Reel Deal: Taking one too many trips to 'Oz'
Alex Plimack
Arts | 3/5/08
I've always been a fan of "The Wizard of Oz."
Blame my mom.
I can't exactly recall the first time I saw the film, but what left a lasting impression on me was when I first saw the 60th anniversary restoration at the Senator Theatre in 1999. It was a classic movie in a classic theater. The colors were vibrant, the sound was bellowing from the speakers and my back ached from those horrid seats. But I didn't mind: I was watching a 60 year-old movie in the theater. The sheer implication was enough to impress me.
"… if I only had a brain."
So imagine my annoyance when I read earlier this week that there are plans to bring yet another remake of "The Wizard of Oz" to the big screen. According to an article published in Variety, Pras Michel of the Fugees has optioned the rights to the "Dark Oz" comic series to be made into a live-action adaptation of the comic trilogy.
This comes after the most recent retelling: "Tin Man," a miniseries on the SciFi channel. Other precursors include "Wicked" on Broadway; the announcement of plans for comic artist Todd McFarlane to bring his re-envisioning of the classic tale to the big screen (where Toto isn't an innocent puppy, but rather a warthog); and the 2005 Muppet remake.
Why?!
"I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too!"
A brief analysis of the aforementioned list with rudimentary criticism will reveal a glaring fact: remakes of "The Wizard of Oz" typically suck. I fully realize that the original movie was in fact an adaptation of L. Frank Baum's novel, but like most movie adaptations, it stood on its own as a truly creative piece of art. Like "The Godfather," "The Wizard of Oz" is more recognizable from is celluloid incarnation than it's paginated one.
What I can't seem to understand, however, is two simple things: why, after almost 70 years, a decent remake, reimagning, retelling, re-whatever can't be convincingly pulled off and why, after almost 70 years of failing, people are still trying.
Blame my mom.
I can't exactly recall the first time I saw the film, but what left a lasting impression on me was when I first saw the 60th anniversary restoration at the Senator Theatre in 1999. It was a classic movie in a classic theater. The colors were vibrant, the sound was bellowing from the speakers and my back ached from those horrid seats. But I didn't mind: I was watching a 60 year-old movie in the theater. The sheer implication was enough to impress me.
"… if I only had a brain."
So imagine my annoyance when I read earlier this week that there are plans to bring yet another remake of "The Wizard of Oz" to the big screen. According to an article published in Variety, Pras Michel of the Fugees has optioned the rights to the "Dark Oz" comic series to be made into a live-action adaptation of the comic trilogy.
This comes after the most recent retelling: "Tin Man," a miniseries on the SciFi channel. Other precursors include "Wicked" on Broadway; the announcement of plans for comic artist Todd McFarlane to bring his re-envisioning of the classic tale to the big screen (where Toto isn't an innocent puppy, but rather a warthog); and the 2005 Muppet remake.
Why?!
"I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too!"
A brief analysis of the aforementioned list with rudimentary criticism will reveal a glaring fact: remakes of "The Wizard of Oz" typically suck. I fully realize that the original movie was in fact an adaptation of L. Frank Baum's novel, but like most movie adaptations, it stood on its own as a truly creative piece of art. Like "The Godfather," "The Wizard of Oz" is more recognizable from is celluloid incarnation than it's paginated one.
What I can't seem to understand, however, is two simple things: why, after almost 70 years, a decent remake, reimagning, retelling, re-whatever can't be convincingly pulled off and why, after almost 70 years of failing, people are still trying.
Be the first to comment on this story