Monday, November 19, 2012

Over the what?

Some may dispute this, but of every single adaptation of my favorite book series, by L. Frank Baum, starting with The Wonderful Wizard of Oz the movie Return to Oz is the worst, and there have been a lot of really bad ones.

Return to Oz was made by Disney, which so far has a rather poor track record of somehow deciding to take my favorite authors/ series, rip them up, and spit out a disaster.

Narnia and A Princess of Mars here... also Tarzan, although I have to admit that movie wasn't bad, as was the first Narnia movie, despite the majorly weird choices they made in both of them.

Did you know that John Clayton is the name of Tarzan in the books, and that in the animated Disney film, that's the name of the trigger happy villain? WTF?

Also, in Narnia, WTF is up with the design of Jadis/the White Witch? She's supposed to be this extremely beautiful greek-goddess looking person. Sorry, but that design is in no way beautiful.

So now they're making a new stab at Oz, and I just don't understand it. It seems vastly different from the book, and yet weirdly similar.
I do think in this movie we finally got a big budget production where Oz is a real place, like it is in the books. Still, having seen the trailer... ???
Some of the color scheme stuff they got right, but there are supposed to be two wicked witches, and neither of them have the "color scheme" Glinda looks great, but the good witch of the North is supposed to be a little old woman. Also, it's a really big thing that the Emerald city is NOT GREEN. It's all made of WHITE MARBLE, and the Wizard is the one who decides to have everyone wear green glasses and wear white in order to compensate. Ozma, when she comes to power, installs emeralds in the buildings, and this is much to the chagrin of the Nome King, Ruggedo/Roquat, who is not a freaking rock thing...

I liked the China Doll character they showed in the trailer, but what was that fairy thing? Also why the monkey? Are they going to actually show the origin of their curse to be bound to the golden cap? I doubt it... I think they just put it in b/c they think it's cute...

I must say the cast looks good, aside from the whole non-keeping with the original manifestations of the witches. Also, I get the feeling we are still not going to see Ozma in this movie, as we have no sign of her/him or Mombi at all. It's weird b/c the whole reason the Wizard gets instated is b/c Ozma is missing. Also, it seems like they aren't going to mention/show the origin of Oz being a fairyland, which came about when Ozma was 13/14. (b/c if you lived in Oz you at that point became an immortal, and immortals don't change age in Baum's world: See the Forest of Burzee in The Life and Adventures of Santa Claus, love you Rankin Bass for getting the movie of that right)

What I'd really like to see is at least a little glimpse of Tip/Ozma, and Mombi, but after having seen the trailer, it seems really unlikely.

One really good thing, though, and I hope they make the full explaination (but IDK b/c it looks like Ozma may be not in this movie, or if they do it will be too damn close to the way they did this in Wicked, and it makes no sense within the scheme of the series that "Oscar"/the Wizard, even knew she existed... so no... he did not even have anything to do with her whatsoever... so seeing as this is "his" movie maybe they don't need to show the full thing w/Ozma/Tip, but it's very important nonetheless)
Anyway... the good thing is they kept his name: Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkel Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs. (They call him Oscar Diggs, which is interesting b/c he "shortened" it to O.Z. not O.D. maybe they thought Zoroaster sounded too weird? But they have to bring it up at some point.) I want to see as scene like the one in the Monty Python skit where everytime someone says his name they say the entire thing: at least in the beginning before he "shortens" it... that would be hilarious!

On the whole, it looks like it's going to be "all wrong" though, and though I see some things in there that I like, I think it's going to be another really poor representation of Baum's books, which will lead nowhere if they were hoping to make a sequel b/c they would have gone and screwed up all the continuity completely... as best I understand it, this is what we know about "Oz before Dorothy" : 
A long unspecified amount of time ago, Oz was not a fairyland. The people there were not fairies, or witches, other animals did not talk, and so on... then a fairy, probably Queen Lurline (described in The Life and Adventures of Santa Claus as being the "Queen of the fairies") came to the islands of OZ, and those areas around, and I suppose brought about the enchantments, creating a new fairy world aside from the Forest of Burzee, and the original rulers of this country were fairies as well (Ozma, and Pastoria (who they called Oz, as Oz was more of a title than a name))
It seems as if some sort of coupe D'etat on the part of the two main "wicked" witches and a bunch of other minor witches and magicians managed to overthrow him, and his child, Ozma, was taken from him. Ozma was turned into a boy by the witch Mombi (a lesser witch) and she never knew/remembered who she was until quite a bit after the "Wizard of Oz" was no longer the ruler of Oz) Neither of them know of each other's existence until book 5, when Dorothy and he accidentally end up back in Oz b/c they fall through part of the Earth during an earthquake... etc. etc.) (That's the best book, BTW : Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz)

Apparantly the final word in the books is that: the Fairy Queen Lurline had left the infant Ozma (who was always a fairy) in the care of King Pastoria (the last King of Oz, who was human), making the Princess the adopted daughter of the last King of Oz. It would seem as if the effects of the fairy magic of immortality for some reason didn't take full effect until 13/14 years after the downfall of Pastoria, but it's all really confusing b/c fairies aren't supposed to age ever, so if Ozma is an infant when Pastoria has her, shouldn't that mean she would be an infant forever? I think it's better for the continuity to go more w/the explaination in book 5, even though Baum gave this "amended version" later. B/C as I explained... big hole in this later explaination... ) So if I were to do a film series I'd go with the one where everyone is turned into a "fairy" all at once when Ozma is around 13/14, after the downfall of her father when she was an infant, as this just makes much more sense)





Sunday, November 18, 2012

You can't have a job if you're Dead

Fracking, Drilling, Polluting, Deforestation, Decrease in Biodiversity, GMO products/food, Overfishing, Smoking... etc.

Are some people immune to the effects of these activities on the human body?

If you are, maybe you should let the rest of us in on your secret, because as far as I know if you are dead, no amount of job creation is going to save you.