It opened in classic 4:3 black and white, a story unfolding
about a magician, Oz (James Franco), who has dreams of greatness. After a visit
from the woman he loves detailing her pending marriage, the Wizard seems torn
between the simple life he rejected and the show business life he’s barely
living. The opening moments embrace the film style of the 1930s, and subtle
satire is the motivation behind nearly every line. We all know how cheesy some
classic movies can be, and apparently so does Raimi, who has every actor in the
prologue overdoing it in the most perfect way.
Oz is a bit of a scoundrel; one who seems to have a weakness
for beautiful women. He’s pulled the same absurd line about his grandma’s music
box a few too many times, and it’s all about to blow up in his face. After a
less-than-successful magic act, he finds himself being chased by the new man of
a former love interest – who happens to be the strongman in the circus.
This review was published by Blogcritics.
Fleeing in fear, Oz leaps into a hot air balloon, is sucked
up in a twister and – well, we’re not in Kansas anymore.
This is what I imagined a Sam Raimi take on The Wizard of Oz
would be, and I loved every moment of it – at least until color slowly crept
its way in, and the screen widened to reveal the land of Oz for what it truly
was. From there on out things got pretty boring.
Oz the Great and Powerful is, to say the least, not the
movie I was hoping for and, as someone who is both a fan of the 1939 classic
and Sam Raimi, I’m doubly disappointed. There are moments where Sam Raimi’s
direction and wit shine like the yellow brick road, but mostly I just felt
uninterested in what I was seeing.
Sure, everything on screen is colorful, and the special
effects are often beautiful to look at (especially during the film’s climax).
But there’s nothing else about Oz that really hooked me in. Somewhere between
that first hot air balloon ride and the film’s decent final moments, I nodded
off as I learned about talking monkeys, china dolls, and a quest to free the
land of Oz from an evil witch’s curse.
Oz the Great and Powerful suffers from the same condition
that so many prequels do in that it seems obsessed with explaining things that
don’t require an explanation. How did the Wicked Witch turn green? Where did
the Wizard get his cool projection image? Seriously, what’s the deal with
munchkins? Well, now I know – and, quite frankly, I really didn’t need to know.
Prequel films that focus on having a stand-alone story have
the most success, and those who seek to give a so-that’s-how-it-happened
explanation seem to bomb, largely because they force themselves in the shadow
of the original. And if we’re talking about one of the greatest, most
historically significant films of all time – yeah, you probably don’t want to
force your way into its story too much, because you just can’t compare. Much
like the failed sequel Return to Oz (1985), this Sam Raimi product feels like
little more than a cheap knockoff, with modern special effects thrown in to wow
the kiddies.
The problem with Oz is that it has a major identity crisis,
and seems unaware of how to capture the magic of the original. At times what’s
on screen feels like a serious prequel, or perhaps an ode to the classic; yet
there are other moments where this adventure feels like a parody. None of these
approaches work on their own, and all of these takes work even less when
combined together.
This inability to find its legs leaves the performances of
the talented cast feeling flat and uneven. It has to be difficult to play a
character when there’s no consistent tone to work with. Admittedly, there are
moments where Franco really steals the show, but typically even he feels bland
and distant.
In defense of Franco, he does spend most of his time
interacting with CGI characters, which could explain why I never felt drawn
into the adventure. Add in a huge budget and modern computer effects, and all
that wonderful charm that comes from costumed characters is gone. It’s hard to
relate to CGI characters, just as it’s more difficult to make
computer-generated backgrounds come to life, especially when it’s the painted
scenery that gave the original its unique appeal.
I think part of the problem may also be the script – it’s busy
throwing one event after another at the audience to be concerned with character
development. There is the occasional bit of family friendly comic relief tossed
in for good measure, but there’s only so many times a monkey can say something
sarcastic before even the kids will lose interest. Most of what happens comes
off as insignificant to the overall story, which could have easily been told in
a movie that was 45 minutes shorter.
I can’t emphasize this enough: I am a huge Sam Raimi fan,
and I was absolutely stoked when I heard he was entering the Land of Oz. With
the Evil Dead creator at the helm and Danny Elfman in charge of the soundtrack
(which is admittedly excellent), I expected something a little darker and a
little more self-aware of the innate silliness of L. Frank Baum’s children’s
stories.
I’ve read that Raimi was forced to edit the film in order to
obtain a PG rating, but I’m not sure that you can chalk up the uneven tone and
dullness of Oz to studio influence. This is a film that’s flawed from the
script up. It may be worth a watch if you’re just looking for some forgettable
family entertainment. But to me that just isn’t good enough. A prequel to The
Wizard of Oz should be nothing less than great, or it simply shouldn’t exist at
all.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.