I didn’t realize how much I wanted to see this movie until the theater went dark. Excitement overtook the trepidation I had about James Franco and another Oz movie in general (let alone a gigantic budget shiny one), and I was most definitely able to enjoy this ride. It was my first Oz experience in the theaters, you see, and though I didn’t experience the equal thrill of a young girl in a theater in 1939 accompanying Dorothy into a technicolor masterpiece, I did get to see the best use of modern 3D since “Avatar” and witness a rebirth that was rife with homage and honor. I counted at least four classic references before the title sequence had even finished, which to me shows that the filmmakers were completely aware of how lucky they were to be involved in such a project and new that they had better show some respect. And for the most part, they did.
This movie was gorgeous. The palettes were bright without ever being hokey, the cinematography was astounding, and as I mentioned before – I’ll never know what it was like to see color on a movie screen for the first time, but I did see some CG work that made me dizzy and awed, which is a first for me. Some will gripe about this, about the use of all this technology and money, but remember: the original “Wizard of Oz” was not a simple film in 1939. It was a big budget spectacle with groundbreaking special effects. Sure, they used pantyhose instead of 350 million dollars, but the principle is the same.
I’m a terrible critic because I don’t enjoy dissing actors, but I’m still not entirely convinced that Franco was the best pick for the conniving and charismatic Oscar Diggs. His heartfelt moments far surpassed his smarmy and for this character those moments definitely should have been equal. But Franco seems like a nice enough guy, and so does the Wizard. Weisz, as well, was beautiful and sinister but they both could have gone so crazy with their performances and still not have reached kitschy. I mean, this is a Sam Raimi movie. I want a little kitschy. But I would also probably acknowledge that the choice of playing it low was directorial, not the actor’s. And so we get to Mila Kunis, who without a doubt brings it. Her screeching, her postures, her laugh – all brilliant and actually raised goose pimples a couple times. Michelle Williams was a great choice for Glinda, as she was inspired by enough Billie Burke but never reached the point of doing an impression. Finley is the requisite CG sidekick, but his animation was pretty good, Zach Braff is a fun voice over actor, and he actually got two audible “AWWWWWWWWW!”s from a large portion of the audience. There are a few great character actors in from the towns in Oz, and one moment that will have all the Sam Raimi fans in the audience happily smirking at each other.
The plot seemed to be more consistent with Baum’s books than with the 1939 film, but still had its troubles. I read recently that using coincidence to get your characters in trouble is cool, but to use it to get them out of trouble is lazy (and I am pretty sure I am paraphrasing Chuck Wendig, so if anyone out there knows I’m wrong please correct me). Oz fell trap to that a couple of times, but this is a children’s movie and sometimes elements of fantasy need to just not be analyzed too deeply. Which brings me to another consideration – just what demographic does this movie aim to please? Those who loved “The Wizard of Oz”? New generations? I remember how scared I was of that damn tornado and those damn monkeys when I was wee, and let me tell you what; there are some wholly terrifying scenes in this iteration of the universe. The monkeys are now flying baboons, and they make the flying monkeys of yore look like, well, Finley. Irony and intention acknowledged. And can I just let my Oz Nerd show for a second? The original slippers were silver, not red, but why was Glinda wearing them in this movie? That is a tiny nitpick that will probably bother no one. But Evanora should have been wearing those shoes.
The costuming and art direction remained of an art-deco feel, with an occasional sci-fi update. If either are snubbed come Oscar time, I will be genuinely surprised. The Wicked Witch is a teensy bit sexified, which I’m sure could inspire discussions of how we see and process evil by lots of people who are either smarter than me or need a new hobby, but it worked.
So back to the demographic. My friend and I discussed just how young a child we would bring to this movie, and we both agreed on ten years. But neither one of us have kids, so maybe take that with a grain of salt. And also we were both watching crap like “Creepshow” when we were seven, so there you go with that. I can promise you that there is one Sam Raimi classic moment that will ensure your five year old sleeps in your bed for the next several months, however, so maybe keep that in mind.
Will “Oz the Great and Powerful” ever be as special to me as “The Wizard of Oz”? No. Does that matter. It really doesn’t. The movie had me smiling, open mouthed in awe, tense with feels and … yes… actually made me tear up once. That’s really all I ask of a good time movie, and I received it in abundance. I would whole heartedly recommend this movie to any lover of fantasy, thrills, or any one who appreciates what is possible in modern film making.