Oz, the Great and Powerful

I thought it was very meh, and found it really sad that the witches had to be represented not as women with agency, but how they related to a man (and how evidently even though they had real magic is wasn't nearly as powerful as fake magic, and how none of them could sit in the throne, only a man could).

I also found the writing weak, and Franco's acting charmless. Some of the visuals were stunning, but some too fake. I wrote a detailed review here, for anyone interested: http://geekhardshow.com/2013/03/review-oz-the-great-and-powerful/

(also if people are interested in the representation of the female characters in the film vs the original books - read this. It's fascinating: http://www.film.com/movies/oz-the-great-and-powerful-witches )

Oh man. I shouldn't have clicked here. I have a girls' day with my daughter Sunday, and we're going to see this before manis/pedis. We've both been looking so forward to it. I'll let you guys know what I think.

I can't figure out why people keep ogling over the special effects. They're not that good, y'all. The CGI was distractingly horrible.

There were parts of it, individual scenes, like the little China girl getting her legs reattached, that were good, but the overall pace and writing was just sloppy. I expected better from Sam Raimi. This felt like he was trying to be Terry Gilliam, and failing.

Toothpaste said:

I thought it was very meh, and found it really sad that the witches had to be represented not as women with agency, but how they related to a man (and how evidently even though they had real magic is wasn't nearly as powerful as fake magic, and how none of them could sit in the throne, only a man could).

Click to expand...

Booooooooooooooooooo

I was thinking about seeing this, but now I think I'm going to stay home and throw knives at a wall.

I'll have to agree on the special effects--or lack of them thereof. Some looked great and the others...cheesy.

Franco is okay in the title role, but the whole movie seemed to distance itself from me, or rather, I didn't feel involved in it. Growing up and watching the original, well, yeah, everything else pales, and reading the Baum books as a child and letting my imagination take over...this film is too hit and miss.

I'd say it's worthwhile renting, but not a buying thing.

("Oreo, reee-o, Oreo, reee-o"--sorry, had a Wreck-it Ralph moment there)

As someone who grew up loving the OZ books, everything I've heard about this film makes me very sad. I knew from the commercials that it would be more of a Judy Garland film inspired prequel (via Wicked) than any sort of actual attempt to bring the original stories to film, but I was still hoping they'd at least capture some of Baum's spirit...

Johnny- You should really read that article I linked to above (not my review, the article below it. I mean, you can read my review too, but that's not my point . . .). I mean, it'll depress you because it explains how this film does not at all capture Baum's spirit, but it's a fascinating article nonetheless.

Toothpaste said:

Johnny- You should really read that article I linked to above (not my review, the article below it. I mean, you can read my review too, but that's not my point . . .). I mean, it'll depress you because it explains how this film does not at all capture Baum's spirit, but it's a fascinating article nonetheless.

Click to expand...

Oh, I read both. That's why I'm sad...

Sorry .

But hey, it did so well at the box office that a sequel is being planned which means they will get the chance to rectify their mistakes!!

Or, you know, just keep making new ones . . .

Rhoda Nightingale said:

I expected better from Sam Raimi.

Click to expand...

After Spider-Man 3? After Drag Me To Hell?

Not expecting much from him seems the smart thing at the moment.

^Well, there is that, I suppose. I have a habit of blocking out the bad of some of my (former) favorite directors even when it's been smacking me in the face for years. Glad I'm not the only one who hated Drag Me to Hell though. I dunno why so many horror fans squee over that mess.

To be fair, I think Spider-Man 3 would have been better if he hadn't been forced to put Venom in by the studio.

At least, that's what I heard.

I've read some mixed reviews about this, and was wondering whether to or not. My sister is a huge OZ fan, but she flat out said 'no.' So I think it's a no.

We are a bit strange though, we both love Jim Henson's Back To Oz.

I seem to have liked the movie better than most people. It had some flaws (thematic and story-telling), but I couldn't help but enjoy myself anyway. *Shrug.*

Zoombie said:

To be fair, I think Spider-Man 3 would have been better if he hadn't been forced to put Venom in by the studio.

At least, that's what I heard.

Click to expand...

Oh, don't blame Venom--he's a great character. The failing is in the way the whole thing was written. Venom's arc was too short and too simple, Peter Parker's "emo" phase was embarrassing, and the whole love triangle business with Harry was just stupid--and should've ended with the first movie.

Rhoda Nightingale said:

Oh, don't blame Venom--he's a great character. The failing is in the way the whole thing was written. Venom's arc was too short and too simple, Peter Parker's "emo" phase was embarrassing, and the whole love triangle business with Harry was just stupid--and should've ended with the first movie.

Click to expand...

I wasn't blaming Venom, per say, I was blaming him being forced in there at short notice.

Rhoda Nightingale said:

Oh, don't blame Venom--he's a great character. The failing is in the way the whole thing was written. Venom's arc was too short and too simple, Peter Parker's "emo" phase was embarrassing, and the whole love triangle business with Harry was just stupid--and should've ended with the first movie.

Click to expand...

I agree, but I didn't even like the first movie all that much. Everyone complains about Spider-Man 3, but I was never really impressed with any of them.

Franco is horrendous in this, totally miscast. Everyone else is okay but rather one-note. Zach Braff and Joey King are impressive as the voices of Finley and China Girl. The story drags a little but goes down easier on a second viewing.

It's worth a rental, but I'm wishing I'd seen Jack the Giant Slayer instead.
Another beef I have with this is they butchered the Wicked canon.

Wicked is canon?

I thought so, I may be wrong.

WICKED isn't canon. It's by an entirely different author written in a completely different time.

If anything it's in the same category as this film, a modern storyteller creating a prequel to the original work. Now whether they are comparable quality wise, that's a whole other question.

And from what I heard, Disney made this because they were p.o.'ed they couldn't get the movie rights to Wicked.