is beyond words. Elle Fanning is somewhat annoying at times. Sharto Copley was really serious and grim and dark, pretty cool. Everyone else acted a little silly.

But overall, as a movie on its own, like if you didn't know that this was in anyway related to the classic, I think it's pretty good. However, as a somewhat different take or reboot or remake or whatever it's trying to be, it doesn't fit in.

Examples:
- Prince Phillip seemed useless as opposed to the original where he was a breakthrough
- King Stefan was really mean, and I did not expect him to a villain. When the movie reached that point, I didn't know how to react.
- The fairies were absolutely pathetic by every single measure.

What do you guys think?

[–] trevlacessej-84195 9 years ago

it's not supposed to fit in with anything. it flat out tells you that "youve heard this story before but it's not accurate and this is what really happened" so i dont understand people being pissed about how some characters are different....when this isnt a sequel or a prequel so it doesnt have to be consistent. hell....most of disney classic movies are just their version of public domain fairy tales, and they changed a lot of the plot to make it kid friendly. nobody seems to care about that, but when this movie changes the plot of disney's version of sleeping beauty, it's somehow a problem.

[–] doc-ahmad-almaiman 9 years ago

That's a very interesting viewpoint. I never thought about it that way! I'm glad you said it!

[–] bbt-geek 9 years ago

My problem with the film wasn't the actual storyline as I found it interesting for Stefan to be the villian (although a couple of scenes with him wrestling with guilt would have been nice).
My problems were how they carried out the plotline and story. So the scene where they copied the original christening or what ever it was they changed the curse. This annoyed me because it was my favourite line growing up and changing it made it quite weak.
I didn't understand why they changed the fairies names or their personalities I cringed every scene they were in. The fact that she didn't change into a dragon which was the most dramatic scene of the film so to me the scene again felt a bit weak and lifeless.

Having the line 'You've seen this bla bla bla...' is fine you don't expect the exact same story. but i feel that they chose to stick to the original as much as possible and just change what they needed to fit round the plot.

[–] jbirdyhome1 9 years ago

The film didn't bother me, but the biggest insult in my opinion is the horrible rendition of the song at the end and the hideous voice of the so-called singer chosen to warble the old classic. I vehemently dislike the voice; it's like nails scraping down a chalkboard. Whoever told this woman she was a singer?

[–] stagedlined466 9 years ago

If feels like some gothic 13 year old's crappy fan-fiction.

[–] filterfan86-1 9 years ago

I find this story very insulting. This whole making the villain into the victim thing is just laughable. Im not against feminism but forreal why does the female villain have to be some sort of victim of sexism? I mean really was it needed? The thing is some feminist really are not into paganism and the historical texts behind these fairytales. Yes it's romanticize where the female protagonist falls in love and be with the prince which some interpret as being sexist,vapid,and other assorted negativities. But it goes deeper and darker than what is on the surface.
These fairytales were recreation of old folktales which were metaphors for diabolical occurrences and creatures. Ya see fairies do not go to christenings. Yeah sure they are fictional characters but in old folktales they only take unbaptized children. That was no christening but a pagan rite that has the same similarities in the story.
Maleficent was more of a unseelie court fairy than a seelie court one like the godmothers.Unseelie court fairies were malicious dangerous and would abduct and torture anyone they came across.
Fairies are very petty when it comes to manners and if you offend them they will come after you in horrible ways. Maleficent was not victim of sexism and Sleeping Beauty is not some vapid depending on a man bimbo.Neither are the fairy godmothers just some sugary sweet nice ladies. Ya think they would not strike someone with baldness if someone came after Aurora?Fairies were frightening creatures even the nice ones.Trust me in folklore the fairy godmothers would look even more sinister than Maleficent but would do good deeds for redemption.These creatures would take a liking to a particular human and gift them with special abilities: clairvoyance,song,beauty etc. But you could not brag about it.So this whole retelling of this story was just dumb. Maleficent was a vengeful offended fairy and that's that.Keep her a villain.

[–] Dominik528 8 years ago

Let's not forget about the Queen, who died off-screen without her husband by her side, and never got to see Aurora return.

[–] Toadman005 8 years ago

Yes. It is trash.

Say, do you hear that? It's the sound of the Reaper.....

[–] magnusplin 8 years ago

I would say Stefan, Phillip (pointless much?), and the three Good Fairies (though calling them good in Maleficent is a stretch) are an insult to the original characters from the 1959 classic, but I don't think the movie as a whole is an insult to Sleeping Beauty.
You want something that's truly insulting to the original film (as well as every other Disney classic)? Watch Disney Channel's Descendants.

[–] Ursulo911 8 years ago

MagnusCrap you are an insult to existence. Descendants is life, Everything and Perfect so *F*U*C*K* off!

[–] magnusplin 8 years ago

you are an insult to existence

Says the butthurt fangirl.

Descendants is life, Everything and Perfect

LOL, nice joke. 

[–] Ursulo911 8 years ago

I'm not butt hurt at all you are butt hurt because you are are miserable about everything and are nothing but a hateful spawn of aberration. Btw I told you I'm a guy so get a brain and a memory which is what you don't don't have so I'm a fanboy not a fangirl. And your existence is a sick, joke and I will tell you about the sick joke you are in a private message.

[–] LetThemEatCake01 8 years ago

At the end of the day people are going to still be watching Sleeping Beauty 500 years from now. Maleficent will just be lumped together with the unfortunate millenium fad of the live action disney films.

[–] littlemermaid22 8 years ago

Yes it totally was an insult to the 1959 version. Feminists claim that this movie is more feminist than the 1959 version because Aurora gets saved by Maleficent & not Phillip. Just because Aurora gets saved by Maleficent & not Phillip doesn't make her any less of a damsel in distress. The 1959 version was actually more feminist because the fairies were powerful whereas in the 2014 version they couldn't do anything. Phillip like you said was useless in this version unlike in the old film. I honestly don't understand why people find this film to be feminist. Maleficent went after Aurora because King Stefan dumper her. How is that feminism? Maleficent was largely motivated by a man whereas in the 1959 version she was not. She just loved to be evil. King Stefan was portrayed as a total skumbag whereas in the old film he was portrayed as a kind & loving father. Tbh he was barley even in the old film. A lot of people these days don't seem understand the definition of feminism. Feminism is not about making men look bad which is what this film essentially did. Feminism is about the equality between the 2 genders & because Maleficent made all the men look bad it is not a feminist movie.