"Oz The Great and Powerful" brings to mind another Disney movie, "Pinocchio". It too had a wooden actor struggling to become a real boy. The movie should guide the future of effects-heavy motion pictures, demonstrating once and for all that actors are a vital and necessary part of the filmmaking process. Another movie also comes to mind, "Dude, Where's My Car?" Not because of the Cali-bro acting style, but because of one the great lines in that movie: "No 'And Then.'" Screenplays that are advanced by "and then he..." and then, they" are not as good as "but, then" and "at the same time," and "somewhere else, this other group." The screenplay is boring through 3 quarters of the movie. The special effects are amazing and the fine actresses in the movie do their best to carry the male lead but his lack of range leaves Oz flat on the ground.
As a 9th Grader, we walked to the local Dome theater and saw 2001: A Space Odyssey. We were amazed by the story, uplifted by the special effects and challenged by the lack of straightforward narration.
Considerably older now, those elements aren't enough to uplift me. I was looking for an Aliens franchise move, which isn't Ridley Scott's issue but mine. I was willing to be enthralled in wonder about the issues raised (which, after all, form the rudiments of Scientology's worldview). This film can't soar however, locked in its cynical view of humans. Nor does it scare with aliens that can only muster contempt for us.
If you're up for visual elements of scenery and art direction, see the movie. If you want to be involved epathetically, miss it.
Pros beautiful scenery, great special effects
Cons no suspense
No, I do not recommend this movie.
Share:
+1point
1of1voted this as helpful.
Overall rating
2/ 5
Scenery Chewing by Charlize, Life-Stealing by Kristen Result in Snooze-Fest
We saw most of "Snow White and the Huntsman." The movie is about a woman that had been aging hundreds of years and still looked the same. Which is how we felt as we left the theater. It wouldn't be fair to review it because it may have redeemed itself in the last 40 minutes, after we walked out. Kristen Stewart is lifeless and charisma-deficient. I had thought she had been enacting the angst of her character in the Twilight series but apparently she can suck the life out of whatever scene she's in.
Charlize may have felt the need to double her efforts so Kristen looked less lifeless, but the result is overblown even for a fairy tale evil queen.
I remember now why fairy tales are read to kids when we want them to sleep.
Mission Impossible's movie stories have difficult burdens. They have to be complex so that the team displays creativity beyond that of a normal spy group. They have to provide twists that demand improvisation from the group. Then they have the usual demands of emotional invovlement between the audience and the characters and be visually and viscerally exciting.
As a result, Mission Impossible moves are demanding upon the actors and the directors.
All of these demands are met and exceeded in this outing of Mission Impossible.
Brad Bird's time at Pixar seems to have given him the tools to put the characters against visual backdrops that are literally jaw-dropping, which is the job of an animation director. Who could have known that he could have helped the actors connect with each other and their inner-depths that put humans where action movie figures had been.
Lest you dread a character-driven movie where an action movie should be, the action scenes are plentiful and brilliant, from large-scale explosions that you've seen in the trailer to physical hand-to-hand combat.
Tom Cruise reaches beyond the usual squinting bravery that he used in this character before and shows heart. Yep, it was a surprise to me too.
Jeremy Renner proves ready to have his own franchise, although we'll have to wait for him to show his lovable-side.
Simon Pegg manages to take the Tom Arnold side-kick role and put a human in there.
Paula Patton has range as well as beauty going for her.
Go. This is one you'll have to see on the big screen.
I loved my Abnormal Psych Class at UCLA; most of it stuck with me. Take, "hysterical disassociation," for example. That's when things get so rough you check out.
WIthout giving away plot, this is a movie about that effect. Sadly, while we share the heroine's path, we share that state with her. By the time the ending comes, we don't feel it as we could have.
Folks that love Kung Fu movies will have a little to look forward to, the fights are so-so.
The actress do well with what they're handed, gamely trying to be empowered and subjugated at the same time. It'll be hard to bring a date to this movie.
There's one good man in this mess, otherwise it's a little tough being a man as we're depicted in this movie.
I have loved the previous graphic novels made into movies, but this one, for as much as it deals with tough, gritty subjects, should have been left on the newsstand.
Three stars for it's visual style, which is interesting and the kung fu.
As a kid, I would sit in a theater on Saturday afternoons watching old WWII movies and Westerns. There would be danger all around one hero, and he would overcome it with lip narrowed bravery, never betraying any fear or cost.
As I advanced into my 20's and 30's, I had the pleasure of big special effect movies, with giant battles with an assortment of folks that were worried while the whole world was threatened.
Put Aaron Eckhart, a great actor, in one of those threatened world, white knucked giant movies and you get a new, great genre, the flawed hero action movie.
The result is a movie that never falters in suspense but that fans of cinema won't be embarrased to be seen emerging from, a movie you can take a date to and have something other than "remember that great scene when the big..." to talk about. And your kids will want to go to more than once.
Ever had a restaurant by the sea that your family wouldl hit every year on vacation? It 's a tradition visit and when, after a while, the chowder stops having the clams it used to, you're vaguely disappointed.
This outing for Harry Potter has the usual ingredients but is missing both the danger of the last two or the wonder of the first three.
We get a chance to feel the wonder of budding romances and the intrigue of what Malfoy is about but we wander from event to event with no outbreaks of action.
We were still enrapt til the end, when a major event happens 1-2-3 and is over with nary a commemoration.
We're thinking most of the action has been deferred until the final two, but we were owed much more than this.
We are friends with the cast of the orignal Star Trek and this movie hurls us into their formative years, which don't dissapoint. We know them better after this movie, and if anything, love them all the more: for their humanity or vulcanity.
The budget showed up on the screen and we are transported to these worlds on ships that are believable and sometimes even gritty.
Our only quibble is that much of the final action sequence feels like it suffers from the lack of scope, i.e., extras, to expand the action beyond a gunfight in the street in an old western.
It takes a lot to drag us out to the movie theater. We'd go again!