New "Wizard of Oz" movie
in...@qvision.net
It is being reported in the trade press that Ron Steiger is
developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
"Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
As with most people who love Oz, I know that Dorothy never reached
60. She returned to live in Oz forever with Uncle Henry and Aunt Em.
Since Oz is a fairy land, she never aged.
Frank Baum wrote 13 more Oz books after "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz"
but it appear Steiger and Hollywood are mostly illiterate. The series
was continued by Ruth Plumby Thompson, Jack Snow, John R. Neill (who
illustrated 13 of Baum's Oz books) and others.
It is really travesty to violate the wonderful fairy land of Oz in this
way. I have no trouble with a remake of the 1930's movie (by way it was
a remake of one done in the 1910's). I had no trouble with "The Wiz"
I have no trouble with a sequel as long as it maintains the sprirt of
Frank Baum instilled in this fariy land. Steiger's project does not.
Dorothy, like the child in us, never grew old. The Cowardly Lion with
his companion the Hungry Tiger always were noble in their deeds. I
hope this project fails before it goes much further.
John M. Schaeffer
Senior Editor - Quiet Vision Publishing
jo...@qvision.net
<A HREF="http://www.qvision.net">www.qvision.net</A>
Home of the Electronic Paperback (R)
PS; So there is no misunderstand Quiet Vision does publish Frank Baum's
work. But this is my opinion, not Quiet Vision's.
Dene Bebbington
[snips]
>It is really travesty to violate the wonderful fairy land of Oz in this
>way. I have no trouble with a remake of the 1930's movie (by way it was
>a remake of one done in the 1910's).
Wasn't it the original one which had Oliver Hardy in it?
[rest snipped]
--
Dene Bebbington http://www.bebbo.demon.co.uk
"Beside the braes of dawn. One clear new morning. Down where the lilies
stood in bloom. I knew that I was just a stranger in this world. A wind
just passing through." - Calum & Rory Macdonald (Runrig)
Edward McArdle
> Warning the article contains opinions.
>
> It is being reported in the trade press that Ron Steiger is
> developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
> "Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
> play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
> her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
> plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
>
> As with most people who love Oz, I know that Dorothy never reached
> 60. She returned to live in Oz forever with Uncle Henry and Aunt Em.
> Since Oz is a fairy land, she never aged.
.....
.....>
> Dorothy, like the child in us, never grew old. The Cowardly Lion with
> his companion the Hungry Tiger always were noble in their deeds. I
> hope this project fails before it goes much further.
>
> John M. Schaeffer
It doesn't worry me. Either the film will be good, and we'll all be happy,
or it will be bad and quietly disappear.
By the way, something has always intrigued me...
I saw the Judy Garland film when I was young (I'm now 61), and I'm *sure*
when she woke up she was still wearing the ruby slippers. Is this totally
my imagination, or was there such a version?
--
Edward McArdle.
You need to alter my return address to reply to me.
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~mcardle
- me, my tennis club, photos, verses, a novel....
Michael Martinez
>Warning the article contains opinions.
>
>It is being reported in the trade press that Ron Steiger is
>developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
>"Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
>play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
>her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
>plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
[snip]
That's a shame. I've seen several attempts at "sequels" as movies and
television specials and none have even come close to duplicating the 1939
movie's magic. Since Hollywood has had 60 years to pull off a good sequel
and failed, I think it's time they gave up until someone with the vision,
courage, and imagination to go back to the Baum books for inspiration comes
along.
When I went to see the re-release of "The Wizard of Oz" last year, I was
amazed at how many people were there with me. Many of them stood up to
applaud the movie when it was over. They REALLY don't make movies like
that any more.
--
\\ // Worlds of Imagination on the Web in...@xenite.org
\\// RealName: Science Fiction and Fantasy Xenite.Org
//\\ [http://www.xenite.org/index.htm]
// \\ENITE.org...............................................
Michael Martinez
>I saw the Judy Garland film when I was young (I'm now 61), and I'm *sure*
>when she woke up she was still wearing the ruby slippers. Is this totally
>my imagination, or was there such a version?
For many years I was sure of that myself, but I have 2 or 3 different
videotape versions and she doesn't have them on in any of those. Maybe we
had a mass hallucination, or else CBS was able to broadcast a version not
put on tape.
Otzchiim
>
>It is really travesty to violate the wonderful fairy land of Oz in this
>way. I have no trouble with a remake of the 1930's movie (by way it was
>a remake of one done in the 1910's).
Too much of a vaudeville show, too little of the story. And it was not really
a remake of the 1910 or so version; that (according to the Baum bio, To Please
a Child) was adapted from the Broadway musical of that time, which I gather was
much more of a success than the 1939 movie was when it was released.
And nobody has mentioned "Return to Oz," which was really taken from two
books, though they threw in some dream garbage to placate the Judy Garland
freaks.
Michael Weinstein, M.D.
is what created the 1939 Movie in the first place. It has much of the book
missing, a lot added on, and other stuff plain wrong. I find it hard to
believe that "the public" thinks Dorothy's trip to Oz was a dream, and most
people are astonished to learn that in the book there was no question but
that it was real.
Michael Weinstein MD |"Those who cannot remember
Nashua, NH | the past are condemned to
| repeat it." - Santayana
----------
In article <79f7ok$gpo$1...@news.xmission.com>, in...@qvision.net wrote:
....snip...
>it appear Steiger and Hollywood are mostly illiterate. The series
>was continued by Ruth Plumby Thompson, Jack Snow, John R. Neill (who
>illustrated 13 of Baum's Oz books) and others.
>
>It is really travesty to violate the wonderful fairy land of Oz in this
>way. I have no trouble with a remake of the 1930's movie (by way it was
>a remake of one done in the 1910's). I had no trouble with "The Wiz"
>I have no trouble with a sequel as long as it maintains the sprirt of
>Frank Baum instilled in this fariy land. Steiger's project does not.
>
>Dorothy, like the child in us, never grew old. The Cowardly Lion with
>his companion the Hungry Tiger always were noble in their deeds. I
>hope this project fails before it goes much further.
>
>John M. Schaeffer
Jim Collier
>
> It is also true that Hollywood's illiteracy (probably willful in this case)
> is what created the 1939 Movie in the first place. It has much of the book
> missing, a lot added on, and other stuff plain wrong. I find it hard to
> believe that "the public" thinks Dorothy's trip to Oz was a dream, and most
> people are astonished to learn that in the book there was no question but
> that it was real.
She never left the high-tacky municipality known as Culver City,
you know. The city of plastic palmettos. Even a real palmetto
should be shot on sight.
--
Jim Collier
Please reply to paccsthwy at home dot com, replacing
"at" and "dot" with appropriate symbols.
Michael Martinez
>It is also true that Hollywood's illiteracy (probably willful in this case)
>is what created the 1939 Movie in the first place. It has much of the book
>missing, a lot added on, and other stuff plain wrong. I find it hard to
>believe that "the public" thinks Dorothy's trip to Oz was a dream, and most
>people are astonished to learn that in the book there was no question but
>that it was real.
I don't believe it was illiteracy which led them to alter the story for the
1939 movie. It cost, IIRC, something like $2,000,000.00 to produce at the
time. That was a tremendous amount of money, and I don't believe it even
made a profit until it was re-released in the 1940s.
However, had they tried to include Dorothy's journey through southern Oz
(including the porecelain land), they would have had to extend the movie by
at least another hour, and the cost would have been considerably higher.
In fact, could they even have produced the special effects required to
represent the southern Oz?
Sin Pak Wing Daniel
in...@qvision.net wrote:
> Warning the article contains opinions.
>
> It is being reported in the trade press that Ron Steiger is
> developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
> "Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
> play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
> her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
> plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
>
> As with most people who love Oz, I know that Dorothy never reached
> 60. She returned to live in Oz forever with Uncle Henry and Aunt Em.
> Since Oz is a fairy land, she never aged.
>
This reminds me of the movie "Hook" by Spieburg, which was an attempted
sequel to Peter Pan. Roger Williams was the grown up Peter Pan who went
back to NeverLand to rediscover his youth. Dustin Hoffman played the
pirate. That was a good story too!
Daniel
Derek Janssen
>
> > It is being reported in the trade press that Ron Steiger is
> > developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
> > "Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
> > play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
> > her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
> > plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
> >
> sequel to Peter Pan. Roger Williams was the grown up Peter Pan who went
> back to NeverLand to rediscover his youth. Dustin Hoffman played the
> pirate.
The title and author escape me, but if this Oz movie is based on the
novel I think it is, it should not only *remind* you of "Hook", the
author even personally dedicates the novel to Spielberg and mentions
"Hook" only a few subtle six or seven times in the forward--
(Can you say "drooling fanboy plaigiarism"?...) ; )
Unfortunately, as Rod & Liz may well find out, not all human beings are
so personally enamored of Spielberg's "Hook"--
Many of them Hollywood studio executives for Sony...
Derek Janssen
dja...@ultranet.com
Fantasy Va
>> sequel to Peter Pan. Roger Williams was the grown up Peter Pan
Actually this was Robin Williams
na noo na noo
Mitch
in...@qvision.net
>
>
>in...@qvision.net wrote:
>
>> Warning the article contains opinions.
>>
>> developing a sequel to the "Wizard of Oz" movie entitled
>> "Dorothy and Oz". It is reported that Elizabeth Taylor will
>> play the part of a 60 year old Dorothy who returns to Oz after
>> her husband dies. Oz will have turn much more human. Steiger
>> plans on playing a gangster Cowardly Lion.
>>
>> 60. She returned to live in Oz forever with Uncle Henry and Aunt Em.
>> Since Oz is a fairy land, she never aged.
>>
>
>back to NeverLand to rediscover his youth. Dustin Hoffman played the
>
>Daniel
At least in "Hook" the characters remained true to the original author.
Robin Williams' character may have lost what he had but he did find it
again. The outlines of Steiger's Oz return violates the spirit of Oz as
recorded by Baum, Many Oz books since are not worthy of being consider
part of real Oz but many are.
The noble Cowardly Lion being played as a gangster even a comic one is
too upsetting to me. I spent 8 months with 9 actor recording all 14 Baum
Oz books. Even though all had different ways of presenting the
characters, all at least capatured the spirit of Oz. During that time
at listen to each Oz bokk at least 4 times.
One another related issue, I can not see Nicholas Cage as Willie Wonka
but at least the people involved in that project are trying to capture
the spirit of the author. I can remember conplains at the time that
Gene Wilder's Willie Wonka did not real;y reflect the autohr's
character.
Cage may be still haunted by "Zandelee" but his performance in "The
Rock" showed acting ability. As long as the spirit of the author is
keep, I wish hin success. (But still wonder how anyone can top Wilder).
At least WIllie Wonka does not look like Murphy's remake of "Dr.
Doolittle".
essjayt...@bellsouth.net
->
->At least WIllie Wonka does not look like Murphy's remake of "Dr.
->Doolittle".
Oh! Don't get me started!
ooo, it just makes my blood boil. They could have at least had the
decency to name that movie something else.
Hugh Lofting is spinning in his grave.
sjt
~*~
this time around there'll be no whining and/or complaining
just one giant aspirin for all mankind ~*~ FFN
jen
Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
-Jennifer
Sin Pak Wing Daniel wrote in message <36C30E5F...@netvigator.com>...
Melissa
"jen" <step...@eclipse.net> wrote:
> They have made a movie in like 1985 or 86 called "Return to Oz" Fairuza
> Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
>
The movie "Return to Oz" was probably the worst movie ever made. The plot is
as follows: Dorothy is still thinking that she was in Oz....Auntie Em decides
Dorothy need electric shock treatment and takes her to a mental hospital,
just as Dorothy is about to be zapped the lightning takes out the electricity
and Dorothy escapes. Only to find herself in an unreconizable Oz. The
Scarecrow is being held captive of the rock monster and theres an evil witch
that can switch her heads. The movie has no point and includes none of the
original characters. Her new friends are a robot that needs to wound up from
his back, a flying moose made out of a sofa and a moose head, a pumpkin that
comes to life. The bad guys are no longer flying monkeys but roller skating
things that have wheels for arms and go around biting people. This movie was
probably the worst I've ever seen!
Please sign my guestbook at:
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Boardwalk/7886
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
William Grosso
Melissa wrote:
>
> In article <7aaeim$qih$1...@news.eclipse.net>,
> "jen" <step...@eclipse.net> wrote:
> > They have made a movie in like 1985 or 86 called "Return to Oz" Fairuza
> > Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
> >
>
> The movie "Return to Oz" was probably the worst movie ever made.
No, that's _Solarbabies_.
> ...The movie has no point and includes none of the original characters.
Dorothy ? Auntie Em ? The Scarecrow ?
--A
Edward McArdle
> In article <7aaeim$qih$1...@news.eclipse.net>,
> "jen" <step...@eclipse.net> wrote:
> > They have made a movie in like 1985 or 86 called "Return to Oz" Fairuza
> > Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
> >
>
> The movie "Return to Oz" was probably the worst movie ever made. The plot is
> as follows: Dorothy is still thinking that she was in Oz....Auntie Em decides
> Dorothy need electric shock treatment and takes her to a mental hospital,
> just as Dorothy is about to be zapped the lightning takes out the electricity
> and Dorothy escapes. Only to find herself in an unreconizable Oz. The
> Scarecrow is being held captive of the rock monster and theres an evil witch
> that can switch her heads. The movie has no point and includes none of the
> original characters. Her new friends are a robot that needs to wound up from
> his back, a flying moose made out of a sofa and a moose head, a pumpkin that
> comes to life. The bad guys are no longer flying monkeys but roller skating
> things that have wheels for arms and go around biting people. This movie was
> probably the worst I've ever seen!
>
The characters in this movie were the characters from the books, not the
previous movie. (I haven't read them, only browsed, but they follow the
illustrations.)
andrew osmond
> The movie has no point and includes none of the
>original characters.
As other posters have commented, just about all the characters come from
Baum: Dorothy, Uncle Henry, Aunt Em, Toto (briefly), Billina, Tik-Tok,
Jack Pumpkinhead, the Gump, the Wheelers, Mombi (taking some powers from
Princess Langwidere), the Nome King (albeit more physically monstrous)
and Ozma.
As to its point, I'm preparing a fanzine article on this very subject.
Suffice to say, I believe it considerably improves on the reactionary
cheat ending in the MGM musical, which even many fans of the '30s film
hate.
--
andrew osmond
Bob Brooks
Melissa wrote in message <7ackn3$bue$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <7aaeim$qih$1...@news.eclipse.net>,
> "jen" <step...@eclipse.net> wrote:
>> They have made a movie in like 1985 or 86 called "Return to Oz" Fairuza
>> Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
>>
The only "Return to Oz" I saw was a cartoon in the seventies. Does anybody
remember that?
Michael Martinez
Vaguely.
Despite the liberties taken by Fleming and others with the 1939 movie, it
was by far the best film adaptation of the Baum books done so far, and
therefore is the one most people remember, and the one most of us probably
remember most clearly.
andrew osmond
>Despite the liberties taken by Fleming and others with the 1939 movie, it
>was by far the best film adaptation of the Baum books done so far, and
>therefore is the one most people remember, and the one most of us probably
>remember most clearly.
Read (in a new book on the making of the film) that the reason Wizard is
so well remembered is more to do with a fortuitous TV deal, which led to
the musical being screened annually from the '50s. Even the authors
concede the film's lasting popularity is an accident of history.
Then again, I prefer the Disney version. (Just to drop names, I think
Gene Wolfe did too...) 'Best' is subjective, but Return is closer to
Baum's books in terms of visuals - many of which were lifted direct from
the book illustrations - and dialogue. The MGM film owed far more to
vaudeville than it did to Baum.
--
andrew osmond
Derek Janssen
>
> Read (in a new book on the making of the film) that the reason Wizard is
> so well remembered is more to do with a fortuitous TV deal, which led to
> the musical being screened annually from the '50s. Even the authors
> concede the film's lasting popularity is an accident of history.
To wit:
When CBS started airing movies on TV in 1957, they wanted "Gone With the
Wind"--But GWtW was too expensive and MGM held out...Meanwhile, "Oz" was
considered a "beloved favorite" but long-run box-office disappointment
at the theaters, so MGM offered a substitute and CBS had to take what it
could get.
(Just think, "It's a Wonderful Life" started the exact same way, when
PBS could only afford to show public-domain films...)
Derek Janssen
dja...@ultranet.com
Jim Collier
>
> andrew osmond wrote:
> >
> > Read (in a new book on the making of the film) that the reason Wizard is
> > so well remembered is more to do with a fortuitous TV deal, which led to
> > the musical being screened annually from the '50s. Even the authors
> > concede the film's lasting popularity is an accident of history.
>
> To wit:
> When CBS started airing movies on TV in 1957, they wanted "Gone With the
> Wind"--But GWtW was too expensive and MGM held out...Meanwhile, "Oz" was
> considered a "beloved favorite" but long-run box-office disappointment
> at the theaters, so MGM offered a substitute and CBS had to take what it
> could get.
Sounds about right, but you do know that "Gone With the Wind" came
from David O. Selznick's studio, not MGM. He was Louis B. Mayer's
son-in-law. Looey B. was working on *his* brilliant experiment
in color at the same time as Selznick.
ObBook: Irene Mayer Selznick, _A Private View_
In which Selznick's widow and Mayer's daughter revealed all.
Although born in New England where her father started his
business (he was from Nova Scotia), the Mayers moved west
early. She and Selznick raised a family, and divorced and
she went to New York and became a successful
theater producer in her own right, bringing such drammatis
personae as Siobhan McKenna to prominence in America
lonely...@newwave.net
"Bob Brooks" <bo...@oneimage.com> wrote:
>
> Melissa wrote in message <7ackn3$bue$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >In article <7aaeim$qih$1...@news.eclipse.net>,
> > "jen" <step...@eclipse.net> wrote:
> >> They have made a movie in like 1985 or 86 called "Return to Oz" Fairuza
> >> Balk starred as Dorothy......I haven't seen it yet but I heard it's good.
> >>
>
> The only "Return to Oz" I saw was a cartoon in the seventies. Does anybody
> remember that?
>
Yes, i remember it. I also remember the live version... with TikTok the
windup man, Pumpkinhead, the talking moosehead called the Gump, I believe. It
came out almost a decade ago.... Rhayes Jr