The early word on "Malificent" is...

[BigTxEars]

"Want to see" and "good" are two entirely different things. Case in point? The Star Wars prequels.

And Spidey 2 was a thematic mess. Godzilla was substantially better. The original Spider-Man 2 was worlds better as well, as that film has the second best performance by a villain in comic book superhero film history....behind Ledger in The Dark Knight.

Agree to disagree on Spiderman and Godzilla.

The critics were harsh on the movie, on the same website people still posted they wanted to go see it. They did not let the critics change their minds with their reviews. As I said alot of people do not listen to movie critics. Count me amount them

I prefer

to

The great strength of the Joker as a villain is not that he is out of control crazy, but that he is very much in control crazy.

I prefer Batman Returns as the best of all the Batman movies. They did an outstanding job of making Gotham City come to life. The latest Batman movies looked like they occurred in NYC Gotham is as key to the Batman story as Batman himself IMO.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

Who's Julie?

Woops, meant to write Jolie. As in Angelina, as in the main actress. Sorry for the confusion!

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Jolie is perfection, visuals are strong, story was surprisingly good. All that was missing was an Executive Producer credit for John Lassetire (relax, I kid).

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Just saw it and FYI there is nothing after the credits. You can leave when they start playing "Once Upon a Dream".

I'm with @GiveMeTheMusic on this one. Maybe people should see it first before passing judment on it, instead of basing their opinions on one-paragraph summaries? It makes its point quite well, and manages to fix some of the more glaring plot-holes of the animated feature. Maleficent is still Maleficent, just not evil for evil's sake.

It looks great (minus some CGI creations), Jolie is great and the movie does not suffer from poor casting choices (like last year's Oz) or a needlessly long run-time. More development in the beginning would have made it better, but for me as a Sleeping Beauty fan this was worth seeing.

 

[BigTxEars]

Your opinion is noted.

See and that is all I ever wanted, now we are buddies

 

[Skip]

Yeah, bummer...it's at 54% at Rotten Tomatoes too, for what that's worth...I'll probably still go see it, though.

You know, I just don't get it...aren't there ANY good fantasy-film scriptwriters in Hollywood anymore? "Oz the Great and Powerful" had a really meh script, and now it sounds like "Maleficent" has the same issue. I think part of the overall problem with such films is that ANY live-action fantasy film has to be "edgy" and "dark". But why? Damn, what I wouldn't give for a new live-action fantasy with the enchantment and heart of a "Mary Poppins". But Hollywood is convinced, I guess, that something like that wouldn't succeed today.

Well, I beg to differ. I think they're full of it. I think families are STARVING for something like that. I wish Disney would step up to the plate and give us something like that, instead of following the same tired dark-fantasy tropes. Oh well. I'll see "Maleficent" this weekend, and give my review here afterward, FWIW...

From what I know of the industry, the problem often isn't the initial draft - it's the increasingly mandatory succession of rewrites imposed by Hollywood execs. Screenwriters generally get under-appreciated and their visions trivialized by in-house writing teams who "pretty up" (read: homogenize & dumb down) what could've been initially a fairly strong story with a more consistent tone. I guess the thought process is, we're investing 100+ million in this film, we better have a say in what happens in it... the problem is, the execs are rarely creatives and their forced input often results in shoddier products.

I have no clue if this is what happened with Maleficent, though many critics are observing that it feels like it might have been.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I have no clue if this is what happened with Maleficent, though many critics are observing that it feels like it might have been.

The movie went through a number of writer/director changes. Having seen the final prodct (and knowing it's 90 minutes before credits) my guess is that it spent a lot of time in the editing room too.

 

[SosoDude]

My wife and I watched it yesterday. I thought it was just O.K. My wife really liked it. Thinking back, there were some very cool things about the story, but they seemed like story "filler", maybe? Joile was fantastic, but I was expecting a few more twist and turns in the story.

That being said, the audience at my particular theater clapped at the end when the credits rolled. It was a half full Friday matinee showing .

 

[stevehousse]

My wife and I watched it yesterday. I thought it was just O.K. My wife really liked it. Thinking back, there were some very cool things about the story, but they seemed like story "filler", maybe? Joile was fantastic, but I was expecting a few more twist and turns in the story.

That being said, the audience at my particular theater clapped at the end when the credits rolled. It was a half full Friday matinee showing .

I don't pay attention to critics because it's the general public who has the last say...with that noted, all 3 evening shows at my theater were sell outs and every show had a huge round of applause at the end...I take the opinion of about 4-500 people over what one guy behind a computer had to say about it...I want to see it!

 

[216bruce]

The missus and I both loved it. Theater was sold-out and applauded at the end. It was truly a fairy-tale movie told in an 'oldschool' Hollywood style- no flippant dialogue, pop culture references, excessive, UN-needed violence and dialogue that was just right for it's tone. We'll see it again as we were stuck in the front row and had a little trouble with the action scenes. Fantastic. Just wish that last years "Oz" would have taken the same reverent, non-wise- approach.
Yeah, just go into it withe the idea that it IS NOT Sleeping Beauty and you'll be fine.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Maleficent had a $24 million opening day in the US, but I think that includes the $4.2 million from Thursday night screenings. Still looks like this movie will have a good first weekend at the box office.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

"Maleficent's $24.2 million debut is nearly identical to Oz The Great and Powerful's $24.1 million and noticeably higher than Snow White and the Huntsman's $20.5 million. Its "A" CinemaScore suggests audiences are enjoying it quite a bit more than critics (49 percent on Rotten Tomatoes), and it should hold up decently over the next few days. A weekend gross between $67 and $70 million is likely, which will make this the biggest debut ever for star Angelina Jolie."

- Box Office Mojo

 

[stevehousse]

Disney must have faith in the movie doing well if they already have the Maleficent figure added for Disney Infinity!

Also something to note, the month of May has had zero kids/family movies out so they will all flock to it...(and no I don't count the abomination of a film called Legends of OZ)

It'll do good for the next 2-3 weeks until Dragons 2 comes out...

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Disney must have faith in the movie doing well if they already have the Maleficent figure added for Disney Infinity!

They had Lone Rager figures, and a whole game level, made last year too. I don't think Disney Infinity means much.

 

[DisneyGigi]

I thought the movie was amazing. Like most Disney fans I am a huge Maleficent fan and what they did with the role was great I thought. I am not one to listen to critics either but will admit that I did as far as The Lone Ranger. I skipped it at the theaters and waited and rented it. It was terrible, I couldn't even finish it. Angelina Jolie was amazing as Maleficent and the 3-D was great as well. Most movies to me don't really feel worth the extra money for it but this one did.

 

[tirian]

Oh please.

So I should based my enjoyment of any type of media based on what the critics say? That is just silly beyond belief.

"Well I liked it but Sam Movieton said it lacked a certain depth of character so I guess it really was not very good after all"

These are the same type of "experts" that vote at the Academy Awards

No, they're not.

And someone in society needs to hold standards.

Critics are sometimes wrong (Blade Runner) but usually right (Pinocchio, Wizard of Oz, Fantasia). They've seen enough movies to recognize a stinker, and the good critics enjoy each film within its genre instead of measuring everything to the same standard. (That quality made Roger Ebert a highly respected reviewer; he even gave The Black Cauldron a rave review!)

I don't always agree with critics, but I recognize their value enough to respect their reasons. Audiences have made the Transformers movies some of the biggest hits in movie history. Critics have made sure we don't forget Miyazaki or Wes Anderson.

 

[tirian]

Awww, I'm disappointed. I thought you were going to tell me that The Golden Child (Eddie Murphy) and Ishtar were masterpieces. But the films you name got high praise by many critics, especially Kick , and you are right. All are pretty entertaining in their own way. But you forgot to include Blackfish. I know that is your favorite movie of all time.



I kid.

Anyway, I'm just worried now that Malificent is going to be an unwatchable bomb. I was really looking forward to it.

IMO, it was terrible. I know it's supposed to be a revisionist version and Disney won't make it canon for the theme parks, etc.; yet it would have been more fun to see a truly wicked Maleficant instead of a mopey one.

 

[tirian]

Agree to disagree on Spiderman and Godzilla.

The critics were harsh on the movie, on the same website people still posted they wanted to go see it. They did not let the critics change their minds with their reviews. As I said alot of people do not listen to movie critics. Count me amount them

I prefer

to

The great strength of the Joker as a villain is not that he is out of control crazy, but that he is very much in control crazy.

I prefer Batman Returns as the best of all the Batman movies. They did an outstanding job of making Gotham City come to life. The latest Batman movies looked like they occurred in NYC Gotham is as key to the Batman story as Batman himself IMO.

I disagree with most of your movie taste except this one!

Batman Returns was by far the best version of true, graphic-novel style Batman. The Dark Knight was a very good crime movie that happened to have a caped crusader in it.

 

[stevehousse]

Finally saw it earlier today and the theater was packed! I liked it! Yes, throw everything you know about disneys animated sleeping beauty out the window, which I understand people have a hard time doing...

To me, it reminded me a lot of "Wicked" just without the singing...

Angie was just magnificent in her role! I just can't see any other actor playing that part at all!

The only thing I didn't really care for in the movie was the 3 fairies...I foun them to b quite annoying...

 

[Magenta Panther]

Finally saw it earlier today and the theater was packed! I liked it! Yes, throw everything you know about disneys animated sleeping beauty out the window, which I understand people have a hard time doing...

To me, it reminded me a lot of "Wicked" just without the singing...

Angie was just magnificent in her role! I just can't see any other actor playing that part at all!

The only thing I didn't really care for in the movie was the 3 fairies...I foun them to b quite annoying...

Ah, you said the secret word..."Wicked". Hollywood's obsession with that overrated adaptation of an overrated (and barely readable) book has now robbed 3 villainesses (The Wicked Witch of the West, The Snow Queen, and now Maleficent) of their reasons for existing. When will it all end?

Well, I'm glad you liked it, and I'm glad the movie is doing so well, since it's built around a Disney creation. I'll probably check it out on Netflix.