- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 18,421
- Real Name
- Robert Harris
Some fairy tale characters get a bum rap.
After due diligence, and months of research on Ancestry.com the production team at Disney had all the required information to create a very interesting back-story.
Reading reviews, some may be turned away from Maleficent, and to be honest, I went into it with more than a bit of trepidation. But here's what I've come away with --
Some superb digital work, without which I doubt that the film could have been made. An interesting character, and a relationship that could have used a bit more detailing.
Also, one of the most painful sequences ever to appear in a Disney film -- where losing one's animated parent had become commonplace.
I find it interesting, that once again, as in Frozen, Disney has decided not to release in 3D in the US, but has made 3D available in the UK (apparently region A and B).
The reason that I bring this up, is that the 3D effects are so obvious, even in 2D, that (even not as a fan of 3D) I miss them, and will be importing the UK disc to compare.
As to the Blu-ray quality itself, it's never short of magnificent, in typical Disney fashion. Both image and audio quality are superb, with the audio portion in 7.1.
For those who might consider sharing with young children, I'd think twice before doing so. I don't wish to sound like the Counsel of Bishops, but the film does have that one very problematic sequence.
I enjoyed learning about Maleficent's background. Nice to know what makes folks what they are.
Worth your time on Blu-ray.
Here's a review also worth the time to read, that explains things far better than I, especially in a few words:
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/maleficent-2014
Recommended.
RAH
I didn't expect much from Maleficent but I did buy the 3D version so I could own it. Obviously Angelina Jolie was a great choice for the role I really wanted more. I keep hearing how evil she was, how mean. Honestly I didn't see the same film. maleficents character in this film has been pushed too far but I never got that she truly went full out evil. the publicity etc was over blown in that regard. Angelina is still the main draw to see the film. The image and sound were great but it doesn't make up for a movie that you only wish could have been more interesting. im curious what changes were made to Linda Woolvertons screenplay. I'd like to think hers was tighter and possibly had some startling differences. if not I find the finished product overlong and I love long movies but I never sensed any danger, I'm sure for younger audiences they would be frightened for sure but this retelling does not pack enough punch. the changes of the story all know are rather drastic and come across as being to showy screaming look how different our story is. yet is just comes across dull . The characters of th me three good faires IMO are wasted in this film, now they are all annoying and bickering lacking any kindness to one another. The original animated Classic Sleeping Beauty IMO stylistically was ahead of its time. While the new fad in updating Classic fairy tales has become a new genre believing if we can just get more backstory into the characters it will be better. This isn't always the case. less truly is more. the pure evil of Maleficent in Disney's classic Is just that we don't need to know why. The animated characters are filled with more life then their live action counterparts. The acting and voice charactizations in Sleeping Beauty are impressive. The way Aurora tells the woodland animals of meeting her dream prince in her dreams is full of life. Mark Davis's animation of Maleficent crashing the birth of Aurora is still more powerful then the live action. this is the one scene that the dialogue is identical and while Jolie relishes the role Eleanor Audley owns it. the ending spectacular and the danger element far greater. the music Tchaikovsky score arranged wonderfully. The animated version at 75 mins is pure class.
