Angie pouts and Michelle plots in this mixed bag sequel
The movie world is full of far too many unnecessary sequels; and here’s another. Coming out this weekend, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil does everything it can in order to try and make itself appear worthy of its existence, from its ideology, to a delicious villain, to a wonderfully overblown finale. It’s all very fun and well-intentioned, but the movie does itself no favors by being far too heavy-handed on its themes and especially in the way it doesn’t know where to take its title character, emotionally as well as physically. Although they try, it’s a struggle that the makers of Maleficent: Mistress of Evil never know how to solve; a fact made even more glaring when it becomes evident that the film’s secondary lead (and sole villain) is really the one worth watching. The movie never really gets beyond ANY of its issues to justify it being on theater screens, it succeeds in both giving Michelle Pfeiffer a chance to camp it up in a lead role, and in being far better than other film sub-par sequels (looking at you, The Huntsman: Winter’s War).
Everyone’s favorite dark fairy, Maleficent (Angelina Jolie), continues to live in the magical land of the moors with her devoted goddaughter Aurora (Elle Fanning) and loyal aide Diaval (Sam Riley) where faeries of all kinds run free. With Aurora now Queen of the Moors, life appears to be tranquil until the handsome Prince Philip (Harris Dickinson) asks the young ruler to marry him. Despite Maleficent’s apparent misgivings, the engagement proceeds as everyone journeys to the neighboring kingdom of Ulstead, where Philip’s mother Queen Ingrith (Pfeiffer) is waiting with a dark agenda of her own.
Everything about Maleficent: Mistress of Evil SCREAMS Disney in a way that’s both traditional and new. One element in which the two are combined is in the on-the-nose social ideology which is so upfront and obvious, there isn’t a single person alive who wouldn’t be able to see the real-world parallels. Immigration, inclusion, tolerance and acceptance are all brought to the forefront here, oftentimes duking it out as to who will be the first one to take Maleficent: Mistress of Evil from an escapist movie, to an important one. When it’s revealed that Ingrith plans to thwart the happy couple’s dream of both Ulstead folk and Moor faeries coexisting together, the fantasy begins chipping away. The diabolical plotting is fun, but the themes are too timely and the movie is so bent on capitalizing on them, that you almost expect Ingrith to regally proclaim: “Make Ulstead great again!” The film even goes so far as to call on aspects of Nazi Germany in a misguided effort to make its points known. In fact, a couple of key sequences prove so disturbing, it’s hard not to squirm in your seat watching the lack of humanity the movie’s makers have chosen to illustrate the points for their audience. Disney has always had a talent for being both entertaining and subversive, drawing on reality in order to craft the danger within their storytelling. But that danger has always come with a safety net which let audiences know that this was a place free from the threat of the outside world, until now. Whatever the minds of Disney are looking to accomplish, I hope to God they eventually get it right.
Not many big-budget Hollywood studio films have the guts to put two alpha females (both over 40, no less) at the center of things. I want to take a moment and applaud Disney for going with this idea and never once backing away from it. For whatever else is wrong with Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, this is one aspect which is every bit deserving of praise. In the midst of all the thematic hoopla, the movie takes the time to explore the women on the screen. As I stated earlier, not many favors are done to Maleficent, who spends a significant portion of the movie discovering her origins when she finds herself in the land of the dark fae headed by the wise Conall (Chiwetel Ejiofor). Yet the movie’s question about how far Maleficent’s level of vulnerability can go is one with enough of a curiosity factor to it which makes the character’s exploration passable. Meanwhile, the movie has fun piecing together the various bits of Ingrith’s dark past that led to her fractured soul and own self-image. At her heart, Ingrith is a survivor and is determined that she will survive through the way she manipulates her emotions and her willingness to carry out the darkest of actions. Both Ingrith and Maleficent represent different images of female strength and female complexity, albeit at an incredibly base level. Still, the fact that two female characters who are painted as flawed and damaged are the leading figures in a movie of this scale and scope represents something of a cinematic milestone in its own way.
The guys in the film are all worthy and welcoming presences as well, particularly the stand-out Riley. Yet it’s all about the three female leads here; each of whom appears to be having fun all around. Jolie seems to be enjoying Maleficent more now than before and exercises a little-known funny bone in the process, earning some true chuckles from the audience. It’s just a shame that the script lets the actress down by giving her iconic character too many moments where she’s observing more than actually participating in what’s happening, temporarily stranding the performer. Fanning gets to be more proactive than Jolie and far more than the movie’s setup and overall nature would have you think. Aurora’s struggle to protect what she values and go after what she wants is brought to life by the actress through a subtle power that makes it impossible to dismiss her. But it’s Pfeiffer who has the movie’s best part, outshining both her co-stars with a mix of campiness and determination. The damaged Ingrith falls into the category of “villain being bad in order to do good,” but there’s something about the look in Pfeiffer’s eyes and delivery of lines which says that Ingrith knows full well the gravity of what she’s doing and is going to do it anyway. With a mix of steely gazes and lines such as : “No more faeries!,” Pfeiffer delivers a performance that results in one of the most evil and enjoyable villains in Disney history.
On a technical level, everything about Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is just as grand as it should be. The production design team have gone to the greatest of pains in crafting all three environments the movie exists in, making them feel like each is a world unto its own that is begging to be explored. The costumes have never been better, even by Disney standards, and the movie’s pacing and editing is just on point enough to where the movie never lingers longer than it needs to in any one instance. It’s the finale which proves the most entertaining as Maleficent: Mistress of Evil goes for broke in its final half hour with a spectacular level of Disney action that boldly never lets up. As a sequel, and as a movie in general, this is not a perfect one; but for some, maybe it is. Earlier this year, Pfeiffer delighted her fans (myself included) when she announced plans to star in a comedy/drama for Sony Pictures Classics called French Exit. Based on a novel from the author of last year’s The Sisters Brothers and directed by a rising name in the independent film world, the project (which starts shooting this month) is something certainly worth looking forward to. Until then, I guess Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is a decent enough way for everyone (including Pfeiffer) to kill some time.