Honestly, the way we talk about Oz the Great and Powerful usually goes one of two ways. People either remember it as that weirdly bright Disney prequel with James Franco, or they’ve completely wiped it from their memory like a bad dream. It’s kinda fascinating. Back in 2013, this movie was supposed to be the next Alice in Wonderland—a billion-dollar behemoth that would launch a whole new franchise of L. Frank Baum adaptations.
It didn't.
Instead, we got a movie that grossed nearly $500 million, which is objectively a lot of money, but it somehow felt like a quiet thud in the cultural conversation. Why? Maybe it's because we're all so fiercely protective of the 1939 classic. Or maybe it’s because the film is such a strange, swirling mix of Sam Raimi’s horror-tinged weirdness and Disney’s polished corporate shine.
The Weird Tug-of-War Behind the Scenes
You’ve gotta realize that making a prequel to one of the most famous movies in history is a legal nightmare. Disney owned the rights to the original Baum books (which are in the public domain), but Warner Bros. owned the rights to the 1939 film.
That’s why the green in the Emerald City looks... off.
Production designer Robert Stromberg had to be incredibly careful. If the shade of green was too close to the MGM version, the lawyers would’ve descended like flying monkeys. They couldn’t use the ruby slippers. They couldn't even use the exact mole on the Wicked Witch's chin. This forced the team to reimagine the world of Oz from the ground up, which is partly why it feels so different from the world Dorothy stepped into.
👉 See also: Album Hopes and Fears: Why We Obsess Over Music That Doesn't Exist Yet
Sam Raimi, the guy who gave us Evil Dead and the original Spider-Man trilogy, was an interesting choice for the director's chair. You can see his fingerprints if you look close enough. The way the camera swoops through the Dark Forest or the frantic, slightly slapstick energy of the opening Kansas scenes—that’s pure Raimi.
But then you have the Disney "filter."
There’s a persistent rumor, discussed in various film circles and even hinted at in retrospective reviews, that Raimi and James Franco had a massive falling out during production. Whether it was "friendship-ending" or just a professional spat, you can almost feel that tension on screen. Franco’s performance as Oscar Diggs—a sleazy, small-time circus magician—is polarizing. Some think he nailed the "lovable conman" vibe, while others felt he was just... smirking his way through a $215 million paycheck.
Visuals That Still Pop (Mostly)
Let’s talk about the look of the film. It starts in black and white, in a narrow 1.33:1 aspect ratio. It’s a love letter to the era of traveling carnivals and primitive sleight-of-hand. When Oscar’s hot air balloon gets sucked into the tornado and he lands in Oz, the screen literally expands. The color floods in.
It’s a cool trick.
✨ Don't miss: The Name of This Band Is Talking Heads: Why This Live Album Still Beats the Studio Records
But it’s also where the movie starts to feel a bit like a video game. The CGI in Oz the Great and Powerful was cutting edge for 2013, but by 2026 standards, some of it has aged like milk. The environments are so lush and saturated that they feel artificial.
However, two characters still hold up remarkably well:
- China Girl: Voiced by Joey King, this tiny porcelain character is the emotional heart of the movie.
- Finley the Monkey: Zach Braff brought a lot of soul to a character that could have been a generic sidekick.
To get these performances right, Raimi didn't just have the actors record in a booth later. He used something called a "puppet-cam." Braff and King were often on set or nearby in booths, their faces projected onto monitors on sticks so the other actors had something real to look at. It made a huge difference in how James Franco interacted with them.
The Three Witches: A Masterclass in Miscasting?
The marketing for the film leaned heavily on the mystery of which witch would turn wicked. You had Mila Kunis as Theodora, Rachel Weisz as Evanora, and Michelle Williams as Glinda.
Honestly? It's a mixed bag.
🔗 Read more: Wrong Address: Why This Nigerian Drama Is Still Sparking Conversations
Rachel Weisz clearly had the most fun. She leaned into the campy, Shakespearean villainy of Evanora with a knowing wink. Michelle Williams brought a soft, almost ethereal quality to Glinda that felt right for a younger version of Billie Burke’s iconic character.
Then there’s Mila Kunis.
People were harsh on her when this came out. Transitioning from a naive, lovestruck girl to a "mythically vindictive" villain is a tough ask for anyone. Some critics argued she was out of her depth, while others appreciated the "scorned woman" tragedy she brought to the role. Regardless of where you stand, her transformation is the catalyst for the entire third act. It’s the moment the film stops being a whimsical adventure and starts feeling like a Sam Raimi movie.
Why Oz the Great and Powerful Still Matters
Even though it didn't spark a "Cinematic Universe," the film is a fascinating artifact. It tried to bridge the gap between 1900s literature and 21st-century blockbusters. It was the highest-grossing Oz-related movie for over a decade, only being topped recently by the Wicked adaptation in late 2024.
If you’re planning a rewatch, pay attention to the "Kansas counterparts." Just like the 1939 film, the people Oscar knows in the real world—the girl in the wheelchair, his loyal assistant Frank—show up in Oz as China Girl and Finley. It’s a nice bit of thematic symmetry that suggests Oz might just be a manifestation of Oscar’s need to be a better person.
Actionable Insights for Your Next Watch:
- Look for the cameos: Bruce Campbell (Raimi's lucky charm) and several Evil Dead actors have bit parts. See if you can spot them.
- Notice the legal "dodges": Pay attention to the Emerald City's architecture and the witches' costumes. They are intentionally designed to avoid looking like the 1939 MGM versions.
- Appreciate the "Puppet-Cam": Watch the eyelines during scenes with Finley and China Girl. They are surprisingly consistent because of the tech Raimi used on set.
Instead of comparing it to the original, try viewing it as a standalone Sam Raimi fantasy. It’s a movie about a flawed man learning that being "great" isn't as important as being "good." It’s messy, it’s loud, and it’s undeniably weird. But in a world of cookie-cutter blockbusters, maybe that’s not such a bad thing.