Respond to these rapid questions in our Maleficent Mistress Of Evil quiz and we will tell you which Maleficent Mistress Of Evil character you are. Play it now.
Angelina Jolie is one of the last remaining movie stars, despite the fact that Hollywood has been largely unable to fashion projects that would demonstrate why in the recent years. Her portrayal of Maleficent, the evil queen from Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty,” serves as a reminder of how electrifying and entertaining she can be on screen.
“Maleficent,” a live-action (but heavily CGI’d) fantasy drama that reimagined the story from the character’s point-of-view, ultimately treating her as more of a volatile antihero enacting grievances upon the land rather than a straight-up villain who existed to do mean things and be vanquished, was Jolie’s first appearance in the role. She appears to have derived her razor-sharp prosthetic cheekbones, elegant horns, and velvety wings naturally from the types of roles she had played before taking a sharp left turn into more neutered or saintly roles in the mid-aughts—particularly the title character in HBO’s “Gia,” and the Jack Nicholson-like rebel she played in the mental hospital drama “Girl, Interrupted” (winning an Oscar in the process). Femaleficent’s Maleficent voice is reminiscent of old Hollywood stars (particularly Joan Crawford), and she is at her most endearing when the character is attempting to keep her witchiness hidden and failing miserably.
The sequel, “Maleficent: Mistress of Evil,” would appear to be a perfect complement to the first film, as it is centered on a confrontation between Jolie and Michelle Pfeiffer, who was also a great actress of the 1980s and 1990s era. However, despite having set up this potentially juicy conflict and detailing a scenario that would place it front and center while also deepening Maleficent’s relationship with her human goddaughter Aurora (Elle Fanning), the film fails to get out of its own way on numerous occasions throughout the film. Ultimately, the result is a disappointment that is even more crushing than a truly bad movie would be. In spite of its flaws, the original film had moments of primal power and a deep understanding of what motivates people, qualities that are sadly lacking in this version.
Diana Pfeiffer is the mother of Prince Phillip (Harris Dickinson), a human royal from another kingdom who wishes to marry Aurora. Pfeiffer is also the star of the film. Seeing their impending union as a “bridge” between the human kingdom and the magical creatures who live on the moors under the protection of Aurora and Maleficent, Aurora and Phillip are excited about the prospect of their union (a bit of a “Shrek”-y touch here).
But you shouldn’t waste any more time and start this Maleficent Mistress Of Evil quiz.
Unfortunately for both of them, as well as for the rest of humanity, Ingrith is a genocidal hatemonger—a bloodthirsty bigot, to put it another way. With vague allusions to racist and genocidal regimes throughout history, as well as the current border crisis in the United States, Ingrith is enraged when her husband, King John (Robert Lindsay), requests that she cease her nonstop invective and behave herself at an engagement dinner at their castle.
After that, there is a long scene that is a high point for all of the actors, with animosities erupting even as everyone involved is attempting to come to terms. All of Ingrith’s decisions are intended to enrage Maleficent, from serving squab (which necessitates the consumption of one winged creature by another) to setting the table with iron utensils (according to the mythology established here, faeries are allergic to iron). Instead of gradually building tension so that we can appreciate the characters’ psychology and the actors’ mostly sharp performances, it appears as if this Disney sequel is attempting to get at something deeper and more true rather than simply taking money from people who enjoyed the first film, it appears as if the script is unwilling or unable to do so.
Maleficent Mistress Of Evil Quiz
The dinner quickly devolves into a catastrophe that precipitates a state of open warfare. Faeries used to live freely all over the world until human hatred and violence forced them underground, where they now reside in a series of caverns and tunnels. Maleficent reconnects with the faeries, who used to live freely all over the world until human hatred and violence forced them literally underground. When Maleficent and her lost fellow winged creatures are reunited, the scenes are skillfully staged by filmmaker Joachim Rnning, who co-directed “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales,” particularly Maleficent’s prolonged entrance into the kingdom through a series of spiraling tunnels; however, once they’re all gathered together, discussing grievances and plans, the film begins to feel like one of those big-budget cable or streaming fantasies that has more money than At the very least, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Ed Skrein make a strong impression as characters who are both sensible and cautious and rebellious hotheads, respectively.
Also, you will find out which character are you in this Maleficent Mistress Of Evil quiz.
With the winged creatures scrambling to figure out how to get past a perimeter guarded by massive crossbows loaded with iron bolts, the stage is set for a battle of armies. In comparison to other Disney animated films, the final battle feels more like a Marvel CGI mayhem-fest or a battle episode of “Game of Thrones” than anything else in the traditional Disney animated canon, and the lead-up spends an inordinate amount of time on court intrigue (including the question of whether a major character was poisoned, and by whom), time that could have been better spent on further developing these characters instead.
And to make matters worse, the story appears incapable of dealing with the issues that it makes a point of bringing to light. Ingrith’s racism (speciesism?) distinguishes her as a villain, one who appears to be driven insane by rage. However, we know from real life that even if we despise people who hold these views, they are still members of a family, and this complicates and painfully affects the dynamics of the household for everyone else. Neither the film nor Aurora give much thought to what the war will do to Phillip, whose own mother is one of the architects of the conflict. Aurora, on the other hand, appears to be a little too quick to accept that the surrogate mother who raised and protected her must be removed from the picture for the greater good, or so that the wedding can proceed. As Kurtz says in “Heart of Darkness,” Ingrith only wants the wedding to go ahead so that she can use it as an excuse to “exterminate all the brutes.” It is in this regard that the climactic settling of scores is particularly cowardly: Ingrith virtually disappears from the film, sparing its creators the trouble of dealing with anything more complex than “bad lady who did bad things is no longer a threat to the nice people.”
About the quiz
What exactly went wrong? The full story may emerge at some point, but it appears to be a case in which a successful film was revamped in order to appeal to a broader audience (i.e. boys who sometimes get antsy when a story concentrates too much on marriage, love, family and all that stuff). “Beauty and the Beast” writer Linda Woolverton and the team of Micha Fitzerman-Blue and Noah Harpster wrote the screenplay, which suggests that the latter rewrote a portion of the script written by Woolverton for “Beauty and the Beast.”
Also, you must try to play this Maleficent Mistress Of Evil quiz.
But no matter how many good ideas are outweighed by a large number of bad, and no matter where each bit comes from, the result is a cascade of mostly unremarkable live-action fantasy imagery, an unintelligible jumble of textures and colors, and cliched camera movements (like the opening “helicopter shot” flying over the realm, which is exactly how every other movie like this begins). Aside from that, the character designs are dreadful: The humanoid animals, the big-eyed “cute” characters who appear to be based on Hayao Miyazki’s woodland creatures, and the borderline-creepy uncanny valley residents who are kinda-human-ish, all lack the spark of personality that Disney’s old-school animators could have created with pen and ink. ) (Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville, and Juno Temple, who play three good faeries who function in a similar way to the mice in “Cinderella,” seem even more rubbery and toylike in this film than they did in the first.)
In addition, the film fails to give Jolie the vehicle she so richly deserves, limiting her screen time in order to focus on new characters who aren’t particularly interesting, and increasingly conveying her most important relationship, that with Aurora, through throwaway dialogue and bits of visual shorthand. Instead of all of this sub-Tolkien scheming and military strategizing, the film should have focused on the relationship between a fearsome and misunderstood mother and her daughter in the months leading up to her wedding. Aurora’s first appearance, which is framed by a makeshift iris created by her mother holding up her crown, is one of the film’s most memorable scenes. Another is an intense face-to-face exchange between Aurora and her mother, which is another. Nonetheless, it all feels rushed and ill-considered, like a fairy tale being told to a child by a tired and bored grownup who just wants to get into bed and sleep off his or her troubles.
For more personality quizzes check this: Baaghi 3 Quiz.
