I May Have Been Wrong About Maleficent

[ForumSafari]

I'm not sure how important that it's, a film can be pretty ham handed and still engage audiences. I know you did this because feminism and rape etc but you'd see a similar difference between audience experience and your reviews if you did this for the original transformers. I was there. That pee scene? Raised the roof.

 

[Hammartroll]

Props to you Bob. When I watched the movie (after seeing your review) I too got the feeling that it would appeal to many more people than you led on. The only negative reactions to the movie I've seen was from critics, in fact.

Also I want to bring up what you said in your review about Aurora representing an anti-feminist message about how having a baby will make things better again (or something like that). I think that was a miss interpretation. My impression was that to Maleficent, Aurora represented her untainted childhood and eventually took sympathy on her in the same way she would've taken sympathy on her own childhood self. The twist ending (spoiler) where only her own compassion for Aurora could bring her out of coma showed that Maleficent merely needed to love herself again for her to begin to heal.

 

[Kameburger]

I don't really understand this article, kind of sounds like you're thinking out loud a bit? But for what is worth I think the first impression you got really is for many of your listeners the core 'what you need to know' about the movie. That is to say that if I listen to you on a regular basis, something about your initial reactions to films will mirror my own, but being a consumer of film and not a critic I'm not going to go see it in theaters twice to go check and see if my opinion changes too. But also I don't quite clearly understand what conclusion you've reached here, or maybe this is more so meant to be a statement that you simply don't feel 100% about your original conclusion.

Some people are going to see some strong rape language communicated through this movie and some people simply aren't as well. Just because it's mostly "male" critics because its important to distinguish the female and male opinion (except when it isn't), it doesn't mean that this view is wrong either. Maybe it is important that boys or men who watch this movie see the rape imagery as it teaches them what kind of man they shouldn't aspire to be. Maybe it is also important that women see it differently as the story doesn't want to communicate this idea that once you are a victim you will always be a victim message that is a recurring theme among victims of this kind level of abuse.

Jolie has since been very outspoken about rape immediately following this film and it wouldn't surprise me if this film is in some case parallel to this thinking.

 

[ExtraDebit]

The thing is: A lot of the scenes in Maleficient is a metaphor to real life romance, and thus resonated with a lot of us. But like all art, it doesn't speak to everyone, in this case if you haven't experienced love and lost, the movie wouldn't have the same impact as if you did.

Edit: Bob refer to the central arc as "redemption" arc, I feel that's a limited way to look at it. It could very well be seen as an "enlightenment" arc or "maturity" arc. Maleficient was wronged and wanted revenge, it was the central purpose of her being, but when she realized that it didn't matter, isn't it more about "growing out of naivety" and "gets over it" than "redemption"?

It's like that one girl that cheated on you with your best friend and maxed out your credit card then breaks up with you. You wanted to get her back so much that it consumes you, but after a while you got over it and realized that there are things in life that matters more.

I just feel that Bob carries a lot of preconceptions and negativity when watching this movie and not enough empathy, most of his points in the original review and somewhat in this article are so superficial and shallow.

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

Saw Maleficent the other week with my wife and kids (one boy, two girls; my youngest is named Aurora) and they all universally really liked it. They understood the betrayal element without picking up on the sexual assault undertones, which are plenty obvious to any adult.

I find myself, like Bob, reflecting on this movie often. I liked it, but I'm still not sure how I feel about them turning an unadulterated evil character into someone sympathetic and see pros on both sides of the fence. I think there is also an undertone of generational grudges and hatred. The occupants of Stefan's kingdom are indoctrinated as anti-fairy and the fairy folk to a lesser extent are anti-human due to the years of aggression. Then Aurora comes along who is pure and raised outside of "racial" biases and she bridges the gap between human and fairy, giving the fairy folk a reason to hope the bond between them can be healed. It makes me think of the children from opposite sides of countries that used to be at war with each other leaving behind old hatreds.

My wife pointed out to me that perhaps Stefan was trying in a totally misguided, yet altruistic way to protect Maleficent by pretending to kill her and avoiding an invasion of the fairy realm, but I just read him as being purely ambitious.

 

[wizzy555]

I think Maleficent is more tonally consistent or a least understandable if you consider it a story about a woman falling in love with her "unwanted" child - a result of her betrayal. Naturally she starts off hating it, then she begrudgingly feeds it and so on.

The revenge arc is secondary to this.

 

[Dandres]

So hmmm, I took my family to see it, they all got bored halfway through and few wanted to leave. The most common complaint was that they had to cast good looking people because there was so little speaking parts. The movie could have been shortened greatly be removing most of the long staring scenes. I felt the writing was hurried and not fluid. We are not going to see Cinderella when it comes.
Now ?The Edge of Tomorrow? is a great movie.

 

[Kargathia]

And to think that Bob's critics call him an amateurish fanboy who can't see past his own biases. How many OTHER critics do you know that can actually go back and reexamine their own opinions? This is a big part of why I love Bob's reviews so much that he's always my first port of call for an opinion on a movie.

This was why I even felt the urge to leave a comment. I haven't seen the movie, but I can't help but cheer on anyone willing to publicly admit that his original opinion needs some adjustment based on new input.

 

[Keith Fraser]

Something Bob doesn't mention here is the moderate amounts of hate Maleficent has had from people who loved the original Sleeping Beauty - either they don't like Maleficent being made less villainous, or they don't like the good characters from the original being changed. I can kind of see the point - the trampling on the original does come off as a little mean-spirited/overly silly in places (and I think the movie ironically reduces Stefan to a bit of a one-note villain). I mention this partly because he does mention the screaming over Man of Steel supposedly tampering with Superman.

Personally, I loved Maleficent apart from some problems like too much voiceover and the tonal issues Bob mentions, and I don't really understand the hate Man of Steel gets from some quarters. I was glad to get a more serious Superman movie, so I guess my tolerance for "grimdark" is higher.

 

[Trishbot]

Something Bob doesn't mention here is the moderate amounts of hate Maleficent has had from people who loved the original Sleeping Beauty - either they don't like Maleficent being made less villainous, or they don't like the good characters from the original being changed. I can kind of see the point - the trampling on the original does come off as a little mean-spirited/overly silly in places (and I think the movie ironically reduces Stefan to a bit of a one-note villain). I mention this partly because he does mention the screaming over Man of Steel supposedly tampering with Superman.

Personally, I loved Maleficent apart from some problems like too much voiceover and the tonal issues Bob mentions, and I don't really understand the hate Man of Steel gets from some quarters. I was glad to get a more serious Superman movie, so I guess my tolerance for "grimdark" is higher.

I feel like I'm caught in a limbo here.

I'm one of the people who is disappointed in Man of Steel. Yes, they turned Superman into a grimdark, violent killer who finishes his opponent off like he's Mortal Kombat's Kano. That's a problem to me, as someone who grew up admiring him BECAUSE he would never have resorted to that in the stories I read and watched. My love for him as a hero was because he was a hero with such strength, but violence was always his last resort, and even then DEATH was NEVER a resort. Like Batman, part of the fun of reading his stories was seeing how he'd solve a problem without ending a life, especially because his very being was so easily capable of taking it. To paraphrase the Justice League cartoon, his challenge is living in a world of cardboard where every fiber of his being is focused on not causing harm to the people around him. That is his struggle... Man of Steel didn't even TRY in that regard. They have changed Superman's costume, powers, supporting cast, origin, name, EVERYTHING... but he was always the same hero at HEART. When you change the very HEART of a hero, it's just someone else wearing the costume.

And I have the same issues with Maleficent, in the opposite regard. THE reason she was my favorite Disney villain was because she was THE most serious, powerful, and gleefully EVIL character Disney has ever had next to Chernobog the literal demon. "Face me and all the powers of HELL!" she gloats before turning into THE GREATEST DRAGON EVER. She was calculating. She was relentless. She was spiteful and vindictive and you could SEE how much fun she had being evil. No Disney villain, before her or after her, wielded so much power and authority or dominated the screen like she did. When people think of Sleeping Beauty, they think of HER, not the bland girl napping away most of the film. So... yes, taking EVERYTHING I loved about her as a villain and tossing it away, only to tell me the HEART of the character is entirely different, means that what we get is not Maleficent, but a NEW character, in name only, with different goals, a different personality, different powers, different character. It's not the same woman, and she has none of the traits I liked about the original.

So they turned Superman from a hero into a monster, and they turned Maleficent from a monster into a hero.

As a fan of the originals, I'm a bit bummed out. I can only accept them if I think of them as entirely new characters. That's easier done for Maleficent than Superman, considering what each of them represents. Redemption is easier to root for than a downfall.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

I saw what Angelina Jolie herself now confirms was a deliberate rape metaphor and thought "Well, that's a weird place for Disney to take this." But many others saw the start of a powerful feature-length meditation on enduring, surviving and moving on from sexual-assault. I saw Disney straining for a Wicked to call their own and winding up with a gonzo dark-fairytale hodgepodge, but to others it's the (re?)birth of a different kind of iconic Disney woman.

This. This right here.

The day your review of Maleficent came out, I saw it. And then I turned to my partner and said "we need to see this. Today." And so we called up a baby sitter and did so (not because I didn't want my kid to see it, but because my kid can't sit still long enough in a theater - my kid will see it the day it comes out on BluRay, because I will have preordered it).

We watched it and were utterly blown away. I knew the rape metaphor was coming - my partner did not. We both thought it was handled perfectly.

One other thing to consider. You wondered (in your review) why Maleficent wanted to give up her revenge just because she'd befriended Aurora. But here's the thing - Aurora was innocent. Maleficent was harming another woman to in turn harm the man who wronged her. She was doing to someone else what had been done to her - using her as a pawn. That's why she tried to lift the curse - not to forgive Stephan, but to spare Aurora. And, if she's been able to do it, she could have simply taken Aurora to the Moors with her and had her vengeance anyway while granting Aurora's fondest wish. Win/win.

Fun fact - one aspect of Third Wave Feminism is to avoid blaming the "other woman" if your boyfriend cheats on you. It isn't her fault - she probably didn't know you existed. Attacking her is missing the point - it is the boyfriend who did wrong. To quote Scott Pilgrim "I cheated on both of you."

This relates because Maleficent punished Aurora for her father's actions. That was wrong of Maleficent - she needs to put her vengeance where it belongs, not on some random innocent bystander.

So not only is Maleficent an awesome film, it is also one of the best examples of a Third Wave feminist film I've seen in ages.

 

[Nurb]

So... a movie ment to show evil isn't one-dimensional, but every other character you're not ment to like is one-dimensionally evil or stupid, and no one seems to notice or care about this?

Also, Disney actually said "We want a rape metaphor and a mediation on feminism in this movie"? Isn't it more likely Disney just wants to get in on the fad of re-imagining books/movies aimed at children into grimdark "evil is just a grey area" movie aimed at adults... and certain people just read into everything until they got what they wanted out of it?

 

[JimB]

Far too many of the children in the audience are going to experience sexual assault at some point in their lives.

If they haven't already.

Sorry to go there. I'm just saying, in case anyone got the wrong idea, sexual assault isn't something that only happens to girls (or boys, for that matter) of a certain minimum age.

 

[HBaskerville]

So... a movie ment to show evil isn't one-dimensional, but every other character you're not ment to like is one-dimensionally evil or stupid, and no one seems to notice or care about this?

... and certain people just read into everything until they got what they wanted out of it?

Spot on for both comments.

Also, Bob, you were right the first time. That movie is a mess and is pretty terrible. The fact people like it and spend money on it is immaterial. People also liked the Star Trek reboots, the Transformers, etc.

 

[tanatoes]

As a tangentially related aside: I wonder how many people saw "Spring Break Shark Attack" - a movie that shocked me when it covered some of the same metaphorical ground as it sounds like Maleficent goes into. Worth a viewing just for the unexpected depth from a stupid shark movie.

 

[Aramis Night]

I really enjoyed Maleficent. I think people are getting way too caught up in the rape metaphor aspect of this movie. It was a betrayal of trust. While perhaps not everyone can relate with having been sexually assaulted or raped, just about everyone has experienced betrayal by someone they loved at some point. It's universal and to promote this movie as a simple rape-survivor-revenge story is selling this movie short. No actual rape took place. Someone taking advantage of another's trust and vulnerability is what happened. Yes its comparable to rape, but its also comparable to a lot of terrible things that happen to people. Packaging it as rape only serves to give people the wrong idea about whether they could relate to what happens or not and may be unnecessarily turning people away from this movie. In my opinion, that is a shame.

 

[Kashrlyyk]

Prince Charming pointing out that it would be more than a little inappropriate to kiss Sleeping Beauty without her consent? Cheers.

Wow. That is so retarded.

It is inappropriate to try to wake someone up from a very long coma so that they can experience the fullness of life instead of rotting on a bed with a kiss? Really???? If he tried to wake her up by mutilation I would agree.

But this is not about a drunk girl that passed out somewhere and will wake up a few hours later. It's about someone NOT waking up at all.

It is a good message used in the wrong situation.

EDIT: I just realized that probably EVERY single person that cheered thinks that MUTILATING a little boys penis without his consent is A-OK. What a disgusting society America has.

I really enjoyed Maleficent. I think people are getting way too caught up in the rape metaphor aspect of this movie. It was a betrayal of trust. .... Packaging it as rape only serves to give people the wrong idea about whether they could relate to what happens or not and may be unnecessarily turning people away from this movie. In my opinion, that is a shame.

So... a movie ment to show evil isn't one-dimensional, but every other character you're not ment to like is one-dimensionally evil or stupid, and no one seems to notice or care about this?

Also, Disney actually said "We want a rape metaphor and a mediation on feminism in this movie"? Isn't it more likely Disney just wants to get in on the fad of re-imagining books/movies aimed at children into grimdark "evil is just a grey area" movie aimed at adults... and certain people just read into everything until they got what they wanted out of it?

Both of these posts. If you have to turn everyone else into morons and arseholes to make your main character shine at all or a little more your story is shit. Also it's incredible lazy. I wonder what a movie would be like that took the fairy tale and turned everyone into believable characters instead of turning everyone into their opposites. A "Sleeping Beauty" movie where everyone has a at least understandable reason or motivation for their actions.

....
Fun fact - one aspect of Third Wave Feminism is to avoid blaming the "other woman" if your boyfriend cheats on you. It isn't her fault - she probably didn't know you existed. Attacking her is missing the point - it is the boyfriend who did wrong. ..

a) You are reading way too much into the movie.

b) How many people that cheat on their partners meet at the workplace where they most likely openly wear their wedding rings? I think quite a lot. So this "aspect of Third Wave Feminism" is taking the easy way out instead of considering the fault of the woman they just hand out a victim card to the other woman in the situation. Lazy.

 

[Aramis Night]

I really enjoyed Maleficent. I think people are getting way too caught up in the rape metaphor aspect of this movie. It was a betrayal of trust. .... Packaging it as rape only serves to give people the wrong idea about whether they could relate to what happens or not and may be unnecessarily turning people away from this movie. In my opinion, that is a shame.

Both of these posts. If you have to turn everyone else into morons and arseholes to make your main character shine at all or a little more your story is shit. Also it's incredible lazy. I wonder what a movie would be like that took the fairy tale and turned everyone into believable characters instead of turning everyone into their opposites. A "Sleeping Beauty" movie where everyone has a at least understandable reason or motivation for their actions.

I think the claim that everyone else in the film is being dumbed down is too readily accepted without enough actual critical thought given to the circumstances.

Spoiler: King Stephan for example

We see him as a young boy living in poverty who dreams of someday living in the castle. He befriends Maleficent. Joins the court of the king in some lower function. When the king pronounces his willingness to name a heir as anyone who can kill Maleficent, he sees an opportunity. He seeks out Maleficent in the guise of warning her. He drugs her. While she is passed out we can see him struggling with the idea of killing her. He instead decides to cut off her wings and presents them as evidence of her demise. In his perspective he saved her and the moors from further assaults from the king's men while at the same time securing the future he has always desired for himself. From his point of view he could attempt to paint it as a win-win.

It was still a terrible betrayal of trust where she suffered and he becomes king at her expense. But the fact that he struggled with the decision and his guilt and paranoia over Maleficent drives him further into madness as the film goes on. I wouldn't say he was made into a more one-dimensional character compared to Sleeping Beauty. The opposite in fact. I think this movie served to flesh him out far more than he ever was in the animated Sleeping Beauty movie just as it did for Maleficent herself.

Spoiler: Her Crow familiar Diablo/Diaval

is another character given far more background and fleshing out of character then previously presented. Even going so far as to act as Maleficent's conscience as well as protector/valet. I was almost wondering if he in fact was going to wind up being the one to deliver true loves kiss given his fondness/concern for aurora.

It just seem's silly to me to try to make the argument that the original story had a lot of deep characters running around by comparison. Sure, not every character even among the main characters were especially fleshed out in Maleficent, but the original Sleeping Beauty made 1 dimensional charichitures out of everyone.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

EDIT: I just realized that probably EVERY single person that cheered thinks that MUTILATING a little boys penis without his consent is A-OK. What a disgusting society America has.

Nope. My son remains uncut because I am absolutely against genital mutilation in any form.

Actually, it was a discussion right here on the Escapist that convinced me that circumcision was wrong.

a) You are reading way too much into the movie.

No, I'm not. At least not about this. How is "Maleficent didn't want to hurt Aurora because it wasn't Aurora's fault" reading too much into stuff - it's right there in the movie!

If you want to hear me read too much into stuff, then we'll talk about the implication of bisexuality in the movie.

b) How many people that cheat on their partners meet at the workplace where they most likely openly wear their wedding rings? I think quite a lot. So this "aspect of Third Wave Feminism" is taking the easy way out instead of considering the fault of the woman they just hand out a victim card to the other woman in the situation. Lazy.

Actually, your rampant generalization is what's lazy.

IF the "other woman" saw a wedding ring - they are possible to remove, after all - then it would be both people's fault. In that situation.

However, the reason for the Third Wave Feminist stance is because many women default to being angry at "that homewrecker" even if said 'homewrecker' had no idea that she was wrecking anything, and without placing any (or at least not a fair amount) of blame on the person doing the cheating. This is because, in America, male sexuality of often praised (so a man cheating is somehow okay) whereas female sexuality is demonized. Thus, people assume that the other woman must have seduced the cheating husband, when just as often it was the cheating husband who did the seducing.

You seem to be taking a lot of issue with a stance of "put the blame where it is actually deserved". Remember, third wave feminism is the sex positive one - we are big on personal responsibility. I mean, seriously, why would you argue to support "put the blame where it doesn't belong" - that makes no sense.

Note: If you were assuming that third wave feminism always blames the man, because men are evil, then you're thinking about the wrong feminism. That's militant second wave.

 

[Nurb]

Note: If you were assuming that third wave feminism always blames the man, because men are evil, then you're thinking about the wrong feminism. That's militant second wave.

The whole movie was about showing Maleficent isn't "just evil" and evil really is just a grey area. It was that she was betrayed (which certain people read as "rape metaphor"), and does bad things because she's angry.

However, she's put in this position by a one-dimensionally evil man who "raped" her, and one-dimensional stupid male characters antagonize her. None of them get the "shades of grey" or "I have my tragic reasons" treatment.

So yea, on the level you examine it; It's a bad man's fault for everything Maleficent does, and because of the severity, she can be absolved of her bad deeds and be seen as sympathetic.