Talk:Maleficent/@comment-3425694-20161203184056

In regards to the 2014 film (which is getting a sequal, just so you all know), I actually believe it was a good idea to give Maleficent a sympothetic backstory. Granted, it could've been executed better, for example, other characters like Stefan and Phillip could've been fleshed out more and Maleficent should have been portrayed as more diabolical, because I found myself liking her too much.

Anyway, the movie wasn't perfect, but it was decent; a box office hit! I have my doubts, but I do hope the sequel at least elaborates more on Maleficent's evil actions within the 16 years she was viewed as an evil fairy. Stefan knew why Maleficent hated him, but he, his people and even the 3 good fairies did not welcome her with open arms, there must have been a reason for that, other then the fact that she took over the moors, which Aurora still found to be a beautiful place.

The fact that the 1959 Maleficent cursed Aurora to die simply because she wasnt invited to a party is actually the reason i prefer Maleficent as a "darth vader" rather then a "palpatine" because i feel she fits that role better. imo, very few vilians can pull off the "pure evil" role. You would need to have a desire for absolute power or be certifiably insane.....or both. Say what you will about the movie, but at least Maleficent has a compelling reason to torment Stefan and his kingdom rather then over somthing petty.

Villians like Jolie's Maleficent, such as Two-Face don't get closure and instead, die a tragic death because of their transition from hero to villian. Perhaps this is the ending fans hoped Maleficent would get, but instead, King Stefan took that role, fittingly enough, in a similar way Two-face died. There was no sympathy for King Stefan though, there lies the problem.