We're off to see the Wizard...
"The Wizard of Oz"
Overall Rating: *****
All right, I know that just about everyone has seen "The Wizard of Oz," and--with the exception of a few detractors (the Munchkins are un-P.C., and the good witch upsets a few zealots' portrayals of witchcraft)--everybody loves it. But, I wanted to make sure my service's premiere weekend would have at least one good review, and since I'd decided to see it again as soon as I heard they were re-releasing it, this particular cultural icon seemed a logical choice for a first review.
The story of Dorothy Gale (Judy Garland) is as familiar as that of any movie: hounded by a neighbor--Almira Gulch (Margaret Hamilton)--she is forced to give up her dog, Toto. When Toto escapes and manages to return to her, however, Dorothy runs away, only to return in time to get swept up in a tornado. In this way, she lands in Oz, accidentally killing The Wicked Witch of the East--whose ruby slippers she inherits--in the process. However, as spectacular as Oz is, she must follow the yellow brick road to get to the Wizard of Oz and back to Kansas, meeting the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodsman, and the Cowardly Lion in the process.
Still, Oz is spectacular. Even on video, the special effects are pretty good by today's standards. In the re-release, with the sound digitally remastered, and on the big screen, the effects will blow you away as surely as a tornado. While Hollywood has developed more sophisticated techniques since "The Wizard of Oz" was first released, the film easily holds its own--indeed, I was pleasantly surprised at just how well the visual effects hold up. The most spectacular effect, is the one most overlooked in current films: color. "The Wizard of Oz" accomplishes more by being in color than any other film I can name--because some of the scenes are in black-and-white. Oz is colorful, while Kansas isn't. I'm completely used to films being in color (in 1939, most weren't), but it still wows me here. "Schindler's List" comes close--though I'd argue it's less effective because almost all of it is black-and-white (only a few scenes such as the religious service are not), and because it is simply repeating the same technique. With most other films, color makes them look more natural--nice; but few films would truly suffer from being black-and-white. "The Wizard of Oz" would.
But more than the special effects, it's the performances that make the film. Judy Garland carries her role beautifully. The Scarecrow (Ray Bolger) and the Tin Woodsman (Jack Haley) are wonderful, and the Cowardly Lion (Bert Lahr) steals the show. One performance that seems often overlooked is Margaret Hamilton's: her delivery of her lines is scary--but not too scary for children; she's fiendish without being inappropriate for a family movie.
Yet, even the best performances and special effects will fall flat without a script to back them up--and "The Wizard of Oz" has such a script. Starting with L. Frank Baum's classic children's novel, the filmmakers involved with "The Wizard of Oz" have created an energetic movie. Every other line is funny. Many of the songs are catchy. Perhaps the biggest testimony is the number of cliches "The Wizard of Of" has given us; lines like "I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore," "I'll get you my pretty--and your little dog, too," and "follow the Yellow Brick Road" appear in other movies ranging from "Independence Day," to "Good Morning Vietnam,"--and in even everyday language.
"The Wizard of Oz" has a few holes: small ones such as the Scarecrow's incorrect quotation of the Pythagorean Theorem, and big ones such as our never finding out what happens with Almira Gulch and Toto. Yet, however real these problems may be, it seems almost sacrilege to bring them up in public--considering how little they detract from the film as a whole.
Director Victor Fleming had a banner year in 1939. Besides "The Wizard of Oz," he also had another little film--"Gone with the Wind." Both rank among the best films ever made, and they're tough to compare (same director, same year, G rating due to the Hays Code--and just about nothing else in common), but for my money, "The Wizard of Oz" is better.
"The Wizard of Oz" is clever, dazzling, and original. I saw it as a young child, and loved it then. I still do.
Title: "The Wizard of Oz"
Release date: 1939 (re-release: November 6, 1998)
Overall Rating: *****
All right, I know that just about everyone has seen "The Wizard of Oz," and--with the exception of a few detractors (the Munchkins are un-P.C., and the good witch upsets a few zealots' portrayals of witchcraft)--everybody loves it. But, I wanted to make sure my service's premiere weekend would have at least one good review, and since I'd decided to see it again as soon as I heard they were re-releasing it, this particular cultural icon seemed a logical choice for a first review.
The story of Dorothy Gale (Judy Garland) is as familiar as that of any movie: hounded by a neighbor--Almira Gulch (Margaret Hamilton)--she is forced to give up her dog, Toto. When Toto escapes and manages to return to her, however, Dorothy runs away, only to return in time to get swept up in a tornado. In this way, she lands in Oz, accidentally killing The Wicked Witch of the East--whose ruby slippers she inherits--in the process. However, as spectacular as Oz is, she must follow the yellow brick road to get to the Wizard of Oz and back to Kansas, meeting the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodsman, and the Cowardly Lion in the process.
Still, Oz is spectacular. Even on video, the special effects are pretty good by today's standards. In the re-release, with the sound digitally remastered, and on the big screen, the effects will blow you away as surely as a tornado. While Hollywood has developed more sophisticated techniques since "The Wizard of Oz" was first released, the film easily holds its own--indeed, I was pleasantly surprised at just how well the visual effects hold up. The most spectacular effect, is the one most overlooked in current films: color. "The Wizard of Oz" accomplishes more by being in color than any other film I can name--because some of the scenes are in black-and-white. Oz is colorful, while Kansas isn't. I'm completely used to films being in color (in 1939, most weren't), but it still wows me here. "Schindler's List" comes close--though I'd argue it's less effective because almost all of it is black-and-white (only a few scenes such as the religious service are not), and because it is simply repeating the same technique. With most other films, color makes them look more natural--nice; but few films would truly suffer from being black-and-white. "The Wizard of Oz" would.
But more than the special effects, it's the performances that make the film. Judy Garland carries her role beautifully. The Scarecrow (Ray Bolger) and the Tin Woodsman (Jack Haley) are wonderful, and the Cowardly Lion (Bert Lahr) steals the show. One performance that seems often overlooked is Margaret Hamilton's: her delivery of her lines is scary--but not too scary for children; she's fiendish without being inappropriate for a family movie.
Yet, even the best performances and special effects will fall flat without a script to back them up--and "The Wizard of Oz" has such a script. Starting with L. Frank Baum's classic children's novel, the filmmakers involved with "The Wizard of Oz" have created an energetic movie. Every other line is funny. Many of the songs are catchy. Perhaps the biggest testimony is the number of cliches "The Wizard of Of" has given us; lines like "I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore," "I'll get you my pretty--and your little dog, too," and "follow the Yellow Brick Road" appear in other movies ranging from "Independence Day," to "Good Morning Vietnam,"--and in even everyday language.
"The Wizard of Oz" has a few holes: small ones such as the Scarecrow's incorrect quotation of the Pythagorean Theorem, and big ones such as our never finding out what happens with Almira Gulch and Toto. Yet, however real these problems may be, it seems almost sacrilege to bring them up in public--considering how little they detract from the film as a whole.
Director Victor Fleming had a banner year in 1939. Besides "The Wizard of Oz," he also had another little film--"Gone with the Wind." Both rank among the best films ever made, and they're tough to compare (same director, same year, G rating due to the Hays Code--and just about nothing else in common), but for my money, "The Wizard of Oz" is better.
"The Wizard of Oz" is clever, dazzling, and original. I saw it as a young child, and loved it then. I still do.
Title: "The Wizard of Oz"
Release date: 1939 (re-release: November 6, 1998)
MPAA rating: G (originally not rated; Hays code compliant)
Overall rating: *****
Overall rating: *****
Aprox. run time: 100 min.
Director: Victor Fleming (some scenes, King Vidor--uncredited)
Writer: Noel Langley ("Adaptation" and "Screen Play"), Florence Ryerson, Edgar Allen Woolf ("Screen Play"), L. Frank Baum (novel), Herbert Stothart ("Musical Adaptation"), E. Y. Harburg (lyrics), and Harold Arlen (music)
Stars: Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, Ray Bolger, Bert Lahr, Jack Haley, Margaret Hamilton
Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Oz.htm
Director: Victor Fleming (some scenes, King Vidor--uncredited)
Writer: Noel Langley ("Adaptation" and "Screen Play"), Florence Ryerson, Edgar Allen Woolf ("Screen Play"), L. Frank Baum (novel), Herbert Stothart ("Musical Adaptation"), E. Y. Harburg (lyrics), and Harold Arlen (music)
Stars: Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, Ray Bolger, Bert Lahr, Jack Haley, Margaret Hamilton
Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Oz.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09
Labels: Movie review, ReviewsbyJohn
posted by John at 11/09/1998 04:36:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home