Cinderella

Whatever you may think of this film, I can state without fear of controversy
that it contains a fucktonne of dresses.

Following on from Maleficent, the next Disney classic to get an in-house live-action remake (I think the first was The Jungle Book, some years back) is Cinderella, starring Lily James off of Downton and Cate Blanchett, with Helena Bonham Carter as the fairy godmother, and directed by Kenneth Branagh.

The film is sumptuous. The sets and costumes are excellent and the effects for the Godmother's magic are suitably sparkly. James plays Ella just the right side of tooth-grindingly winsome, the Prince (herein named Kit) is decent enough, and the support is of a very high standard. Derek Jacobi as the King is both conservative and sympathetic, and Stellan Skarsgard and Nonso Anozie as the bad and good courtiers are great fun. While essentially played straight - which, as I think I may have said before is the new radical interpretation - the film inserts a scene in which Ella and Kit meet incognito to establish a spark, and reverses some expectations by having the King bless Kit's intention to marry the mystery woman on his deathbed rather than frocing a promise to do what is 'good for the Kingdom'.

The sisters really are just Blanchett's
backing group.

Cate Blanchett is of course a fabulous wicked stepmother, although it is a pity that the sisters weren't a bit more nuanced (I overheard a ten year old girl in the audience telling her father that the sisters aren't always portrayed as entirely wicked, so it's not as if the target audience couldn't deal.) Blanchett is also so very venomous that a third act push to give her a sympathetic backstory falls flat.

What the film does very well is take out some of the more cringeworthy aspects of the source, such that Ella isn't set on either attending a ball for its own sake, or because of some misty dream of meeting a prince. Instead, she is hoping to catch up with 'Kit the apprentice', whom she met by chance in the forest. It is only when everyone watches them dance that she realises who she is. It makes the character far more sympathetic, to me at least, that she is interested in a person and not a title (and this is also pitched as the thing that wins the King over.)

My main complaint is that, like Maleficent, they left out the songs, despite making a film that would be perfect for a song or two.

As an aside, if you want to introduce your kids to the subject of death, this is the film for you, knocking off both of Ella's parents and the King during its runtime.

Elsa once more displays her power over ice, snow, and all
kinds of fabric.

Speaking of children, Arya didn't really get on with the film, mostly because it had real people in it, I think. She did, however, love Frozen Fever. Short and sweet, Frozen Fever is a delightful snippet, but encapsulates a lot of my concerns regarding the idea of a Frozen II. It works because it's a short story about the characters, rather than a continuation of the main narrative which had effectively finished. I choose to be cautiously optimistic about the sequel, but the emphasis is on the caution.

Maleficent

There's a lot of mileage in retelling old stories from a new perspective these days, and Disney has not been slow to jump on the bandwagon. From Once Upon A Time to the massively successful Frozen, this process has perhaps peaked with Maleficent, a sumptuous live-action Sleeping Beauty from the perspective of the iconic villain of Disney's 1959 adaptation.

As far as first impressions go, this can not be denied: Maleficent is a gorgeous piece of film-making, if a little heavy on the CGI for my own tastes. Maleficent is most impressive in her free-spirited, flying woman phase, although her black-capped, ultra-goth mode is certainly striking. The enchanted Moors are spectacularly realised, and the human kingdom, even with its classical Disney castle, is rather bland by comparison.

The story is a little less sound, and in its attempts to turn Maleficent into the hero without losing her villainy she becomes a little too vacillating. There are some nice touches, and a splendid sidekick in the form of the raven Diaval (Sam Riley). In terms of performances, Angelina Jolie revels in the quieter moments, but falls down a little when belting out challenges to invading armies; her voice doesn't quite have the force. Her interaction with Diaval is delightful, and I'm shipping those two so hard it isn't funny. Elle Fanning as Aurora isn't utterly grating, which is in itself an achievement, and while we don't have much of Prince Philip to work with, I did like that they gave him at least some qualms about kissing the coma girl.

My problems with the film are mostly in the details, and thus require a few spoilers.

As has been noted, it is a crying shame that Maleficent herself doesn't get to turn into a dragon, but more or less inevitable given how the rest of the film is shaped. The betrayal that acts as her start of darkness has her drugged and her wings cut off by the young man she loves, a Wagnerian act of figurative rape-as-female disempowerment which is frankly a little strong for a film with a family focus. Her power can only be restored with the return of her wings, and if she could turn into a dragon herself, she would have wings.

My only other major issue is that the farcical incompetence of the pixies charged with raising Aurora is such that it is impossible to see why anyone would trust them to do it. It's not as if they're just a little bumbling, the baby is literally safer in the care of an untamed carrion bird.

I was disappointed that they didn't go a musical route, as a character with the stalking menace and superior incidental music cues that Maleficent displays throughout the film deserves a really kick-ass villain song.

Overall, I enjoyed the film a lot - I think it definitely helped that I wasn't expecting something sublime - although I was left with the feeling that I'd just watched a propaganda piece commissioned by Sleeping Beauty to explain that historically, the enchanted Moors had always been part of generic Britland.

Pete's Dragon

So, I suspect that I'll be watching a lot of old Disney films with Arya-Rose over the years. Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang, The Three Lives of Thomasina, Darby O'Gill and the Little People; you know, the terrifying ones.

Pete's Dragon is the tale of a yougn boy and his friendship with a magical dragon named Elliot, whose ability to become invisible makes most people assume he's imaginary. Pete and Elliot stumble into a quaint little town, where Pete is taken in by the lighthouse keeper and his daughter, while being pursued by the violent redneck family who in some means purchased him and wish to assert their ownership. Meanwhile, Dr Terminus is in town, a quack doctor looking to go 'legit' by selling remedies made from slicing up Elliot.

Both the child slavery angle and the violent dismemberment of a sentient being are, of course, discussed through the medium of jaunty, upbeat singing.

At the end, Pete has a family, and so Elliot goes off to help the next child in need, as magical friends in disney movies of the era were wont to do.

It's not terrifying like any of those others I mentioned, but it is weirdly dark given the tone of the songs, or possibly vice versa. In particular, We Got a Bill of Sale right here - and the fact that no one seems to question this on legal grounds, worries me. Hannah suggested that the bill was in fact adoption papers, but they certainly never refer to them as such.

70s Disney; it's its own brand of messed up.