Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

The Wizard of OZ remake... Just POO !

I loved the effect where the snow came through the screen and then beyond the boundaries of the image as if it had come through into the auditorium. This is the first movie ever where I would recommend seeing it in Imax 3D.
 
I don't know what to say. I liked it. No great acting. No special story. Nothing to do with the original. Yes, could have been so much better.

Still, if I was a kid, I would have loved the visuals and I would have been fine with the story (cause it made sense and was a simple tale). Would I go out and start buying the toys or eating happy meals to get collector cups. Doubt it. As a kid (which is the target - not the same league as pixar where adults and kids can both find it cleaver), I would have loved it when I watched and well, by tomorrow, moved on and forgot about it.

Sure it's not for all kids and really only up to a certain age, but it's a nice family movie. Nothing ground-breaking.

As a Red Owner, I loved the visuals (despite most being CG). Another proud moment.
 
THIS WAS A PREQUEL , Plus Warner Bros, Hold most of the rights to the film so, Disney really just made up a New Movie in the world of OZ.. All the Ladies in the Film are Fine, Fine, Fine. Mila, Rachel and Michelle ..
 
Mark Toia said:
Dragged in to see OZ with the kids... Now know disrespect to the VFX guys, the DP or anyone involved in creating all the bits and bobs of the movie... But seriously has to be the worst movie I have seen from Disney in a very long time. It was like there was know director at the helm...
Click to expand...
I disagree completely. I just saw the film last night, had low expectations, and was very pleasantly surprised. I think it's a very simple story, and if you take it as just a big-budget picture for a young audience (you know, for kids), it's fine.

My three biggest issues: 1) James Franco is just OK to me, not great, and I agree with the critics who've said Robert Downey, Jr. would've been a much better choice; 2) the movie is very long and takes a while to get going, though the last 1/3 of the film is really, really good; 3) the whole concept would've been improved if Disney could have only found a way to pay MGM for the rights to use all the visual and story elements of the 1939 Wizard of Oz movie.

Having said that, there's a lot of great stuff in the movie: it sounds terrific, the photography is (generally) beautiful, the effects are brilliant, Danny Elfman's music was spectacular, and I got a kick out of all of Franco's carnival tricks and projection schemes at the end. That was terrific.

Apparently the audience believes this, too, since it's already made $281,000,000 worldwide and is pretty much on its way to half a billion dollars. I think there are some holes in logic in the plot here and there, but there were in the 1939 classic, too.

jake blackstone said:
Unless you didn't know, no film in history of Hollywood ever made any money or broke even. Just saying...
Click to expand...
Who knew there were five different kinds of movie profits: Box office gross, rentals, studio gross profit, studio net profit, and actual net profit?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
 
Marc Wielage said:
I disagree completely. I just saw the film last night, had low expectations, and was very pleasantly surprised. I think it's a very simple story, and if you take it as just a big-budget picture for a young audience (you know, for kids), it's fine.

My three biggest issues: 1) James Franco is just OK to me, not great, and I agree with the critics who've said Robert Downey, Jr. would've been a much better choice; 2) the movie is very long and takes a while to get going, though the last 1/3 of the film is really, really good; 3) the whole concept would've been improved if Disney could have only found a way to pay MGM for the rights to use all the visual and story elements of the 1939 Wizard of Oz movie.

Having said that, there's a lot of great stuff in the movie: it sounds terrific, the photography is (generally) beautiful, the effects are brilliant, Danny Elfman's music was spectacular, and I got a kick out of all of Franco's carnival tricks and projection schemes at the end. That was terrific.

Apparently the audience believes this, too, since it's already made $281,000,000 worldwide and is pretty much on its way to half a billion dollars. I think there are some holes in logic in the plot here and there, but there were in the 1939 classic, too.


Who knew there were five different kinds of movie profits: Box office gross, rentals, studio gross profit, studio net profit, and actual net profit?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
Click to expand...


Its ok to disagree Marc... :) Glad you liked it.
My kids wanted to leave mid way through it.... I myself wanted to walk out about 15 minutes in... but we are a tough crowd.
Snakes on a plane had a great opening weekend as well.... It was the worst film I have ever gone to.
The power of marketing is what drives us to the movies to be disappointed. I should have read some of the reviews first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
And it will never make profit, no film does.... Hollywood are the masters of tax evasion, fraud and creative accounting... Why do you studios are rich (but are perceived to be going broke) and the humble filmmaker are poor...
 
Have to say I disagree also. Not a narrative or cinematic masterpiece by any means but entertaining, fun and with that little spark of "Movie Magic" that fits well in the overall Disney brand. It felt like an old, happy go lucky (but with a cynical lead) adventure film like the good old days. The world created is immense and it has potential for many, many stories with much more character development. Hope Raimi sticks with it and brings something bolder storywise after this succesful start, and not a simple remake of the original "Dorothy" plot as a safe sequel!
 
Marc Wielage said:
Apparently the audience believes this, too, since it's already made $281,000,000 worldwide and is pretty much on its way to half a billion dollars. I think there are some holes in logic in the plot here and there, but there were in the 1939 classic, too.
Click to expand...

Regardless of how one feels about the substance of the film, this is one key point to look at. Disney has a formula that gets people to the movies and makes money. As much as the '39 Oz film is cherished as a classic, it did poorly in its initial box-office outing. And many of the critics of its time were hard on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top