Sleeping Beauty

On the data. The thing to understand is that the Maleficent films are not a prequel and not a sequel. They are a contradiction, on purpose. In the 1959 film Maleficent curses a baby because she was not invited to a christening. In the 2014 film that is not what happened, the christening is not the point, and the character who is villainous in the original is a victim here while a character who was not a villain becomes one. The kiss that wakes Aurora is also not the prince's. So watching them as one continuous story does not work; watching the 2014 film as a response to the 1959 one does. The 1959 film is worth seeing for the look alone. Eyvind Earle designed it to resemble medieval tapestry and manuscript illumination, flat and vertical and stylised, and he was given unusual control over it. It was shot in a wide seventy millimetre process. It was also the most expensive animated film made to that point, it underperformed badly, and the studio did not make another fairy tale for thirty years. The score is Tchaikovsky. Most of the songs are taken directly from the 1890 ballet. Perrault's original has a long second half in which the prince's mother tries to eat the children. Nobody adapts it. On the tale: Perrault printed his version in 1697, and it has a long second half in which the prince's mother, an ogress, tries to eat the children. Nobody adapts that.

On your progress. Checkmarks are saved on this device and are tied to permanent title IDs, not to list positions, so new episodes, titles, and whole franchises can be added later without disturbing anything you've already marked. Use Sync & backup to move progress to another device.