User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 433 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 73 out of 433

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 10, 2014
    2
    In all honesty, the only reason I watched this movie was because it happened to be on TV and I had nothing else to do. I expected this movie to be okay, not anything truly amazing, and it still managed to greatly disappoint me and waste my time despite my standards not being set very high at all. The visual effects are average and at some points very cheesy, the actors are more good-looking than talented, and the writing was fairly poor, resulting in a story that lacks sense throughout and that somehow manages to stretch on for over two hours. I was never really a Wizard of Oz fan to begin with, so that may have impacted my level of enjoyment, but none the less, it is difficult to watch this movie and not be distracted by all the nonsense over the course of this movie. Expand
  2. Apr 28, 2014
    4
    By accounts, this should have worked. Sam Raimi knows how to give us a good blockbuster, and it had many Oscar nominees in the cast. But it doesn't. The story has been done millions of times before, the characters were all one-note (even Glinda, who is a love interest for some weird reason), and James Franco can't muster up any wonder for the world he's supposedly in- and thus, neither can we. If it weren't for the eye-popping visual beauty, this film would have nothing. Well, not completely true; it helps if you watch the movie with a slightly perverted friend who can make an innuendo out of every single line and/or event. Because I have first-hand knowledge that it is possible. Expand
  3. Mar 20, 2014
    2
    Some of the worst acting i have ever seen. the movie is just pointless, stupid, and corny. if i didnt pay i wouldve left halfway through. very tough to watch
  4. Feb 28, 2014
    3
    This movie is basically about Oz who ends up in an enchanted world and has to face 3 witches. Its not like The Wizard of Oz in case you have not seen it. This movie may make some people angry as I am one of the viewers who was Oz (James Franco) is a selfish and greedy fraud. His acting is very good and he fits in well with his role. He meets Theodora (Mila Kunis) eventually throughout his journey pretending to be the powerful Oz because he knows that he will get money. He is very lucky and manages to trick pretty much everyone there that he is Oz even though he is not. She then takes him to meet her sister one of the witches who he then also tricks into thinking he loves but she doesn't take it to heart as much. He is basically a player. He then leads Theodora on to thinking he loves her but he does not he doesnt know that she is one of the witches and he breaks her heart when she finds out he was a fraud. Her sister Evanora (Racheal Weisz) is also one of the witches they all posses a different power. is the one who he has also lead on. Theodora comes to Evanora crying telling her about "Oz" she then cries in a scene and her tears burn her flesh she does very good acting throughout this whole time. She becomes furious when her face burns and her sister Evanora convinces her to take a potion of some sort to get rid of the pain in her heart. This makes her an evil green which who seeks revenge on Oz. Mila Kunis does not fit in well at all with this role she plays her "evil laugh" is very weak and she just cant pull it off its ridiculous. Eventually Oz meets many more people till he meets the nice witch Glinda who he also then starts make to fall for him he is very good at playing a player in the movie. She also does a very good job playin her role. The evil witch then plans to destroy the land and Oz witch is why she told Theodora to take that potion to turn into an evil witch. The movie seems like it could have been good but these people are dumb..... they just get tricked and think that Oz is the powerful wizard and he is not. Mila Kunis should not have played the evil witch seems like she just got the role because she is a big actress. This guy basically a player, a fraud, a lair, and yet at the end he ends up with falling for the nice princess its just not a good message to kids if that's why its a Disney movie I regret even witching this movie there's much more to the movie but bare with me people. Expand
  5. Dec 23, 2013
    1
    This movie was garbage. The black-and-white portion is the best part, and the green screening was horrendous, the visuals were terrible, the supporting cast was little help to Oz, many parts that came were predictable, and was a waste of 215 million dollars, if they even used that much.
  6. Dec 16, 2013
    2
    At the beginning normal, then slow and boring and at the end poisonous, there's nothing good to say about this movie besides its good for kids to watch, but as a movie, it is just a film that takes away time of your life. I thought it would be a better representation of the meaning of "Oz, the great and powerful", as its title says. Hopefully, there are other millions of films in the world.
  7. Dec 3, 2013
    2
    Falar que falta criatividade em Hollywood e que a onde de continuações, prequels e refilmagens confirma isso chover no molhado, mas, não deixa de ser verdade, e isso pode ser constatado na existência de Oz: mágico e poderoso, um desnecessário capítulo de acontecimentos anteriores ao clássico filme de 1939, que resolvia-se de maneira excelente por si só. Por outro lado, por mais desnecessário que o filme possa ser, interessante (e surpreendente) constatar como ele funciona muito bem tanto como um “anteriormente no mundo de Oz”, não negando os fatos vistos no filme original, como também como uma aventura independente, não dependendo da experiência prévia do espectador com Dorothy e companhia para funcionar. E, ao se estabelecer como um bom filme, Oz: mágico e poderoso passa então, a justificar sua “desnecessária existência”.

    Iniciando em uma inspirada intertextualidade que homenageia o longa de 1939, Oz: mágico e poderoso nos apresenta Oscar Diggs (ou Oz, seu apelido), um mágico de circo que além da clara falta de talento, exibe também uma falta de ética assustadora, estabelecendo-se como uma figura resmungona, mentirosa, gananciosa e, por tudo isso, sem amigos. Rodado em preto-e-branco e com razão de aspecto de 1.33 1 (similar ao longa da década de 30 que, rodado 1.37: 1, exibia uma tela muito menor e próxima um quadrado), essa introdução eficiente ao estabelecer a existência do protagonista como uma vida pequena e sem cores (sentimentos), tornando sua chegada na terra de Oz levado por um tornado enquanto fugia de uma birga um sinal de que sua vida está para mudar, evidenciado no aumento de sua presença (a razão de aspecto cresce para 2.35 1) e pelo surgimento de cores expressivas na tela.

    Claro que, em impacto, essa cena não supera o momento em que Dorothy abre a porta de casa e, através de seu olhar subjetivo, somos espantados com as cores de Oz, mas, uma homenagem bonita, elegante e que, encontra na narrativa uma razão de ser.

    Ao chegar terra de Oz, o protagonista tomado como o mágico de uma profecia deixada pelo antigo rei do lugar, e que, viria para libertar todos das mãos da bruxa-má Theodora, que governa a cidade das esmeraldas. Para ajudá-lo em sua jornada, Oz conta com um simpático e divertido macaco voador, uma boneca de porcelana e a bruxa-boa, Glinda. Porém, tudo se complica quando, Evanora, a terceira bruxa (irmã de Glinda e Theodora) tem seu coração partido pelo mágico e se torna a terrível bruxa-má do leste enfrentada por Dorothy.

    Contando com um roteiro irregular (de autoria de Mitchell Kapner e David Lindsay), Oz: mágico e poderoso alterna escolhas inspiradas com outras claramente equivocadas. Na primeira definição podemos encaixar a maneira como o filme nos faz “entrar” em sua história e nos importar com o final de seus personagens que, apesar de conhecido ora, já vimos os acontecimentos posteriores em outro filme, não mesmo? em momento algum torna o que vemos na tela menos satisfatório, conseguindo por vezes, despertar o suspense no espectador. Da mesma forma, a maneira como diversas situações posteriores são explicadas de maneira interessantíssima (a ideia do mágico de projetar-se em um rosto gigante) e rimas temáticas são criadas (os presentes entregues ao fim do filme), contribui para angariar pontos positivos para a projeção. Por outro lado, os roteiristas parecem não confiar na capacidade dos espectadores de se entreter com um filme sem um clímax recheado de ação e lutas, já que todo o confronto final entre Glinda e Theodora parece ter sido inserido na trama apenas para dizer “olha, prometemos um grande combate e aqui está ele”.

    Irregular também em sua técnica, Oz: mágico e poderoso apresenta um excelente design de produção, amparado em cenários grandiosos e belos em sua explosão de cores e, claro, em figurinos precisos que, por si só, já evidenciam importantes traços da personalidade de seus personagens repare como Glinda usa roupas sóbrias e claras, enquanto Theodora usa um vestido escuro e mais ostensivo e, como a mudança de personalidade de Evanora retratada apenas através de uma inversão no chapéu, revelando por si só como a maldade já era algo inerente bruxa. A fotografia e os efeitos visuais, por outro, surgem irregulares, indo do orgânico (os planos aéreos que passeiam pelos cenários e as expressões realistas do macaco e da boneca de porcelana) ao completo desperdício das técnicas (planos claramente criados em função do 3D, com coisas arremessadas na tela e, claro, a falta de cuidado em certas cenas recheadas de efeitos, onde percebemos nitidamente a “falsidade” do que visto em tela).

    O elenco, por outro lado, se sai muito bem. James Franco no papel-título exibe carisma e presença de tela que o garantem como escolha acertada para protagonizar o longa. Rachel Weisz se diverte com suas caras e bocas de má, convencendo como a traiçoeira Theodora. Michelle Willians retrata a bondade de Glinda de maneira eficiente, com expressões e fala t
    Expand
  8. Aug 28, 2013
    2
    The story is bad from the beginning to the end. The visuals are not the astonishing art that a usual blockbuster should deliver. James Franco and his wonderful moment is the only nice thing I can save from this one.
  9. Aug 28, 2013
    1
    One point for Michelle Williams's performance which was fantastic. Everything else in this film was poorly crafted, poorly performed, and generally uninteresting. I suppose if you thinking yelling is acting, really like James Franco for whatever reason, or have no concept of what tension is this film would be worth watching.
  10. Aug 26, 2013
    0
    Horrible it's not just horrible, this cost 215 million to make. Same as Jack the Giant Slayer ,The Lone Ranger, Man of Steel, Battleship, World War Z, Pacific Rim, Snow White & the Huntsman, Wreck-It Ralph, Furious 6. Movies that are great, impress me are great movies with very little budget, not only that movie that made huge profit. Movies like Jurassic Park, The Lion King, Ice Age,Independence Day, Star Wars. I don't understand why would a company let directer to spend that enormous money. Most high budget films are bad, some are good, but not worth a money. Expand
  11. Aug 17, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Great And Powerful Oz deserves a mixed review I think. It's greatest accomplishment is the visual wonders it achieves. It's worst feature is that it stretches the boundary of incredulity between how a movie can be so superbly visually portrayed with such masterworks of imagination as to continually stun even a jaded creativity, and yet at the same time allow itself to be so damaged by insipid dialogue in its first hour as to actually create the possibility of walking out. It is all the more paradoxical because of the quality of the imagery is so awe inspiring, and by that same measure all the more unforgiveable in that the discrepency is so great, as though two universes of quality existed in the same production effort and na'er the two were allowed to meet. If this disparity can be thought of as a dis-ease, then it is a disease I would instantly to blame on Disney, as the brand may never shake it’s association with dissolution of the soul of it’s stories by drowning them in artificial sweetener. The soul message of it’s story does finally find some ground to stand on, but only after an hour or so of threatening to not have any ground at all, another horror of the beginning.

    A movie has two things, the soul of it’s master message and the artfulness with which that message is rendered. If only the visual world created here could have played more of a role than a mere backdrop. But that is usually the way of it. It is the emotional relationship between characters and the quality of dialogue which play the most important role in establishing how artfully the message is being delivered. No matter how great the visuals or how clever the little side stories or how good the acting or even how good the message, nothing can save a movie from bad dialogue, and my goodness how this movie suffers. It is that syndrome I suppose of being trapped in the notion that your main audience will be children, and in not really understanding children well, winding up with something that is dumbed down, hamhanded, cliche, trying to be funny and failing, and just plain insipid. This ends up failing to entertain anyone, children included, and that is not a worthy legacy to the great Frank Baum. The dialogue and humor is not all bad and generally improves in the second half of the movie, but even then it still suffers from mediocrity about half of the time.

    The messaging begins to gain it’s very first traction when the good witch Glenda reveals that she knows our protagonist is not really a wizard but a con man, a trickster and yet this is partly because this is how he defines himself within his own mind. If you have stayed to that moment, you will stay to the end. Part of the problem is that there has been no tension established in our wizard character’s personality up to this point. Until this point he is one dimensionally and utterly a boor and a twit with no personal appeal whatsoever. Suddenly however, he becomes interesting, and the movie beings to save itself from ruin. Finally he discovers that he can use his trickstery skills to do good and save Oz from evil. It is an idea which is simplemindedly executed, but ultimately an empowering message and that is probably the best thing about this movie. Until the last scene however, the movie continues to suffer from details which are formulaic cliches before plopping to an end with a standard sentimental happy ending. One such cliche I find hilarious when comparing to the gentle spirituality of Frank Baum is the final superhero battle between the good and bad witch wherein the contest appears to be mostly based on which player has the greatest amount of pure voltage at her disposal an unfortuate nod to the power of technology over spirituality, and a treatment which is unfortunately repeated again and again in modern movie remakes of all the great myths and stories from the past, hence degrading them.
    Expand
  12. Jul 23, 2013
    0
    I am going to start out right away and say this movie was terrible. Just terrible. I had hopes for this movie but they were shattered within the first twenty minutes of the movie.

    There was probably only one likable character in the entire movie and it wasn't Oz. In fact, he was probably the least likable character. I thought choosing Jame Francco to play Oz was a bad move. Most of the
    casting for the movie was bad.

    The special effects were terrible. It reminded me of Revenge of the Sith were everything was green screened. I am serious, EVERYTHING WAS IN GREEN SCREEN. I even notice background cows that literally look like something from a 1990s PC game. Also the 'lovable' monkey awkward and obviously fake. I am unsure if they even tried to make the CG portions of the film fit with the two real things on screen.

    The overall story was pointless too. I mean was there really a need to go back and tell the story of Oz other than money? NO. I was uninterested throughout 98% of the movie. That 2% is when the china girl doll thing was on the screen, she was the one interesting character in the whole movie. They tried to portray Oz and a con man was silly and how he just suddenly changed his ways was absurd because there was no build up, all of a sudden, boom, he was good.

    I need to stop before i saw something insulting. This i a terrible movie. Don't see it, Don't buy it, Don't rent it. It ranks and one of the worst movies I have seen.
    Expand
  13. Jun 28, 2013
    3
    Gwaaaah, what a terrible movie. James Franco should NOT be a leading actor and Mila Kunis should NOT be a leading actress. It had a good set of ideas and what could have been a really touching story that was just trampled on my ham-fisted acting. Gwah.
  14. Jun 28, 2013
    2
    Well, it did deserve a point just to see Mila Kunis in tight leather pants. Thank you, Di$ney. Oh, and another point to the actors for sticking it out through this turd. Otherwise, I'd recommend watching something with a little more substance--like Spongebob.
  15. Jun 19, 2013
    2
    A little less CGI and a maybe someone else besides James Franco in the title role would have made this movie worth watching. I enjoyed the black and white element in the beggining but a bad script is a bad script. Also for those scratching there heads to a number of scenes this is a prequal to the book Not the movie. Overall it was interesting at times but dull and lifeless overall.
  16. Jun 18, 2013
    1
    La pelicula es muy mala, es mas me arrepiento un poco de esta nota tan alta comparada a lo aburrido que la pase viendo, la pelicula...................
  17. Jun 17, 2013
    2
    I was so disappointed, it is a nothing movie, charmless and colorless misadventure and misunderstanding for the world magical movies for ex. Alice in Wonderland wasn't perfect but at least it delivered a good time, unlike this powerless, unfunny movie, don't let any of the visuals trick you or catch your eyes. Here is nothing.
  18. Jun 9, 2013
    1
    Oz the Great and Powerful? More like Oz the Lame and Terrible. I can't believe I wanted to see this movie in the first place. My least favorite person in this movie was Mila Kunis, mostly because of her performance in the second half of the movie.
  19. May 31, 2013
    2
    Underwhelming. Amounts to a series of colour palette choices and some adequate CGi. This abomination should be avoided at all costs. If fast forward had been available at the screener, I would have been home in time for YouTube. Grow up!
  20. May 27, 2013
    2
    Just terrible. This movie was definitely done 100% in front of a green screen and for 3D and it clearly shows. The animations are sloppy, the 3D "gotchas" are cringe worthy, the story is terrible and the acting is just laughable. How does James Franco get acting jobs?
  21. May 8, 2013
    4
    Honestly just wanted to see this film by Michelle Williams; and the truth not me surprised, was what I expected: a bad film. Good Special effects but its only this, no more.
  22. Apr 29, 2013
    1
    The thing that lets this film down the most is the terrible terrible dialogue. If you're drowning in water and there's nobody around, do you start yelling "I can't swim!" No you don't. It's as if the director thinks we're so moronic that we need everything spelled out for us. James Franco is incredibly annoying to the point where you want to just slap that inane smile from his face. His acting is ATROCIOUS, but with a script like that it's hardly surprising. Loaded with cliches (cackling witches anyone?) this film is a soulless, special effects driven mess that will be forever known by people with taste as a thorn in the side and embarrassment to the original. Avoid like the zombie plague Expand
  23. Apr 28, 2013
    3
    It is boring and less magical than recent movies with almost the same plot such as Alice in Wonderland which is amazing, but this it is not entertaining not good but the thing is that it is visually stunning, it is like lyrics without music, it is not good, it is not entertaining, it is boring and
  24. Apr 23, 2013
    4
    Mention the Wizard of Oz in America and everyone has an opinion, it's an institution. In Britain it doesn't have the same effect which may make most people over here quite cynical when it comes to this prequel or maybe it means they will see it impartially. However this didn't happen for me because ultimately it just felt like any other fantasy film, a pretty one for sure but nothing in it ever distinguished it as the prequel to a classic. In fact it turned me off the original slightly. The film follows Oz an arrogant, slimy Kansas magician who is swept up in a hurricane and transported to Oz. He must travel the land that sees him as its savior despite his inherent nature. However he must contend with an evil witch (or two) along the way as well. It's a shame that a director known for being adventurous and ambitious plays Oz so incredibly safe in not only casting but story. There are certain qualities to be found in Oz that are hidden away beneath a wealth of mediocrity and problems, most of which reduce the film to an average family picture that will leave you empty on your exit. James Franco makes a good Oz but there is nothing surprising about his performance, it just feels as though he was a good choice, but not the right one. Michelle Williams however continues to impress with her turn as Glinda the good witch as she is knowledgeable, whimsical and a realist, something Williams shows almost effortlessly. Rachel Weisz entertains too but she is let down by Mila Kunis who is terribly miscast. Her naive witch comes across as irritating and when her character changes, you can guess how, she just becomes loud and even more irritating. An attempt to call back to the camp of the original just turns into poor emulation, especially in regards to the witches. The story itself is basic, bordering on formulaic forcing the film to impress with its visuals which like i said it does but it just isn't enough. The addition of sidekicks for Oz makes him a different kind of Dorothy with Zach Braff and Joey King playing a flying monkey and a china doll who can see the best and the worst in him. In fact the two of them are the most memorable parts of this film adding some great comic relief as well as most of the film's heart. The film has heart but it doesn't have enough to mask the problems and all around average feeling the movie creates Expand
  25. Apr 8, 2013
    4
    While this film got great visuals, the attacking by James Franco and the three witches is less than except able and its shows that it is a Disney film. I have nothing against Disney. In fact I love Disney. However you can tell Disney and director Sam Raimi were trying to make the film kid friendly. The wicked witch of the west is not as scary as the original. There are no memorable quotes and the dialogue does not contain any complex words. All in all this is a good movie for kids but think about it before bringing older kids to it. Expand
  26. Mar 26, 2013
    3
    Main thing is James Franco's miscasting,he was Raimi's choice, 'cause he had work him in SM trilogy.But it should have been Johnny Depp,he is kinda born to play such fantasy roles,so he is the most perfect for Oz.Weisz is quite good,as she is always,and Mila and Williams are nothing special.The story is soooo predictable at the end.A Movie to entertain the people who only care about CGI and nothing else.And Disney cant repeat Alice's success 'cause, 3D revolution is over and WHO CARES 3D now huh??!!. Expand
  27. Mar 26, 2013
    3
    Going into this "Oz", I expected at least a moderately coherent plot, serviceable acting, and some decent special effects, but apparently even those expectations were too high. For the amount of money spent on this movie, and the amount of work put into it, the result is underwhelming to put it mildly. The overall quality of the film could be compared to a Disney Channel movie. James Franco's acting ranged from decent to bad, and Mila Kunis' performance ranged from sleepwalk-acting to soap opera-level awful (at some points she was unintentionally hilarious). I would recommend it for children 6 and under, but even then, there are scenes in "Oz" that would actually be terrifying for very young children. In the end, I will say to just avoid this movie if possible. Expand
  28. Mar 24, 2013
    4
    The Good: Glenda was awesome. Michelle Williams did a great job in her performance. The final action scenes were great. Zach Braff was great in both roles. The China Doll was well acted and presented. The overall story was well devised.

    The Bad: James Franco was atrocious. I loved him in other roles but this was terribly acted. Mila Kunis another favorite of mine received the
    same fate. Even her media circuit seemed unwanted. The CGI was sometimes good and sometimes bad. There were times when you could see the actors walking and it looked like they were in a homemade video like you might find in a mall or something. Sam Raimi let me down on this because I've seen all of these actors do better in other roles which leads me to believe that this film was under-directed. This is a big fall from the Spider Man films. Verdict: Rent It. Expand
  29. Mar 24, 2013
    1
    Everything about the original has turned into a laughable embarrassment that is heartless and mindless. The Great and Powerful Oz is bland, uninteresting and carries no magic or wonder to it. As for James Franco, this should be a wake up call that his acting career needs to end.
  30. Mar 21, 2013
    4
    A disappointing return to Oz. Visually dazzling at times, but I literally felt like I was watching a cartoon at times. The tone switches awkwardly from sweet/humorous to dark/ominous; the combination doesn't work and makes the whole project feel messy. The performances were underwhelming. The main problem I had with the film is that, for the most part, I was completely bored. Add to that the tonal inconsistencies, cartoon visuals, and disappointing performances, you get a film that's hard to enjoy for all it has to offer. I thought the finale was great; the last 20-30 minutes were really entertaining and also added to the original 1939 film. As for the rest of the 90 minute running length though, well, I couldn't wait to get out of Oz. Oz is an okay film, but (re)enter at your own risk. Collapse
  31. Mar 21, 2013
    4
    The Wizard of Oz is one of those timeless classics that many critics and moviegoers say should not be touched. The film was originally based off of L. Frank Baum’s book of the same name in 1900. The Wizard of Oz was actually the first in a series that spanned multiple sequels starring Dorothy and other original protagonists. With so much additional material, another trip to Oz could prove to be very fun. Disney, the company behind this newest installment, attempts to capitalize on some of those other works by highlighting the exploits of Oz himself in Oz the Great and Powerful. It’s too bad that this most recent attempt by the House of Mouse fails in almost every regard to capture the magic that the original film and books have. Directed by Sam Raimi (Spider-Man, Evil Dead), Oz the Great and Powerful acts as a sort of broken continuity prequel to the original film. We see Oz’s origins as desperate carnival magician and con man Oscar Diggs (James Franco) in 1909 Kansas. His eventual transportation to Oz via CGI twister is much like the one Dorothy took on her original voyage in 1939. The movie shows the transformation of Diggs into the Wizard of Oz as well as his interactions with the three witches from the first movie.
    One would think the role of Oz would call for an actor who is capable of being charming, snarky and somewhat manipulative. Sadly, Franco is just too laid back, too normal and too boring to play a role that requires an actor to act larger than life. Oz needs to be a charismatic trickster, someone who can wink and smile his way out of life and death situations. Franco’s “charm” has him stumbling over his words and sputtering nonsense to every character that crosses his path.
    The rest of the cast is a mix bag as well. Evanora the Wicked (Rachel Weiz) and Glinda the Good (Michelle Williams) don’t really bring anything to the film at all. They’re not necessarily bad, but they’re just not that interesting either. Theodora (Mila Kunis), the third and probably the most recognizable of the witches goes through a character arc that is so unbelievably clichéd and laughable that it truly shows that the writers were just being lazy. Finley (Zach Braff) and China Girl (Joey King) are the only two characters in the film who provide any reason to care what’s happening on screen. While lacking in strong characters, the film is very pretty look at. Viewers are given the chance to see to new places in Oz and even revisit some old ones. The Emerald City and the Dark Forest are created using actual sets along with CGI imagery. The creatures, such as the always terrifying flying monkeys, provide are a much needed reprieve from the boring characters that audiences are stuck following. Oz the Great and Powerful is a pathetic franchise-starter that is attempting to cash-in on the name of the film that came before it. There's a generic hero’s journey, woefully underwritten characters and poor casting choices. The sense of magic is completely absent and replaced with special attention to green screen backdrops. The obvious merchandizing throughout makes the movie look like it’s following a pre-planned checklist of what to sell to kids after they see it. Stealing its plot lines and underdeveloped characters from 2010’s Alice in Wonderland doesn’t help the film’s claims of it being “an original tale from the mind of Sam Raimi.” Oz the Great and Powerful is nothing more than a poor attempt to exploit any nostalgia that people have for this world and its characters.
    Expand
  32. Mar 19, 2013
    4
    I was really hoping this would be a good film. I grew up in the 1990s and used to watch The Wizard of Oz every year with my family for Thanksgiving as a kid. And to my surprise, at the age of 23, I can still say it's one of my favorite movies of all-time. With that said, I knew 'Oz: The Great and Powerful' could never reach the status of the original. I just wish I could have liked it enough to walk out of the theater satisfied, and wanting to buy it on Blu-ray. I didn't. Another reviewer mentioned how this is a kid's movie, not a family movie. I couldn't agree more. And it's such a shame, because kids aren't that stupid. Or at least, you don't have to reduce them to that. I appreciated The Wizard of Oz as a kid because Judy Garland was beautiful, and believable, the Witch was scary, and all the side characters played a crucial role in the story. In Oz: The Great and Powerful, I never became attached to any of the main characters (namely James Franco and Mila Kunis), and the side characters felt more like extras from Shrek (except they stayed on screen far longer than they should have). All in all, the semi-clever ending wasn't too bad, and to me, that's what saved the film. If not for that, the poor structure in the first half of the film, and the misplaced acting (Franco and Kunis are good actors, but weren't meant for this film) would have killed it for me. Rent it, or wait for it to come out on Netflix, it's not necessarily worth going to the theater for. Expand
  33. Mar 18, 2013
    4
    I was mostly baffled by the amount of dialogue in what was intended to be a children's movie. Every 10 minutes of action (and by action, I mean characters actually doing something, not necessarily fighting) was interrupted by another 20 minutes of dialogue-based exposition.
  34. Mar 17, 2013
    4
    Oz contains not so good performances and a horrible flowing script. However the visuals bring out of being a huge failure in this forgettable in this pathetic Disney adaptation of how Oz found his way in the classic wonderland.
  35. Mar 17, 2013
    0
    Juvenile, awful directorship, an unfortunate use of 3D (incomparable to Ang Lee's use of 3D Life of Pi) which gave me a terrible headache. The woeful attempt at homour was absurd.
    Unsophisticated with banal motivational lines about believing blah blah. The actors possessed little acting skills, with perhaps the exception of Michelle Williams who managed to portray a tolerable (but not
    exceptional) Glinda and Rachel Weisz (who wasn't at her best). James Franco's Oz was extremely annoying and if that's what the director hoped to achieve then he accomplished this feat extremely well. However, the dangers of manifesting the egotistical, greedy and seedy characteristics of Oz without any charming offsetting traits has its disadvantages.Consequently, I felt no empathy with any of the characters with the exception of Theodora (despite Mila Kuni's poor performance) one managed to garner some understanding relating to her hatred of the Wizard (however, I attribute that due to my own feelings of contempt towards him). This film has not lived up to its exceptions but I blame Disney for appointing a terrible Director. With a huge budget it could have done so much more. Expand
  36. Mar 16, 2013
    1
    This movie is horrible. Dialog is bad. Horrendous. Visuals are ok, not eyecandy material. There were a few convincing moments, but that's not enough. This movie is badddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd. Expand
  37. Mar 15, 2013
    0
    Disappointing does not even begin to describe how I felt when watching this movie. The only enjoyable part is the first 15-20 minutes, when everything is in black and white. After that, the movie descends into horrible cliches and the worst acting I have seen in a long time (looking at you Mr. Franco). Normally even a bad movie can keep me entertained with great visuals. Unfortunately, most of OZ's visuals were absolutely terrible. The "funny" flying monkey side kick is alarmingly fake looking. The most fun you will have seeing this movie is driving to the theater. Expand
  38. Mar 13, 2013
    4
    A melodramatically cheesy script, a little miscasting, and some missed opportunities at twists make this much-anticipated film a disappointment. For those wanting winks and nods at the MGM classic will become desperate for anything. Those who are able (and willing) to watch with fresh eyes without any expectations might find this film more enjoyable.
  39. Mar 13, 2013
    3
    One of the worst movies I have seen in a long time. James Franco's slapstick/over the top/general hospital es-que performance will go down as one of the most cringe worthy performances on screen ever. Mila Kunis brings no intimidation/menace to her role, Rachel Weiss feels cold and one noted in her role. The only reason I did not give this movie a 0 rating is because the Porcelain girl, The monkey and Glenda were all fantastic in their roles. I would have much preferred a movie about Glenda and not about Oz, or at least not about James Franco's Oz. Expand
  40. Mar 11, 2013
    1
    And James Franco wakes up from his Peyote induced fever dream he suffered from realizing how completely pointless and pathetic his life was, to see all of his friends aren't in fact monkeys, or dolls, or witches. They are just normal human beings, who he has treated poorly, and continues to lie to, for what he narcissistically claims is "The Good of The People." Oz, the Great and Powerful kids, hand in hand with Disney teaching you that if you scam your way along long enough, and make sure to use the emotions of every single person you step on along the way to your advantage, you too can one day make out with with your ex girlfriend (who may or may not be Eminem's mom from 8 Mile) in a dark enclosed space, waiting to offer empty promises and life lessons to cowardly lions, heartless tin men, and dumb, unappreciative little girls from Kansas. Expand
  41. Mar 11, 2013
    4
    The first semi-highly anticipated film of the year Oz the Great and Powerful is not a worthy prequel by any means. Raimi's touch was satisfying with a few Evil Dead like camera work, but that along with the great animated visuals was not enough to carry the film. James Franco gives a below average performance and Mila Kunis is ridiculously silly as the evil witch and a horrible casting choice.
  42. Mar 11, 2013
    3
    How anyone actually likes this is a shock to me! Bad acting, bad directing, bad special effects. A pointless prequel to say the least. James Franco was awful, completely unbelievable as Oz. Sam Raimi should be embarrassed at how bad this movie is. It had no heart, no brain, and no courage.
  43. Mar 10, 2013
    3
    Excessive length kills an already verbally challenged storyline. I must confess to not being a huge fan of the land of Oz. There is no denying the classic status of 1939's 'The Wizard of Oz', but recent theatrical productions have either been truly awful (Wicked) or overly familiar ('Wizard of Oz). This Oz fares no better. James Franco is charismatic as the fake wizard injecting both humour and a liveliness into the proceedings, but the film runs out of steam long before the second half. Compensations are to be had with the aesthetics of the film. Costumes, Art-Direction, Visual effects and Make-up are all truly amazing and the film looks the millions of dollars that it probably cost to make. It is probably the best looking film of the year so far. However, it is probably the worst scripted also, and where film making is concerned it is always better to have a good story to get involved with than a visual feast. Both in sync is the ideal. This Oz is basically a boring, but beautiful series of pictures. Expand
  44. Mar 9, 2013
    4
    This movie relies too heavily on CGI. It would have been much nicer to have real scenery, because using too much of CGI just loses the realism it once had from the original. Along with it, annoying supporting characters. They're either there for comic relief as their only purpose, or just plain annoying. However, some scenes does compliment the original movie and does explain how everything came to be in the first place. This movie is basically Disney trying to make a Wicked copycat. It's worth a try for the average moviegoer, but those who know the story will notice problems with this movie. Expand
  45. Mar 9, 2013
    0
    Forget the original. Taking this film on its merits, of which there are few, there is a gaping chasm between what I might deem to be watchable and this movie. Most of the film panders to either slow children or simpering adults, don't know which. I went into the film given Sam Raimi the director yet another chance to redeem his pitiful directorial career, and again, he falls short. Rachel Weisz does her usual bad job, adding to the misery of this film. While I am not a special effects guru, most of the film looked flat and boring. Another waste of time from Hollywood, thanks for another bad evening at the movies. As my children are not mouthbreathing knuckledraggers they won't be seeing this movie. Expand
  46. Mar 8, 2013
    1
    It's March and there is finally a film released in 2013 that I was looking forward to going to the theater and watching. My expectations for this film were not super high, I certainly would never expect it to live up to the original which is one of the greatest films of all time. I expected a respectable origin story, great visuals, and maybe a few easter eggs thrown in for fans of the original. With Raimi directing two of the better young actors working today, and two other more than capable actresses I didn't feel that my expectations were too high. I was blown away...with how poorly this film turned out.

    In two hours plus there is no story here that we don't already know from the original material, none, the screen writing couldn't possibly have been lazier. The acting is bad, soap opera bad. Some may possibly give Franco or Williams a pass because of the material. However no one will give Kunis a pass when she is transformed into the wicked witch of the west. If you need a reminder of how an over the top stereotypical witch should be played go back and watch a few minutes of Margaret Hamilton's version.

    There are several new characters introduced, as expected and as there should be. Unfortunately not one of them worked. Some are introduced for humor, some to tug at the heart strings, and some for plot devices. Not one of them is effective, and none of them are memorable.

    Probably most disappointing of all were the visuals of the film. I know the 1939 version probably doesn't actually look better, but the fact that I had that thought several times during the course of the movie gives you a glimpse into how poor the visuals were. The only exception was the opening credits and first 20 minutes of the film. All this was the black and white portion of the movie. These are the only moments where it is not obvious that the actors are on a sound stage going through the motions.

    The Wizard Of Oz was perfect family entertainment. Whimsical, humorous, frightening, and endearing. The characters were one dimensional, yes, but they were fun and we cared about them. Oz The Great And Powerful is none of these things. All I wanted was a glimpse back into aspects of the original. Instead I received my worst theater experience since Spiderman 3. Wait who was responsible for that one?
    Expand
  47. Mar 8, 2013
    0
    complete garbage. Disney claims that its films are for the family, but they are for kids and no one else, don't be fooled! Disney is not capable of making anything other than kid garbage. They are completely incapable of creating multidimensional characters, realistic dialog or anything that makes an actual quality film. This is nothing more than a shameless money grab. Very sad for some of these great actors that have been tarnished by this garbage. I hope they made a lot of money, and can't wait to see the return of their real careers. Expand
  48. Mar 8, 2013
    3
    This movie is a major disgrace to the 1939 version. They can't go thirty seconds into a song without being interrupted by another character. Long story short: NOTHING LIKE THE ORIGINAL
Metascore
44

Mixed or average reviews - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 42
  2. Negative: 10 out of 42
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Mar 18, 2013
    30
    At the center of the movie, in place of the ardent, emotionally pulverizing Judy Garland, there is James Franco...as he smirks and winks, his reflexive self-deprecation comes off as a gutless kind of cool, and it sinks this odd, fretful, uncertain movie like a boulder. [18 March 2013, p.86]
  2. Reviewed by: Lawrence Toppman
    Mar 10, 2013
    58
    What we get here is Oz the Amiable and Unthreatening.
  3. Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    Mar 10, 2013
    75
    It's familiar enough to be comfortable but not so familiar that it feels worn and repetitive.