Sam Raimi Not Interested In The Oz Sequel
KGenocyde.
It's a real shame that Raimi won't be back, I just saw Oz The Great and Powerful and it was wonderful. Without him helming I have a feeling that the sequel won't be as memorable.
ScoochMagooch.
Agreed... man I love his direction
Skeevin.
Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz is another good choice for a sequel. That's the book where the Wizard returns to Oz with Dorothy, a talking horse, eight baby piglets, and some dude named Jeb. He fights invisible bears and vegetable people. It's pretty cool.
Soldier_7.
I would love to see an Oz movie that actually followed more closely to the book, not some musical version. Surprisingly, as I only just read the book to my kids for the first time last year, it is quite more violent and actiony than the movie is. I want it remade. The classic is what it is but I want a faithful adaptation.
Marc Nix.
They've tried a few times (did you see Walter Murch's Return to Oz?) but the Judy Garland version is just so overwhelmingly present of mind that it's impossible to escape influence or comparison. What's worked out better is TV miniseries versions or alternate universe versions, like say Tin Man or Wicked or stuff like that (and this Oz Great and Powerful movie itself) which have managed to approach the story or subject without running into a yellow brick wall...
Soldier_7.
I did see Tin Man and thought that it was pretty good.
raffum35.
Sounds like a job for Mr. Tim Burton!
ScoochMagooch.
Nooooooo.... I love Tim and all but after Alice i don't want him making more children stories into movies..
Pinback_Sherman.
Nope. Del Toro. But he's way too busy in other projects he probably won't ever get to.
infin8um.
Some people don't seem to grasp what has already been said here: it is not a remake of Victor Flemming's 1939 movie that has been announced. The 1939 film does not follow the first book, added ruby slippers and was a musical (it wasn't even the first Wizard of Oz movie). Following the prequel would be a matter making the books into movies (or even original stories). Think of the Narnia, Hunger Games & Harry Potter films... only with a book series that is now public domain.
GRIML0CK122.
WICKED
Thribs.
I thought the sequel was the 1939 film?
magnusalpha.
The 1939 film was based on a bunch of different Oz stories, and some stuff was invented for the film. The sequel to Raimi's film would be based on the first book.
ObiTrev.
Why not set the squeal 1,000 years in the future. Do a complete Cyberpunk makeover on the Oz world, where the magic of old is fighting to reclaim the world that gave way to science and technology years before.
batman1hulk2.
You want the next Oz film to be Tron: Legacy?
ObiTrev.
No, more like Blade Runner meets Tin Man.
Pinback_Sherman.
Funny you say that. I bought an anthology on reimagined Wizard of Oz stories. It's pretty good and they have a cyber Wizard of Oz story and a steampunk one - among other interesting takes.
JarJarBlinks.
Mesa become director and the movie will be retitled to Jar Jar the Great and The Powerful.
JarJarBlinks.
Mesa interested in Oz sequel.
Barbacoazord.
Thanks for the spoiler alert IGN
jasonalexandris.
Ummm....thanks for the spoiler warning on the update part of the article, assholes.
kmarxx.
So we still doing Spoiler Alerts... or nah?
grippie.
I'm psyched about this. I really want a book version of the wizard of oz. Most have probably never even read the original. if you have you know that the old movie is Hollywood garbage. It's classic but none of the themes are remotely the same. Kind of like Charlie an the chocolate factory .
FrozenLove.
If you want the books iTunes has them for free, if you don't mind some digging. There are about 13 books in all for the series by Buam himself
the-snoss.
Noooooooooooo! That scuppers a chance of a 'Wicked' movie. This happened with The Looking Glass wars movies too. Never happened because it was usurped by Tim Burtons Alice in WonderLand. Damn you Disney!
ThirdEchelonKilly117.
Why can't they use the ruby red slippers along with other things?
serrano862004.
MGM filmed the Wizard of OZ and they came up with the ruby red slippers. The book had silver slippers. MGM mad the ruby slippers so it can look good in technicolor.
ThirdEchelonKilly117.
Hm, I remember a lot from that book but I never remembered silver slippers, either way, I would like to see a faithful adaption of that book because I loved the 1939 movie but there were no field mice, no tiger bear things, no decapitations, etc. I guess I'm probably one of the few but I'm sure it would be interesting
Fellstrike.
Because the Ruby Slippers are a studio property. The Silver Slippers that Baum wrote about are part of the public domain that Disney can use.
FrozenLove.
MGM has rights still to the original movie, so they can not use references from it. Also the ruby slippers were made for the movie. The slippers are supposed to be silver and not ruby. Like someone said before they made them ruby because of technicolor and even the munchkins weren't as colorful as in the books
SleepingLion78.
Disney likes sequels, though usually they wait until a film opens before they start planning on how to mine a franchise further.
SuperJPM2.
That's some pretty bad press, saying you wouldn't do a sequel before your movie even comes out
Rarthus2.
I was never even interested in this friggin' prequel. No one asked for a movie like this. When I watch Wizard of Oz, I don't go "HEY! WHERE DID THE WIZARD COME FROM! WHAT DID HE DO!" but someone did, and now we have this. And now we're gonna get a sequel to a prequel. Fantastic.
Pinback_Sherman.
I have. And I'm pretty sure it's been told somewhere in the books. Moron.
ScoochMagooch.
The movie was pretty good actually
SuperJPM2.
Cry about it, girl.
Jcool0.
Moron Alert
SuperJPM2.
Freaking OWNED by Jcool0!!!
hamburger606.
Jcool0 replied to you, this would indicate he was calling you a moron!
SuperJPM2.
I KNOW man! I got freaking OWNED!! remember when that guy owned me so hard
Gibson.
Vote with your dollars. If you don't wanna see it, no one is gonna make ya. :)
NeedWeed.
Im sorry but mila kunis is not even that hot at all. In my school shes a solid 7
ScoochMagooch.
Where the hell do you go to school? Hottsville or something?
Pinback_Sherman.
And your point is?
TecHead5.
Milky Milk.
cleanundies.
Making a sequel to a movie they expect to sell well is somehow "milking"? ... I call it a smart business strategy. EA putting micro-transactions in a full retail priced game... that's "milking"
Snoop-Tyson-ty.
Thats funny bc i bet this movie fails..... ;-)
ScoochMagooch.
Movie theater was pretty packed where I was... We shall see
LiquidFreeman34.
Woah wait here. Talk about jumping the Shark! The film just came out today! How does Disney really know for sure it will do well at the box office? They could have another John Carter situation on their hands.
ScoochMagooch.
Ughh but John Carter needs a sequel! Gods of Mars is fantastic! And needs to be made into a film!
AquamanIsCool.
Movie is gonna flop
Closingracer.
Well the new York Daily news gave it a zero....
poorpigg.
Raimi is not interested in the sequel, and neither is any one else. Sort of disappointed in this one.
xsincarax.
damn this sucks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbmobwsgaFs&feature=youtu.be -xSinCarax
NoLifeKing23.
Not interested in the original.
Dalinkwent13.
Without Sam's unique filming style and creativity, I don't have much hope for the Sequel unless Del Toro or Alfonzo Cuaron are hired.
ScoochMagooch.
Agreed... If there is a sequel Sam is the only one that can do it
PushxShove.
Talk about jumping the gun, or should we say the shark?
AceJace.
Wow a sequel already!? that..that escalated quickly.
Ophanim-Kid.
what would be the point of a sequel?
hiruu.
Sounds great, because I'm not interested in seeing one either...VERY disappointed in this movie. I had high hopes, after the re-imagined Alice movie, and thought Disney could strike gold again, but this was not the case.
BettyBlues.
Maybe they should slow it down and see how this movie does fin a month or two then see if it deserves a sequel.
JPW83.
I thought Wizard of Oz was the sequel. They tied most of the loose ends. And they can't really kill off the Witches anyway because that's Dorothy's job.
JTShiro.
Oz was a decent movie, but really doesn't need a sequel since the end (mild spoilers I guess) of it kind of set everything up for the original film. Glad to see that Raimi isn't gonna try and force a sequel just because the studio wants it.
jaguar_claw.
This movie looks silly.
crazyasian55.
Dudes, I got this great idea for a sequel. It's about this girl and her dog who get transported to Oz by a tornado just like the wizard and she has to battle the evil witch. She could even meet some companions along the way like a scarecrow, a tinman and a lion who each have to battle their inner demons all so she can find a way home where she will take the lessons learned in Oz and apply them to real life. I bet it will be a winner!
HisDivineOrder.
"That thing [he] would need to get interested" being money. Lots and lots of money.
loum410.
This movie was just awful..everything was so overdramatic and to be honest, Mila Kunis was the worst of them all..really dissapointed
BettyBlues.
All she should ever be is the voice of Meg and that is it.
DaercomaDoctor.
If it's any consolation, neither are we.
BadCombatman.
Whatever happened to the days when a studio would wait to see if a movie was successful before greenlighting a sequel?
KH3wisher.
Raimi finally makes his first good movie in forever.... "Sequel? Nope, not interested."
WarriorPrince.
Since when did Disney owned the Wizard Of Oz?
DJCowboy.
Since 1954. They actually never owned "The Wizard of Oz" but they did own the other Oz novels but those have been around long enough that they are now considered public domain so technically no one owns them anymore
ssjdragons.
I was actuallly blown away by this movie and I really hope they DO add the ruby slippers
Gibson.
All they have to do is make the slippers silver like they were in the original book. The ruby slipper design was purely an invention (or tweak really) by WB. I don't see how they could stop them from using slippers of any type in the new series.
_mi_garlock.
And they're planning to rerelease the Wizard of Oz with James Franco as Oz.... http://youtu.be/TQqh0TAlD20 ;)
dustinscarsdale.
I like how reports KEEP saying "no ruby slippers" - they should also say "no musical numbers", because I was looking forward to Elfman doing silly songs for this movie, but sadly, he didn't.
dustinscarsdale.
Fuuuu??? The movie just came out TODAY MAN!!!! WTF??? WHo says we want another goddamn OZ movie DISNEY???!!!!
impurekind.
Well if a film version of The Wizard of Oz doesn't have the ruby slippers it's just missing something. Still, I'm sure they could still make it great. Assuming they don't c**k it up.
ajcroskery.
Disney used the ruby slippers in Return to Oz in the 80's, so they may pay to use the again.
Theme44.
So i take it no one at ign reads yet u guys write articles......oz is a 17 book series by frank l baum soooooo why r u tellin us theres a sequel this is the first book dorthys story is the last and the next book there making is the second outta 17 books so yea
Marc Nix.
That's ... not true in the slightest. There are a lot of Oz books, span a wide range of time, but Wonderful Wizard is not the last story (it's not even Dorothy's story) and I'm not too familiar with them to know which goes where in the timeline but I know that it's often confused and inconsistent between books, even fans don't know exactly what happened when. http://www.timelineuniverse.net/Oz/Introduction.htm But it doesn't matter. This "sequel" will likely try to again tell a story of Oz himself since he's the center of the first movie, and it'll probably continue to tell the story of the characters introduced in this movie as well as follow the stories of familiar characters in order to get them closer and closer to what we see in Wonderful Wizard (aka the Judy Garland movie Wizard of Oz.) I don't think there's much in Baum or the other stories that's about the Wiz himself, so unless they adapt previous Baum stories to fit the pre-Dorothy storyline or do a bunch with Ozma, it'll have to be new stories like this movie is a new story.
EpicLx20.
Is the Wizard of Oz really a story that needs telling? It's just such a lame concept. Now, if they did it in the same vein as American Mcgee's Alice games, that would be a different story.
micksick.
omg no ruby slippers what are they to do.. lol
Thr33Dog.
So a prequel is getting a sequel huh.
delta169.
Woah, pump the brakes there Disney. Wait till the first two weeks turn out!
KGenocyde.
It's a real shame that Raimi won't be back, I just saw Oz The Great and Powerful and it was wonderful. Without him helming I have a feeling that the sequel won't be as memorable.
ScoochMagooch.
Agreed... man I love his direction
Skeevin.
Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz is another good choice for a sequel. That's the book where the Wizard returns to Oz with Dorothy, a talking horse, eight baby piglets, and some dude named Jeb. He fights invisible bears and vegetable people. It's pretty cool.
Soldier_7.
I would love to see an Oz movie that actually followed more closely to the book, not some musical version. Surprisingly, as I only just read the book to my kids for the first time last year, it is quite more violent and actiony than the movie is. I want it remade. The classic is what it is but I want a faithful adaptation.
Marc Nix.
They've tried a few times (did you see Walter Murch's Return to Oz?) but the Judy Garland version is just so overwhelmingly present of mind that it's impossible to escape influence or comparison. What's worked out better is TV miniseries versions or alternate universe versions, like say Tin Man or Wicked or stuff like that (and this Oz Great and Powerful movie itself) which have managed to approach the story or subject without running into a yellow brick wall...
Soldier_7.
I did see Tin Man and thought that it was pretty good.
raffum35.
Sounds like a job for Mr. Tim Burton!
ScoochMagooch.
Nooooooo.... I love Tim and all but after Alice i don't want him making more children stories into movies..
Pinback_Sherman.
Nope. Del Toro. But he's way too busy in other projects he probably won't ever get to.
infin8um.
Some people don't seem to grasp what has already been said here: it is not a remake of Victor Flemming's 1939 movie that has been announced. The 1939 film does not follow the first book, added ruby slippers and was a musical (it wasn't even the first Wizard of Oz movie). Following the prequel would be a matter making the books into movies (or even original stories). Think of the Narnia, Hunger Games & Harry Potter films... only with a book series that is now public domain.
GRIML0CK122.
WICKED
Thribs.
I thought the sequel was the 1939 film?
magnusalpha.
The 1939 film was based on a bunch of different Oz stories, and some stuff was invented for the film. The sequel to Raimi's film would be based on the first book.
ObiTrev.
Why not set the squeal 1,000 years in the future. Do a complete Cyberpunk makeover on the Oz world, where the magic of old is fighting to reclaim the world that gave way to science and technology years before.
batman1hulk2.
You want the next Oz film to be Tron: Legacy?
ObiTrev.
No, more like Blade Runner meets Tin Man.
Pinback_Sherman.
Funny you say that. I bought an anthology on reimagined Wizard of Oz stories. It's pretty good and they have a cyber Wizard of Oz story and a steampunk one - among other interesting takes.
JarJarBlinks.
Mesa become director and the movie will be retitled to Jar Jar the Great and The Powerful.
JarJarBlinks.
Mesa interested in Oz sequel.
Barbacoazord.
Thanks for the spoiler alert IGN
jasonalexandris.
Ummm....thanks for the spoiler warning on the update part of the article, assholes.
kmarxx.
So we still doing Spoiler Alerts... or nah?
grippie.
I'm psyched about this. I really want a book version of the wizard of oz. Most have probably never even read the original. if you have you know that the old movie is Hollywood garbage. It's classic but none of the themes are remotely the same. Kind of like Charlie an the chocolate factory .
FrozenLove.
If you want the books iTunes has them for free, if you don't mind some digging. There are about 13 books in all for the series by Buam himself
the-snoss.
Noooooooooooo! That scuppers a chance of a 'Wicked' movie. This happened with The Looking Glass wars movies too. Never happened because it was usurped by Tim Burtons Alice in WonderLand. Damn you Disney!
ThirdEchelonKilly117.
Why can't they use the ruby red slippers along with other things?
serrano862004.
MGM filmed the Wizard of OZ and they came up with the ruby red slippers. The book had silver slippers. MGM mad the ruby slippers so it can look good in technicolor.
ThirdEchelonKilly117.
Hm, I remember a lot from that book but I never remembered silver slippers, either way, I would like to see a faithful adaption of that book because I loved the 1939 movie but there were no field mice, no tiger bear things, no decapitations, etc. I guess I'm probably one of the few but I'm sure it would be interesting
Fellstrike.
Because the Ruby Slippers are a studio property. The Silver Slippers that Baum wrote about are part of the public domain that Disney can use.
FrozenLove.
MGM has rights still to the original movie, so they can not use references from it. Also the ruby slippers were made for the movie. The slippers are supposed to be silver and not ruby. Like someone said before they made them ruby because of technicolor and even the munchkins weren't as colorful as in the books
SleepingLion78.
Disney likes sequels, though usually they wait until a film opens before they start planning on how to mine a franchise further.
SuperJPM2.
That's some pretty bad press, saying you wouldn't do a sequel before your movie even comes out
Rarthus2.
I was never even interested in this friggin' prequel. No one asked for a movie like this. When I watch Wizard of Oz, I don't go "HEY! WHERE DID THE WIZARD COME FROM! WHAT DID HE DO!" but someone did, and now we have this. And now we're gonna get a sequel to a prequel. Fantastic.
Pinback_Sherman.
I have. And I'm pretty sure it's been told somewhere in the books. Moron.
ScoochMagooch.
The movie was pretty good actually
SuperJPM2.
Cry about it, girl.
Jcool0.
Moron Alert
SuperJPM2.
Freaking OWNED by Jcool0!!!
hamburger606.
Jcool0 replied to you, this would indicate he was calling you a moron!
SuperJPM2.
I KNOW man! I got freaking OWNED!! remember when that guy owned me so hard
Gibson.
Vote with your dollars. If you don't wanna see it, no one is gonna make ya. :)
NeedWeed.
Im sorry but mila kunis is not even that hot at all. In my school shes a solid 7
ScoochMagooch.
Where the hell do you go to school? Hottsville or something?
Pinback_Sherman.
And your point is?
TecHead5.
Milky Milk.
cleanundies.
Making a sequel to a movie they expect to sell well is somehow "milking"? ... I call it a smart business strategy. EA putting micro-transactions in a full retail priced game... that's "milking"
Snoop-Tyson-ty.
Thats funny bc i bet this movie fails..... ;-)
ScoochMagooch.
Movie theater was pretty packed where I was... We shall see
LiquidFreeman34.
Woah wait here. Talk about jumping the Shark! The film just came out today! How does Disney really know for sure it will do well at the box office? They could have another John Carter situation on their hands.
ScoochMagooch.
Ughh but John Carter needs a sequel! Gods of Mars is fantastic! And needs to be made into a film!
AquamanIsCool.
Movie is gonna flop
Closingracer.
Well the new York Daily news gave it a zero....
poorpigg.
Raimi is not interested in the sequel, and neither is any one else. Sort of disappointed in this one.
xsincarax.
damn this sucks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbmobwsgaFs&feature=youtu.be -xSinCarax
NoLifeKing23.
Not interested in the original.
Dalinkwent13.
Without Sam's unique filming style and creativity, I don't have much hope for the Sequel unless Del Toro or Alfonzo Cuaron are hired.
ScoochMagooch.
Agreed... If there is a sequel Sam is the only one that can do it
PushxShove.
Talk about jumping the gun, or should we say the shark?
AceJace.
Wow a sequel already!? that..that escalated quickly.
Ophanim-Kid.
what would be the point of a sequel?
hiruu.
Sounds great, because I'm not interested in seeing one either...VERY disappointed in this movie. I had high hopes, after the re-imagined Alice movie, and thought Disney could strike gold again, but this was not the case.
BettyBlues.
Maybe they should slow it down and see how this movie does fin a month or two then see if it deserves a sequel.
JPW83.
I thought Wizard of Oz was the sequel. They tied most of the loose ends. And they can't really kill off the Witches anyway because that's Dorothy's job.
JTShiro.
Oz was a decent movie, but really doesn't need a sequel since the end (mild spoilers I guess) of it kind of set everything up for the original film. Glad to see that Raimi isn't gonna try and force a sequel just because the studio wants it.
jaguar_claw.
This movie looks silly.
crazyasian55.
Dudes, I got this great idea for a sequel. It's about this girl and her dog who get transported to Oz by a tornado just like the wizard and she has to battle the evil witch. She could even meet some companions along the way like a scarecrow, a tinman and a lion who each have to battle their inner demons all so she can find a way home where she will take the lessons learned in Oz and apply them to real life. I bet it will be a winner!
HisDivineOrder.
"That thing [he] would need to get interested" being money. Lots and lots of money.
loum410.
This movie was just awful..everything was so overdramatic and to be honest, Mila Kunis was the worst of them all..really dissapointed
BettyBlues.
All she should ever be is the voice of Meg and that is it.
DaercomaDoctor.
If it's any consolation, neither are we.
BadCombatman.
Whatever happened to the days when a studio would wait to see if a movie was successful before greenlighting a sequel?
KH3wisher.
Raimi finally makes his first good movie in forever.... "Sequel? Nope, not interested."
WarriorPrince.
Since when did Disney owned the Wizard Of Oz?
DJCowboy.
Since 1954. They actually never owned "The Wizard of Oz" but they did own the other Oz novels but those have been around long enough that they are now considered public domain so technically no one owns them anymore
ssjdragons.
I was actuallly blown away by this movie and I really hope they DO add the ruby slippers
Gibson.
All they have to do is make the slippers silver like they were in the original book. The ruby slipper design was purely an invention (or tweak really) by WB. I don't see how they could stop them from using slippers of any type in the new series.
_mi_garlock.
And they're planning to rerelease the Wizard of Oz with James Franco as Oz.... http://youtu.be/TQqh0TAlD20 ;)
dustinscarsdale.
I like how reports KEEP saying "no ruby slippers" - they should also say "no musical numbers", because I was looking forward to Elfman doing silly songs for this movie, but sadly, he didn't.
dustinscarsdale.
Fuuuu??? The movie just came out TODAY MAN!!!! WTF??? WHo says we want another goddamn OZ movie DISNEY???!!!!
impurekind.
Well if a film version of The Wizard of Oz doesn't have the ruby slippers it's just missing something. Still, I'm sure they could still make it great. Assuming they don't c**k it up.
ajcroskery.
Disney used the ruby slippers in Return to Oz in the 80's, so they may pay to use the again.
Theme44.
So i take it no one at ign reads yet u guys write articles......oz is a 17 book series by frank l baum soooooo why r u tellin us theres a sequel this is the first book dorthys story is the last and the next book there making is the second outta 17 books so yea
Marc Nix.
That's ... not true in the slightest. There are a lot of Oz books, span a wide range of time, but Wonderful Wizard is not the last story (it's not even Dorothy's story) and I'm not too familiar with them to know which goes where in the timeline but I know that it's often confused and inconsistent between books, even fans don't know exactly what happened when. http://www.timelineuniverse.net/Oz/Introduction.htm But it doesn't matter. This "sequel" will likely try to again tell a story of Oz himself since he's the center of the first movie, and it'll probably continue to tell the story of the characters introduced in this movie as well as follow the stories of familiar characters in order to get them closer and closer to what we see in Wonderful Wizard (aka the Judy Garland movie Wizard of Oz.) I don't think there's much in Baum or the other stories that's about the Wiz himself, so unless they adapt previous Baum stories to fit the pre-Dorothy storyline or do a bunch with Ozma, it'll have to be new stories like this movie is a new story.
EpicLx20.
Is the Wizard of Oz really a story that needs telling? It's just such a lame concept. Now, if they did it in the same vein as American Mcgee's Alice games, that would be a different story.
micksick.
omg no ruby slippers what are they to do.. lol
Thr33Dog.
So a prequel is getting a sequel huh.
delta169.
Woah, pump the brakes there Disney. Wait till the first two weeks turn out!
Hermitsage888.
Money grabbing sons of nutcrackers!
BrothaDoug.
Well, there's no place like...Hollywood.
gojiwarrior.
Guess it's time for a reboot with an untold story.
Son_of_Bmore.
So Star Wars & Wizard of Oz I guess Disney can't come up with anything of there own
Tjanglim.
Idk about 15-17th century pirating or anything, but I'd say PotC was kinda original
TheDodgerHatKid.
Mickey Mouse: We need more ideas for movies haha. Employee: We can make movies based on our park rides. Mickey: Perfect haha. Lets do Pirates of the Carribean and The Haunted Mansion.
DavidWurzel.
It's widely believed that Disney transmogrified a screenplay of a Monkey Island adaptation into the first Pirates movie. Even the creator of Monkey Island, Ron Gilbert, has called shenanigans. http://www.cracked.com/article_19443_7-classic-movies-you-didnt-know-were-rip-offs.html
Raptor_J3SUS.
I'd like to see an ACTUAL Monkey Island movie
LustfulMind.
I want to see a LITERAL Monkey Island movie.
eleven59.
I'd like to see a FIGURATIVE monkey island movie
WanderinRaider.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGEjFPA3-Yg
Guest8310.
PotC was really good at first, loved the first one, liked the second one. But PotC 3 was the stupidest thing I've ever seen, didn't even want to go see the fourth. When you start bringing people back from the dead your story is ruined instantly, and that ending was just stupid.
HardcoreDeadlygamer.
...which was like nine years ago. Yeah, I'm pretty sure they made Cinderella Dumbo, Bambi, and all that, but point is: nowadays, they have no sense of originality left. Just the sense of money-grubbing...
gliese581.
PotC definitely wasn't 15th century, but it wasn't properly 17th century either. Honestly that series was all over the place in terms of costume, technology, some of the settings, and even the use of props dressing the sets, but it was never trying to be a serious period drama or anything. Pirates offered us fun and adventure with a healthy side-order of Anachronism Stew: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AnachronismStew
Latnok.
This film was actually great. I saw it at an early staff screening (I work for odeon) and I enjoyed it. I'd even watch it again at the cinemas. The 3D was great. Nearly every scene used 3D tech so it wasn't a waste. this is a must watch for 3D. It was also delightful. I laughed quite a bit through out the film. Good acting and great settings. Kudos to Sam Raimi. I actually wouldn't mind seeing a sequel to it.
mksystem74.
I didnt get the chance to see it in 3D, but I do agree it was a very enjoyable film. Knowing they can't use a lot of stuff from the original movie, it'll be interesting to see what a sequel will be like. No matter what, Michelle Williams is a must!
gazwkduk.
I'm afraid I thought it was amazingly boring, I even hoped for a roaring finale and was disappointed. A waste of both money and time :(
rjdrennen1987.
I guess you can't come up with the right form of "their".
chubdaddyfresh.
Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is nonexistent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery – celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from – it’s where you take them to.â€â€â€”Jim Jarmusch, The Golden Rules of Filming
Spazo.
And Marvel...
falcon_punch87.
saw this movie last night. man it was good. hope he comes back for the sequel.
kill4money213.
They can't. Why do you think all of their movies that were supposedly, "never to leave the Disney vault", are all of a sudden coming out in 3-D? Even though it doesn't do jack shit?
consoledead.
i think that became apparent when they decided to make a prequel to a movie that was all a dream so none of this movie or the next matters.
Pinback_Sherman.
Um, it was actually based on the books - hence - they can't use elements from the film like the ruby red slippers.
joepascoe.
Philosophically, this was also a dream. Dorothy just dreamt of how the land of Oz got a wizard
Andodalf.
More importantly, the movie already exists, and they seem to be talking about it as an original new thing. I'm ok with a Remake of tWOO (its been a lot longer than most since the original) but at least be honest about it.
magnusalpha.
People don't seem to realize the 1939 film "The Wizard of Oz" is itself a mishmash of bits from several books, and that Raimi doing a film version of the book "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" IS NOT a remake or reboot of the 1939 film. It would be a film-version of the book.
run_around_man.
Well put. If my memory serves me correctly, "The Wizard of Oz" was somewhat of a series was it not?
magnusalpha.
There's 15 or so "Oz" books written by Baum himself, starting in 1900, and there's a ton more written by other authors, authorized by the Baum estate. "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" is book 1, and Raimi's film that's coming out is a set-up prequel to Book 1. If they do a sequel it would be based on Book 1, not the 1939 film.
WAHI1547.
who abbreviates The Wizard of Oz?? i mean really. "/
Andodalf.
"WAtWOO iMR "/" I don't know man. I don't know.
gernb.
Since everyone knows the Wizard of Oz, they should just skip it and adapt some of Baum's other Oz stories for the sequel.
Way_of_Samurai.
You see why i don't want these guys making the next Star Wars Franchise?
Pinback_Sherman.
No. What does that have to do with anything? I mean - you're right. Look how they messed up all those Marvel movies.
TheNewGame.
Greatest story line EVER. Top 3 1. FEAR ITSELF 2. AGE OF ULTRON 3. FLASHPOINT U CAN'T ARGUE THAT LIST
GravyRobberJosh.
Age of Ultron has been out for one day. You have no idea if its going to be awesome yet. Furthermore the other two in your random list blow in comparison to some of dc and marvel storylines from the 70's/80's. you must be a new comer to comics? Welcome, let me first introduce you to Locke & Key!
BrothaDoug.
Or Saga.
GravyRobberJosh.
Definitly Saga!
Kidstellar.
Or Criminal, or Incognito, or Morning Glories, or American Vampire, or The strange talents of Luther Strode, or sword, or Girls.
GravyRobberJosh.
Yes, all of those!
TheNewGame.
HEY BRO DON'T GO AND GET BUTT HURT U LOSER. IT WAS JUST A JOKE. I KNOW THOSE MENTIONED WERE GARBAGE JUST LIKE U. CRYBABY
GravyRobberJosh.
That was the gayest joke I have ever heard.
GravyRobberJosh.
Asswipe, you have posted the same freaking thing on 10 other articles. Are you retarded or something?
inty_tes.
It's obvious he's very young.
GravyRobberJosh.
Yeah that's for sure.
sassybunseeds.
My baseball coach his name is Ozvaldo so we call him The Wizard I'll leave now
omegadk1.
The slippers in the book are silver anyway... so no big loss
android475.
Emma Watson as Dorothy please
batman1hulk2.
Dorothy Mantooth is a saint!
android475.
I agree ;)
bbr1394.
How about Judy Garland? Is she not available?
Charles_Buttlicker.
I heard she isn't doing much of anything these days. She could probably do it.
wonka01.
Terrible... ;^)
BrothaDoug.
ahahahahahahah y'all ain't right
Fellstrike.
Or an eight year old actress to be age appropriate to the books. That'd be better. ;)
android475.
If they do that they better find good kid actresses
Bertuzzi44fan.
Maysie Williams FTW!
LustfulMind.
They should hire Willow Smith.
Pinback_Sherman.
He never gave a specific age - keeping it generic on purpose so any kid could relate however old they are.
Fellstrike.
Tell that to the illustrator.
Pinback_Sherman.
It's different depending on what books you're looking at. I've seen many different versions of her.
Son_of_Bmore.
Most actresses can't sing anymore so who would play Dorothy
FrozenLove.
The wizard of Oz was not originally a musical
batman1hulk2.
That's what Raimi's Oz is probably missing, the musical aspect. I hate most musicals, but I still think the Wizard of Oz films should be musicals.
STROUDWESRod.
It should be though because I havn't seen a good musical since Dr.Horrible. On that note they should cast NPH as Scarecrow.
FrozenLove.
I can tell you have not read the first books. A musical would take way from alot of amazing detail and plots that were taken away from the original book. That's like saying Harry potter needed to be a musical series.
jyu467.
Anne Hathaway? I actually think Emma Watson would be a better Dorthy, but Hathaway can sure sing.
sammyv17.
Please...no...
Ryandamon.
Probably Anne Hathaway.
FrozenLove.
I'm glad to hear they are using buams book instead, it is alot better than the movie and originally the slippers were silver, the only reason they were ruby red was because technicolor had just come out and they wanted to utilize it
acanoftuna.
Nice to see another fan of the books, It's been forever since I've read them though. I hope they adapt the other books as well the Saw-horse was one of my favorite characters.
Pinback_Sherman.
You can get all of them in a nice set for .99 cents. 55 hours of books - well - based on my reading speed. Or you can find them separately for free. But the set I got is pretty nice and had some formatting work down and it also has a clickable table of contents.
ajjjevans.
Ok someone who has read the book i have a question. Is the story for this oz movie based off the books, because (this may be a spoiler) it had an incredibly similar plot to one of Sam Raimi's older movies Army of Darkness, and when i say similar i mean many characters are similar and some of the character arks are really close with one another, i hope im not crazy and other people noticed this as well.
FrozenLove.
I haven't seen it yet but when I do I will let you know. By the way if you have iTunes or any iOS device you can download all the book for free
ajjjevans.
I will have to do that then.
Alienfreaks04.
I haven't seen this movie yet, so I can't comment on what a sequel will be, but I thought it leads up to The Wizard of Oz.
batman1hulk2.
Maybe the next film will skip over the events of the Wizard of Oz and be a sequel to it. Similar to how Star Wars 7 will not be another sequel to a prequel, but a sequel to the events of the final sequel of the original trilogy.
Mandafett.
Emma Stone as Dorothy.
wisepossum1988.
Nah, the way things are going in cinema they will cast Johnny Depp as Dorothy and Helena Bonham Carter as Toto.
VivixGames.
I'd watch that...
batman1hulk2.
Johnny Depp as Scarecrow would be good.
bsemph16.
I hope they make some of the sequel books movies. Where the Scarecrow is the ruler of the emerald city, the tin man the ruler of the winkies, etc. It should be dark like the source material as well. I was really hopping to see the Witch curse Nick Choppers axe and see his limbs get cut off, turning him into the Tin Man
Pinback_Sherman.
Damn, I knew I read that somewhere when I was younger. Must have been an excerpt from one of Baum's books in one of the sets of the anthologies of kid stories my dad had when he was a kid.
mattabatta.
So, essentially, we might be getting a remake of sorts for the Wizard of Oz?
Dartfulodger.
The Wicked Witch of the West..... Dorothy.....
magnusalpha.
Not really, it would be a film version of the book. The 1939 film took parts of several books and made a new story out of them.
mattabatta.
Oh ok. I still have to get around to reading Baum's work.
Charles_Buttlicker.
GUYS!!! I come from the future, to be exact-- a little after noon on Sunday March 10, 2013. We just received word that The Wizard of Oz pulled a John Carter and flopped! Disney is in shock, they thought James Franco would bring in tons of girls in to watch their movie, James Franco is stoned, and Lavaburn wound up being top comment in the Box Office article that went up a few minutes ago in the future. You guys can still change this! You have the power!
PokemonMester.
Thats why Franco is in 'This is the End'.
Charles_Buttlicker.
Holy shit! What am I doing this weekend?!
Charles_Buttlicker.
I CAN'T TELL YOU DUE TO LEGAL REASONS!
Charles_Buttlicker.
Buttlicker you're such a tease!
Charles_Buttlicker.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE MOM SAID!
Charles_Buttlicker.
...shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.
ZEMANATOR.
Stop replying to yourself it's creepy.
Cr7madridfer.
Another success for Disney
batman1hulk2.
I'm glad, they never seem to catch a break.
endymionn.
WHEEEEEELLLERRRSSSS
leDarkMonkeyGod.
well that escalated quickly...
batman1hulk2.
that really got out of hand fast...
No comments:
Post a Comment