MALIFICENT: MISTRESS OF EVIL

By Marc S. Sanders

Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil has a strong cast and a serviceable approach for the sequel to Disney’s 2014 live action hit. Yet, the film falters anyway.

First, and this is always something that irks me, the sub title is completely inappropriate. (Like Star Wars: The Phantom Menace where the only menace was Jar Jar Binks, who was never my first choice to be a phantom.). The film carries a bait and switch title. Did the marketing department at the Happiest Place On Earth even watch the film? Angelina Jolie returns as the title character, still dressed in stereotypical evil black. However, the script penned by Linda Woolverton, Noah Harpster and Micah Fitzerman-Blue offer up an adoring struggle for her to keep up appearances. Never does the film imply that Maleficent returns to her evil impulses. Rather, she’s only characterized by Michelle Pfeiffer’s evil queen as such. So there’s a betrayal of advertising going on here.

The film directed by Jochaim Ronning is a Meet The Fockers variant. When Princess Aurora (Elle Fanning), who was unofficially adopted by Maleficent, gets engaged to the Prince, naturally the in laws have to become acquainted. As expected, dinner does not go very well and the King is spellbound, leaving Maleficent as the scapegoat forced into running underground where she meets up with her fellow fairy community ready to wage war against the human kingdom.

Pfeiffer’s queen uses this as an opportunity to convince the kingdom to wipe out the fairies. Yeah. You’ve heard this story a hundred times before.

I can forgive the redundancy of the storytelling. However, Rollins can’t get his film right. The cinematography is annoyingly murky in darkness and clouds and mist. Doesn’t matter if it’s the fairy kingdom, the castle or even the forest in daylight. Rollins serves up murky, dramatic effect for the sake of murky dramatic effect. It’s hardly visible. This film has Angelina Jolie and Michelle Pfeiffer. If I want to emit drama, I’m gonna rely on them to bring their game.

As well, and disappointingly, Jolie is hardly in the film, at least not enough to justify the title. Rather, Pfeiffer is here to chew up much of the scenes. There are long periods of storytelling where Jolie is nowhere to be seen. She actually doesn’t appear for at least the first 15 minutes. Again, like the title itself, the film under promises what it sells. I have no problem with Pfeiffer or Fanning. They’re really good. Yet, there’s just too many opportunities for them to exchange dialogue and threats, and not much else. Yes, you get to see the fairy kingdom, but they really are a miserable angry bunch for a family oriented film. The 3 fairies led by Imelda Staunton? Yup. They’re here…hardly though and they were the most fun of the last film. Maleficent’s sidekick, Diaval (Sam Riley) – the half man/raven? Well he’s only there when Maleficent is there (literal sidekick) and tell us he wishes he could be turned into a bear. What do you think happens? Incidentally, the CGI bear is nothing great, an uncolorful blur of roaring with a raven beak.

All of these elements present themselves but never follow through with any humor or fun or eye opening surprise. Instead we get a lot of Pfeiffer and Fanning.

The third act is straight out of Lord of the Rings with swords and shields and marching and charging. Meh. I was bored with all of this and the CGI of fairy flights and swoops looked blurry.

Clearly, Disney prioritized preparation of the film for IMAX and 3D. Can we let this go for a change, and just make a movie, please? It’s apparent, watching a 2D standard presentation of this film, where the 3D pops were to occur. Yet, it’s a lousy sacrifice for a simple view.

Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil is a shameless, opportune cash grab on Disney’s behalf. Crank out the sequel, prime it for 3D, get Jolie back for whatever time she’s available, and make sure to slap on a title that amps up the darkness that audiences relish and surefire goosebumps.

I like the story. The execution however fell very short however. No one will remember this sequel in a year from now.

ONWARD

By Marc S. Sanders

I’m thinking director Dan Scanlon could very well be the next Chris Columbus or JJ Abrams or maybe…well maybe not Spielberg. But still! His new film Onward from the genius labs of Disney/Pixar is better than I ever expected.

Think about it. The imagination of the film all goes in reverse. Magic and sorcery once ruled in a land of mythical creatures. But then the automobile was invented, along with cell phones, video games, exercise machines and every other every day to day invention known to mankind. Who needs magic anymore?

When two elf brothers, Ian and Barley, voices by Tom Holland and Chris Pratt, come upon their deceased father’s magical staff, they realize that as nerdy as he was, he was in fact a wizard. Some exposition allows them one day to revive him and spend only that particular day with him. It’s an opportunity for older brother Barley to reconnect and Ian to meet him. Something goes awry though when dad is only resurrected up to his waste, legs dressed in khakis with chino shoes and black leather belt. Hilarity and adventure ensue as they must embark on a quest to find a precious gem that will complete the resurrection before time runs out and the sun sets.

As the boys hop into Barley’s van called Guinevere. Adventure inspired of the level of The Goonies fare takes place. There are caverns with booby traps, maps and Holland and Pratt give up good vocal chemistry as they sort out their brotherly issues.

Julia Louis Dreyfus is mom and basically doing the typical Pixar mom but she has a great sidekick. Octavia Spenser as Corey the monstrous Manticore who runs a restaurant. To give side story filler, Dreyfus and Spenser are brought in to be on the trail of the boys. They have some good moments.

Onward has good, often funny and sentimental writing from Scanlon along with Keith Bunin and Jason Headley. It’s ironic actually. So many films from Harry Potter to Star Wars to Marvel focus on mysticism and magic that as movie goers we’ve become inundated with the gimmicks. Onward reminds us that ordinary dependence in a more grounded reality can actually lead to adventure too.

I liked it.

INCREDIBLES 2

By Marc S. Sanders

Disney/Pixar and (yeah, let’s single him out) Director Brad Bird continue to impress with marvelous feats of imagination. Yet I’m not necessarily referring to the art of their animation, outstanding action scenes or the colorful superhero names. Rather, it’s the story that usually stands above all else in each entry that’s released year after year.

Allow me to sidetrack for a moment. Consider a film like Lethal Weapon 2. It’s a fun movie that I’ve always liked, but it was not just an action movie. I mean, think about it. There’s a reason the first film was on Roger Ebert’s Top 10 list of 1987. It focused on the trauma and suicidal tendencies of a burned out cop along with some great action and humor. It’s sequel however, just did the same thing. Just more of the same stuff, despite a very capable partner that was featured in the film. The partner remained the sidekick again. Not much effort in thought the second time around (or 3rd or 4th).

Incredibles 2 avoids the same trap. While the first one focused on Bob Paar and his alias, Mr. Incredible, this new film relies on Holly Hunter’s Elastigirl, known by day as housewife Helen Paar. Yeah, as I’m writing this, I’m realizing she’s kind of recruited for a mission the same way her husband is, but the perspective seems fresh; consistent in step with other female hero protagonists like Wonder Woman and Katniss Everdeen.

Adding to the effectiveness of this film is that these larger than life characters are humanized. Dad is out of work, following a government mandate. So he stays home with the kids and mixes the pinks with the whites while trying to get the atomic demon baby Jack Jack to sleep. Side note: Jack Jack is an awesome scene stealer. There’s a reason this kid was on every toy shelf and t-shirt in countless variations from the end of summer through Christmas. He’s now up there as one of my favorite Pixar characters.

A surprise reveal is no surprise at all. So don’t set yourself up for disappointment. Just relish in a very cool new villain known as The Screenslaver. He’s no Syndrome but he’s pretty intimidating nonetheless.

As a major comic book geek, another thing I appreciated was that Bird’s script and direction follow a pattern of the golden and silver ages of comics without all the heavy drama that comic film adaptations depend on today. There’s a bad guy wreaking havoc and the superheroes come in to save the day. There’s no heavy pseudo tragedy to get in the way. Often I don’t mind that, but here it’s absence is refreshing. Just make it about a bank robbery and a bad guy with the “mwah ha ha” maniacal laugh and it’ll satisfy. It kept the movie light, playful and especially funny.

So glad that I was able to take time out to see Incredibles 2. Go find your super suit and soar to seat in front of the screen.

NOTE: there is a scene midway through the film that might be disruptive for people prone to having seizures. It contains the equivalent of an actual strobe light effect and it lasts a good 2-3 minutes. Please take that into consideration. If you want to know when it takes place, message me and I’ll clue you in when you might want to excuse yourself from the viewing.