Oz: The Great and Powerful - Part 1

[lespaul59]

I give Oz: The Great and Powerful an 8/10. I really liked the 3D scene with the snow right before it turns to color. I loved the way it seemed like it came out of the screen at you like being in real snow. And I thought Michelle Williams looked amazing. I've always thought see was good looking but something about her in this just made me go wow. Rachel Weisz and Mila kunis looked amazing as well. Mila even looked great at the Witch. I agree with a lot of what has already been said. Like I thought the movie moved fast and never really had any real slow points. But I also agree I would have like to have seen more more time for Oscar's and Theodora's relationship as RachelDawes said.

One quest I do have is can Disney do a version of Wizard of OZ of is it compleatly off limits? I read a little about how the rights work but still left me confused.

 

[SpitCurl]

I give Oz: The Great and Powerful an 8/10. I really liked the 3D scene with the snow right before it turns to color. I loved the way it seemed like it came out of the screen at you like being in real snow. And I thought Michelle Williams looked amazing. I've always thought see was good looking but something about her in this just made me go wow. Rachel Weisz and Mila kunis looked amazing as well. Mila even looked great at the Witch. I agree with a lot of what has already been said. Like I thought the movie moved fast and never really had any real slow points. But I also agree I would have like to have seen more more time for Oscar's and Theodora's relationship as RachelDawes said.

One quest I do have is can Disney do a version of Wizard of OZ of is it compleatly off limits? I read a little about how the rights work but still left me confused.

Not to critique your critique (every opinion is valid), but, what are some of your thoughts on the overal story? Performances? Characters? I just ask because a lot of what you listed as liking seem to have to do with visuals (again, perfectly valid) and I'm just curious, since I've heard a lot of similar opinions.

Obviously the visuals are important, certainly in a film where you really have to world-build, but in a way, hearing so many people singlng out that aspect seems to validate the idea that Hollywood doesn't have to care about story/character so long as there's something pretty to look at.

 

[GregComicFan]

Anybody else think that if this turns into a trilogy they should make the 3rd and final film a remake of the Wizard of Oz... with Dorothy, Scarecrow, Lion, etc...

???

 

[CGHulk]

Anybody else think that if this turns into a trilogy they should make the 3rd and final film a remake of the Wizard of Oz... with Dorothy, Scarecrow, Lion, etc...

???

Sacrilege!!!

Stone him!!
[YT]R_hlMK7tCks[/YT]

 

[Poeman]

If Willy Wonka can get a remake then so can Wizard of Oz

 

[FVD]

I reckon the WONDERFUL Wizard of Oz should be a 4th film. I reckon there is room for two more backstories.

 

[Majik1387]

Sacrilege!!!

Stone him!!
[YT]R_hlMK7tCks[/YT]

I'd rather he be stoned for mentioning trilogy.

 

[childeroland]

The '39 film is really its own thing, and the book is sufficiently different so that Disney could adapt it successfully. And let's face it, if its Oz films continue to be a success, Disney's gonna get to Dorothy at some point.

 

[The Joker]

If Willy Wonka can get a remake then so can Wizard of Oz

The Wonka movie was not in the same league as The Wizard of Oz.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Anybody else think that if this turns into a trilogy they should make the 3rd and final film a remake of the Wizard of Oz... with Dorothy, Scarecrow, Lion, etc...

???

That's probably what is going to happen. It makes the most business and financial sense. The reason why it being the third film over forth films makes more business sense is because all of these actors probably signed a three picture agreement contract at a certain price. Adding in another picture to that contract gets more complicated because said actors might want more money. This way, the contracts are fulfilled and new ones are written up in the case that Disney wants to go on to make another trilogy this time centering around Dorothy if the financial gain incentive is still there.

 

[RemixNinja]

There was a lots of difference between book and the movies heres is some of them so Disney could make the wizard of Oz and it would actully turn better than the original


In the book-

Dorothy is an orphan.
Their house is very small- just one room.
There is no cellar, just a trapdoor in the middle of the house floor which led to hole in the ground.
There are no trees or other houses around the farm.
Aunt Em and Uncle Henry had a hard life and never laughed.
THERE ARE NO FARMHANDS- Hunk, Zeke, or Hickory.
THERE IS NO MISS GULTCH.
There is no Professor Marvel.
There is no Toto being misbehaving plot.
The cyclone just comes and Dorothy and Toto are too late to go down the trapdoor.
Dorothy DOES NOT HIT HER HEAD and have a dream- the cyclone REALLY takes the house away and transports Dorothy and Toto to another place.
The Good Witch of the North is NOT Glinda; Glinda is the Witch of the South. The North Witch kisses Dorothy to protect her from all evil.
The Munchkins were not midgets or dwarfs, just smaller than regular adults.
The Wicked Witch of the East had Silver Shoes, not Ruby Slippers.
Dorothy is greeted by three men and the Witch of the North.
I’m pressed for time right now, so to list the biggest differences besides the tale NOT being a dream:

1- The Wicked Witch of the West is just in one chapter and is simply an obstacle to overcome as opposed to the centerpiece of the story.

2- Oz himself has many different illusions.

3- The Tin Woodsman was originally a human.

4- The death of the Wicked Witch of the West is in the middle of the book, and the Scarecrow isn’t even there.

5- Dorothy’s journey is much longer, and the team gets separated at times.

6- Oz wants Dorothy to kill the Wicked Witch of the West as opposed to bringing him her broomstick.

7- The Flying Monkeys weren’t evil; they were under control via a magical Golden Cap. Dorothy actually gets the cap and controls them.

8- Everyone wears emerald glasses in the City of Emeralds so everything looks green (another scheme by Oz).

9- Dorothy and friends fought more monsters and visited different cities, such as a city made entirely of china.

10- The Tin Woodsman used his axe to kill 40 wolves sent by the Wicked Witch of the West.

11- Then the Scarecrow broke the necks of a bunch of crows she sent.

12- Toto isn’t responsible for everything and doesn’t have the super-intelligence he has in the movie (he accidentally moves the screen Oz is hiding behind as opposed to detecting the scheme).

13- Dorothy is like 11 or 12.

If you’d like to read some more differences you can follow these links. They don’t list EVERYTHING, which I will do one day, though.

heres the link:http://baseball.dailyskew.com/2010/02/differences-between-wizard-of-oz-movie-and-book.html

 

[GreenKToo]

Saw it today in 3D..pretty good, 8/10. great visuals, good acting.
saw a couple spots where the CG was questionable. just a nickpick really.
Also, didnt like the visual of theodora after her transformation. She really didnt strike fear into me with her look. she was just a, well, a hot, green witch, with very white teeth lol.
Loved the flying baboons..scary fookers they were.

I cant help but think franco, even tho he did a fairly good job, was miscast. I never for once believed he was a younger Oz. Still, it was enjoyable overall.

 

[Bruce Malone]

The Wonka movie was not in the same league as The Wizard of Oz.

Exactly. It's probably a lot closer to trying to do a remake of gone with the wind.

 

[TheAQU4M4N]

enjoyed the film, did not like Kunis' portrayal of The Witch from the original film (it seemed to me that they dubbed her screams when zooming off with the broom). Braff and King definitely stole the show IMO.
8/10

 

[darkslayer101]

I am gonna watch this later this week...so did anyone catch IM3 trailer in front of Oz?

 

[lespaul59]

Not to critique your critique (every opinion is valid), but, what are some of your thoughts on the overal story? Performances? Characters? I just ask because a lot of what you listed as liking seem to have to do with visuals (again, perfectly valid) and I'm just curious, since I've heard a lot of similar opinions.

Obviously the visuals are important, certainly in a film where you really have to world-build, but in a way, hearing so many people singlng out that aspect seems to validate the idea that Hollywood doesn't have to care about story/character so long as there's something pretty to look at.

I thought the over all story was really good but not great. I think the weekest part of the story was the Oscar and Theodora relationship. To me Theodora came off as more of a crazy stalker than someone who had feel in love and had their heart broken I guess you could say. I don't know if this was Mila Kunis's fault or the script. To me apart from Oscar being a womanizer I think the way he acter was to keep people from getting close or maybe to run away from aproblem insted of dealing with it. Not to mention he was selfish, greedy may be a better word to use. But then you have scenes where they show that Oscar is a good person despite his flaws.

Spoiler

Like one of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Oscar uses his glue to fix the China Girl's legs.

But again where do you place the blame. One thing that kept running through my head was shouldn't Oscar be a little older. But I do wonder did this pop up in my head because I knew Robert Downy Jr. was at least offered the role or would I still think this not knowing that going in. I thought Rachel Weisz was great in her role. If it wasn't for Michelle Williams Rachel Weisz would probaly be my favorite performence. Michelle Williams in my opinion stole the show. Since I've only seen the movie once I can't recall any issues I had with Rachelle Weisz or Michelle Williams off the top of my head. I thought Zack Braff was great in both of his roles. I thought the Flying Bell Hop monley looked great but if had no character I would problaly been like his looks great but serves no purpose. Same with the China Girl. I know she didn't do a whole lot but when they needed her for the story I really liked her. The only complain I have about any of the other characters is that Bill Cobbs beard could have looked better.

If anybody ever has a question about what I liked or didn't like about a move , tv show or whatever ask. I tend to kept my thoughts short because I can start to ramble pretty easy. Plus I'm not always the best at putting my thought into words.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I am gonna watch this later this week...so did anyone catch IM3 trailer in front of Oz?

The trailer played when I saw it.

 

[SpitCurl]

I thought the over all story was really good but not great. I think the weekest part of the story was the Oscar and Theodora relationship. To me Theodora came off as more of a crazy stalker than someone who had feel in love and had their heart broken I guess you could say. I don't know if this was Mila Kunis's fault or the script. To me apart from Oscar being a womanizer I think the way he acter was to keep people from getting close or maybe to run away from aproblem insted of dealing with it. Not to mention he was selfish, greedy may be a better word to use. But then you have scenes where they show that Oscar is a good person despite his flaws.

Spoiler

Like one of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Oscar uses his glue to fix the China Girl's legs.

But again where do you place the blame. One thing that kept running through my head was shouldn't Oscar be a little older. But I do wonder did this pop up in my head because I knew Robert Downy Jr. was at least offered the role or would I still think this not knowing that going in. I thought Rachel Weisz was great in her role. If it wasn't for Michelle Williams Rachel Weisz would probaly be my favorite performence. Michelle Williams in my opinion stole the show. Since I've only seen the movie once I can't recall any issues I had with Rachelle Weisz or Michelle Williams off the top of my head. I thought Zack Braff was great in both of his roles. I thought the Flying Bell Hop monley looked great but if had no character I would problaly been like his looks great but serves no purpose. Same with the China Girl. I know she didn't do a whole lot but when they needed her for the story I really liked her. The only complain I have about any of the other characters is that Bill Cobbs beard could have looked better.

If anybody ever has a question about what I liked or didn't like about a move , tv show or whatever ask. I tend to kept my thoughts short because I can start to ramble pretty easy. Plus I'm not always the best at putting my thought into words.

I think it's 50/50 script vs performance. Theodora's "turn" was paper-thin to begin with. It didn't help that both she and Franco felt horribly miscast. Maybe too young is it, or perhaps neither is that skilled in shedding their "modernity" or whatever you'd call it. There's nothing about either that feels turn-of-the-century, I could easily imagine Sam yelling "cut" and both immedately taking out their phones and sending tweets. Certain people have a timelessness about them, and others just feel painfully of their era.

Mila, especially, really was just a "hot green chick w/white teeth". You need an actor who can disappear into that part. If anything, I think she and Rachel Weisz should've switched roles. Rachel I can buy as the woman scorned, who goes bat-***** insane. Mila felt like Meg playing evil.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Ya as I've said many times casting Kunis in this role was just a huge mistake especially since she didn't really put much effort into any kind of performance.

 

[RetrogradeOrbit]

I gave it a 7. Mainly for the great 3D and the fantastic visuals.

Felt that James Franco was a bit out of his depth. My take is that he really didn't seem old (mature?) enough to be playing the part. The symbolism was very obvious in places and I cringed at the Batman like usage of the "Not the wizard you deserve..." line.
Was rather unimpressed by Danny Elfmans score, it was far too similar to Spider-Man for my ears.
Very much enjoyed, Rachel Weisz and Mila Kunis as the [BLACKOUT]evil[/BLACKOUT] sisters.

 

[BestGirl]

I gave it a 7. Mainly for the great 3D and the fantastic visuals.

Felt that James Franco was a bit out of his depth. My take is that he really didn't seem old (mature?) enough to be playing the part. The symbolism was very obvious in places and I cringed at the Batman like usage of the "Not the wizard you deserve..." line.
Was rather unimpressed by Danny Elfmans score, it was far too similar to Spider-Man for my ears.
Very much enjoyed, Rachel Weisz and Mila Kunis as the [BLACKOUT]evil[/BLACKOUT] sisters.

Agreed. I'm very puzzled by all the praise it's getting. It sounded like standard heroic, fantasy stuff to me.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

Yeah I wasn't wowed by elfmans score as well, but I'm not a huge fan of his stuff in general. To me It didn't sound any different than the twenty other scores he's done in a similar style. He really is the musical counter part to burton, in that he really seems to lack versatility, at least in his old age.

 

[TheAQU4M4N]

Yeah I wasn't wowed by elfmans score as well, but I'm not a huge fan of his stuff in general. To me It didn't sound any different than the twenty other scores he's done in a similar style. He really is the musical counter part to burton, in that he really seems to lack versatility, at least in his old age.

agree, he's definitely comfortable doing what he does similar to Zimmer.

 

[NCBIII]

I'll admit the score is very much in his comfort zone, but I find it fitting for the movie. I find his Oz score catchier and more suited for the film than his Spider-Man scores are for their respective films (though I do like those scores, too).

 

[terry78]

That one part of the score during the b/w sequence where the balloon is swirling up inside the tornado's funnel right before it starts falling was very 1930s. You know the part I mean.