Obviously: 'Oz The Great And Powerful' Sequel In The Works

News
by Kevin Jagernauth
March 7, 2013 11:08 PM
4 Comments
  • |

By now, it shouldn't really be a surprise. When you're spending $325 million on a movie, you're hoping for a franchise, especially if you're Disney. Remember before "John Carter" came out how there was already tentative plans for a followup, "John Carter: The Gods Of Mars"? Perhaps learning not to count their chickens before they hatch, Disney has until now remained mum on any further travels down the yellow brick road after this weekend's "Oz The Great And Powerful" (our review). But with a massive opening weekend in the forecast, a small bit of their plans have been revealed.

Variety reports that Mitchell Kapner -- who co-wrote 'Powerful' with David Lindsay-Abaire -- has been tapped to write the sequel. But the more interesting morsel is that Kapner was hired "several months ago to work" on the followup, and you can probably bet that if the movie were projecting to tank, we wouldn't be hearing anything about this. You gotta play your cards right. And while the studio isn't officially commenting, that means there's no word on where the story will go next, but there are some things to consider.

As we outlined in our feature on the history of Disney and Oz, the rights are complicated, and basically the filmmakers still can't reference any of the iconic imagery from the classic MGM movie (the ruby slippers for instance). Basically anything on screen in 'Powerful' is fair game, but anything hewing closer to the 1939 film is probably off limits. So our guess? If there is a "Oz The Great And Powerful 2" we could see it deviate even further from the works of L. Frank Baum, but keep the same spirit.

Of course, if/when the 'Powerful' sequel gets made is anyone's guess. Disney has already commissioned a followup for Tim Burton's billion dollar "Alice In Wonderland" and that doesn't seem any closer to reality in the foreseeable future, so who knows. But anyone buying a ticket this weekend has pretty ensure the Wicked Witch won't be gone for long. 


News
  • |

More: Oz The Great And Powerful, Walt Disney

You might also like:
Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

4 Comments

  • ali | March 8, 2013 10:55 AMReply

    Why didn't Disney adapted Wicked? It is a better prequel to the Wizard of OZ.

  • jasper johns | March 8, 2013 10:21 AMReply

    A sequel? “Oz the Great and Powerful” is all smoke and no mirrors, no fantasy, just effects without affect. To be honest, more like Oz the Amiable and Un-threatening. The best, funniest Oz thing I've read lately is DA YELLER BRICK ROAD, a revisionist telling of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by Uncle Remus. The conceit is it was originally by Remus (who didn't exist) and then "borrowed and cleaned-up" by Baum. Hilarious and charming. All that "Oz the Great and Powerful" is not.

  • Alan B | March 8, 2013 10:19 AMReply

    I would never thought I would write this, but Tim Burton's 'Alice in Wonderland' shits on this film. Although the Burton film doesn't give a hell of a lot of time to its supporting cast, at least they are all well cast and perform their roles as well as you could hope in their limited time. You never question that Stephen Fry is the Cheshire Cat, Michael Sheen is the White Rabbit or Crispin Glover is the ... creepy, weird guy. They inhabit their roles without effort. This film has the most stiff, lifeless performances from its key cast members. Franco is neither here nor there: instead he gives the most weirdly uncharismatic lead performance since 'Saint Joan'. He NEVER hits the right notes of comedy or pathos. Every joke is punctuated by a lifeless or overly manic line reading. I'd argue that the jokes are actually fine: for instance, imagine what Downey would have done with the sequence in which Oz sits on the throne. The script demanded a very contemporary presence - like a proto-Errol Flynn - who could smirk his way through proceedings. And Franco is simply never on the same wavelength as the viewer. Disney should have paid whatever price Downey or Depp wanted. It's that simple. And Kunis is way, way outside of her comfort zone even from her first scene, and only gets worse as the script requires her to become more theatrical. She's a naturalistic performer, and I never, ever want to see her do anything close to this again. It's almost as painful as Franco. Weisz coasts. I don't get the acclaim for that performance. Only Michelle Williams brings her game, capturing the right tone whilst also lending emotional authenticity to her bland character. When you're ruing for the good ol' days of 'Wonderland', you know you're in serious trouble.

  • BoxOfficeBuz | March 7, 2013 11:49 PMReply

    I was at the early screening for this last night, and actually really enjoyed it. Did it have many flaws. Of course. But overall it was just a fun movie to watch.

Email Updates