The Wizard of Oz(s)


Hmmm, first instinct was awful. But they could make it well if they stick to the mythology of the original stories, rather than trying to make a quick buck.

This is the greats movies for the family,this is the great classic, I very highly recommended it.

Wizard of Oz! I was a kid when i watched it, lol! But great movie

suuuuper good movie.

Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
It looks like most people don't bother to read the first post. Pshaw!
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I am burdened with glorious purpose
At first, I had the knee-jerk reaction of, "you've got to be kidding!" But the truth is, there are many books that could be adapted into a great franchise, if done right.

It could work!

I want to see a film version of "Wicked." That's what I'm waiting for.

If they don't go overboard with the CG I could be cool with it.

Something to the tune of Chronicles of Narnia could be the way to approach it. I know, that one was heavy on the CG but it was done in such a way that it wasn't too much. Except for that final battle scene.

I am burdened with glorious purpose
I don't know, CGI didn't hurt Lord of the Rings for me. It allowed us to have the film.

But you know, their real challenge is overcoming the 1939 film which is why they're having trouble getting this off the ground. Most people don't know the books, they only know the movie. People would compare even though Baum's books have many more stories to tell.

Going back to "Wicked," MacGuire has created three books in his retelling of Oz and I think they would make great films. At least the first two would. He hasn't finished the story though. I loved the idea of a re-imagining of the land of Oz and he created some interesting characters.

If I had money to invest, I'd go there instead. I'm repeating myself, I know.

Disney made a sequel, Return to Oz, just before Eisner was put in charge...big flop.

Warner Bros Wants Robert Zemeckis For 'Wizard Of Oz' Remake Based On Original Script

Originally Posted by Deadline NY
Warner Bros is in early talks with Robert Zemeckis to direct a live-action remake of the The Wizard of Oz and plans to use the original script from the 1939 classic. Warner Bros owns the screenplay because Ted Turner bought it along with the MGM library before Warner Bros bought Turner’s empire. This latest Oz twist comes as Disney is trying very hard to mount The Great And Powerful Oz. Sam Raimi is developing that film while he simultaneously develops World of Warcraft for Warner Bros and Legendary. Disney and Raimi want Robert Downey Jr. as their star. The original Wizard of Oz script had a total of 19 writers (seems not much has changed in Hollywood) with many of them uncredited, including Bert Lahr who played the film’s Cowardly Lion. This wouldn’t be the first hugely high-profile remake for Zemeckis; he's in the middle of a Yellow Submarine animated redux for Disney, scheduled for a 2012 release. Also, after working for years in performance-capture animation, Zemeckis has been moving toward a return to a live-action films, attaching himself to Timeless also at Warner Bros. Whenever you remake a revered Hollywood film, there’s bound to be controversy, but going right to the original material is certainly an interesting approach.

What do they mean they are going to remake the 1939 movie? With the songs? Bad idea.

I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
GP, please be sure and give credit, where credit is due (reference your sources).
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg

I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
Umm.. Spud!! The link is available in the post itself.
I understand that, but as you've told me before, people are lazy.

A simple [quote=Deadline New York] tag will work.

Disney made a sequel, Return to Oz, just before Eisner was put in charge...big flop.
I think Return to Oz flopped because it was marketed all wrong. They played it up as the sequel to the 1939 musical. It wasn't a musical. It was dark and sometimes scary. Dorothy was a little girl instead of a young woman. Except for story points, names and the ruby slippers (which Disney paid MGM big bucks for the rights to use, since they were created for the musical), it had no connection to the original film.

It was, however, loosely based on the second and third Baum books (Dorothy's not in the second book, so they mashed the two together), and much closer to Baum's original Oz than the MGM classic. I think if Return to Oz had been released around the time the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings adaptations were taking off, it would have been a hit.

I really enjoy the movie, and my kids do too. They've watched it almost as many times as they have The Wizard of Oz. I would love to see a series of films faithfully adapt the original books. I'm not that excited about a new version of the 1939 movie with the same script. Leave the original classic alone and make a new interpretation.
"I made mistakes in drama. I thought drama was when actors cried. But drama is when the audience cries." - Frank Capra
Family DVD Collection | My Top 100 | My Movie Thoughts | Frank Capra

We dont need a remake but if i had to predict who would play Dorothy , it would be Selena Gomez as it is her dream role and it would push her career to a new level.

In support of my argument for a film series faithfully adapting the original stories, I offer the success of Marvel Comics' current line of Oz adaptations. Having begun two years ago with The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, followed quickly by The Marvelous Land of Oz, the comics are selling well enough that the adaptation of the third book, Ozma of Oz, began this month. If it works for comics, a very troubled medium, don't you think it would be good for the movies too.