Bum Reviews - Oz The Great and Powerful

(85 votes, average 4.91 out of 5)


Doug's Review
Facebook Share
Doug's Official Facebook Page
Comments (88)
  • UnShame
    wait why do you wear hats in both videos?..
    oh, whatever, that's a really unnecessary movie, doesn't even worth watching the review :/
  • Zorro4k6  - Um...
    avatar
    UnShame, are you new? He use to do two videos before he started Sibling Rivalry. The first video is the Bum doing his usual thing. The second video is always Doug giving his actual thoughts. Not just playing them up for jokes like he does as Chester.

    Since Sibling Rivalry got started, he stopped putting a second video up. He always just waited to do a video with Rob to give his actual thoughts. That's what Sibling Rivalry is.

    From what I hear, Oz the Great and Powerful is actually rather enjoyable. So I may check it out. I may actually like it. So you don't really care for the movie and as a result don't care to hear what Doug thinks about it? What if the movie was really good? How would you know if it is or not? I mean even if I'm not interested in a movie, I still watch Doug's reviews just to see what he thinks about the film and get a good laugh. So I just think it's rather silly not to watch Doug's review and laugh because you're not interested in the film. But that's just my view. If that's what you want to do, then I respect that.

    Anyway, nice review Doug. :)
  • PlayMp1
    avatar
    UnShame was only talking about the hat - Doug doesn't usually wear a hat while out of character (but almost always wears one in-character, no matter the character... hm).
  • Zorro4k6
    avatar
    Oh, I missed "hat" in the comment. It was really late, so I was pretty tired when I wrote mine. My mistake, haha. Thanks for pointing that out to me PlayMp1. :) Although Doug doesn't usually wear a hat out of character, I don't see it that jarring really. Nice that he changes it up every now and then.
  • reservoir dog ren
    Nice!
    I think it´s one of your best Bum Reviews.
  • SRanger1071  - Look on the bright side
    There's no "liar revealed" story arc.
  • PsychopathUltimate
    avatar
    Uh, yeah there kinda is. It's when Oscar tells Finley that he isn't a real wizard after Finley swears his life to serving him. There's another one where Glinda figures out that he isn't a real wizard. There's also another one when it's exposed to Theodora that the magic box Oscar gave to here was a stock item he had multiple copies of and gave to any given woman he wanted to take advantage of at that time such as in the beginning of the film where he gives his female assistant a music box.
  • KouTheMad
    avatar
    true, but it is done in a different way, it's not......bad, it doesn't feel as bad as other liar revealed moments......it feels like it works.
  • Data Girl 3
    Bum Reviews: From what I've heard, there were no ruby slippers in the movie because they were the property of MGM. (The slippers were originally silver in the book, but MGM made them ruby slippers in the movie to take advantage of the Technicolor process, which was new at the time.) Disney was not able to obtain the rights to them when they made this movie.

    Doug's Review: Funny, I thought the whole thing at the end when Oz appeared to be dead kinda worked. To be honest, the only things that really bugged me was the rather cliche ending with Oz and Glinda. (Just because there's a guy and a girl doesn't mean there has to be a romance.)
  • CC*
    avatar
    well,disney got to do the ruby slippers in return to oz so why not now ?
  • Seolyk
    because Warner Bros Owns the rights to Wizard of Oz now. MGM had them and Disney owned MGM, but WB has them now so they can't.
  • ladydiskette
    avatar
    Welcome back Chester A Bum, I've missed you and your happy-go-lucky antics! *gives him chocolate coins*
  • LikaLaruku
    avatar
    The Oz franchise is public domain. There are over 50 movies, TV shows, animated series, comic book series, & musicals based n it. Or are you just saying that Disney only owns the rights to MGM's movie?

    As a fan of the books, this movie is high on my shit list. Disney must have been like "none of these dumb f**ks read, let's make a movie based on fanfiction, & also give all the parts that should be played by elderly midgets to young tall people & put a romance where it has no place being."

    The MGM movie also took a lot of liberties with the first book, especially with the characters personalities.
    ------------------------- ---------------------
    *Dorothy was actually pretty bossy & insistent little girl who had short blonde hair, a white dress, a hat, & found silver slippers. Shirley Temple would have been far more appropriate for the role.
    *Tin Man (Nick Chopper) is incredibly flamboyant, violent, & egotistical (yes, he seems to enjoy killing animals with his axe) He is basically a munchkin cyborg. He's a huge fan of gaudy jewelry & statues of himself.
    *Glinda; they crammed the Quadling sorceress/queen from the end of the book & the Gillikin witch from the beginning into one person. She's the most powerful person in Oz, ranks 2ed only to Ozma, & has an all female military.
    *Scarecrow, after getting a sack of nails for a brain, turned into Captain Obvious; he's just as dumb as ever, but he thinks he's a genius. (He's basically Wogglebug + Jack Pumpkinhead).
    *Cowardly Lion who has low self esteem & performance issues but his cowardliness is all talk when push comes to shove. (His best friend is a tiger who jokes about eating babies).
    *Oscar (Oz) is a really short old man who comes to Oz & learns his tricks from Glinda the Red. All Ozian rulers were named "Oz" if male and "Ozma" if female. Since Mombi turned Ozma into a boy named Tip & brainwashed her, & since Oscar already had the nickname "Oz," the people took it as a sign.
  • Pure_Eternal
    avatar
    cool! the naming system is a copy of russian names you add an a to the end of a woman's name. i.e. anastasia romanova.
  • cvrpapc
    avatar
    Ya. I had to see this with my kid. I agree with you about that cliche shit. Its annoying.

    I also genuinely enjoyed his (Doug's) review of this movie. I liked how he discussed the elements of the film and critiqued them analytically. Its not just a I like this...or I don't like that...here's what happened.

    The acting was wooden. James Franco is wooden. Looks like he's stoned all the time. Mila Kunis was miscast. Who knows what happened since this is a "disney" movie. It certainly could have used some nudity.

    Keep up the good work Doug!

    (black leather...classaaay)
  • PsychopathUltimate
    avatar
    My review of the film:

    http:// psychopath.newgrounds.com /news/post/831832
  • KainGerc
    heh, YOU'RE A WIZARD HARRY!
  • ArcaneArts
    There's never actually a Liar Revealed in the way it normally is used. Theodora doesn't erupt at Oz because he lied about being the Wizard, she's pissed because of he charms any woman who catches his eye(And Evanora lies). Glinda figures out quickly Oz isn't a wizard, but doesn't care because he still gets the job done. The people either never really figure out he's lying about the Wizard or kind of transition into just accepting it. The usual problems of the Liar Revealed just don't play out like they normally do.
  • JahLis
    avatar
    what can I say? Chester is back and it is awesome! even though the movie isn't.
  • GernBlanston
    Yeah, there was a lot to like but I think it was bogged down by the script, which felt like it was made up by Disney execs moreso than the filmmakers, something that happens to big movies like this too often. It averaged out to being alright.

    I think it's all the blue screen acting that hurts the actors, there's always something "off" every time they do a movie like that.

    Overall it was a decent time at the movies but it needed more Raimi quirkiness, because when he got to do his stuff that's when the movie really took off.

    Also, glad that Doug appreciates Drag Me To Hell as much as I do. While he's entitled to his opinion, I lost respect for Phelous since he completely failed to get that movie. I still can't believe he missed the point.

    Yeah, so I think kids and families will enjoy this the most. It's much, much better than Disney's similar Alice In Wonderland.
  • timotaka
    Little China Girl? Please tell me this movie has David Bowie on its soundtrack.
  • LikaLaruku
    avatar
    This movie's not cool enough for David Bowie.
  • Seolyk  - Resasons fo things
    The Chinatown thing was actually from a bit cut out of the original Wizard of Oz movie. It's also apparently in the books.

    I'd also like to bring up who owns the original movie: Warner Bros. Anything lacking in character design in certain characters (and you'll know who I'm talking about when you see them) is due to copyright issues and certain character images being copyrighted.

    this includes the ruby slippers... although they could have gotten around this by using the silver slippers from the book (since to be able to do this movie at all they had to write it as a prequel to).
  • Ela
    avatar
    "Harry Osborn's a wizard now?"

    He must be. He even grew his arm back.
  • mr.keys
    This was a pretty fun revisit of the land of Oz, I enjoyed it.
  • Cat-Alin
    avatar
    My mother watched this movie on Sunday in the cinema. Eh, she said it was worth watching it once.

    And despite working in a cinema, I completely forgot this movie existed until my mom actually went and watched it! The OV version, not the german one that my cinema might be getting...

    Then again, I dunno, I don't see the point of this movie. Or any movie that is basically a "new take" or "new perspective" on an old classic.

    C-A
  • DogoHalibar  - Harry Osborn vs. Tony Stark.
    avatar
    Originally, I heard Robert Downy Jr. was approached to play Oz, but he turned it down or something.
  • DarkAlkaiser  - Mila Kunis
    She's portraying that she's an incredibly innocent character, beyond what could be normal, this plays into her falling for Oz so easily because she truly believes his normal flirtatious lies other women would see through. The older sister even mentions that she is just like her father in this way. This was really obvious to me in her performance.

    I thought she pulled the laugh and rage perfectly as the wicked witch, though I gotta say, they needed more make up on her, she's still totally hot, I'd still be all over green Mila Kunis XD

    This was written nearly a century ago, the bits that seem cliche (a pointless concern, no ideas are original, complaining about it is meaningless) but this is from so long ago, they weren't viewed as cliche when it was written. Changing them too much from the book would bother more people than a century old plot being cliche compared to modern films.

    I thoroughly enjoyed this movie (and I've HATED Sam Raimi's recent work, I went into this expecting decent at best)
  • Javo
    larry franco?
  • jycool
    Personally, you should have saved this till towmarow. BTW when's the next ATGWTG? Also no end comment? SHAME!
  • Zodia195
    avatar
    I honestly have no interest in this movie mostly because I know what is going to happen in the long run, it's a setup for the actual Wizard of Oz. I felt the same way about Star Wars 1, 2, and 3 with the prequel. Anytime you have a prequel come on after the regular movie, I am just not into.

    Nice review though.
  • Dancing_Satyr
    avatar
    Wait, Bruce Campbell was in it? How did I miss it? I've watched Burn Notice and I can recognize myself a Bruce Campbell anywhere. Where was he?
  • starfall42
    Bruce Campbell was the Emerald City guard that checked the wagon.

    Ted Rami was in a few scenes too.
  • aberry89  - Green Screen
    I always feel that in movies that depend highly on green screen, and I mean the actors are literally surrounded by it at all times and they have very little environment to act with, the acting is SO flat. You can never quite put your finger on what is bad, it's just boring and stale. Same thing happened with Alice in Wonderland, the main girl can act, but was just sooo boring in that movie.

    They are VERY few people that can pull of a thrilling performance acting to nothing, I think it's like Andy Serkis...and Andy Serkis.
  • Dancing_Satyr
    avatar
    Sincerely? I don't think this was the case in this movie.

    It wasn't the actors fault. And to an extent, not even the director. Like Doug said, those guys can act. We've seem they act. The thing is, at first, I picked right away what was the problem.

    As soon as the movie starts I picked something up. The acting was a bit exaggerated. Not really stale, just very, very hammy. And when he got to Oz, this really took up a notch.

    The problem isn't the blue screen. Really, voice actors have been doing great acting in a dark room to a microphone. The environment can be a problem to some actors, but I believe most of them can actually do their jobs without the environment.

    Then it hit me. It wasn't just those actors acting badly. Heck, they'd need to TRY to sound this hammy. And... hell, that's precisely what they were doing. They were trying to mimic the acting of the original movie. It was most noticeable on Milla Cunis. She REALLY was trying to channel the original Wicked Witch. So was Oz, trying to Mimic the original wizard behind the curtain. Heck, the transformation of the Wicked Witch ends up with what Doug called cheap, but it was obviously trying to look as close as possible to the original Wicked Witch. That wasn't just done with the 50's movie makeup. It was done with CHEAP 50's movie makeup. Even the good Witch is trying so hard to act just like the original.

    And I know the hammy acting is part of the charm of the original film, but this really didn't work here. Finley and the China Girl are the biggest proofs I have of this, since they both are portraying characters that are new and didn't need to mirror anything from the original. That's why they stand out so much against the other actors.

    It was an interesting experiment, but as an experiment, it just served to prove that it doesn't work...
  • Malvolio21
    The original "The Wizard of Oz" came out in 1939. It wasn't the '50s.
  • Dancing_Satyr
    avatar
    Thanks for the correction. I always get this idea that it was made in the 50s. I think that's when it got TV airing or something.

    But my point stands, no?
  • TragicGuineaPig
    avatar
    There are three kinds of witches: Good witches, Bad witches, and Chaotic Neutral witches.
  • Eyeshot
    avatar
    I just got back from seeing it. I was hoping the negative reviews about the acting was exaggerated, but unfortunately the acting really could have been better. Mila was downright miscast. She was good in the beginning as the doe-eyed innocent, but she could not pull off the Wicked Witch of the West, not with that voice.
  • xXUnderGroundXx
    Does this mean Sibling Rivalry is no more?

    Shame if so, I thoroughly enjoyed that.
  • choninja21
    I'll bet he got a bad hair cut!
  • caligirl
    OH MY GOD, A NEW BUM REVIEW!
  • FliggleBobbin
    I wish you'd addressed the sexism in the entire premise of the movie... :/ In the original Oz books, the witches were the strongest characters but in this movie they're all just falling over Franco like "YOU're the chosen one!"
  • Gothka13
    avatar
    Geez...talk about a tough room. Originally Walt wanted to make the Wizard of Oz, but MGM ended up getting the rights to the book. Now the books are public domain. Once you realized that, then you realized this was supposed to be the movie that Walt really wanted. I see it as a tribute to Walt's legacy.

    And has anyone seen the original Wizard of Oz lately? Even as a kid, I always thought it was corny myself, even though it's an old film, and only liked the parts with the witch in them because Dorthy is a bit of a ditz. Can I really relate to a girl who is from Kansas and likes dogs? No, I'm from California and a cat person. So to say that it had overacting, of course it did! The original had a lot of overacting too, but it was just a different time. We're just a 21st century audience, and used to subtly. But I saw a lot of kids walk out of the theater a little shakened up by the witch.

    That's not to say it didn't have any flaws, I just think the flaws that are discussed are a little nitpicking. I'm a Wicked fan, so I rather have wanted Elphaba's version come out instead of Theodora's. Also, I thought Evanora should have become scared herself what she had turned her sister into and stop giving so much scenes to Oz. I just want to see the witch.

    But still. It's a prequel that manages to tell a well rounded story. That is almost impossible to do with sequels/prequels and I applaude their effort. Even if it wasn't the 'greatest', it's a lot better then some of the prequels/sequels we get these days.....Excluding Dark Knight and Spider-man 2. That shit was awesome.
  • Bobzeaux
    And yet I guarantee that almost EVERYONE HERE ripping on this movie has a total nonchalance about (and inexplicable compulsive need to defend) the Transformers movies. "Oh, just shut up and enjoy it!" they say, while completely picking apart every OTHER movie in existence.

    Good lord...
  • Ebalance
    Walt... yea, let's talk a little bit about LYMAN FRANK BAUM'S LEGACY!!! UGH... I am alone in the universe when it comes to caring about one of the greatest, most influential writers of the 20th century. WHY?
  • Sijo
    The Wizard of Oz was one my favorite movies as a child, and still is, no sequel or remake I've seen has ever compared to it- but I still think this was a good movie. I don't see why so many people complain about Franco as Oz, I think he played the part very well- if anything the dialog was limited (he really needed more inspiring speeches, for example.) I do agree that Theodora was not very convincing either when being naive nor when she went evil.

    And yes, China Girl was the best character, the one who made the film feel most like an Oz book. Plus the SFX were great (except in the scenes were stuff jumps into your face, which they always add for 3d, it's annoying.)

    Overall an enjoyable film, and the best Oz adaptation yet (not perfect, just better) in my opinion. I wonder what an adaptation of Wicked! would be like thought.
Only registered users can write comments!

Follow us on:

Latest Videos

Brad: Hercules

Watch Video

Nash: HTBD - Ladyhawke

Watch Video

NChick: BYOA - Lindsay Ribar

Watch Video

Linkara: Destiny of AT4W Live

Watch Video

Phelous: Beauty & the Beast Part 2

Watch Video

Diamanda: Dawn of the PotA

Watch Video

Korra Vlogs: Terror Within

Watch Video

NC: The Purge

Watch Video

Todd: Desp Seeking Susan

Watch Video

LAG: Guardians of the Galaxy

Watch Video

CR: Familiar Faces - Olaf

Watch Video

Film Brain: Behaving Badly

Watch Video

ChaosD1: Global Agenda

Watch Video

Lesbian Talk: Episode 65

Watch Video

Linkara: US-1 #4

Watch Video

Sage: Fatal Fury Double Impact

Watch Video

Vangelus: Cyberbots Blodia

Watch Video

Dena: Abadox Commentary

Watch Video

Adventure Time: The Prince Who

Watch Video

BB: Stan Lee's Top 10 Awesome

Watch Video

Brad: Anime Midwest Panel

Watch Video

Lupa: BW - We Need a Vacation

Watch Video

Lotus: Galerians Parts 3-4

Watch Video

Adventure Time: Furniture & Meat

Watch Video

Nash: Serial Pooper

Watch Video

Smarty: DAH - ChaosD1

Watch Video

Shaun K: P4GA & Anachronauts

Watch Video

Brad: Hercules & Lucy

Watch Video

Vangelus: Dinobots Grimlock

Watch Video

Adventure Time: Food Chain

Watch Video

Rap Critic: Ridin

Watch Video

Brad: TR - Infringment

Watch Video

NChick: BYOA - S2E8

Watch Video

Paw: QfG4 Parts 5-6

Watch Video

Tom: Beneath the PotA P3

Watch Video

Blog Categories

What's Up? (141)
Sports (264)
News (279)
Book Reviews (551)
Funny (573)
Top # Lists (736)
Animation (919)
Wrestling (988)
Movies (1052)
Anime (1071)
Thoughts (1145)
Comics (1191)
Misc Reviews (1281)
Music (1394)
Video Reviews (1932)
Film Review (2715)
Uncategorized (4012)
Video Games (5155)
Old Blogs (15313)