Comments on: Warner Bros. ‘Oz’ Project Not So Twisted After All

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:14:24 +0000

A sequel to the MGM musical!!!!!!!!!! I hate this dark and twisted versions from fairy tales like “American McGee’s Alice” and so on, the ORIGINALS are CHILDREN BOOKS, and the movies should be also for kids!!!
I image something like Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” for the Oz sequel. I think it looks really great and stunning, just awesome, the visuals are great, it’s for children and adults, and this is the way I would made also “Oz”!!!

By: Details of Warner Bros. ‘Oz’ Script Emerge - Screen Rant

Details of Warner Bros. ‘Oz’ Script Emerge - Screen Rant — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 17:36:20 +0000

[...] which Olson himself had conceived using some of the original Oz books by L. Frank Baum. We heard brief summaries of what the sequel might involve, but nothing really solid…until [...]

By: PretenderNX01

PretenderNX01 — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:03:54 +0000

Didn’t SciFi channel already do a pseudo-Oz movie with Zooey Deschanel playing DG and a cast of Oz-like characters?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DG_%28character%29

By: Jackson

Jackson — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 12:27:46 +0000

You really can’t write a story like this and leave out “Return to Oz” because this is just history repeating itself. This would explain why the current production is hitting a brick wall. A lot of the studio execs were around in 1985 when Return to Oz flopped. Walter Murch is still one of Hollywood’s top editors. The studio people know him and know he directed one movie that went fizzz. It was a great movie, but it died for the exact same reasons that Twisted Oz probably will.

By: Rik van Dyke

Rik van Dyke — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 01:25:05 +0000

Um…
Wasn’t there a “dark(er?)” sequel to ‘The Wizard Of Oz’ already?
Flashback to 1985 – “Return To Oz” A Walter Murch film, Executive Produced by Gary Kurtz (Star Wars , Dark Crystal) -Described by Leonard Maltin as:
“Distressingly downbeat sequel with Dorothy fleeing a spooky sanitarium in Kansas to return to her beloved land – only to find evil rulers in charge”

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:41:04 +0000

I want the dark twisted oz. New take on the classic story.

By: charles darwin

charles darwin — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 22:34:49 +0000

Why would they do a sequel on something that is perfect as a stand-alone movie?
You REALLY need an answer to that? Fine. How about MONEY. The rights to use the Wizard of Oz name alone will guarantee at least 300 million in box office, domestic. Still sounds like a bad idea? Of COURSE it is. But, remember, they DID do a sequel to Gone With The Wind, so, that basically means the Hollywood elite have no qualms whatsoever about trashing established hits. May as well get to work on Citizen Kane’s sequel as well.

By: Foopher

Foopher — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:34:16 +0000

Those pictures are creepy

By: Luke

Luke — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:30:24 +0000

MGM’s Wizard of Oz is one of my top five favorite films of all-time, but I find it interesting that Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is a semi-sequel but you don’t see people complaining about that. And to be honest, I think that’s probnably how this will be. It’s not remake of the original, it’s not a direct sequel, it’s just a way to make another Oz film while trying to be as respectful fo the original as possible, which really seems like the best way to handle a project like this.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:49:04 +0000

I just can’t see a sequel doing well in the box office. I think they’d be limiting themselves to an older demographic. Young people today aren’t so interested in soft fairy tales like that anymore. The fact Olson says the film will be in the vein of Harry Potter might make it more marketable, but I still think it’ll be a hard sell. A twisted Oz, on the other hand, would have been an easy sell, and I think the would’ve hit bigger box office numbers with McFarlane’s version.

By: Mike E.

Mike E. — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:30:19 +0000

um, just a quicky, Josh… there aren’t too many people around on forums of this type that were “brought up on” the original version of Oz.. it’s nearly 70 years old.

By: Josh R

Josh R — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:25:38 +0000

I had never heard of McFarlene’s toy line before the last article, but I have to say it got me excited. I’m going to make an educated guess and say that those of you who thought it was a bad idea are older (I’m 20).

To the people who grew up with Wizard of Oz I can see why you’d think this is a stupid idea, but I feel that a sequel, or, worse, a true remake, are even more stupid ideas. The original is undoubtedly a classic, and a sequel or a remake would never live up to the legacy of the original.

But a new take on the idea, that takes the original story in completely different direction is a great idea. Where the original is an optimistic, happy, family-safe musical, this Twisted Oz would be a pessimistic, dark, adult, and I stress this next part, Rock Opera.

It would do worse at the box office, for sure, so I can understand the mentality of the studio, but I think at the end of the day it would be a much, much better film than a straight up sequel.

By: Kofi Outlaw

Kofi Outlaw — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:08:24 +0000

@ Kosta

You’re right about the picture, but this post isn’t meant to focus on Murch’s “Twisted Oz,” It’s about McFarlane’s

By: Kosta

Kosta — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:00:40 +0000

Well done, Kofi. You start your article on The Wizard Of Oz with a picture of Alice from Amercian McGee’s reinterpretation of Alice in Wonderland, and fail to mention that there’s already been a dark sequel to Oz – Walter Murch’s 1985 film Return to Oz. Underrated, based far more closely on L. Frank Baum’s novels and replete with dark and twisted imagery, which is why most of the fans of the 1939 musical were suitably horrified.

By: William

William — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:45:19 +0000

Stupid! I want dark twisted Oz!!!

By: Jason

Jason — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:23:18 +0000

Dark Oz all the way. It’s much more entertaining to see something so well known get turned on its head. “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” doesn’t count.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:48:12 +0000

New take on it, just dumbed down from McFarlane’s toy line.