OZ The Great And Powerful (movie review)

I remember my mom and dad setting my sister and I down in front of the TV about once a year for the annual CBS playing of The Wizard Of OZ. Not only did we love watching it because it was a great movie, it aired in the evening and we got to stay up just a little later than normal. I can't remember if we watched it every year, or if we even watched it more than the one year I am currently recalling, but I remember, this one time in particular, at least, it was a family event. That is the memory I associate with the original movie. How could a new rendition of the original even compare? And after watching RETURN TO OZ? Forget it. That movie ruined my belief that a new OZ movie could work. Return to OZ was a decent movie, but it was too different, too weird. As a stand alone movie it would have been better, but they really bastardized a classic there.

So The bottom line becomes the top line: I have decided that I liked the movie. Shame on me, I didn't build up any suspense! A movie review is suppose to build pros and cons and then, to keep the readers in suspense(and hopefully to keep them reading), I'm suppose to reveal my final assessment at the end. Well, if you haven't noticed yet, I'm not really into doing or writing what is expected. So my final assessment is that the movie was good. Here are my observations during and after viewing the film, for whatever it may be worth:

The word "prequel" is not in my Oxford English Dictionary for a reason. It's not really a word. Spellcheck, however, has maintained it's relevance by adding the word to its list of recognized terminology, slang added for the sheer purpose of helping one understand the trends in today's ever changing world of misguided and perverse twistings of a once eloquent language. I once took a creative writing course in college, in an attempt to hone my fiction-writing skills into something entertaining, or at very worst, readable. We were coached in multiple assignments to open the story with an attention grabber. Invest the reader immediately, to dispense with initial exposition. This is why George Lucas started with Episode IV with no intention (at the time) for Episodes I II and III. It's why he started Dr. Jones in a cave, deep in a jungle and hunting for a golden statue right off the bat. A prequel, by its very nature, should be expositional. It's all the mush before the main action starts. A good writer can make anything into a compelling story, but because it should have been a boring description of events leading up to the really cool stuff, it ends up being forced despite the skill of the screenwriter. Don't get me wrong. Writing a prequel must be way more difficult than writing an original. There are already world rules established. There are already fans that will be expecting these rules to be followed and they'll also be extremely critical with any liberties that might be taken. Yes, a prequel is a difficult write, indeed. So this new OZ, this highly computer animated, visually spectacular feature is a prequel to the original, if you didn't know. It, in a nutshell, is the wizard's venture into OZ and what he must overcome to establish himself as such. The movie never gives us much of a timeframe in respect to its relation to the first film, but it does give us a date at the beginning and eludes to a timeframe by reference of names and generations. But you've gotta be sharp to catch it.
The opening credits were a striking embodiment of Danny Elfman's musical signature. Danny Elfman, composer of the Beetlejuice score, Edward Scissorhands, and a slew of other Tim Burton films, has a distinct staccato, circusy sound that is difficult to ignore. Going into it, I didn't know that he was the composer of the score and while he composes great music, I would not have thought he could pull it off. Refreshingly, his signature was subtle and only widely considered during the opening. His score didn't pull me out of the world of OZ and if anything, his subtlety amplified the experience. Kudos to Danny Elfman. He exercised his compositional maturity by scaling back and not overpowering the action.
Homage was payed often and respectfully to the original film. It began in black and white, but not only that, it was in a 4:3 aspect ratio: a square box. It's an aspect ratio used for the old square tube TVs. In other words, it was not formatted to fit the movie theater's screen. Upon entering OZ, the aspect ratio smoothly and slowly corrects for wide screen and the color appears. I knew it would happen, but the transition was done nicely. L. Frank Baum, the creator of The Wonderful Wizard Of OZ, was given his due respects in the opening scene. We begin with a carnival, the Baum's Brothers', indicated by the banner at the entrance. It's starts the movie on a good note, I think, even though the opening felt at least a little contrived. The camera panned past carnival barkers until it arrived at the great wizard's trailer, who, straight away, was revealed to be a womanizing fraud. But it was the carnival barkers that made me feel that the movie would be an imposter. It felt almost too--stage act. Does that make sense? The scene's only saving grace was that the barkers could still be heard once they were off camera, making me relax a little, knowing that their lines went beyond the scope of the camera, adding a little bit, albeit, JUST a little bit of realism that the scene desperately needs.
This movie, unlike the first, starts at the Emerald City and works it's way back to munchkin land. The route they take is true, first entering the forest, then arriving at the corn field, then into munchkin land. They come to the corn field from the correct direction, which is odd to me that I noticed--but I did, so good. Apparently, they detour through Chinatown, which is not a decree of nationality, but instead a town fully comprised of fine ceramic, china. As in the original, the wizard begins to meet characters which add themselves to his party. I personally did not experience this foray into Chinatown because during this part of the film, I was gently scooting past the people in my row, careful of drinks and being sure not to bump knees. My son, whom I was there with had to use the restroom. Therefore, I only have second hand accounts from my wife and two girls of the existence of Chinatown. I cannot comment further on it, but I did see the result of the wizard's presence there, so I know it probably did happen.
I had a hard time with Theodora, the wicked witch of the west. She was played by Mila Kunis famed actress of That 70's Show and the voice actress of Meg from Family Guy. All I could hear was Meg from Family Guy, and it took me out of the moment on several occasions. Bummer. She played the part very well, but it was hard to look past that recognizable vocal talent and see her as someone--anyone else.
My final gripe is when the wizard first landed his hot air balloon in OZ, the whole thing was overdone. He landed in a river, in his balloon basket and floated down it as he saw many of the natural wonders of OZ. The scene was trying to be fantastic. Giant flowers opened as he passed by, a tree composed of nothing but butterflies scattered and flew all around him. Multicolored songbirds flocked around him, and he passed reeds that made music. It WAS fantastic, but it went on for too long and it was too much, as if the animators were just trying to come up with something to throw in that would be fun to animate. It was simply too much.
As a fan of the original movie, and skeptical that this one would be even remotely decent, I was quite surprised by the strict attention they payed the original and pleasantly surprised that I didn't hate the liberties they did take. Overall, it was entertaining and magical, much like the original. Go see it if you have an opportunity. I suspect the big screen does it more justice than a home television.

Attitude Is Everything

Jamie posted a picture on Facebook today of captain Jack Sparrow. It said, "the problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem." Obviously this cannot really be attributed to Johnny Depp playing a role in a movie. He spoke a line a writer wrote. But the quote is definitely worthy of reflection. I think it holds true.
I have seen it so many times. I've been guilty of it on WAY more than one occasion. I'm sure that you, who are reading this, have committed the foul before. Attitude is everything. Attitude is everything. I had to write it twice. This one idea is the single most powerful idea that can shape who you are, how others view you and how much of an impact you can potentially make in another person's life. People don't typically want to associate with someone who is always negative. Don't misunderstand. There are times when it is appropriate to be down, negative, or irritated. But whatever it is, it's not the end of life, existence, humanity. Step back. It's a problem that can be dealt with and overcome. Doom is NOT nigh. The sooner you pull yourself up by your bootstraps, the sooner you will handle the issue and move past it.
I observe people. I watch closely how people react. Without getting too New Agey here, I get a general feel for people based on how they react to problems. I'm not saying that I can read your aura. It is simply observation. And I may or may not be good at it. All I'm saying is I, like most people, consciously or unconsciously, make a judgement of someone's character based on human interaction. Then, subconsciously, we make a decision on whether or not that person would be someone we want to regularly interact with. Constant negativity is exhausting to deal with. It drains us of positivity. And whether we realize it or not, we tend to push those people away. Now. Here's the hard part. Look in the mirror. Not literally! But just look at yourself and analyze your general attitude. Be honest with yourself. But don't make the call as yourself. The trick here is this: how do other people view your attitude? We all believe ourselves validated. Validated to hate, or be frustrated. Validated to be in a bad mood. Validated to be negative. We have good reason for it--in our own minds. After all, who the hell knows what I've been through today? I spilled hot coffee all over myself right before an important meeting, got a flat tire and accidentally bounced a check. What do people know of my problems? Fuck them if they don't understand why I flew off the handle for something seemingly simple! They don't know what kind of day I've already had! Validate your negative energy. It's what we do. We all have problems. But how do people typically view your attitude? That's the question and the answer is an eye opener. So, as "unholy" as it is to judge, lest WE be judged, let's face it. We should all have law degrees for as much as we judge others. It's human nature. Lets move past it. Everyone forms an opinion about everyone and everything.
Attitude is everything. There. I wrote it three times. I have gotten promoted in my professional life several times, not because I am insanely good at everything I do, but probably more often than not, because of my positive attitude. I'm not saying I'm perfect. I'm far from it. But its the attitude, the "I can handle anything you throw at me" attitude that wins the day. And here's the secret: it is noticed because most people don't have it. You want me to what?? Work a 16 hour shift and no break? Are you fucking craz----? Stop. Sure, I'll do it. Man, don't worry. I got this.
"I gotta be honest, Bill, I was expecting a little pushback. I was nervous about asking you to do this on such short notice." No problem boss. I'm your guy. The impression, now, is that I'm the go-to guy. Bill is good. He doesn't hesitate to do what we ask when we ask it. All because I didn't complain. I just handled it and with a positive attitude. Is being a "yes man" a bad thing? I guess it is if you don't exercise your opinion when you are asked for it. If you disagree, disagree. It's possible to disagree with a positive attitude.
This is a long dissertation on a simple quote, but dammit, attitude is everything! There is no can't (now I sound like Yoda--I'm leaving out the, "there is only do, or do not) or won't, unless it violates your ethical code. Everything else is manageable. Everything else is doable. Be that guy. Be that girl. The one that people know they can go to because you are positive and reliable. Trust me, it is a breath of fresh air in a room stale with negativity, in a sea of, "I can't because...."
Make it happen. Just do it. Nike has cornered the market on this phrase. Push your stupid pride out of the way and just do it.
"The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem." --Captain Jack Sparrow
Thanks, Jamie!

Wear A Purple Hat

     Somewhere deep within, somewhere quietly brooding inside of my psyche, there is a malnourished, socially unkempt, and psychologically naive hunchback of a person clawing at the walls of my brain to be released from the confines of his tiny cell. He emerges occasionally, just to make his presence known, just enough to give his host that odd quirk, that almost normal edge that fools people most of the time. And I beat him back, trying my best to decommission the bastard, but he always recovers and comes on again, just as strong as before, just as nimble and adept at the attempt to fortify his position as the premier personality as he always is.

     At first glance, I fit in. At first glance, I am a social giant, an agent of normal society, outgoing with charm and personality to boot. In a snapshot, I can make the whole seem like a masterpiece, the music heavenly and inspiring--all of that. But I get inside my own mind. My uncontrollable urge to inwardly reflect damages my ability to prove that the whole suite IS a masterpiece. Instead I'm forced to demonstrate the simple etudes and sell people on the fact that the rest is of equal quality. I'm a pretty good salesman. Despite my ability to sell the full suite sight unseen, there are times when a piece of the drivel goes public, leaked beyond my ability to curtail its release. This small fact has made me a master of cleanup, able to reign the crazy back in, and present a beautiful snapshot of sonata in behind it almost immediately. So fast in fact, that people often wonder if that glimpse of mush ever really happened at all. It has become an arrangement I can at least comfortably handle.

     I often wonder if other people have this inward process of thought. If others, too, are suppressing bouts of second guessing, lack of confidence, and unhealthy self examination. Maybe it's human nature. Who can really say they are openly honest 100% of the time? I believe that most people are not. Not are they not honest with others, they probably are not even honest with themselves. But the reality of it is that I really don't know if this is the case at all, and so I can only judge it from my own instincts, my own inward mental activity and strive to at least be honest with myself, which is a hard pill to swallow. That pill is proverbial, for your reference, in case you thought I might ingest a foreign hormonal crutch into the already unbalanced mix. In digression, I think that personal honesty is important to one's development as a human being. It is a facet to life that humanity pays too little attention to. This process of internal awareness and personal growth can be practiced without anyone else's knowledge of it. It's strictly a mental exercise. It takes time to become honest with yourself, to examine how you truly feel about something and why. It's so easy, as busy as we make ourselves to accept the surface feeling of something and then move on, without much more thought about it.

     Language is a barrier to feelings. If we can not articulate how something makes us feel, how can we really even justify those feelings to ourselves? It's difficult, and often, the feeling of difficulty is so great, we don't even try. It takes too much time. Anything worth doing is difficult. I've heard that somewhere before. It makes sense, I guess. So, I suppose what I'm really wondering is do I fit in? Can I fit in? People ask this question of themselves. Normal. Am I normal? And I wonder, then, what defines normal? Normal is what most people are doing. If the population of the world wears purple hats, and I don't, I'm not normal. It is a little distressing how willing I am to make sure that I fall in line, that I too purchase a purple hat so that I'm not outcast, exiled from the right of humanity. We are defined by our individuality as people, and what we, personally, have to offer that others cannot. Yet, we don't want to be TOO individualistic, TOO off the grid and unable to reconcile what the masses consider to be normal.

     So, I'm saying that my desire to be normal is a forced action, a fraudulent move so that others can feel comfortable interacting with me. My inner hunchback, that abnormal creature clawing to get out is my individualism, my need to be different, expressive, and creative. But everything in me tells me to keep him chained up, locked away because people just won't understand it. Not in this world, where purple hats are the going trend.

Check out my book! Shift!