The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Even though the story is a bit flat, Oz The Great and Powerful is visually stunning. The colors, sets and visual effects are gorgeous, but the dialogue is cheesy in parts and the plot is the same one we've seen a dozen times. Still, it's a fun family movie, full of references to the classic 1939 film and adding some new memorable characters. I wonder how this film would play out with people who haven't seen The Wizard of Oz yet.

This movie is boring and forgettable and not worth talking about. Its not terrible, there's just nothing here.

One of the best Disney feature films I saw so far. It's not on par with Pirates franchise or Lone Ranger, but it could not possibly be because it's completely kids-friendly. No one dies, there's no jokes inadequate for kids, it's tame fairy-tale, but it's beautifully written, designed and filmed and in the given limits it's the very best Disney movie I saw. I'm not sure, but I suppose that story is prequel to classic Wizard of Oz tale. Nothing here is superb, but there's no flaws either and I warmly recommend it to all fairy-tale and/or Mila Kunis fans.8/10

This film, conceived as a prequel to the famous "The Wizard of Oz", 1939, shows us how the "sorcerer" goes to that fantastic land, and how he managed to become the greatest sorcerer in the country. Directed by Sam Raimi, this film has a script by Mitchell Kapner and David Lindsay-Abaire. The cast is headed by James Franco, Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz and Michelle Williams.This prequel was made almost a hundred years after the original film, probably due to the status of "classic" that it won through the decades. And the idea to revive Oz, decades after Dorothy's journey through the big screen, is quite good.The script is interesting and the story isn't bad, unrolling quite naturally from the moment the magic arrives in Oz. The biggest problem is that this film completely breaks with its '39 predecessor in a key point of the story: everything that Dorothy does in Oz never happened, it was just a dream but, in this film, the magic really goes to Oz, awake and aware, and the film never explains how. This would never be a problem if the rest of the film wasn't an attempt to prequel the first film but, if it's a prequel and Oz was a dream in the first one, it should have remained a dream in this film or, at least, the arrival of the magic should have been better explained.The actors generally fulfilled reasonably with their work. Rachel Weisz was excellent in the role of Evanora, and her British charm gave to the character an additional dose of calculism and cruelty that was very welcome. Michelle Williams also didn't disappoint as Glinda, managing to personify the qualities of her character. Mila Kunis is very good to roles with personality and great presence, but this isn't the case of Theodora, a woman highly influenced by her bad sister and suffering because of their impulses and passions. Perhaps this has posed problems for the actress, and the way she sought to overcome them has not been the best. The fact is that her character, initially too warm and bland, just improves when becomes a villain. James Franco was an extremely seductive and charming magician, but also opportunistic, hypocritical and more concerned with saving his own skin than helping others. The way he changes was well achieved by the actor, but his performance was generally irregular, with very good scenes followed by other totally uninteresting.The production gave the biggest attention to the sets and visual effects. Raimi knew that the public would require a re-creation, with current techniques, of the colorful and fantastic universe of Oz, and the computerized effects would be essential to achieve that. The result is excellent and worthy of being admired. The photography also helped a lot, and we must emphasize especially the way it helps to mark the "border" to the world of Oz, with a gradual change of color and screen format. The special effects were also made with great detail. The soundtrack, however, is absolutely disappointing. The music was an essential part of the first film, which had great musical moments, and there isn't a single decent musical moment in this film, and the main theme are too regular to be worthy of any positive mention.