--- title: "Maleficent: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/maleficent/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/maleficent" critics_score: 58 critics_reviews: 20 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Maleficent (2014): what the critics said Critics' score 58 from 20 reviews: 7 positive, 7 mixed, 6 negative. The reviews split almost evenly three ways, and the critics’ score settles in the middle. On one thing nearly everyone agrees: Angelina Jolie. Critic after critic calls her casting the film’s strongest feature, praising her presence, her physical control and the way she makes the character both tender and dangerous. The visual design draws the next largest share of praise, with the richly imagined fairy world and the costumes singled out repeatedly. The disagreement is about everything around her. Those who like the film find its feminist revision of the old tale witty and moving; those who do not say the storytelling is clumsy and the emotional arc incoherent, and that turning the villain into a wronged heroine sanitises what made her interesting. The spread is wide, from warm raves to Empire calling it confused and boring. Paste is the rare dissenter on Jolie herself, finding her performance limited, and Den of Geek says even the striking visual moments cannot carry the weak acting and muddled story. ## The Hollywood Reporter — Sheri Linden Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 28 May 2014. Linden finds the film a dazzling, emotionally absorbing reinvention, despite a few bumpy patches. She especially praises Angelina Jolie’s magnetic performance and the film’s richly imagined visual world. [Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/maleficent-film-review-706491/) ## Evening Standard — Charlotte O'Sullivan Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 30 May 2014. O'Sullivan gives the film an emphatically positive verdict, calling it a project with peculiar, landscape-changing power. She especially praises Angelina Jolie's natural fit for the role and the film's feminist mood, visual effects and costumes. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/maleficent-review-angelina-jolie-is-a-natural-as-the-titular-bad-fairy-9457856.html) ## Total Film — Jane Crowther Rating 4/5. 28 May 2014. Crowther finds the film a magical, modern adventure that is visually sumptuous and thought-provoking, though it does not fully reinvent the tale. She especially praises Angelina Jolie’s commanding, emotionally nuanced performance as Maleficent. [Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/maleficent-review/) ## The New Yorker — Joan Acocella Fi1m's normalised score 78/100 (inferred from the text). 2 July 2014. Acocella finds the film’s revision of the fairy tale’s romance and gender politics witty and moving. She especially praises Angelina Jolie’s nuanced physical performance, which makes Maleficent both tender and dangerous. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/loves-true-kiss-maleficent-s-complex-sexual-politics) ## Screen Daily — Mark Adams Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 28 May 2014. The critic calls the film a thoroughly entertaining fantasy romp. The standfirst praises its overall entertainment value, but the paywalled text does not reveal a specific element singled out for praise. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/maleficent/5072482.article) ## Los Angeles Times — Betsy Sharkey Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 29 May 2014. Sharkey finds the film uneven but ultimately engaging, with Angelina Jolie making a mesmerizing Maleficent. She also praises the striking visual world, while noting that the film’s many ideas blunt its emotional impact. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-maleficent-review-20140530-column.html) ## IndieWire — Eric Kohn Rating C+. 30 May 2014. Kohn finds the film visually dazzling but ultimately predictable and narratively weak. He praises Angelina Jolie’s commanding screen presence, while criticizing the film’s shallow attempt at progressive storytelling. [Read the review](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/culture/review-maleficent-is-a-predictable-3-d-wonder-but-should-we-expect-more-from-angelina-jolie-25935/) ## RogerEbert.com — Christy Lemire Rating 2.5/4. 28 May 2014. Lemire finds the film visually sumptuous but emotionally hollow. She singles out Angelina Jolie’s performance and the film’s striking visuals, while faulting its thin emotional depth. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/maleficent-2014) ## Radio Times — Jamie Healy Rating 3/5. The review considers the reworking enjoyable. It singles out Angelina Jolie’s portrayal of Maleficent as a highlight. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-k4ilqg/maleficent/) ## Time Out — Joshua Rothkopf Rating 3/5. 27 May 2014. Rothkopf gives the film a three-out-of-five-star assessment, suggesting a mixed verdict. He singles out Angelina Jolie’s casting and expressive eyebrow as a strength. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/maleficent) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 28 May 2014. Bradshaw gives a mixed verdict on the revisionist fairytale spin-off. He praises Jolie’s fierce screen presence, while finding her performance panto-like and wanting to see her in a grownup film. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/may/28/maleficent-review-angelina-jolie-sleeping-beauty-horns-vinegar) ## Vulture — Bilge Ebiri Fi1m's normalised score 42/100 (inferred from the text). 30 May 2014. Ebiri finds the revision of Maleficent intriguing but says the film’s storytelling and weak antagonist undercut it. He praises Angelina Jolie’s emotionally urgent performance, while lamenting that the rest of the movie lets her down. [Read the review](https://www.vulture.com/2014/05/movie-review-maleficent.html) ## The New York Times — A.O. Scott Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 29 May 2014. Scott’s verdict is mixed to negative, finding the film more clumsy than compelling. He singles out Angelina Jolie’s performance as its strongest feature. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/30/movies/angelina-jolie-stars-in-maleficent-from-disney.html) ## Slant Magazine — R. Kurt Osenlund Rating 1.5/4. 29 May 2014. Osenlund argues that the film weakens its compelling central character by turning her into a sanitized, all-purpose heroine. He praises Angelina Jolie’s captivating presence, while criticizing the visual excess and the story’s failure to explore Maleficent’s transformation. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/maleficent/) ## Variety — Andrew Barker Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 28 May 2014. Barker finds the film visually arresting but narratively unsatisfying, with an incoherent emotional arc. He praises Angelina Jolie’s commanding performance and the consistently exquisite visual craft. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2014/film/reviews/film-review-maleficent-1201194138/) ## Empire — Olly Richards Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 8 May 2012. Richards finds the film confused and boring, arguing that it fails to make its reimagining of Maleficent cohere. He praises Angelina Jolie’s casting and expressive looks, but complains she is given a costume rather than a role. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/maleficent-review/) ## The Wrap — Alonso Duralde Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 28 May 2014. The review finds the film entertaining and bold, despite its aggressively unpleasant visuals. It especially praises Angelina Jolie for making Maleficent a fully fleshed-out character. [Read the review](https://www.thewrap.com/maleficent-review-angelina-jolie/) ## Digital Spy — Ben Rawson-Jones Rating 3/5. 27 May 2014. The review finds the film uneven, with a weak opening and clumsy storytelling redeemed by a rousing finale. It particularly praises Angelina Jolie’s mesmerising performance, which keeps the film afloat during its worst stretches. [Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a573570/maleficent-review-angelina-jolie-is-mesmerising/) ## Paste — Geoff Berkshire Rating 5.9. 28 May 2014. Berkshire finds the film creatively disappointing, with a softened lead character and a story that drags. He praises the extravagant visual design, while faulting the narrative choices and Jolie’s limited performance. [Read the review](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/maleficent) ## Den of Geek — Don Kaye Rating 2 out of 5. 29 May 2014. Kaye finds the film incoherent, dull, and lacking a reason to exist. He singles out its striking visual moments, but says they cannot compensate for the weak performances and muddled story. [Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/maleficent-review/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/maleficent.md