Dir. Sam Raimi
130 Minutes
Rated PG
The Wizard of Oz is possibly the single most famous movie of all time. It's a generational film that parents pass down to their children, and truly defines what a 'timeless classic' should be. But with that hugely recognizable brand name comes movie studios foaming at the mouth for their next blockbuster. In 1954, about twenty years after MGM's adaptation of the Frank L. Baum book was released, Disney finally got their dirty hands all over the property and acquired the rights to the remaining Oz books. Shortly after (and by shortly I mean thirty years later in 1985), the big D released the financial and critical flop Return to Oz (but screw everybody, I kind of liked that movie). Although that didn't pan out, sooner or later another attempt at an Oz film was going to happen. In 2010, Sam Raimi came on board to direct this "unofficial" prequel to the 1939 film, starring James Franco as the titular wizard.
The trailers pretty much explain the whole plot, so I'll spare you the details, but it's basically about how Oz, the man, gets sucked into this magical world that he has to save due to his own pre-hero character traits (aka, he's a con artist/asshole who blossoms into a "good man"). He's joined by two little sidekicks: one is a CGI flying monkey voiced by Zach Braff, the other a tiny orphaned porcelain girl. Then there are three witches, Glinda (Michelle Williams) the "good" witch, and Evanora (Rachel Weiss) and Theodora (Mila Kunis), the two b-witches. It goes exactly how you think it would, with Franco thrust into a situation against his will, fighting against the evil witch(es?) to save everybody.
I'm a huge Sam Raimi fan. I'll even defend Spider-Man 3. But while I don't think it's Raimi's fault, this Oz adventure doesn't have the depth or the "magic" to deliver anything beyond mild amusement. That mild amusement is pretty damn good though. Raimi definitely reminds us that it's his picture, with those little touches that let us know this is the same guy who made Army of Darkness (in fact this story features a few parallels to that film). Especially when we are in pre-Oz mode, where everything is in black and white and the boxed-in aspect ratio is present, there are so many cool visual nuggets in there that make this one of the few films I'd recommend seeing in 3D. There are a number of his signature quick zoom-ins, and the Evil Dead 2 slapstick and clever humor reared its head throughout this movie. So in case there were other Raimi nerds who were worried, be cool, his style did not get lost in the Disney shuffle.
Even though it does have those cool moments, for some reason this movie feels cheap, despite the price tag that must have come with it. I think because so much of this world is computer generated it just comes off as fake and un-lived in. Not helping things are its unfortunately miscast actors. I really do like James Franco (I thought he was amazing in 127 Hours), but this is not his role. This character screams to be played by Robert Downey Jr. He was originally set to star in this but backed out for unknown reasons. Also, Mila Kunis as a villain? Really? When you're casting the Wicked Witch (OK spoilers, but who doesn't know this by now), you are competeing with the likes of Margaret Hamilton. Hamilton's rendition of the Wicked Witch is one of cinema's greatest all-time villain performances (and she's only on screen for 11 minutes!). She brought so much to that role, you really felt as though she was pure evil. Kunis just does not fit this type. She normally excels at playing a funny, down to earth girl. Am I really supposed to believe Mila Kunis is this naive, emotional, intense evil presence? It just doesn't come off right at all, and her make-up is pretty terrible. I haven't seen the musical Wicked, but especially in comparison to the 1939 film, Kunis looked like a friggen fashion model in her makeup. You'd think a transformation in a Raimi/KGB film would be a little more intimidating (if you don't know KGB's work, there's too much to list, IMDB that shit, they've done EVERYTHING).
It has some sweet moments, it has some funny moments (mostly coming from colorful side characters), and it has some clever filmmaking techniques that no doubt came from Raimi's mind - if only there were a stronger narrative structure and a cast that matched the roles they were playing. If it weren't for the well-concieved CGI monkey and 'China Girl' the land of Oz would be pretty boring. Oz The Great and Powerful begins and ends strongly, but seems to get lost along the way, never really feeling like the grand adventure it set out to be. There is a lot to like here though, and it does tie in quite a bit with the 1939 movie even though there are a lot of legal reasons why they couldn't include a bunch of things (everything from the ruby slippers to the Munchkin haircuts were scrutinized by Warner Brothers lawyers looking to SUE, GOD DAMN IT). Anyway...I do think it's worth seeing, and I'm sure general audiences will respond to it, but this just fell a little short for me.
Rating: C+ (I was teeter-tottering between this and a B-, so take that how you will)
No comments:
Post a Comment