Some things are better left alone. Sometimes, those who wear white hats
shouldn’t have them tarnished while those who don the black version shouldn’t
have them lightened. Obviously, in life
it’s better to understand how people become the way they are but as far as some
forms of entertainment, absolutes are better where dramatic tension is
concerned. Case in point: Disney’s
“Maleficent,” the studios reimagining of the “Sleeping Beauty” tale that sheds
some light on the title character, a starkly drawn villain in previous versions
of the story who, here, is seen as a misunderstood, scorned woman whose dark
deeds are all but justified. The success
of the novel “Wicked” and the wildly successful Broadway adaptation of it have
made tales of this sort fashionable and while that story worked primarily because
it explored every angle of the Wicked Witch of the West’s backstory, the
screenplay here by Linda Woolverton is content with giving us a simplistic
explanation of how an innocent fairy could become a paragon of evil.
There’s a civil war brewing at the beginning of the film as
two kingdoms – one filled with traditional human folk, the other a magical land
replete with fairies, trolls and other enchanted creatures – exist side-by-side
in a tenuous peace. While the denizens of the mystical realm wish to be left
alone, the human’s curiosity as to what lies beyond their border has reached a
fever pitch. When a young boy, Stefan
(Michael Higgins) trespasses into the forest and is caught stealing a crystal,
he encounters Maleficent (Isobelle Molloy), a powerful winged fairy,and he’s
immediately smitten. They form a deep
friendship between them and as time passes it begins to resemble love. Eventually, King Henry (Kenneth Cranham) invades
Maleficent’s (Angelina Jolie) home but is run off and wounded by her. As a
result, he puts a price on her head – his crown being the prize – and the
now-grown Stefan (Sharlto Copley, delivering a one-note performance) sets out
to find his former friend. He commits an
act that drives a wedge between the two lands, irreparably scars Maleficent,
and ultimately results in her placing a dreaded curse on his daughter Aurora
(Elle Fanning) years in the future.
Once we reach this point in the story, it plays out pretty
much as Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty” did with a few key exceptions. The title character crashes the party
celebrating Aurora’s birth, cast that dreaded spell – you know, 16th birthday, the spinning wheel, eternal sleep, etc., etc. – and then bides her
time. However, in the years leading up
to the fated birthday, Maleficent, tormenting the three diligent aunts (Imelda
Staunton, Lesley Manville and Juno Temple) assigned to raise Aurora in a remote
cottage, comes to love the girl, so much so that she attempts to retract her
curse but is forced to watch fate play its hand.
Woolverton goes out of her way to cast Maleficent in a more
favorable light, and for the most part she succeeds as the character’s journey
from dark to light is gradual and benefits from Jolie’s reserved performance in
this section of the film. The writer
provides her with a worthy foil as well in her faithful crow Diaval (Sam
Riley), who we now learn was once a man she saved and who can be transformed
into any creature she sees fit. (His
appearance as a dragon is one of the film’s highlights.) He proves to be
Maleficent’s Jiminy Cricket, nudging her towards the high road until she sees
the error of her ways. However, this all
takes a bit too long – scenes are needlessly stretched and there’s too many
failed gags with the aunts – and you can feel Woolverton looking for ways to
pad her thin tale.
Without a doubt, the film rests on Jolie’s shoulders and she
carries the enterprise with ease.
Sporting wonderfully sharp angles – reminiscent of the Bride of
Frankenstein – and a wardrobe a dominatrix would kill for, the actress glares,
sneers and preens her way though the production, refusing to be upstaged by the
copious special effects and fantastic sets that surround here. Having been
absent from the screen for four years, it’s easy to forget what a formidable
presence she is and her turn here left me hoping she’d choose more worthy
projects in the future to showcase her talent than she has in the past.
In the end, despite Jolie’s fine efforts and exceptional
production and art design, “Maleficent” feels oddly off. It all comes down to a question of
perspective or, as my assistant Megan Bostaph stated in reference to the title
character, “Once she became good, she wasn’t really that interesting,” which
sums up the problem with the movie.
While telling Maleficent’s backstory may satisfy the curiosity of some
and increase Disney’s coffers, it doesn’t necessarily make for a compelling story.
This article appears in May 29 – Jun 4, 2014.
