Tangled wrote:
The main thing I remember is more of a romantic relationship between the Hatter and Alice. They kiss twice in earlier drafts of the script, which, like Maleficent, have been leaked online. Yeah...I can see why that would be taken out. Good choice.
There's probably more, but I just skimmed through the script, and I haven't watched the Tim Burton Alice since 2010. I think Burton may have added more minor fantasy and action scenes and changed loads of the dialogue, which is a given. The plot seems the same.
Kind of similarly to how a romantic relationship between Malefient and Diaval was referenced in the leaked script? I don't think it was as overt as the Alice/Hatter relationship was, but it was definitely present. Glad that was axed, I was actually impressed that, despite Maleficent and Diaval being opposite gender characters being around each other for 16+ years, there was never any romantic interest shown between them. Pretty unexpected if you ask me.
That don't stop the shippers from shipping.
... Of course, they also ship Maleficent and Aurora, so...
Musical Master wrote:7. In the Hightopp Clan attack scene, there was a moment where the Cheshire Cat tries to help a group of children escape but when he sees the Jabberwocky, he vanishes and the Jabberwocky kills the group; hence why the Hatter said: "You ran out on them to save your own skin".
Thank you for posting this. I always wished they had explained more what was meant by the line the Mad Hatter gives the Cheshire Cat. I wish the White Queen and the Cheshire Cat had both got more screentime.
Listening to most often lately:
Ariana Grande ~ "we can't be friends (wait for your love)"
Ariana Grande ~ "imperfect for you"
Kacey Musgraves ~ "The Architect"
Well, saw this again on Sunday, and much to my surprise, the cinema was FULL. As in, we had to get Première seats as all the regular seats were gone !
I thought it would be myself and a few others possibly, not a full jam packed cinema. This third (and final) viewing inspired me to downloaded the soundtrack; absolutely embraced it when I saw it again, especially 'Maleficent Flies' and 'The Christening'.
Atlantica wrote:Well, saw this again on Sunday, and much to my surprise, the cinema was FULL. As in, we had to get Première seats as all the regular seats were gone !
I thought it would be myself and a few others possibly, not a full jam packed cinema. This third (and final) viewing inspired me to downloaded the soundtrack; absolutely embraced it when I saw it again, especially 'Maleficent Flies' and 'The Christening'.
You went a third time? I'd love to see it again on the big screen, but I think I'd feel a bit guilty, since I already saw it 2 times already. As for the soundtrack, yes, it is amazing. The "Christening" track is my personal favorite, along with "The Power of the Spindle". Those two have powerful music and they really make their respective scenes more intense. I'm planning to get the official novelization of the film, when I'll go to France, along with the film's 2015 calendar.
Atlantica wrote:Well, saw this again on Sunday, and much to my surprise, the cinema was FULL. As in, we had to get Première seats as all the regular seats were gone !
I thought it would be myself and a few others possibly, not a full jam packed cinema.
I had this same experience. I thought I had waited so long to see the film that, thankfully, the theater would be closer to empty, but there were so many people...
Listening to most often lately:
Ariana Grande ~ "we can't be friends (wait for your love)"
Ariana Grande ~ "imperfect for you"
Kacey Musgraves ~ "The Architect"
Linda Woolverton did say in an interview that she will take a break from writing fairytales (or working for Disney if I'm guessing) and is planing on doing other genres for television (which does translate to freelance) which I think will suit her just fine.
Disney, Pixar, Rodgers and Hammerstein, and Cinema fan
Atlantica wrote:Seeing this again at the weekend, will be the third time now.
Really really excited to see it one last time on the big screen, and also to see the perfection that is Angelina's make up....stunning. I've been trying to create the same red lip but can't find the right one!!
MAC Cosmetics did her makeup for the movie, and released the products they produced for and used on Angelina in the film-including her lipstick. The lipstick is called True Loves Kiss. It's sold out online but I'm sure you could find a new one on ebay if you're willing to pay above retail. HTH
Thank you for that JohnnyWeir; I keep hearing conflicting reports of what they used on her …. some say it was the MAC range, others say that is isn't the same shade as the one she has on in the film, which is so annoying !
I don't have an ebay account sadly So seems I've missed the boat on this one …
I saw this 4 times in theater... And I didn't even like it that much! Well I actually I enjoyed it a lot but I just kept seeing it with different people.
ANYWAY, I thought it was good. I didn't like how much they changed from Sleeping Beauty but I guess it is a reimagining after all.
1. Loved Angelina Jolie as Maleficent, she owned the role but I knew she would ^.^
2. Loved the origin story as to why she puts the curse instead of just plain being mad cause she wasn't invited to the christening.
3. Music was good, visuals were good, character relationships was were bland. Aurora doesn't actually talk to the fairies until she's ready to live with Mal. Not to mention her and Mal only shared one solid conversation because it was a plot point!
I was kinda hoping Maleficent would have stayed evil and all that jazz but eh, I liked her as a good guy character... Overall I give it 3/5 stars.
AND... Now that Maleficent made them a gajillion dollars (about 0.004% thanks to me) I'm gonna need Disney to make a live-action URSULA movie but I swear if they make Ursula nice and her Ariel become BFF's I'm gonna slap someone at Disney.
So I suppose we can expect a sequel or two to this bloated, uninspired, artless trash? I was wholly disappointed by Maleficent. Not in the sense that I expected it to be any good - of course not. With a script penned by someone as uniquely talentless as Linda Woolverton, I anticipated awfulness. Yet, woefully, I hoped for somewhat interesting rubbish. Something with such poor quality that you could really get your teeth into it. Something it would be fun to tear apart. Alas, Maleficent is an empty vacuum of a film, a cold unfeeling plastic structure adorned with the staples of whatever is trendy and current.
Jolie's performance was, at best, a pale imitation of the excellent original character developed by Marc Davis & Eleanor Audley. Her predictable character arc, gravitating from woman scorned to surrogate mother, is hardly a feminist revolution. The fact the director was inexperienced was ubiquitously obvious from scene to scene. And as for the production design, the visuals - perhaps the one thing that might just have been worth watching - were darkly-lit (creating an atmosphere of banality to substitute the genuine uncertainty and fear permeating the 1959 classic) and recycled tired old images and effects. It was an exercise in squeezing the credulous out of money for the sake of an inane light show. The very idea that it is tied in any way to the masterpiece that is the original is too laughable to cause revulsion.
Dr Frankenollie wrote:So I suppose we can expect a sequel or two to this bloated, uninspired, artless trash? I was wholly disappointed by Maleficent. Not in the sense that I expected it to be any good - of course not. With a script penned by someone as uniquely talentless as Linda Woolverton, I anticipated awfulness. Yet, woefully, I hoped for somewhat interesting rubbish. Something with such poor quality that you could really get your teeth into it. Something it would be fun to tear apart. Alas, Maleficent is an empty vacuum of a film, a cold unfeeling plastic structure adorned with the staples of whatever is trendy and current.
Jolie's performance was, at best, a pale imitation of the excellent original character developed by Marc Davis & Eleanor Audley. Her predictable character arc, gravitating from woman scorned to surrogate mother, is hardly a feminist revolution. The fact the director was inexperienced was ubiquitously obvious from scene to scene. And as for the production design, the visuals - perhaps the one thing that might just have been worth watching - were darkly-lit (creating an atmosphere of banality to substitute the genuine uncertainty and fear permeating the 1959 classic) and recycled tired old images and effects. It was an exercise in squeezing the credulous out of money for the sake of an inane light show. The very idea that it is tied in any way to the masterpiece that is the original is too laughable to cause revulsion.
I share your opinion and you express yourself really good, you have indeed pointed out all that is wrong with this movie. I do hope that we will not get a sequel, but that we rather get more Disney live action fairytales (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin etc) and that these movies will be directed by a more experienced director and most important - that the script will be penned by someone who actually have a talent for writing screenplays. Future live action Disney movies should hopefully be more in the spirit of their animated counterparts.
Favorite Disney-movies: Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Tangled, Frozen, Pirates, Enchanted, Prince of Persia, Tron, Oz The Great and Powerful
Dr Frankenollie wrote:So I suppose we can expect a sequel or two to this bloated, uninspired, artless trash? I was wholly disappointed by Maleficent. Not in the sense that I expected it to be any good - of course not. With a script penned by someone as uniquely talentless as Linda Woolverton, I anticipated awfulness. Yet, woefully, I hoped for somewhat interesting rubbish. Something with such poor quality that you could really get your teeth into it. Something it would be fun to tear apart. Alas, Maleficent is an empty vacuum of a film, a cold unfeeling plastic structure adorned with the staples of whatever is trendy and current.
Jolie's performance was, at best, a pale imitation of the excellent original character developed by Marc Davis & Eleanor Audley. Her predictable character arc, gravitating from woman scorned to surrogate mother, is hardly a feminist revolution. The fact the director was inexperienced was ubiquitously obvious from scene to scene. And as for the production design, the visuals - perhaps the one thing that might just have been worth watching - were darkly-lit (creating an atmosphere of banality to substitute the genuine uncertainty and fear permeating the 1959 classic) and recycled tired old images and effects. It was an exercise in squeezing the credulous out of money for the sake of an inane light show. The very idea that it is tied in any way to the masterpiece that is the original is too laughable to cause revulsion.
I share your opinion and you express yourself really good, you have indeed pointed out all that is wrong with this movie. I do hope that we will not get a sequel, but that we rather get more Disney live action fairytales (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin etc) and that these movies will be directed by a more experienced director and most important - that the script will be penned by someone who actually have a talent for writing screenplays. Future live action Disney movies should hopefully be more in the spirit of their animated counterparts.