EW Scan – First Look At The Queens of Darkness

[Slurpeez]

To each his own when it comes to personal taste, but to say Mal’s costume simply looks closer to the Disney version seems like a big understatement. It just seems really obvious that Eduardo Castro pretty much copied the costume from the live-action Maleficent Disney film. There is nothing all that original anymore about the Once version of Mal’s costume, except for maybe the red beaded sequence. I’m not saying the new costume isn’t lovely or even an improvement on Once‘s original costume for Mal, but A&E trying to deny the influence of Disney’s costume jut seems silly to me, since anyone can spot the change in style to resemble Angelina Jolie’s costume (which was very similar to the cartoon version). Giving Mal actual horns is more than just a nod to the recent film; it’s a direct copy of it.

Before Disney’s Maleficent, she looked like this back in 2011:

And now, Mal looks like this in 2014

Now compare that to Angelina Jolie’s costume in 2014 Maleficent.

[Felie]

Her new costume is a vast improvement on the old one if you ask me. She’s instantly recognizable as the same character we know and love from ‘Sleeping Beauty’ now, which was not the case with her old costume imo.

If they’re going to give us Maleficent then they’re going to have to give us Maleficent. How they twist her to fit in with the OUAT plot is up to them, but I’m glad they’re making her visually more in-keeping with her movie-self, and I’ll be really disappointed if they don’t make her a fairy.

"so there’s this new show….."
"there’s lesbians in it"

[TheWatcher]

To me it just always looked silly and didn’t make the character seem all that threatening.

Which, to me, worked because Mal on OUAT wasn’t threatening at all. Her personality was different than that of the cartoon and she actually seemed like a good person or a person who was trying to be good. She even encouraged Regina to move on with her life. Idk. Like I said in another thread too, I’m fine with them givng her a costume change, my issue is that her new costume seems to be a copy of the film version of Maleficent and I am not okay with that. Its a nice costume, sure, but I would rather they had been creative and came up with another original design that would fit the character and the purpose she has (if she is supposed to be evil now it would dark and black as opposed to pink and purple) that didn’t look like something we’d already seen a few months ago. Looking online, there are tons of variations of cartoon maleficents costume design that look NOTHING like either the cartoon version or the film version and they all work. But hey *shrug*

"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsis’s Glasses , Ariel’s Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Pan’s Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGIC

[RumplesGirl]

Her new costume is a vast improvement on the old one if you ask me. She’s instantly recognizable as the same character we know and love from ‘Sleeping Beauty’ now, which was not the case with her old costume imo. If they’re going to give us Maleficent then they’re going to have to give us Maleficent. How they twist her to fit in with the OUAT plot is up to them, but I’m glad they’re making her visually more in-keeping with her movie-self, and I’ll be really disappointed if they don’t make her a fairy.

And that’s the problem fro me. This is not supposed to be Disney Live Action TV. It’s OUAT. It was sold as your favorite stories come to life–not your favorite Disney movies, which is why we had an array of characters in season one, even those not popularized by the Great Mouse. This isn’t creative or new and fresh. It’s just a Disney carbon copy plopped down, complete with all the trappings. Shouldn’t have to be instantly recognizable. She should be THEIR Mal, not the one I could watch on my Disney DVD

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[MatthewPaul]

And that’s the problem fro me. This is not supposed to be Disney Live Action TV. It’s OUAT. It was sold as your favorite stories come to life–not your favorite Disney movies, which is why we had an array of characters in season one, even those not popularized by the Great Mouse. This isn’t creative or new and fresh. It’s just a Disney carbon copy plopped down, complete with all the trappings. Shouldn’t have to be instantly recognizable. She should be THEIR Mal, not the one I could watch on my Disney DVD

And yet they’ve been using the distinct Disney names and even some of their character traits since day 1. When you use those names, people expect enough of the Disney traits to be retained.

[Slurpeez]

And that’s the problem fro me. This is not supposed to be Disney Live Action TV. It’s OUAT. It was sold as your favorite stories come to life–not your favorite Disney movies, which is why we had an array of characters in season one, even those not popularized by the Great Mouse. This isn’t creative or new and fresh. It’s just a Disney carbon copy plopped down, complete with all the trappings. Shouldn’t have to be instantly recognizable. She should be THEIR Mal, not the one I could watch on my Disney DVD

Well, Once now is Disney live-action, ever since they decided to include all the cartoon charcters come to life from Frozen. Sure, Ingrid was a nice adaptation of the original Snow Queen fairytale by Hans Christian Anderson, but her entire back-story with her sisters was pretty much just the same conflict that Anna and Elsa faced in the cartoon. Frozen was a big cash cow for Disney, which is probably the real reason A&E wanted to include it (to try and increase viewership).

So, now Maleficent no longer visually resembles the fresh, original version who appeared in 1×2; instead, she visually resembles Angelina Jolie’s version. We’ll see if her characterization remains original, since as @Watcher pointed out, that Mal was pretty much reformed already. I’m guessing that Mal is going to have fully relapsed as she seeks revenge against Emma for killing her and mostly against Regina for entrapping her as a dragon beneath the town library for 30 years. Since Kristin Bauer van Straten is a great actress who specializes in portraying villains, I have faith she’ll keep her portrayal of Maleficent as distinct as possible from Angelina Jolie’s portrayal; yet, if A&E are going to change the writing of the character and her behavior to match that of the 2014 film version, then there is only so much that Kristen will be able to do as an actress to keep her portrayal feeling fresh and unique.

"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy

[RumplesGirl]

RumplesGirl wrote:

And that’s the problem fro me. This is not supposed to be Disney Live Action TV. It’s OUAT. It was sold as your favorite stories come to life–not your favorite Disney movies, which is why we had an array of characters in season one, even those not popularized by the Great Mouse. This isn’t creative or new and fresh. It’s just a Disney carbon copy plopped down, complete with all the trappings. Shouldn’t have to be instantly recognizable. She should be THEIR Mal, not the one I could watch on my Disney DVD

And yet they’ve been using the distinct Disney names and even some of their character traits since day 1. When you use those names, people expect enough of the Disney traits to be retained.

I didn’t say that they didn’t use some Disney–of course they have. Snow might have had dark hair, but she was also a bandit living in a woods. Charming might have been a dashing knight but he was also once just a farmer. Regina might have the EQ persona but she also had her Stable Princess role. The influx of Disney is to be expected. But we also had characters like King George or Midas or big spins like Rumple being the Beast and being a father looking for his little boy. But now everything is a Disney carbon copy. Look at Elsa and Anna. The actresses were great but it was a very literal interpretation (not even sure if I’d call it an interpretation, honestly). There is paying homage to Disney and then there is copying them. And of course, this is to saying nothing of the obvious “falling in line” they are doing with regards to the marketing of Disney. Cruella is going to be on our screen as a villain in March. Guess what comes out in Feb? This is why it’s shaky when giant corporations get heavily involved in what is supposed to be art: they have different agendas. Disney cares about their bottom line (read: money) and TV shows are, yes, financially driven but also supposed to be about story. Like Slurpeez said above me, even the SQ’s story was really just the Disney Frozen story adapted for a different snowy girl

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Felie]

And that’s the problem fro me. This is not supposed to be Disney Live Action TV. It’s OUAT. It was sold as your favorite stories come to life–not your favorite Disney movies, which is why we had an array of characters in season one, even those not popularized by the Great Mouse. This isn’t creative or new and fresh. It’s just a Disney carbon copy plopped down, complete with all the trappings. Shouldn’t have to be instantly recognizable. She should be THEIR Mal, not the one I could watch on my Disney DVD

I would agree with you if she was going to be treated like Regina, i.e. made a main-cast villain, where she could be given all the backstory she needs to feel truly fleshed out in the OUAT universe. Unfortunately she’ll be sharing the limelight with two other extremely charismatic villains next season, meaning that her getting anything resembling the backsory she needs is unlikely.

The problem with Maleficent is that she is a Disney original, unlike all the other fairy-tale characters we’ve had so far (minus the Frozen characters). In the original she was just some random angry fairy who cursed a baby. It was Sleeping Beauty that gave her depth, made her intriguing, and gave her her instantly recognizable look. If she doesn’t resemble the Disney version somewhat (even in just a couple of minor ways, such as looks, and the fact that she’s a fairy) then A&E may as well create an original character, because all she would be is a character with the name Maleficent, instead of being Maleficent herself.

She has consistently been voted one of the top Disney villains, and has even made it onto a few lists encompassing all villains. People love her.

"so there’s this new show….."
"there’s lesbians in it"

[Heart of Darkness]

I never really liked the old costume, but the new one is definitely drawing too much inspiration from the disney/movie version.

[RumplesGirl]

She has consistently been voted one of the top Disney villains, and has even made it onto a few lists encompassing all villains. People love her.

So? People love her. So what? Is A and E’s job supposed to be bringing all the Disney people you love to life? I thought it was to create Once Upon a Time which took a unique spin and look on the those stories. And of course, they already had Mal…she was in season 1, in WL, and even in dragon form in S2. They are changing her NOW–after already establishing her in the show–to fit what is more profitable. We already know it’s Mal. People have been asking for more Mal long before S4; they do not need to change her to make her Maleficient. She already is Mal.  Why change her now? Money.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Author]

Posts