What do y'all think?

I'll probably go see it this weekend just to support my girlfriend. But even if Mila Kunis wasnt in it I still think it looks pretty cool. Got high hopes for it.

I never got into the Wizard of Oz, because, well... http://www.cracked.com/article_18881_5-reasons-greatest-movie-villain-ever-good-witch.html

And it all boils down to this, really:



But Oz does look like a decent adaptation/continuation of the story for those who are into it.

I'm definitely interested. Hoping it's more like Return to Oz than Wizord of Oz though.

Looks pretty terrible to me. Disappointing for Raimi but it looks stale, and I just don't think Franco has the depth or charm to pull off this type of role.

AbsolutNET wrote:Looks pretty terrible to me. Disappointing for Raimi but it looks stale, and I just don't think Franco has the depth or charm to pull off this type of role.

I agree, I loved Franco In 'Planet of the Apes' and he was outstanding in '127 Hours'. This role doesn't quite fit him IMO.

Sandpoint Hawk wrote:

AbsolutNET wrote:Looks pretty terrible to me. Disappointing for Raimi but it looks stale, and I just don't think Franco has the depth or charm to pull off this type of role.

I agree, I loved Franco In 'Planet of the Apes' and he was outstanding in '127 Hours'. This role doesn't quite fit him IMO.

You forgot his best work: Pineapple Express!!

JSeahawks wrote:

Sandpoint Hawk wrote:

AbsolutNET wrote:Looks pretty terrible to me. Disappointing for Raimi but it looks stale, and I just don't think Franco has the depth or charm to pull off this type of role.

I agree, I loved Franco In 'Planet of the Apes' and he was outstanding in '127 Hours'. This role doesn't quite fit him IMO.

You forgot his best work: Pineapple Express!!

...and "Your Highness".

My 9 year old is super excited to see this, so I'll probably take my wife to see it before we let my daughter watch it. I'm not expecting to be blown away by awesome, but I think it will be worth the price of admission (Groupon = 19 bucks for 2 in the Parlor at Cinetopia + a free drink).

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/oz_the_ ... _powerful/

I like Raimis' work, however this is a CGI extravaganza, and more than likely not the best circumstance for his style.

no thanks

The movie was not great, but it was a solid flick with decent acting. Mila certainly hammed it up and you could tell she enjoyed doing so. It was nice to see some old school 3D effects with stuff coming at you.

3D gives me a headache.

CALIHAWK1 wrote:3D gives me a headache.

Try it again once 48+ FPS 3D films come out. Avatar 2 will probably be the first. 24 frames per second is the main reason people get headaches from 3D, it's a horrible frame rate that only ever "worked" because of motion blur. You don't get motion blur with visual effects.

Not 3D gives me a headache.

Oh good, the 3D thing again. Maybe Roland will call me grandpa again.

Oz was...meh. Didn't much care for it. The way the movie was previewed on the Disney Channel made it seem a lot more like a kids movie than I felt like it really was. It was mostly pretty boring and dark. No Disney-style happy endings, rather it seems the new MO is the "backhanded happy ending". I probably should have expected it based on the people involved in the movie though.

Zach Braff was probably the best part.

Does anyone else see Franco as sort of creepy? If I came into a room and James Franco was talking to my kids I wouldn't be starstruck at all...I'd just be wondering who the creep was that was talking to my kids. Then, after I realized who he was...I would wonder who the creep was that was talking to my kids.

I thought that The Hobbit was done in 48 FPS, I could be wrong though. I saw it in 3D at the theater and notices much less blurring than with the original Avatar, figured that was the reason.

The Hobbit was shot at 48 FPS, but most theaters still don't have 48 FPS projectors. It's expected that almost all theaters will have it within a year/year-and-a-half.

I had forgotten that The Hobbit was filmed at 48 FPS, even though a lot of 3D showings weren't showing it in that. I haven't even seen it, but I already know the difference it will make; and it was desperately needed.

JesterHawk wrote:Oz was...meh. Didn't much care for it. The way the movie was previewed on the Disney Channel made it seem a lot more like a kids movie than I felt like it really was. It was mostly pretty boring and dark. No Disney-style happy endings, rather it seems the new MO is the "backhanded happy ending". I probably should have expected it based on the people involved in the movie though.

This is about the best news I could hope for. You better be accurate on this or I'm going to have you flayed.

Zebulon Dak wrote:

JesterHawk wrote:Oz was...meh. Didn't much care for it. The way the movie was previewed on the Disney Channel made it seem a lot more like a kids movie than I felt like it really was. It was mostly pretty boring and dark. No Disney-style happy endings, rather it seems the new MO is the "backhanded happy ending". I probably should have expected it based on the people involved in the movie though.

This is about the best news I could hope for. You better be accurate on this or I'm going to have you flayed.

Keep in mind I took my kids to it, so I was watching through my grownup glasses.

I did put on my juvenile glasses for a few moments to enjoy some of the assets on display by the cast members...

Let's just say I'm pretty sure Franco works out.

Any other eye candy beside Mila?

...Franco...

Michelle Williams and Rachel Weisz also star.

If that's your primary motivation for going though, you will probably be disappointed.

JesterHawk wrote:...Franco...

Michelle Williams and Rachel Weisz also star.

If that's your primary motivation for going though, you will probably be disappointed.

It's never my primary motivation. It's always a great bonus though.

And stop with the Franco love fest, creepathon.

Zebulon Dak wrote:

JesterHawk wrote:...Franco...

Michelle Williams and Rachel Weisz also star.

If that's your primary motivation for going though, you will probably be disappointed.

It's never my primary motivation. It's always a great bonus though.

And stop with the Franco love fest, creepathon.

I think it's the mustache. Ever since Aaron Rodgers grew one...

naw I feel you tho bro

Saw this last night and enjoyed it. I'm not good at writing reviews so I'll just give some thoughts (mostly the negatives I guess).

- Not a huge Franco fan. Sometimes it's hard to tell if he's just not good at acting or if he just wants us to think he's not good at acting. Pretty obvious his intentions were to over do it a bit, probably as kind of a throwback to old Hollywood, but either way I wasn't really into it.

- It was really hard for me to watch this without thinking of it as a remake, or as though the actors were doing sort of their best impressions of the original characters, more than trying to play the roles as best they could, especially in Mila's case. Not to downplay the difficulty of the role, I'm sure it's tough or whatever blah blah... Thought Rachel Weisz did the best job overall, or maybe her's was just the easiest. I dunno. Shout out to Mila's tight black pants though.

- The 3D was amazing. Some of the CGI/green screen stuff was a little hokey to me, but overall the scenery and color was phenomenal. Thought Finley could have been a little more realistic looking. Can't blame the monkey.

- Overall, thought the did a good job of telling the story and recapturing the feel of the original 1939 film. Felt a little bit like a Dr. Seuss movie at times though. Like Oz was more like Whoville.

I'll give it a 6.5 out of 10.

Did they have all the music and dancing like they did in the original?

Tech Worlds wrote:Did they have all the music and dancing like they did in the original?

Nooope. They almost did, but they didn't.

Saw it this weekend when the missus dragged us to see it. Over all, meh. Characters were really shallow, when they could have been far deeper, especially in such a key aspect of the entire story - fooling the "wizard" into thinking good witch was bad and bad witch was good. It was a letdown.

The special effects were overblown as usual. I did like the transition from black and white to color though. Happened very subtly.

The best part of the movie was imagining how over-the-top baby puppy would react to seeing the movie. He goes nuts watching anything with animals in it.

Seahawk Sailor wrote:Saw it this weekend when the missus dragged us to see it. Over all, meh. Characters were really shallow, when they could have been far deeper, especially in such a key aspect of the entire story - fooling the "wizard" into thinking good witch was bad and bad witch was good. It was a letdown.

The special effects were overblown as usual. I did like the transition from black and white to color though. Happened very subtly.

The best part of the movie was imagining how over-the-top baby puppy would react to seeing the movie. He goes nuts watching anything with animals in it.

Yeah, it felt a lot like The Phantom Menace to me. I mean, better than that, but similar feel.