In the best tradition of Disney, this film has a rousing score and looks stunning; but just like the recent rehash of "the Lion King" is entirely an example of style over substance. Maleficent is meant to be evil - like Venger from "Dungeons and Dragons". Instead we get a sugary, goody-goody with all the venom of a water snake. Robert Lindsay, Chiwitel Ejiofor and Harris Dickinson fail to make anyver mais...

A lot better then the first. This one had a lot more action and some epic battles. Easily the best out of the series.

More sluggish than entertaining, for me anyway. I enjoyed the first film, but <em>'Maleficent: Mistress of Evil'</em> is one I never really got into. The whole premise surrounding Angelina Jolie's character is uninteresting, not helped by a lack of serious rationale for why characters, other than Maleficent, are acting the way they are; namely Michelle Pfeiffer's Queen Ingrith. At best, it's laver mais...

Great watch, would watch again, and can recommend. This was a very impressive sequel to the original. I'm sure it had something to do with low expectations, "What are they going to do to follow THAT....ohhhh". It's probably the first time I've registered a large scale battle like this movie has since....I guess "Infinity War", but "Lord of the Rings" seems more apt as it is a fantasy movie ver mais...

‘Maleficent: Mistress of Evil’ is not only a surprising follow-up to the original film, but also among 2019’s live-action Disney offerings is the only one that I actually sat through and enjoyed. It made me laugh, and the action is really engaging. Jolie and Pfeiffer are having so much fun that you can't help but join in. Yes, it’s filled with flaws, but it’s nice to leave a Disney film not wantinver mais...