DVDizzy Forum

atlanticaunderthesea wrote: Though I do have one question; how come it's coming out in 2014 ? Isnt that a vast way off to begin production so far in advance ?

Well they finished filming Oz the Great and Powerful in 2011 I think? So it look's like, There will be a gap for marketing possibly


CAN SOMEONE ANSWER

Is the filming all going to be done in "the real word" or are they going to use CGI like in Alice and OZ?

It probably also gives time for the visual effects team to make the CGI as good as possible.

Disney Duster wrote:

lord-of-sith wrote:Australian actor Brenton Thwaites was cast as Prince Phillip!

Oh man he's cute, and he looks like Phillip! That good! But he's 23...and will be macking on 13 or 14 year old Elle Fanning. That's creepy!

Well, in the Disney movie, the 1959 one, Aurora was (turning) sixteen and Phillip was most likely five or six years older than her and that movie was set during a time when marrying a girl fourteen or sixteen years old wasn't really a big deal. It was part of tradition then.

DisneyDude2010 wrote:She looks good!

disneyprincess11 Stopping quoting images!

Okay, okay. Sorry -__-

DisneyDude2010 wrote:
CAN SOMEONE ANSWER

Is the filming all going to be done in "the real word" or are they going to use CGI like in Alice and OZ?

I guess they're filming, then adding/editing CGI later.

lord-of-sith wrote: Australian actor Brenton Thwaites was cast as Prince Phillip!

http://www.hypable.com/2012/05/31/disne ... ina-jolie/

I can see the resemblance. He will be great as Philip!

So they decided to turn Maleficent into some kind of faun (bit like a female version of dr. dillamond....check angie's ears, )...Looks pretty Narnia-like to me

What's interesting is that in the black leather costume the horns look much smaller, so maybe it's this kind-off story were a girl with horns gets born, gets picked on because she's different and decides to cut of her horn leaving herself scarred

Toky wrote:So they decided to turn Maleficent into some kind of faun (bit like a female version of dr. dillamond....check angie's ears, )...Looks pretty Narnia-like to me

Oh good catch on the ears! I didn't even notice that! Very interesting...hmm...

Disney Duster wrote:Yea. Yea they'll spoil it all. Her horns look more like a headdress to me though. I don't know why you think it looks like she has real horns.

Did you even look at the on set photos of her walking with the cattle? The ones where her hair is down (no headdress) and horns coming out of her head????

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:Though I do have one question; how come it's coming out in 2014 ? Isnt that a vast way off to begin production so far in advance ?

DisneyDude2010 wrote:Well they finished filming Oz the Great and Powerful in 2011 I think? So it look's like, There will be a gap for marketing possibly

estefan wrote:It probably also gives time for the visual effects team to make the CGI as good as possible.

What estefan said, for both Maleficent and Oz the Great and Powerful.

DisneyJedi wrote:Well, in the Disney movie, the 1959 one, Aurora was (turning) sixteen and Phillip was most likely five or six years older than her and that movie was set during a time when marrying a girl fourteen or sixteen years old wasn't really a big deal. It was part of tradition then.

I never thought about it, but I guess he could have been 6 when he met her as a baby. But it could have been as young as 4 too. I know Snow White's prince was only 18 when she was 14 though.

But in their real life ages, this Australian actor will be at least 8 years older than Elle Fanning, so it's still kinda ehhh because she's not even the legal age of consent yet (which is 16). I know in the time the movie's set it would have been acceptable but today I actually wonder if they'll run into legal problems.

DancingCrab wrote:Did you even look at the on set photos of her walking with the cattle? The ones where her hair is down (no headdress) and horns coming out of her head????

...well taking another look I get more why you all would think that way, but not only do the horns still look like nothing organically protruding out of that skull in color or anything, it also doesn't look like her natural hairline on her forehead, it looks like there's something covering her forehead to me. It looks like she could be wearing a skull cap or something. I don't know. I guess we'll have to se who's right later.

Disney Duster wrote:

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:Though I do have one question; how come it's coming out in 2014 ? Isnt that a vast way off to begin production so far in advance ?

DisneyDude2010 wrote:Well they finished filming Oz the Great and Powerful in 2011 I think? So it look's like, There will be a gap for marketing possibly

estefan wrote:It probably also gives time for the visual effects team to make the CGI as good as possible.

What estefan said, for both Maleficent and Oz the Great and Powerful.

DisneyJedi wrote:Well, in the Disney movie, the 1959 one, Aurora was (turning) sixteen and Phillip was most likely five or six years older than her and that movie was set during a time when marrying a girl fourteen or sixteen years old wasn't really a big deal. It was part of tradition then.

I never thought about it, but I guess he could have been 6 when he met her as a baby. But it could have been as young as 4 too. I know Snow White's prince was only 18 when she was 14 though.

But in their real life ages, this Australian actor will be at least 8 years older than Elle Fanning, so it's still kinda ehhh because she's not even the legal age of consent yet (which is 16). I know in the time the movie's set it would have been acceptable but today I actually wonder if they'll run into legal problems.

DancingCrab wrote:Did you even look at the on set photos of her walking with the cattle? The ones where her hair is down (no headdress) and horns coming out of her head????

...well taking another look I get more why you all would think that way, but not only do the horns still look like nothing organically protruding out of that skull in color or anything, it also doesn't look like her natural hairline on her forehead, it looks like there's something covering her forehead to me. It looks like she could be wearing a skull cap or something. I don't know. I guess we'll have to se who's right later.

I thought they were coming out of her head too, but look at the pics, Angie has a stunt double! That stunt double is clearly wearing a headpiece with horns, so now I'm in doubt(She could be some sort of Druid or Pagan enchantress) And a headpiece would explain the shorter horns on the leather outfit...

But still I think Disney is going crazy on this and they will give her real horns....

Disney Duster wrote:Don't give up hope. Maybe she'll be really good. I don't know why you think she's so bad, but we'll see.

Ehh, she just...

I never really saw anything overly spectacular about her. And she's kinda over-rated in my opinion. As I mentioned before, there are probably several other actresses out there that could do a good job as Maleficent-- Possibly better.


But, maybe she will do a good job. It's just...

Maleficent's my favorite character of all-time, and Angelina Jolie is just... Blah, in my opinion. I'm nervous that they'll do something that could somehow ruin it(and, as mentioned before, NOT a fan of Angelina Jolie)...

She's already ruined looking so different and with the good fairies called Knotgrass, don't ya think? lol

I'm kidding. She can't be ruined because this movie isn't really the true story of the Maleficent Walt Disney and his men created, it's not how they always imagined Maleficent to be. It's just an interpretation that some people will think is the true one if they like it and think it fits enough...or are dumb enough.

Disney Duster wrote:She's already ruined looking so different and with the good fairies called Knotgrass, don't ya think? lol

I'm kidding. She can't be ruined because this movie isn't really the true story of the Maleficent Walt Disney and his men created, it's not how they always imagined Maleficent to be. It's just an interpretation that some people will think is the true one if they like it and think it fits enough...or are dumb enough.

True, good point.

Well, even if the character was somehow ruined in this film, I'll always love the Maleficent that appeared in Disney's 1959 Animated Film.


"... Not that I'd want to pick out curtains, or anything..." ~Genie

O my god, they are going to make her fly.....





more pics on http://collider.com/maleficent-images-a ... ie/175762/

I've been following this movie's progress ever since rumours first surfaced back in what was it? 2009? I can't believe they're now ACTUALLY filming it! It sounded like nothing but a pipe-dream for hardcore disney fans to begin with, but now it's ACTUALLY happening! A movie based on the life of Maleficent!

The pictures look fantastic too! I wasn't sure about her casting, but I have to say, Angelina Jolie certainly looks the part! The on-set images posted so far seem to show a young maleficent, and the horns appear to be part of her body too, which answers the question most Disney fans have always had about the character. As for flying, well I guess she is a supernatural being. Is she a fairy in this? Do we know yet?

Also, I hope that the names of the fairies for the movie were wrong when they were reported a few months back, I hope they'll still be Flora, Fauna and Merryweather - it'd be great to see some images of them surface too! Seeing the backstory of not only Maleficent but my favourite characters as well would be amazing!

Is Tim Burton still attached to this in any way? I didn't notice him credited on IMDB anywhere so I wasn't sure.

Patrick wrote:Is Tim Burton still attached to this in any way? I didn't notice him credited on IMDB anywhere so I wasn't sure.

Nope he's not now.

Wikipedia (Maleficent) wrote:Reports surfaced online in May 2011 stating that Burton had left the project to focus on his other upcoming projects; Disney began to look for a replacement director

Just to point it out, Maleficent does fly in the original film. She flies from her tower to the front of King Stefan's castle before turning into the dragon. Now she doesn't quite stay in her human form, rather, turning into a shooting fire-work type thing, but it stands to reason that she can fly.

lord-of-sith wrote:Just to point it out, Maleficent does fly in the original film. She flies from her tower to the front of King Stefan's castle before turning into the dragon. Now she doesn't quite stay in her human form, rather, turning into a shooting fire-work type thing, but it stands to reason that she can fly.

Yes, I was thinking about that earlier when I first saw the photos.

As for the three fairies, I just did a little reading online and apparently the final casting is Imelda Staunton and Lesley Manville as Flittle and Knotgrass (not sure which way round though) and Juno Temple as the third fairy, Thistletwit.

Assuming that the fairies are still based on the 1959 film version, it makes sense to have two older women and a younger woman, making Juno Temple "Merryweather". I never imagined Merryweather to be quite that young though, although this IS a prequel/backstory type of film so I guess it could make sense. The article that I read stated that the three women were playing the fairies who took Aurora into the forest to raise her and protect her from Maleficent though, so it makes sense.

I just cannot understand the reason for the name changes though. Oh well, a lot can happen in the next year and a half. Maybe the original names just didn't suit this new take on the story. Once it's still the same characters though I guess I don't mind.

Is King "Henry" actually King Hubert too? it seems to fit and wouldn't be too drastic a change. Can't wait for more updates on the story though!

Will the three fairies play much role in this film? I almost imagine they--and Aurora--will be side characters in Maleficent’s story. Although I prefer the original names for the fairies over what they’ve been given, I can’t say as the name changes matter that much. The same people who would dislike them are the same who wouldn’t like the film in the end regardless, so I can’t say as it makes much of a difference in the long run.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Will the three fairies play much role in this film? I almost imagine they--and Aurora--will be side characters in Maleficent’s story. Although I prefer the original names for the fairies over what they’ve been given, I can’t say as the name changes matter that much. The same people who would dislike them are the same who wouldn’t like the film in the end regardless, so I can’t say as it makes much of a difference in the long run.

Oh I have no doubt that they will be side characters, it's just that seeing as they're my favourite Disney characters it'll be nice to see them making an appearance in some form, no matter how small their role is.

And no, the names don't really matter that much, and I really do hope that I like the film, I just find that the name change is a little strange seeing as the characters are based on pre-existing characters established over fifty years ago.

It'll also be interesting to see how they work into the story overall. They're described as neglectful and superficial in several articles about the film, which sort of reminds me of Wicked. Sort of like Maleficent is the Wicked Witch of the West and the Fairies are more like Glinda, in that they appear to be good, and are essentially, but they can be quite self-absorbed and shallow at the same time.

I can't wait to find out how Stephan's own fairy lineage figures into the story as well. This film really does sound like it could be great.