Wasn't keen on it myself. Didnt hit the spot for me, didnt like the witches not witchey enough. Kunis not evil enough for me. Too modern day. Maybe I just wanted it to be Wicked.
Can't stand the blond actress who played Glinda, sorry to say she has a face I would like to slap but then because of that I wouldnt much like her in anything.
I'd wait til it comes on tv and give it a go then.
Saw this today and I want overly impressed which is a shame cos I was really looking forward to it!
I really like Mila Kunis but I've got to admit I wasn't at all convinced by her portrayal of the wicked witch, she was doing fine until that point! I agree with the poster who said she seemed to shout a lot.
Michelle was great I thought, defo stayed true to the original good witch. It was an okay film overall but nowhere near as good as I was expecting.
Yes I think there is but it's still waiting for final agreements , decisions, contracts etc.
Wicked will happen sooner or later, Universal are the producer of the stage version so they'll greenlight it, the various productions are still doing very well, I believe it has grossed over $1bn worldwide but that's over a long period,
Think Robert Downey Jnr was originally asked to play Oz,for those that have seen the film do you think he wouldve done a better job than James Franco?
That's correct. When i was watching the film i tried to imagine him in the role and i don't think he would have been suitable either. I think an actor that could convincingly play awkward, arrogant and quirky would have sufficed.
It's received mixed reviews but none too scathing/bad. I'm seeing it next week (as an 'TWOO' fan) but the Wicked Witch of the West is my favourite character
Saw it on Friday and enjoyed it very much. Not a fan of 3D but was this in IMAX 3D and was blown away, well worth the extra £££. The middle of the movie dragged abit but that's the only negative i have. I want a Finley "servant" monkey, he's great & cute in the little bellhop uniform.
I was really looking forward to this for months. It started off great, but the middle just dragged and I found the story boring. Didn't like Mila Kunis as the witch. James Franco was excellent and probably the only good part about the film.
Really wish i had seen this in 3D, it really is made for it! I liked the nods to the original and seeing the back story but no mention of the ruby slippers which were the wicked witchs sisters, thought she would have them tbh.
Really wish i had seen this in 3D, it really is made for it! I liked the nods to the original and seeing the back story but no mention of the ruby slippers which were the wicked witchs sisters, thought she would have them tbh.
There are many connections to the original Oz film that couldn't be included due to Warner Brothers owning the rights to certain specifics of said film.
From Wikipedia:
The production team were often pressed the concern of abiding by the stipulations set forth by Warner Bros. (via its Turner Entertainment division), the legal owner of the rights to iconic elements of the 1939 MGM film, including the ruby slippers worn by Judy Garland. Therefore, Disney was unable to use them nor any character likenesses from that particular film. This extended to the green of the Wicked Witch's skin, for which Disney used what its legal department considered a sufficiently different shade called theostein. The studio could not, however, use the signature chin mole of Margaret Hamilton's portrayal of the Wicked Witch of the West nor could they employ the Yellow brick road's swirl design for Munchkinland.
I quite enjoyed the film but dont think Robert Downey Jnr would have been good in the role, definitely made for role for Franco for me
And also Zach Braff any comments on him? As I thought he was alright and the two of them in the interview gel quite well so yeah what would it have been like with iron man lol
There are many connections to the original Oz film that couldn't be included due to Warner Brothers owning the rights to certain specifics of said film.
From Wikipedia:
The production team were often pressed the concern of abiding by the stipulations set forth by Warner Bros. (via its Turner Entertainment division), the legal owner of the rights to iconic elements of the 1939 MGM film, including the ruby slippers worn by Judy Garland. Therefore, Disney was unable to use them nor any character likenesses from that particular film. This extended to the green of the Wicked Witch's skin, for which Disney used what its legal department considered a sufficiently different shade called theostein. The studio could not, however, use the signature chin mole of Margaret Hamilton's portrayal of the Wicked Witch of the West nor could they employ the Yellow brick road's swirl design for Munchkinland.
Didnt even think of the legal stuff as a reason for things not to be in! Its a huge shame though as it would have been a great tie in.
Really wish i had seen this in 3D, it really is made for it! I liked the nods to the original and seeing the back story but no mention of the ruby slippers which were the wicked witchs sisters, thought she would have them tbh.
i recomend watching it in 3D the eefects are amazing
I saw Oz: The Great and Powerful last night and actually quite liked it. I knew nothing of the film and pretty much nothing of the 1930's original either so maybe because I had no expectations I enjoyed it more?
I do remember having a blonde moment at the end when I said "Oh, I thought they would have showed how Oz returned home at the end", to which I received a stare with raised eyebrow and a look of "Do you realise what you just said?!" Then I realised!
I liked all the cast, didn't think there was a weak one personally and the story had my attention throughout, I wasn't bored or looking at my watch. I even laughed out loud at a few things (a road sign for Oz's Chinatown district, really?!)
I'd give it an 8/10. (I really must watch the original though!)
Comments
Yes I think there is but it's still waiting for final agreements , decisions, contracts etc.
Can't stand the blond actress who played Glinda, sorry to say she has a face I would like to slap but then because of that I wouldnt much like her in anything.
I'd wait til it comes on tv and give it a go then.
I really like Mila Kunis but I've got to admit I wasn't at all convinced by her portrayal of the wicked witch, she was doing fine until that point! I agree with the poster who said she seemed to shout a lot.
Michelle was great I thought, defo stayed true to the original good witch. It was an okay film overall but nowhere near as good as I was expecting.
6/10 for me
Wicked will happen sooner or later, Universal are the producer of the stage version so they'll greenlight it, the various productions are still doing very well, I believe it has grossed over $1bn worldwide but that's over a long period,
That's correct. When i was watching the film i tried to imagine him in the role and i don't think he would have been suitable either. I think an actor that could convincingly play awkward, arrogant and quirky would have sufficed.
There are many connections to the original Oz film that couldn't be included due to Warner Brothers owning the rights to certain specifics of said film.
From Wikipedia:
The production team were often pressed the concern of abiding by the stipulations set forth by Warner Bros. (via its Turner Entertainment division), the legal owner of the rights to iconic elements of the 1939 MGM film, including the ruby slippers worn by Judy Garland. Therefore, Disney was unable to use them nor any character likenesses from that particular film. This extended to the green of the Wicked Witch's skin, for which Disney used what its legal department considered a sufficiently different shade called theostein. The studio could not, however, use the signature chin mole of Margaret Hamilton's portrayal of the Wicked Witch of the West nor could they employ the Yellow brick road's swirl design for Munchkinland.
And also Zach Braff any comments on him? As I thought he was alright and the two of them in the interview gel quite well so yeah what would it have been like with iron man lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dyW1H1cJ04
Didnt even think of the legal stuff as a reason for things not to be in! Its a huge shame though as it would have been a great tie in.
i recomend watching it in 3D the eefects are amazing
Its actually done about $80.3 million so far apparently which is pretty good I'd say
The role would have been perfect for him, I was actually thinking all the way through that it should have been him playing the part.
I saw Oz: The Great and Powerful last night and actually quite liked it. I knew nothing of the film and pretty much nothing of the 1930's original either so maybe because I had no expectations I enjoyed it more?
I do remember having a blonde moment at the end when I said "Oh, I thought they would have showed how Oz returned home at the end", to which I received a stare with raised eyebrow and a look of "Do you realise what you just said?!" Then I realised!
I liked all the cast, didn't think there was a weak one personally and the story had my attention throughout, I wasn't bored or looking at my watch. I even laughed out loud at a few things (a road sign for Oz's Chinatown district, really?!)
I'd give it an 8/10. (I really must watch the original though!)
A friend says all three witches are sisters but I don't recall Glinda being a sister to the other two - but maybe I'm wrong.
W U,surely ?