Maleficent

[jgsugden]

...There is another thread (Man of Steel) where we talk about how the IP holder can take different slants on their character over the years.  The example used is Batman - starts grimdark, goes campy, returns to grimdark.  Same shit here.  This is misunderstood, still pretty nasty, but also kind of good Maleficent.  Were any of you horrified when Batman returned to grimdark?

If your idea of grimdark is 1940s Batman... "Holy Candycorn, Batman... the Mad Hatter stole the key to the Pumpkin Festival!"

The discussion in the Superman thread turns on the changes to the core elements of a deeply developed character.  Superman has lived in the comics since the 1930s with a set of core character traits that define not just him, but provide the pillar by which the entire pantheon of heroes in his universe are judged against.  Maleficiant had a few pages of text and a few minutes of screen time to define her - before various artists grabbed a hold of and manipulated her to suit their needs.  Superman has the depth of a protracted protagonist, while Maleficient has the shallow character of a melodrama villain.  You can't mess with core and deep without changing the essence of a character, but you can bend undedeveloped and shallow all you want as there is nothing to defile by adding your twist.

[Phildo]

I've just now decided to be arbitrarily upset with this film, too.  It's ruining my parents' childhood, god dammit!

[tazelbain]

Just because you take my grandma's skin and wrap it around some other woman doesn't make her my new grandma.

[Ingmar]

Disney did a version of Rumplestiltskin?

[Merusk]

Not unless you count little golden books.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apZuO1nwSvQ

[Riggswolfe]

Disney did a version of Rumplestiltskin?

No, I just accidentally put the word Disney in front of Fairy Tales. My bad. That's been corrected now.

[Maven]

The discussion in the Superman thread turns on the changes to the core elements of a deeply developed character.  

Is this all part of some meta-argument you're having? Any creative that gets his hand on a property is going to do their own spin of it, and it's going to be compared to a traditional vision that people have come to know because A) that traditional vision exists! and B) has existed for a significant period of time to build association and support.

Does the brand serve the creative, or the creative the brand? It's not so black and white but I'd say its more the former. But the 'best' version of something doesn't necessarily exist in the past... or the future! In fact the 'best' may be how it reflects the times its representation finds itself in.

Modify: I'm mistaken about "best" qualities vs. "core" qualities -- however the stream-lined, "core" of a character can be influenced by future iterations (Iron Man), which requires creatives to be able to explore their own, different interpretations.

[Typhon]

[snip]If your idea of grimdark is 1940s Batman... "Holy Candycorn, Batman... the Mad Hatter stole the key to the Pumpkin Festival!"
[snip]

You know, I ought to know better than to put a reference to a comic book character in any post on f13 because you are kind of pathological about the topic.  And I absolutely know better than to respond to anything you say about because it's no-win.

But this...  Batman kills without remorse in those early comics, pre-Robin.  Gradually he does so less and less, then not at all, especially after the introduction of Robin.  They reverse that in the 80s, at least in the movies (which is actually what we're talking about).  So, from that perspective, yeah, Batman is dark.  Vigilante = dark.  Seems pretty simple.  Regardless of the names of the villains, or the language used to describe things, killing someone in premeditated cold blood for vengeance seems pretty dark.

So, back to Maleficent, I actually see a death-like-sleep (yes, I know that she says, "sleep-like-death" in the trailer, but that is fucking stupid, is she asleep or dead? which is it?!) as the bigger twist of the knife than straight-up killing her - especially if it's only Sleeping Beauty that sleeps.  Unchanging, not alive, not dead.  A constant reminder of their betrayal and failure to protect their child.

That said, clearly Disney is making the character more sympathetic, and it's likely that she develops a soft spot for Aurora and ends up getting herself killed to protect the her.  I will laugh at this part.  I will laugh long and loud thinking about how Zod is furiously, though impotently, shaking his fist at the TV (surely he's not going to see it in the theater).

I'm actually laughing as I type this.  I had no intention to see this in the theaters, but now I just might have to.  We all have a bit of spite in us, after all.

[rk47]

Cant wait for Rita Repulsa the movie. I really want to know how she came to decide to attack Earth. A Zordon Origins would be nice.

[SurfD]

Cant wait for Rita Repulsa the movie. I really want to know how she came to decide to attack Earth. A Zordon Origins would be nice.

She just wanted more living space for the Putties.

[Maven]

Cant wait for Rita Repulsa the movie. I really want to know how she came to decide to attack Earth. A Zordon Origins would be nice.

The audience eats this shit up!

[Signe]

My sister said she wanted to see this so I thought I'd read this thread.  I think I've a horrible mistake.  I have no idea what anyone is talking about and I'm not entirely sure this is about the film at all.  Or maybe it's me.  I think in light of not being able to follow a thread about a Disney film, I will hit the sack early and wake up late. 

PS  I forget why we dislike Angelina.  Is it the lips?  I LOVE her dad.

[Lantyssa]

It's the Lips.

[Phildo]

Since Signe reminded us that this is a Disney movie, I'll reserve judgement until the inevitable direct-to-video Maleficent 2.

[Riggswolfe]

I took my daughter to a sneak preview of this tonight. We both enjoyed it. It takes a turn for the predictable but it was still a fun reimagining and it has a great visual style. My only major complaint with the movie is


Overall, to be blunt, this forum is far too cynical for most of you to enjoy it but if you go in with the mindset of "this is a reimagined fairy tale" and just go with it you'll enjoy it.

[SurfD]

[Riggswolfe]

[01101010]

I just came back from the matinee (because I am a cheap bastard) and I enjoyed it for what it was. The sore taste Jolie leaves in my mouth after one of her movies was graciously missing from this.

[Samwise]

The sore taste Jolie leaves in my mouth

I think that's herpes.