BEFORE: In 2012, I engineered something of a Virtual World Tour, where I arranged my final films for the year based on where they were set (admittedly, I stole the idea from TCM's "30 Days of Oscar" programming) - beginning with "They Call Me Mister Tibbs!", set in San Francisco, and then journeying across the U.S, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia, then up through South and Central America to end with "The Lady from Shanghai", also set in San Francisco. 63 films that I guarantee no one else has ever watched in that order - because why would they?
This week I've been on something of a similar tour of fictional lands, from Gantua (land of the giants), to Middle Earth, Cimmeria, and now the granddaddy of fictional places, Oz. And linking from "Conan the Destroyer", Mako was also in "Under the Rainbow" (fittingly, a film about the making of "The Wizard of Oz") with Tony Cox, who appears in tonight's film. I think that may be the weirdest bit of actor linkage I've found.
THE PLOT: A small-time magician is swept away to an enchanted land and is forced into a power struggle between three witches.
AFTER: This is where I really reap the benefits of putting similar films together and maintaining a daily schedule - I get to discover the commonalities of various genres, in this case fantasy quests. This is the fourth or fifth film in the last week to feature a "treasure room", for example. But more than that, this week's films have more or less been about regular people (or hobbits) going on quests, overcoming great obstacles and self-doubt in order to face peril and accomplish great deeds. (The Conan films did this, but to a lesser extent, because they're mostly about stabbing enemies.)
Tonight, Oscar Diggs, a cut-rate carnival performer who dreams of being Houdini and/or Edison, is whisked away by a tornado (stop me if you've heard this one before) to a fantastical land with a complex heirarchal government system. (that's what you get when your economy is poppy-based, just look at Afghanistan...) He's thrust into a land he never imagined, doesn't know what's expected of him, and he has to determine which witch is which.
(ASIDE: This was perhaps the worst kept secret in Hollywood last year, except maybe for the villain in "Star Trek Into Darkness" - when people learned this might tell the backstory of the Wicked Witch, I think most people just scanned the IMDB cast list and said, "Well, duh, obviously.")
And on that level, the film succeeds. The "wizard" goes on a quest, assembles his team, defeats teh evil power, and saves the day. I could just leave it there, but you know I won't.
Where this film fails lies in what it says about men + women - with so few human characters, what a film says about a man is what is says about ALL men. So by extension, all men are manipulative dreamers who can't commit. Also by extension, women are catty and manipulative and hold grudges - did anyone take a look at these characters and consider that kids are going to be watching it, and so maybe we they shouldn't put out such a bad takeaway message? The 1939 film told us "There's no place like home." What's the message here - "Try to keep it in your pants"? More relevant for today's youth, perhaps, but it just doesn't have the same zing to it.
Next I come to magicians and politicians - who are both portrayed as liars (OK, I'm with you so far...) and a magician who essentially becomes a politican is a double-liar. I'm fine with the character being who he is, but the film seems to promote a "Fake it 'Til you Make" it mentality. I guess we've all been there, since none of us are born knowing how to do the jobs we'll later have, but again, it's an odd message to put out in a kids' fantasy film. There's a fine line between pretending and lying, after all.
(ASIDE: Those who are inclined to pick up on the political nature of this story could easily use it to make whatever point they want. A man with no real skills comes to town, and ends up running the whole country? I could easily connect the dots to George W. Bush, but I suppose other interpretations are possible. Make of this what you will. But the future books in the Oz series detail how the Wizard's government got corrupted. Time for some traffic problems in Munchkinland, and perhaps an unjustified war with Narnia.)
Now, as to the backstory, doesn't this conflict with the plot seen in "Wicked"? (I haven't seen that play, but I'm going to look up the plot now...yep, it sure does) If you've got two different backstories for a character, it makes it seem like no one's in charge of the franchise. I know, they pull this crap in comic books all the time, changing Superman's origin every few years just to keep it current, but I don't have to like it.
I think what we've got here is another severe case of "prequelitis" - we all know where "The Wizard of Oz" begins, so this film has to end in a certain way, one which sets up the 1939 film. But when you try to piece it together, the timeline just doesn't work - if you go back 20 years and bring Oscar Diggs to Oz, then he has to remain there, so he'll be there when Dorothy arrives. But Dorothy visited that psychic, Professor Marvel, in Kansas before the tornado - and he looked exactly like the Wizard. Assuming that was the same guy, how could he be in two places at once? There are other inconsistencies as well, but the main one I won't mention for fear of giving away a plot point.
Of course, the brilliance of the original film was it's duality - was Dorothy's trip to Oz a dream, or was it real? Some people view it one way, some the other, but it works either way. This one, not so much. They had to pick a horse here and say this guy got whisked over the rainbow to a real place - but who knows, maybe he was just in a coma or something and never woke up.
I'ts also worth nothing that this is the first portrayal of Oz that's post "Star Wars" - I couldn't help but think that the way the way Evanora shot green lightning greatly resembled Emperor Palpatine's Sith lightning, and that the climactic battle was a shout-out to Yoda vs. Palpatine in the grand council chamber. Bad witches = Sith and good witches = Jedi?
I did like the Wizard's use of early motion-picture technology - the tech of movies is forever intertwined with the story of Oz as we know it, after all. In the original book, Dorothy's slippers are silver, but since red plays better in a Technicolor film, the 1939 film changed them to ruby slippers. Same with the Emerald City - in the book all the citizens wore glasses with green lenses, so it merely appeared green to them (there's another political point there, no doubt). But who doesn't want to see a giant glittering green city on film? The irony is therefore lost for the sake of spectacle.
Kudos for employing real little-person actors (even if that means my wife can't watch the film). They need to work in that difficult period between St. Patrick's Day and the Christmas season, and lord knows those "Hobbit" films are no help, hiring regular-sized people to play dwarfs.
Also starring James Franco (last seen in "Never Been Kissed"), Michelle Williams (last seen in "Dick"), Rachel Weisz (last seen in "The Lovely Bones"), Mila Kunis (last seen in "Black Swan"), Zach Braff (last heard in "Chicken Little"), Bill Cobbs, Joey King, with cameos from Bruce Campbell (last seen in "The Ladykillers"), Ted Raimi, Martin Klebba (last seen in "Project X").
RATING: 6 out of 10 flying bubbles
No comments:
Post a Comment