Oz: The Great and Powerful - Part 1

[L.A.]

Quick question thismovie filmed in 3-d or converted?

 

[terry78]

He's the ruler the Oz deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Because he's a cloud of smoke...a giant head.....a Wizard of Oz.


He and Glinda were having a discussion where he said something along the lines of "maybe I'm not what you wanted, but what you need" or something and i almost busted out laughing because of the similarity.

 

[The Caped Knight]

He's the ruler the Oz deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Because he's a cloud of smoke...a giant head.....a Wizard of Oz.

lol Priceless

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

The part where Evanora turned ugly and looked at Glinda saying, "You did this to me!", was hilarious. Couldn't stop laughing because of the way she said it for some reason.

 

[mclay18]

Quick question thismovie filmed in 3-d or converted?

It was shot in 3D, with the Red Epic. Some shots may have been converted, but most of it is natively-shot and processed in the format.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Wicked is very possible and I can guarantee you they are talking about it right now. Just how Hollywood works, execs want to get in on the trending.

 

[Liam_H]

If it does happen they don't have to give it a blockbuster budget. It doesn't need one.

 

[roach]

In the 1939 film they took the attitude that Oz didn't really exist, it was just a dream Dorothy had. Hence the Wizard character in Kansas, Professor Marvel, never really left Kansas and went to Oz. Dorothy just dreamed that she saw him there. He did float away in the balloon from the fair (although it says 'Omaha' on it so I guess he was in Nebraska, not kansas!) at the end of the movie but that was simply part of Dorothy's dream and never really happened.

In the books, as in Raimi's film, Oz is a real place and Dorothy really went there. It doesn't sound to me like the 1939 film and the new one are connected in any way except through the original source material.

I think they did the same thing in this movie because some of the actors played normal and Oz roles.

 

[dark_b]

Quick question thismovie filmed in 3-d or converted?

it was filmed with 3D cameras. but Raimi explained that he sometimes used 3D settings that were against the rule. he said all respect to Cameron but he wanted to have some fun with the 3D. but he was still smart enough to understand that in dialoge scenes with slow or static cameras the 3D has to be dialed down. Raimi is a director with experience he knows how to compose shots.

i disagree with him with the zero point. i dont know if this is how you explain it. its where the 3D starts. Cameron thinks that the 3D should be inside the screen.so the 3D is negative. so zero is the screen and everything is inside like you are looking through a window. Raimi used the 3D a lot of times like the 3D is outside the screen. the problem is that your brain notices that the 3D can not go through the black edges so you think its more fake.

 

[AnneFan]

I won't be able to see the movie until this weekend, but I'm looking forward to it. The box office results have been pleasing.

 

[Bruce Malone]

So a sequel has been announced and i think Disney wants a trilogy. Are they going to keep this whole series as a prequel type work or are they actually going to venture into a full blown remake/adaptation of The Wizard of Oz?

That would be quite tricky to pull off. Not the least because they can't use any ruby slippers.

 

[jacobed]

Or the wart

 

[AnneFan]

Are they going to keep this whole series as a prequel type work or are they actually going to venture into a full blown remake/adaptation of The Wizard of Oz?

I'd prefer the prequel approach to continue.

 

[sueb1863]

They can just use silver slippers, like they are in the book. The only difference is the color. If they do an adaptation of the Wizard of Oz book I imagine they'll make it much closer to the book than the 1939 version. They're different enough to stand apart.

I know they used doubles in this version as well as the 1939 version, but the difference is that in 1939 Dorothy never went to Oz because it didn't really exist. In this version it's an actual place and not a dream.

As for Wicked I think that's always been on the drawing boards but they were waiting to see how Les Miserables did. Since LM made over $400 million internationally I'm sure Wicked will be made. The next step is finding a director and casting.

 

[def28]

Yeah, just use the Silver slippers. No biggie.

They could always introduce Ozma before going to Dorothy I guess. Might be a little out of order, but Im sure they could create something by taking different parts of books, like they did here. Maybe add Tik Tok and Jack Pumpkinhead to the mix and keep China Girl and Finely.

 

[<(o_o)>]

So a sequel has been announced and i think Disney wants a trilogy. Are they going to keep this whole series as a prequel type work or are they actually going to venture into a full blown remake/adaptation of The Wizard of Oz?

That would be quite tricky to pull off. Not the least because they can't use any ruby slippers.

Why can't they use the ruby slippers? Are they copyrighted to the WB version & only WB can use them?

 

[terry78]

I suspect they'll make a couple more where it's Oz dealing with random **** like other creatures and monsters or enemies that want to take over and the trials of being a ruler. Then the final flick sets up everything happening with Dorothy coming and he's an older man. We never see it play out, but it leads up to it at the end, somewhat of a "and this is where the Wizard of Oz begins."

 

[DarkSovereignty]

I suppose they can do an origin for the lion, the tin man and the scarecrow, maybe bring in the nome king too.

 

[childeroland]

@<(o_o)>

The ruby slippers are part of the '39 film, not the books, so Disney can't use them.

 

[DorneyDave]

It was a solid 7 from me.

If the Wicked Witch would have been a stronger performance, one of those "iconic" all-time villain performances like Joker or the original wicked witch, then this film would have gone down in history as an all-timer in my opinion. It's not that Mila was necessarily bad, it's just that the whole thing felt very forced. Her evil lines didn't come across well to me. The visuals of her were wonderful, but the vocal and physical performance left something to be desired.

 

[DarbyD53]

I went in expecting nothing I guess other than figured it would look good on the big screen. With that being said I enjoyed it. I just have always assumed anything tied into the Wizard of Oz will be a big let down but this was well done. I enjoyed almost everything about the movie.

 

[terry78]

The thing is that as much of a classic as it is, it's nowhere near as faithful to the book as this one and Return to Oz probably is.

 

[def28]

Yeah, I think Return To Oz remains the most faithful. Few things changed and characters/books merged but pretty close.

 

[danoyse]

As for Wicked I think that's always been on the drawing boards but they were waiting to see how Les Miserables did. Since LM made over $400 million internationally I'm sure Wicked will be made. The next step is finding a director and casting.

Although they don't seem any closer to greenlighting it, according the Universal. Just that it will be here "sooner rather than later". Last thing I read that they were talking to Stephen Daldry to direct it.

Wicked was actually supposed to be a movie first, but the show took off as such a hit that they held off on making the movie.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I suspect they'll make a couple more where it's Oz dealing with random **** like other creatures and monsters or enemies that want to take over and the trials of being a ruler. Then the final flick sets up everything happening with Dorothy coming and he's an older man. We never see it play out, but it leads up to it at the end, somewhat of a "and this is where the Wizard of Oz begins."

If they decide to follow the books a bit, they can do the story of the Wizard saving Princess Ozma from the witch Momba (who they could simply swap with the Wicked Witch of the West if they wished).