Maleficent And Antihero

the humans bring with them wherever they go. His entire reason for being in the Moors is because he was trying to steal a jewel. He is entirely focused on himself and his success. Interestingly enough, with the change of Maleficent from a villain to an antihero, we see the change of Stefan from a hero to a villain. This is something that I am going to affectionately call “filling the villain gap.” What this means is that every story has to have a villain, in one form or another. After all, what would a story be without a villain? There would be no one to defeat, nothing to fight for or against because everything would be easy and simplistic. So, why does a movie that is trying to give one of the most dastardly villains a second chance take a character who hasn’t done anything necessarily wrong and bring him to his ethical knees? All that sounds like is a shift of blame, moving from Maleficent to Stefan. To put it another way, it is not Maleficent’s fault that she seems evil and bad tempered, it is Stefan’s actions that have caused her to behave this …show more content…
Through his inability to forgive, he ends up losing his life and his kingdom. Maleficent turns out just to have been misunderstood the first time her story was told, and has now gotten her side of the story out, showing us that she isn’t as bad as we thought she was. This change of character, helping us relate to Maleficent, has been enacted to affirm that evil actions have motivations, that circumstances are the cause of villainy, and that we can control those motivations and circumstances. Maleficent isn’t a power wielding, spell casting sorceress anymore. She is as close to one of us as any super powered being is, protecting herself and her home with all her might, just like we’ve all had to