The Wizard of Oz needs a reboot,and a franchise

[CHEYENNE-BLACKBIRD]

Return to Oz was closer to the second and third book than the original fim was to the first book.Plus in the book tin man actually used his axe on people.

I think a truer adaptation will work now then it would have back in the day.

[KenK]

Yeah, but the original film is just too big a part of the golden age of cinema. Even if a new film were a truer adaptation of the book, I doubt it would have as lasting an effect as the Judy Garland film.

Wasn't that Fairuza Balk in Return to Oz?

[CHEYENNE-BLACKBIRD]

Yeah, but the original film is just too big a part of the golden age of cinema. Even if a new film were a truer adaptation of the book, I doubt it would have as lasting an effect as the Judy Garland film.

It won't matter to todays audiences,Me personally i don't really care for the original (yes i'm one of few).

[blackdragon6]

It won't matter to todays audiences.

LMAO,it really won't matter for real

[blackdragon6]

Wasn't that Fairuza Balk in Return to Oz?

yeah it was if i recall.........

[Chou Blaster]

I honestly think this:

The Wizard of Oz, the movie is a Hollywood Icon, from the Golden Age.


And the latter stories, got a whole lot darker with odd monsters and crap.


While it could be a good movie.

I think it may cause a back lash that may taint the orignal.

AHh what the Hell, if Uwe Boll is still making movies, how bad can this turn out to be?

(What I mean is.. If crappy films are already being made.. Might as well hope they make a GOOD movie with that franchise.)

[Copper]

I'm gonna laugh if they do decide on a remake and get Alex Proyas to direct it.

[titanfan]

Screw the reboot, I'm for turning it into the world like American McGhee's "Alice" game.

[Forefinger]

I honestly think this:

The Wizard of Oz, the movie is a Hollywood Icon, from the Golden Age.


And the latter stories, got a whole lot darker with odd monsters and crap.


While it could be a good movie.

I think it may cause a back lash that may taint the orignal.

AHh what the Hell, if Uwe Boll is still making movies, how bad can this turn out to be?

(What I mean is.. If crappy films are already being made.. Might as well hope they make a GOOD movie with that franchise.)

I selectively read, so what I got out of this was Uwe Boll directing new Wizard of Oz. NOOOOOO!

[Callie]

The 1939 version of The Wizard of Oz is a classic movie. Why do people insist on tainting it with endless remakes and sequels? Granted, it is a remake itself, but when you hit upon a perfect movie, the only place to go is down.

That latest Muppets one was hideous.

[Dr. Banner]

I heard Peter Jackson wants to take a shot at a remake of Wizard of Oz.

The witch, of course, will melt in in slow motion.

[Forefinger]

I heard Peter Jackson wants to take a shot at a remake of Wizard of Oz.

The witch, of course, will melt in in slow motion.

I'd like him to make a series of movies based on the novels.....starring a smoking hot babe as Dorthy of course.

[BoosterBronze]

I agree that 'Oz' would be well served by a reimagining. I think that there is a lot of charm in the books that is left out of the classic film version. No knock against the classic, but there are things in Oz both stranger and creepier that were left out of 'Wizard of Oz' as well as the 17 (?) other books that have not been adapted.

But any new 'Oz' project wouldn't be seen as an addition to the 'Oz' library, it would be seen as a challenge to the beloved American icon that the judy Garland picture is (and rightfully deserves to be). Lord of the Rings wasn't compared (except by real geeks like us) to the old LOTR cartoon. Narnia wasn't compared to the BBC version. But 'Oz' would be endlessly compared to the classic version.

I'd love to see a bold retelling, possibly animated, or "Wizard," "Return to" "Ozma of" or "Patchwork Girl." (Plus, reading the books as a kid, it seemed important that Dorothy is only 6, which of course didn't roll in live action).

Is Oz public domain these days? If it isn't, how did that guy right 'Wicked' the book?

[Callie]

The difference is that the LOTR animated movie was an utter mess. The Hobbit was excellent, but the LOTR was just awful. The story was unintelligible and many of the characters fell to the wayside.

[Greg Hatcher]

Exactly this line of thinking-- it's been decades, no one has ever really done the books, let's get Dorothy cast at the right age, etc.-- was the reasoning behind "Return to Oz," which was a really good movie just on the merits, and an enormous treat for fans of the books. The movie tanked horribly at the box office. There was a huge outcry. "Return" was mercilessly panned for all sorts of lunatic things, but they all translated to: "It doesn't have Judy Garland (or Ray Bolger or Jack Haley or Bert Lahr or Margaret Hamilton, or whoever) and it's not a musical."

You gotta figure if a forty-year wait didn't clear some room for a remake, nothing will.