Oz The Great and Powerful

[fishstick]

Yeha but it was stupid. To make such quick crush work you gotta give it the whole movie or people will go Huh? like we here obviously do. One of the greatest things about Titanic is that everyone buys into Rose falling for Jack and leaving her old life behind in a span of 3 days! When you watch the movie you don`t think, c`mon, it`s freakin 3 days, who does that? You forget that because the movie makes the love birds feel like they know each other for a lifetime thus her choices make perfect sense, are 100% clear and understandable. OTOH, I`m still not sure whether Theodora agreed to bite th apple because she was a jilted lover or Queendom has just slipped through her fingers.

Edited March 9, 2013 by fishnets

[jstevan]

Well I think that it's understandable why she fall for him so quick when I watched it for the first time..it's a fantasy world, she's a witch, we don't know how witches feel, act, do...on the other hand in fairytales, princessess accept marriage proposal after third sentence and say that they're in love etc etc...it's fantasy, people! don't overanalyze it...

[fishstick]

It isn`t overanalysing, just asking for more substance and stronger foundation.

 

Besides, for a movie that starts off in real world and than continues in the fantasy world where real life perosns have duplicates of sorts, it totlaly doesn`t bother to close the circle (which is what WoO did). Really all over the place.

[FilmBuff]

Time for my poorly written review!

 

I enjoyed the hell out of this movie. It's been a solemn year for movies up until this weekend. I only really liked Side Effects through the first 2 months of the year. The thing I enjoyed the most about this movie is the visuals. Sam Raimi's films always look INCREDIBLE. This is magnum opus. At certain points, I felt like I was actually there in Oz. The visuals were mind-blowing and some of the best I've seen since Avatar.  This movie had a MUCH better visual style than Alice In Wonderland. There were very few poorly done shots. Sam Raimi did a better job directing this movie than Tim Burton did with Alice. Raimi has a much better grasp on story-telling than Burton-the-hack. The movie is a straightforward by-the-numbers fairy tale, I wasn't looking for a big/confusing story line. 

 

Of the witches, I disliked the performance of Mila Kunis. Yuck! She didn't look like she cared to be in the movie, her transformation was poorly executed. She gave a very bored/flat performance. Michelle Williams and Rachael Weisz were both great in their roles, you can tell they had a lot of fun. The side characters were both great. The China Doll was definitely my favorite character, I liked this child-like innocence she brought to the movie. The talking monkey was also hilarious, albeit I didn't like how he disappeared for a long part of the movie though. As for James Franco, I didn't mind him as much as others seemed to. He gave a so-so performance, not great/ not horrible. 

 

The movie never slowed down for me, the ending was great. I enjoyed the black/white portion of the movie as well,  a tribute to the original Wizard of Oz. All in all, I enjoyed this movie much more than I thought I would. The only thing preventing it from being an A movie is Mila Kunis. Her crappy performance dropped it a letter grade.

 

I give it a B+.

[JackO]

I think my big problem with this film was Mila Kunis. I mean she had THE character, the wicked witch, and she played her character like it was a piece of paper. Rachel Weisz's character had much more layers as she manipulated Kunis and Oz. With Kunis it was play it innocent and then shriek like a banshee and then even when the whole reason she went mad, Oz tells her she can come back to zo if she behaves, she just shrieks again. 

 

Another issue I got Oz was a serial womanizer. Haven't read books or nothing but it seemed really awkward that he was more interested in getting laid then learning magic or performing tricks or making friends. He was just generally an asshole. I mean they set it up so that he could see the light but i never really believed that he did. Even when he saved the day. It still felt like to me he was just tricking people again. He even lied at the end to Williams but it was a good lie. He didn't really change. He had no arc. Just that he manipulated people in less obnoxious ways. I though the china girl and monkey vfx were better then richard parker.

 

It felt overlong. I mean I can understand why they explored his unlikable character. It hasn't been on film. But it made for a depressing horndog movie. I mean not having a bunch of magic works within the story but I don't think it works cinematically There were opportunities to show magic but each time the movie chose the safe and cheap route. Worst offender was when Oz and Williams and china and monkey were running away from those flying things and they chose clouds and fog instead of something much more over the top. Maybe it is because i am spoiled on superhero movies but it just felt kind of flat. 

 

But int he end, the climax 'fight'  made it so worth i, I almost forgave the film for wasting my time with such an insufferable character for 90 minutes but alas I could not do that.  It was really inventive how they developed the Oz with the fireworks and smoke. And the edits back to him sitting in the carriage. It all worked.  

 

I hope sequel focuses more on the magic and flash and less on the insufferable con artist.

[Claire of Themyscira]

For a long time now, I had been wishing that Rachel was the WW and not Mila. :|

[Punishment]

Movie had its moments, but I thought it was a bit overreaching.  I echo some of the other reviews in that the first part of the movie was quite drawn out.

 

C/C+

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Pretty bad, a nice visual film and I liked all the references. But the acting and screen drag this film down. I am going to gave to watch the Wizard of OZ tomorrow.

[fishstick]

WW problem is that WW is really not the villain of the piece but they make the mystery of who WW is the focus. And when we find out who she is, it`s still Evanora who is the main villain because she created WW and continued to pull strings. WW was reduced to maniacal laugh and spouting threats because that looks good in a trailer. It was not sufficient for 2 hours + movie.

 

You simply cannot use an iconic character like that and make it a cypher. WW here had no substance whatsoever. She wasn`t the main villain, she wasn`t even a hanchman (that Vader was to Emperor), but just some hysterical loon. I mean, if this is a set up for sequels where she`s gonna take over as the villain, I`m not impressed.

[FilmBuff]

Felt like MIla Kunis was just reading lines of dialogue with no emotion whatsoever. What the Fuck! If they do make a sequel, leave her out of it and recast someone who can ACT!

[ChD]

Felt like MIla Kunis was just reading lines of dialogue with no emotion whatsoever. What the Fuck! If they do make a sequel, leave her out of it and recast someone who can ACT!

 

Gotta agree. That fake crying when the tears burned her. I mean, OMFG. Even my dog can act better

[jstevan]

Agree, crying was really bad, although I love Mila's performance...

[mattmav45]

It's a mediocore film that is nearly saved by two stand-out performances.I'll get the negatives out of the way first.........I do agree that Mila Kunis was miscast. She is likely the type of actress that will never be effective in a villian type role, so I'm not really holding this against her. I'm somewhat surprised that nobody (besides Gopher) has mentioned just how bad James Franco was. This is the biggest problem with the film, as the whole story centers around you getting behind his character. Only thing is, I didn't really ever see a character to relate to or get behind. Terrible performance, IMO. There was way too much build-up prior to the climax. It simply meandered around for 30-45 minutes, and it felt like the product of an unfocused script.As for the good.....the climax was pretty good, and at least let you leave the theater on a high note. Michelle Williams and Rachel Weisz were simply awesome, and easily the best part of the film. Without their acting, I likely would have hated this. Rachel Weisz in particular has some scene-stealing scenes, and hams it up in marvelous fashion.All in all.........it's not another Alice in Wonderland, but I'd say it's a distant cousin. B-/C+

Edited March 9, 2013 by mattmav45

[fishstick]

OK, lets stop pretending that Mila can`t act at all. She can. She just didn`t click with the material here. It happens. Not eevery perforemnce by every actor is going to be great or even passable.

[ddddeeee]

 I'm somewhat surprised that nobody (besides Gopher) has mentioned just how bad James Franco was.  This is the biggest problem with the film, as the whole story centers around you getting behind his character.  Only thing is, I didn't really ever see a character to relate to or get behind. Terrible performance, IMO. 

I loved Franco. I thought he was really charming and has very good comedic timing.

[fishstick]

I loved Franco. I thought he was really charming and has very good comedic timing.

 

Plus good chemistry with Michelle and interaction with China Girl and Finley.

 

It`s the character of Oz that`s a typical douche with a hidden heart of gold trope that wasn`t very interesting. You could see from miles away how the story will ened and the journey there wasn`t particulary engaging either.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Franco was forgettable but his character was poorly written. 

[fishstick]

I hope someone makes NO MERCYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY and NEVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH gifs So I can restore Team Bombur - putting the ham back where it belongs - on your plate! sig.

Edited March 10, 2013 by fishnets

[Cmasterclay]

I enjoyed myself. I thought it was visually brilliant and the themes and dialogue, while more "kid-film" than I had thought, were enjoyable.  The parts in Kansas were perfect, and the first thirty minutes in Oz were great as well. I enjoyed Franco. He was self-aware and had great comedic timing. Williams nailed it, and I didn't mind Kunis like everybody else seemed too.  Weisz was excellent though a bit excessively generic at times. I found it 100 times better than Alice or John Carter.

 

B+

[Spidey Freak]

Okay, got some horrible seats because we didn't prebook and the screening was almost full when we arrived. Nevertheless I enjoyed it. Some incredibly pretty, if derivative, visuals, some cool Raimi moments, show stealing China Girl, adorable Finley, Revenge of the Giant Face climax was fun, shout outs to original movie were neat, Rachel and Michelle were good (color me surprised that Glinda had so much focus. I thought her character would get shortchanged considering she is the less interesting Goody Two Shoes; see Anne Hathaway's White Queen in Alice).

 

Also, I found James Franco to be utterly charming. The Wizard of Oz was always a con-man and sleaze, and Franco managed to portray those aspects perfectly while still making him charismatic and likable. A tall order for anyone. People not liking Franco obviously did not like his character to begin with, not Franco's acting.  

 

Okay, now we come to poor Mila Kunis and her portrayal of the equally pitiable Theodora. It is apparent that whoever wrote this movie was HEAVILY INSPIRED by the WWW's portrayal in Wicked, the musical and book. Making Theodora a shy, unloved, misunderstood creature was definitely borrowing heavily from Elphaba's character in Wicked. This also explains why they did not have her as the main villain and simply manipulated by her sister till the end. They wanted to make her a tragic character and have people feel for her downfall. However, in order to do so effectively, they should have really given her more focus, which isn't asking much as the Wicked Witch is the franchise's biggest USP.

 

As fishnets mentioned, it seemed unbelievable that Theodora would fall madly in love with Oz in just a span of.. 12 hours? I have been wondering why was she so jilted, was it because she felt Oz had taken advantage of her (my friend suggested that he had probably.. ahem, deflowered her, which certainly explains her strong words for him like "immoral" later on when she confronts him and Glinda for the first time post transformation). Another place where they failed was, as fishnets mentioned again, zero chemistry between the sisters. Evanora was supposed to be the evil, scheming one so it made sense for her to be cold towards Theodora, but if Theodora was supposed to be sympathetic, naive and trustworthy, shouldn't she have shown more blind adoration and respect for her elder sister? They really skimmed over the relationship the sisters shared with each other. I think this is why you couldn't really feel for Theodora the way you were expected to, she just wasn't fleshed out enough in any aspect and you couldn't be brought to care for her. Contrast this with the wonderful work Wicked did with the WWW. If you are going to copy, at least don't make a half-assed work out of it. Then again, this is Raimi we are talking about, who just substitutes ham for actual, touching emotionalism.

 

It is interesting how messing up the characterization of one character can mess up an entire movie. But that just underlines how the Wicked Witch of the West is the appeal of the Oz franchise. Sad, considering the rest of the movie is pretty darn enjoyable.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Spidey Freak