MOVIE NEWS: Oz: The Great and Powerful

jaydee74

So I saw this last night with my wife and really enjoyed it. I liked the transition from Kansas to Oz and I could see how some of the scenes would have been really nice in 3D. (I saw it in 2D) My experience with the Oz franchise really only comes from the movie, The Wizard of Oz so I wasn't overly familiar with the characters so I got some things mixed up but really enjoyed it overall. I'm not a huge James Franco fan but thought he did a well enough job with the movie. This is really a question to @Adam_Murdough because I know how much he loves this topic. Did you see the movie? Did you like it and why or why not? What did you think of the characterizations? Having seen this movie has made me want to get into the books so I'll be checking those out so I guess that's one good thing the movie did.

John_Steed

just in case you haven't seen this post

http://thecomicforums.com/discussion/1730/skottie-young-on-the-film-junk-podcast#latest


and I also am looking forward to hear @Adam_Murdough talk about the movie

jaydee74

@John_Steed that sounds aweosme. I'll download it tonight. That's a long episode though. Good thing I have a job at the moment where I NEED stuff like that. Thanks for the link.

Adam_Murdough

Well, Jamie and John, I have seen the "Oz" film, and I hope to sound off on it at some length on next week's Comic Talk episode (I had to miss the recording session this week). For now, I'll just say that the movie inspired a combination of mild enjoyment and mild disappointment in me. I thought it was a decent enough little fantasy/adventure flick with some fantastic effects, sets, and costumes, but it just wasn't quite authentically "Ozzy" enough to appease my inner nine-year-old.

Also, for Jamie: I would never discourage anyone from trying the original Oz stories as written by Baum, Thompson, et al., but if you're expecting those stories to bear any resemblance to what you saw on the screen in Raimi's movie, prepare to be disappointed. Remember, the Oz books were written expressly to entertain children, and children of the early 20th century at that, and as such they consist mostly of good-natured, whimsical fantasy with the occasional burst of comic violence, as opposed to the far more "intense" action-, romance- and effects-oriented melodramatic spectacle Raimi has produced to entertain older and more contemporary audiences. Actually (and this comparison isn't perfect either), "Adventure Time" on Cartoon Network has more in common with classic Oz than does Raimi's movie, so if you dig that show, there's a good chance you'd enjoy the Oz books, too.

nweathington

Adam_Murdough said:

Actually (and this comparison isn't perfect either), "Adventure Time" on Cartoon Network has more in common with classic Oz than does Raimi's movie, so if you dig that show, there's a good chance you'd enjoy the Oz books, too.

An excellent comparison, though Jake is much cooler than any of Dorothy’s animal companions.

Adam_Murdough

nweathington said:

Adam_Murdough said:

Actually (and this comparison isn't perfect either), "Adventure Time" on Cartoon Network has more in common with classic Oz than does Raimi's movie, so if you dig that show, there's a good chance you'd enjoy the Oz books, too.

An excellent comparison, though Jake is much cooler than any of Dorothy’s animal companions.

Perhaps--but is he cooler than the Woozy? True, the Woozy can't change its size or shape, but Jake doesn't shoot fire out of his eyes when he hears someone say the words "Krizzle-Kroo"! :o3

nweathington

I’m not sure, but I’ll bet Jake would kick the Woozy’s butt in Card Wars.

MarkRojas

I highly recommend picking up the Eric Shanower/Skottie Young Oz books if you can. There was so much going on in Baums world.

WetRats

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

John_Steed

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

and free to watch in decent quality >>> Return To Oz

nweathington

John_Steed said:

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

and free to watch in decent quality >>> Return To Oz

I'll just watch my VHS copy, Murd-style.

John_Steed

:)) @nweathington

Adam_Murdough

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Totally agree, Stewart. In fact, "Return to Oz" was what first piqued my interest in Oz, 'way back when I was six years old! Whatever its shortcomings, let's hope that "Oz, The Great and Powerful" at least manages to affect a few of today's kids in the same way, inspiring them to start down the yellow-brick road to true Ozophilia!

Fade2Black

Return to Oz may look dated by today's standards, but I fondly recall the first time I saw video footage of the then yet to be released movie and thinking to myself, "OMG the characters resemble the John R. Neill illustrations I was weaned on."

Matt

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Wait, you're saying Return to Oz is better then Oz: The Great & Powerful?

M

WetRats

Matt said:

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Wait, you're saying Return to Oz is better then Oz: The Great & Powerful?

M

Yes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

O:TG&P just seems like a lame attempt to cash in on the success of "Wicked".

And Franco is so dull he makes Keanau Reeves look like Marlon Brando.

Matt

WetRats said:

Matt said:

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Wait, you're saying Return to Oz is better then Oz: The Great & Powerful?

M

Yes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

O:TG&P just seems like a lame attempt to cash in on the success of "Wicked".

And Franco is so dull he makes Keanau Reeves look like Marlon Brando.

I think Return is more adult oriented. The 1939 musical makes me want to get blown away by a twister to avoid it. I thought Oz was entertaining. There were a few moments I could've done without, but it held my interest enough to research Oz characters.

M

Fade2Black

Early on in Oz's promotion phase, the film was touting that it was done by the same folks that worked on Disney's CGI version of Alice in Wonderland, as if that correlation was intended to be a selling point. Personally, I thought Disney's latest Alice incarnation was a train-wreck of a film, and the notion that Oz was being billed as being done the same people who worked on it did absolutely nothing to make me want to rush out and see Oz. To those of you who have seen both Oz and the Burton Alice in Wonderland film, how would you compare the two films?

DoctorDoom

Looking forward to watching this movie. (On DVD, of course)

LibraryBoy

Haven't seen the new movie yet, but Return to Oz is a damn freaky movie. Good, but surprisingly scary for something marketed as a kids movie, and from Disney no less. Good for the company to think that kids could handle more than most media purveyors think they can, but still, my wife and I watched this for the first time in years a little while back and were both still freaked out in spots... the Wheelers are creepy as hell, and that part where Dorothy has to find her friends in the room full of transformed objects is really suspenseful. Not to mention all that stuff in the beginning with the asylum and the electro-shock therapy! :-S

WetRats

LibraryBoy said:

Haven't seen the new movie yet, but Return to Oz is a damn freaky movie. Good, but surprisingly scary for something marketed as a kids movie, and from Disney no less. Good for the company to think that kids could handle more than most media purveyors think they can, but still, my wife and I watched this for the first time in years a little while back and were both still freaked out in spots... the Wheelers are creepy as hell, and that part where Dorothy has to find her friends in the room full of transformed objects is really suspenseful. Not to mention all that stuff in the beginning with the asylum and the electro-shock therapy! :-S

The Wheelers and the room full of transformed objects are straight out of the book.

Bibliomike

Agree with everything Murd said about this movie on the podcast. Although I found "Oz" mostly entertaining while watching it, it doesn't sit well with me long-term, largely because it doesn't "play fair" and obey its own rules (such as they are). It begins in Kansas a la the 1939 film, and so many Oz residents are doppelgangers of people Oscar knows in Kansas; but ends in Oz as a real place a la Baum's books - which is it, a dream or reality? If it's a dream, why does it resemble Dorothy's dream so much? If it's real, why is Dorothy's visit in the 1939 film a dream? If the Raimi film didn't trade so heavily in the visual shorthand of and knowing wink-nods to the 1939 film, I could take it more on its own merits - but not as it stands.

Was surprised to hear Return to Oz's sfx described as "cheesy." I don't think they are at all. No CGI, sure, but Will Vinton's Claymation is still amazing, almost thirty years on.

WetRats

Bibliomike said:

If it's a dream, why does it resemble Dorothy's dream so much? If it's real, why is Dorothy's visit in the 1939 film a dream? If the Raimi film didn't trade so heavily in the visual shorthand of and knowing wink-nods to the 1939 film, I could take it more on its own merits - but not as it stands.

Could not agree more.

Matt

I did not get this as a dream like in the 1939 musical. I saw it more as a real location. I think the sequel is actually to redo the Wizard of Oz. If so, maybe it won't be a dream.

M

jaydee74

Interesting. @Adam_Murdough I never compare the novels as compared to the books because it will always disappoint. I'm actually very interested in reading the original material that got the movies and whatnot. I have heard great things about Adventure Time but just never got around to seeing it. I do like books though and I am more interested in seeing how different the books differ from the movies. I'm also very intersted in re-watching the Wizard of Oz as well as reading the books. I sort of remember The Return to Oz but not so well. Who played Dorothy. Also, did anyone see SciFi's version of the Wizard of Oz? Did they like it?

dubbat138

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Love that film so much. Saw it when it first came out,and was amazed years later to find out it was considered a major bomb.

dubbat138

WetRats said:

Matt said:

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Wait, you're saying Return to Oz is better then Oz: The Great & Powerful?

M

Yes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

O:TG&P just seems like a lame attempt to cash in on the success of "Wicked".

And Franco is so dull he makes Keanau Reeves look like Marlon Brando.

So far the only thing I liked James Franco in was "Freaks and Geeks". Since then he has been more miss than hit. I wouldn't say he was more boring than Keanau,but it seems like in every film he is in he is either really stoned or really bored.

WetRats

dubbat138 said:

WetRats said:

Matt said:

WetRats said:

"Return to Oz" was way better for a fraction of the budget.

Wait, you're saying Return to Oz is better then Oz: The Great & Powerful?

M

Yes.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

O:TG&P just seems like a lame attempt to cash in on the success of "Wicked".

And Franco is so dull he makes Keanau Reeves look like Marlon Brando.

So far the only thing I liked James Franco in was "Freaks and Geeks". Since then he has been more miss than hit. I wouldn't say he was more boring than Keanau,but it seems like in every film he is in he is either really stoned or really bored.

He was stoned & bored in F&G, too... but he was *supposed* to be!

John_Steed

I've met him in person when he opened his exhibition "Gay Town" in Berlin this February. He's exactly that kind of bored and stoned looking guy in real life. In his speech he was talking about being up for 48 hours though.