Oz: The Great and Powerful

More that they felt it was safer to stick to what the viewers already knew and work off of what was already famous, but yeah.

@kyun: This is different. The Wizard of Oz is a hugely iconic movie that holds a strong grip on popular culture to this day and, at least in the minds of executives, playing with that expectation the audiences are going to have is a really big risk.

In fact, I think this movie is finally making me realize just how influential the 1939 version really is.

I was talking to kyun, not you. Using Harry Potter and Twilight as examples doesn't work because they weren't being held up to the same standard.

edited 12th Apr '13 2:01:52 PM by Mort08

How exactly is that different?

It's still sticking to the same story because of the assumption that the viewers can't handle something new. And if the viewers really can't handle something new, well, that's a problem for the film industry as a whole isn't it?

edited 12th Apr '13 2:00:13 PM by KnownUnknown

Then it might as well not even be a sequel to this movie.

To be fair, this movie does take place way before anything else that happens in Oz, I think. It is a prequel, after all.

Well then why are we talking sequel since everybody already knows what happens next?

edited 12th Apr '13 4:13:53 PM by maxwellelvis

Do thy know what happens between the great and powerful and "next?"

edited 12th Apr '13 4:22:26 PM by Canid117

Not much. The witches host a reign of terror over the East and West countries, the East Witch enchants Nick Chopper's ax, forcing him to replace his body with a tin one, and the Wizard sells Oz's true heir to Mombi. Nothing good happens until Dorothy.

^^^ Interesting point. Why adapt things to film in the first place when a person could just read the books and know everything that happens?

edited 12th Apr '13 5:18:47 PM by KnownUnknown

I'm just saying, the story of what happens next has pretty much been done to death.

So have movies about good conquering evil.

But good doesn't really triumph in this movie, so much as it manages to run the clock with a no-score draw.

Also, remember what happened to Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, and how it kept being compared to the old version and not allowed to stand on it's own like it tried to do? That's what would happen if a sequel to this movie was made that focused on Dorothy's first journey in Oz.

I suppose they could make it about when the Wizard came back to make up for being a bad wizard in the past, learns real magic from Glinda, and devotes himself to protecting Dorothy. 'Course, then you'd have people complaining about just ditching Mila Kunis from the series without much explanation, so this is kind of a no-win scenario.

But a sequel to this doesn't really have to be The Wizard Of Oz. There are lots of characters and stories in Oz and even the other stories with Dorothy in it aren't necessarily retreads of Wizard.

I like the idea of the sequel involving the Nome King, Ozma, Mombi, etc.

I think the majority of people would be fine with that, actually.

edited 13th Apr '13 1:29:37 PM by Mort08

Eh, depends on who you ask.