AA
enthusiast
Posts: 864
Loc: Allen, TX
Reg: 07-20-09
|
03-22-13 05:27 PM - Post#159717
I was kind of disappointed in this movie. But after seeing right before I sat down that it was only rated PG, my hopes had already gone down. I knew at that point that it was not going to be as dark and exciting as the preview made it out to be. And it wasn't. I know the original was also just rated PG and considered a family movie, but the preview made this to look that they were taking it to the next level. Even my wife was apprehensive about watching it since she's a chicken. But in reality, it is just as family oriented as the original. Take that and add a few cheesy/mushy scenes, making the story drag on at times, and you just have an OK movie. Not the instant classic that the "Wizard of Oz" was.
The story in general was interesting and did a good job building up to where the "Wizard of Oz" takes over. It was interesting seeing where the Wizard came from and how he got to be who he is. What I didn't like, was some of the cinematography. I really enjoyed the beginning starting in black and white just like the original, but as soon as he got in Oz and the colored CGI took over, it lost me. The CGI was bright colored and over the top making it look more like a cartoon than what you have in your head the way Oz looks like. I know they have to keep up with industry standard and have enough CGI to blow your mind, but I was hoping for more of an "Avatar" or "Pirates of the Caribbean" CGI, instead I got "Alice in Wonderland". The 3D in this I thought was sub-par. There was hardly any noticeable scenes of images popping out at you, which is fine in my book (I'm not a huge 3D guy anyway), but even on those few scenes, the 3D images were all blurry and seemed sloppy. Nowhere near the quality that other new 3D movies have been showcasing.
The casting just didn't work for most of the characters. Kunis (Theodora - Wicked Witch of the West), and Franco (Oz), neither fit their character at all and many of the supporting characters I just found irritating. The only one that nailed the character in looks and performance was Michelle Williams (Glinda - Good Witch of the South).
Disney tried to make the movie funny, and most of the people in the theater laughed (I did not but a few times), but I think it was just one of those times that being in the theater makes it funnier than it really is. I feel that if you watched it alone at home and nobody was there to start the contagious laugh, you would not think it was funny.
In conclusion, I think this would be good for children, but even though it was rated PG, it would have to be an older child. Maybe 8 and older. The story would be confusing and some of the scenes would be scary for younger children. For the adults, save yourself $10/ticket and see this when it comes to your local Redbox.
|
rtinallentx
enthusiast
Posts: 454
Loc: Allen, TX, USA
Reg: 04-08-03
|
03-23-13 02:33 AM - Post#159725
In response to AA
We disagree on this one as well. I thought Oz was an enjoyable 130 minutes.
Yes, the story slows down a bit at times, and they could have made the movie darker, but why would they? The Wizzard of Oz is a children's fantasy franchise not an adult drama, and the original is rated G (there was no original rating as there were no ratings in 1939).
As for the CGI being "bright colored and over the top making it look more like a cartoon than what you have in your head the way Oz looks like", I thought Oz looked just as it should. What part of Oz in the 1939 orginal didn't look cartoonish. Afterall it's the magical land of Oz not the alien plant of Oz.
I don't have any comments on the 3D aspects of the movie as I hate 3D and won't pay the extra cost for the ticket.
I thought the acting throughout was above par. That's actually saying a lot for Franco. I will say that I wasn't impressed with Zach Braff.
Considering that Oz has already grossed $130mil in US distribution alone, I think it's likely that Disney is already discussing a sequel.
|
 Debbie
enthusiast
Posts: 609
Loc: Allen, TX USA
Reg: 01-24-00
|
03-23-13 02:09 PM - Post#159729
In response to rtinallentx
I agree the movie was enjoyable. I didn't have any great expectations. I just wanted to see something wholesome and enjoyable and that's what I got!
|
AA
enthusiast
Posts: 864
Loc: Allen, TX
Reg: 07-20-09
|
03-23-13 11:31 PM - Post#159733
In response to Debbie
I understand that the Oz franchise is considered a family film, but I just hate it when they advertise it as something completely different. Like I said before, the previews look very dark. Enough to where my wife thought she would be scared and I was excited thinking that they were showing more of a dark side of Oz. Nowhere in the previews do they show a talking China doll or an emotional monkey in a hat that both made for some very cheesy scenes
|
gma3
enthusiast
Posts: 676
Reg: 10-17-06
|
03-24-13 08:56 AM - Post#159734
In response to Debbie
I agree. It was an enjoyable movie and enjoyed it with my family..Loved the little china doll....
|
lostyankee
enthusiast
Posts: 1336
Reg: 10-27-05
|
03-25-13 06:53 PM - Post#159763
In response to gma3
I went to high school with one of the Munchkins... kinda cool actually knowing someone in a movie
|
|
