Tell us what you thought of 'Oz the Great and Powerful'
Audiences return to the Emerald City this weekend
Are you a fan of In Contention?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
I'm slowly making my way back to movie-watching mode after the onslaught of awards season. You need a palette-cleanser in the immediate wake of such craziness. And one of the biggest films of the year, Sam Raimi's "Oz the Great and Powerful," is hitting theaters this week after a rather sluggish start for 2013 at multiplexes. (Seriously, there may be good little films in this and that nook and/or cranny, but I walked past a marquee the other day and got immediately depressed. It's dreary out there.)
I haven't yet seen Raimi's spin on the Emerald City with James Franco leading the charge, but I've heard good and bad, to say the least. In his review HitFix's Drew McWeeny wrote "there's enough genuine wonder to make this work where ['Alice in Wonderland,' an inevitable comparison point] failed, and it honors the world that Frank L. Baum first created instead of trying to rebuild it into something it's not." Others weren't so kind. I'll let you be the judge of that. So when and if you get around to seeing the film this weekend, give us your take in the comments section and vote in our new poll below!
Related Events
-
movies
2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Makeup And Hairstyling
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Production Design
Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
Best Visual Effects
Best Animated Feature Film
Best Documentary Feature
Best Foreign Language Film
Latest Posts
-
Michael Douglas and Matt Damon excel in Soderbergh's witty Liberace biopicTuesday, May 21, 2013
-
The actor-director gets all the best close-ups in his Faulkner adaptationMonday, May 20, 2013
-
'Traumatized critics exhale.'Monday, May 20, 2013
-
The prestige distributor also handled Asghar Farhadi's 'A Separation'Monday, May 20, 2013
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupMatthew Starr
March 8, 2013 at 2:22PM EST Reply to CommentAs we all know Jan-April is pretty awful in terms of wide releases. If you're in NY though you have a few options. Like Someone in Love, Stoker, The Gatekeepers, Lore and No (among others) are all playing right now.
Kristopher Tapley I noted there were diamonds in the rough. This year's dumping ground has felt particularly miserable, though.
March 8, 2013 at 2:27PM ESTMatthew Starr Yeah I just wanted to point out some of the specific diamonds. Of course as noted unless you are in a city like LA or NY you're only option probably is indeed, Oz the Great and Powerful.
March 8, 2013 at 2:31PM ESTAndrej
March 8, 2013 at 3:09PM EST Reply to CommentLiked it! Though it was a bit diffuse with its characters. All but James Franco come and go very abruptly through the narrative, but they all have their one unique moments to themselves.
It kinda emits a bit of a "classy classic" feeling, too -- it doesn't try to reinvent the story with selfawareness or hipness, but instead, it refreshes the charisma while keeping things intact. Alice in Wonderland might be an easy comparison because of how big and vibrant both their worlds are in 3D, but I'd draw a more apt comparison to Mirror Mirror, as they share close levels of magical whimsy, updated charm and some bits of dark here-and-there.
That said, I can see this movie getting the same three nods as 'Alice'. The setting and the characters are all very creatively designed, and the 3D is a pleasant joy to the eyes, being used so intelligently -- it escapes the black & white frames, and then it tours you along the yellow brick road, on and above it. Lovely little thing, overall.
Kyle Fuller
March 8, 2013 at 3:21PM EST Reply to CommentQuite disappointed. The first half feels vibrant, alive and has a unique sense of humour. Then, after Oz meets Glinda, I felt like the entire movie fell apart. Poorly paced, and lacking in any type of wonder. The four leads all feel like they are starring in different movies. There isn't any tangible chemistry between any of them. Franco relates better to the two CGI characters than he does any of the women. I was especially let down by Kunis and Weisz. Their characters are underwritten, even by family fantasy film standards. If only Raimi had brought the sense of unpredicatability to this that he did Drag Me To Hell. Not a total waste of time, but nothing really memorable besides a few throwaway lines and some nicely composed shots (in particular, the long shot in silhouette as they all try to save Oz from teetering off the cliff).
Kyle Fuller Just got home from Dead Man Down, and I, shockingly, enjoyed this far more than Oz.
March 9, 2013 at 5:57PM ESTCarol
March 8, 2013 at 3:22PM EST Reply to CommentThe ok but that was because of the way too good performances of Rachel Weisz, who steals the film with her fun performance and Michelle Williams, who does wonders with her goodie, goodie role. James Franco and Mila Kunis were miscast to the point of being a capital offense.
JJ1 While I also thought Franco and Kinis were miscast, I still liked what Franco was bringing to the table, so to speak.
March 8, 2013 at 9:41PM ESTDiane @ CAROL~
March 8, 2013 at 10:52PM ESTI found Michelle Williams to be one- dimensional and monotone. Once Glenda was introduced. the movie got to be very very long and seemed never ending. As a viewer I kept waiting for the film to end, thinking it would get better but it never did.
thatguy
March 8, 2013 at 4:43PM EST Reply to CommentDidn't quite like it, but didn't hate it. I liked Mila Kunis and Rachel Weisz quite a bit, and thought they were the best parts of the movie. The film could have used more witch on witch action, IMHO. James Franco was the letdown for me. He just didn't seem convincing as a showman, nor as flawed as his character should have been at the beginning (in order to make his redemption more significant at the end.) Nice production design and nostalgic kicks though.
HoustonRufus
March 8, 2013 at 6:57PM EST Reply to CommentI can't bring myself to see this. I just feels . . . wrong. I think I'll check out some on demand/netflix movies that I've been meaning to catch up on. All suggestions welcome!
JuanL
March 8, 2013 at 7:45PM EST Reply to CommentThe little gems are out there, but wide films, there has been nothing good except Side Effects. The movies by once respectable directors (Parker-Hackford, Safe Haven-Hallstrom, Jack the Giant Killer-Singer, and Oz- Raimi) have all bombed and aren't very good.
The gems to look into include Inside Satan (Dumont), Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami), Beyond the Hills (Mingui), War Witch (Nguyen), Happy Valley: A Year in the Taiga (Herzog), No (Larrain), Lore (Shoreland), Caesar Must Die (The Tavianis), Nights Across the Street (Ruiz) and The Gatekeepers. Of Course though, unless you live in NY or LA, you probably have only gotten one or two of these so far.
JLPatt Chicago has gotten most of those.
March 8, 2013 at 10:04PM ESTAaron McMahon Safe Haven and Oz definitely haven't bombed. Haven't and probably will never see Safe Haven but I think it's funny that hallstrom has become to Nicholas Sparks what Justin Lin is to Fast and Furious
March 13, 2013 at 6:10AM ESTJuanL While they haven't bombed financially, they have bombed critically and artistically, which are much more important to me.
March 13, 2013 at 4:35PM ESTAaron McMahon Nope. You said bombed and aren't very good, which would mean the same thing using that definition.
March 14, 2013 at 2:02PM ESTAlso you can't really use the term bomb in terms of artistry since it's really subjective and bomb is usually an objective metaphor.
Not that I'm really disagreeing with you, just giving you a hard time.
youngjt80
March 8, 2013 at 8:35PM EST Reply to CommentIs this only being released in 3D? I'd like to see it but I won't support 3D movies.
Diane Watch Oz in 2D and save your money on those 3d glasses.
March 8, 2013 at 10:57PM ESTAaron McMahon Yeah...movies are never only released in 3D.
March 13, 2013 at 6:16AM ESTRaimi fans should check it out in 3D since he has always loved throwing things at the camera though the action and cinematography isn't exciting enough to take advantage of it all the way through.
teaparty
March 8, 2013 at 9:14PM EST Reply to CommentWhen Mila dropped her gown in front of the mirror in her bedroom, staring in awe of her naked body and slowly touching every inch with her magic wand while her two sisters hid in her closet in hopes of finding the reasons for her emotional outbursts of wickedness.
Her sisters overcome the sight of their normally reserved sister tenderly caressing her perky lungwarts begin to caress each others lungwarts and begin to kiss without thinking in 3D and I wake up, my hands sticky from soda and click my dirty converse three times wishing that i would be transported to a theater that was showing this film instead of the human skid mark on the underwear of life James Franco.
Kristopher Tapley Sticky with...oh, soda, got it.
March 8, 2013 at 10:01PM ESTJJ1
March 8, 2013 at 9:39PM EST Reply to CommentLoved it. Furthermore, I am convinced that most critics have it out for these type of big budget family film special effect extravaganzas.
Is this movie the pinacle of superb filmmaking with exceptional storytelling? Well, no.
But what it did was provide me a vibrant, wholly imaginative 2 hours of entertainment.
-James Franco gave Oz a goofy charm that I quite enjoyed.
-Rachel Weisz, Michelle Williams, and Mila Kunis all have their moments to shine.
-Loved Franco's sidekick monkey. Brought lots of laughs from he audience.
-And the china doll girl was really adorable; and so well done from a visual effects standpoint.
There was even a moment near the end btwn. Franco and Williams (behind the curtain) that made me teary eyed.
I also thought the movie did a great job tying-in certain subplots and narrative connections that would surface later in the 1939 film.
And the way in which Franco rigs his "magic" in the climax, I thought was genius.
I dont really understand the criticisms that this film was incoherent.
Diane
March 8, 2013 at 10:44PM EST Reply to CommentThe opening credits of Oz are very cleverly done. So right for a prequel with early 40 s cinima -charm . The story line was great and computer generated effect were second to none. Mia Kunis was engaging , so was Zach Braff. The big elephant in the Emerald room ( that no one will mention) is Franco . You sit there watching the story unfold and you're thinking. "DeCaprio could have pulled this off so much better."
Actually there are a dozen other male stars who could've done a muchbetter job in the lead role. Franco was not the only miscast character. Glenda played by Michelle Williams was milquetoast.
I know Disney is creating a franchise of OZ but the first instament left something to be disired ........meaning forget you have a brain and ignore the main charactor. I give it a c+
JJ1 While I dont necessarily disagree, does a main character have to be the Be All End All in enjoying a movie?
March 9, 2013 at 12:04AM ESTAugusta
March 9, 2013 at 1:13PM EST Reply to CommentI agree with JJ1. I wasn't expecting such a family film, but it was fine for what it was. I don't have an inbuilt disdain for films that are aimed at children or families.
James Franco was a good choice for the lead role. One thing that's clear about Franco is that he does have a good heart, and that's the backbone of the story. We also believe that he's clever enough to have bursts of mechanical invention, but self-absorbed enough to miss some important things. He has kind moments too, and he's not frightening. I think he'll be a hit with kids.
Paul Outlaw
March 9, 2013 at 2:32PM EST Reply to CommentI was bored quite a bit (and admittedly tired), but I perked up whenever the 1939 classic was quoted or referenced. Those moments were clever and thrilling. Visual FX/Production design: B+. Mila Kunis is the standout of the three witches, and Franco is a conundrum. So often he just seems out of place in this film, but when the whole thing is over you're pleased that they didn't make a more conventional casting choice. Because he's a good, if often wrong, actor.
Kyle Fuller I completely agree about being bored. Halfway through, the magic just dies out and the movie seems to go on autopilot.
March 9, 2013 at 5:58PM ESTJanice
March 9, 2013 at 6:50PM EST Reply to CommentI too just can't give in to see this even tho I want to and know its not a remake. But It's like forget the ever loving 1939 Judy Garland classic and like this better. Unfair of me but that's how I feel.
Chris138
March 10, 2013 at 7:16PM EST Reply to CommentI had a good time.
Aaron McMahon
March 13, 2013 at 6:05AM EST Reply to CommentRaimi only seemed half interested in the movie: the aspect ratio-based 3D effects and an action finale based on old school magic tricks.
The rest of the movie almost gets by on the Joe Roth blockbuster gloss. The CGI china doll looked pretty great though.
The main problem was the script: was it a buddy story with the monkey, a love story with Glinda, an origin story of the Wicked Witch (there was a three hour musical that gets condensed into five minutes here)? Basically all and none.