penny-119

I will start by saying that I am not a Tyler Perry fan. I don't generally watch or enjoy his movies. I was also hesitant to see this play turned into a movie, but my husband really wanted to see it, so I went somewhat reluctantly to see how TP would butcher this play.

I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised. First of all, the play is not something that can be easily rendered into a movie. It's more of a performance than a traditional "play". There is not a coherent plot, and even the vignettes are often incomplete stories. The men that are central actors in the womens' stories are completely voiceless and have no role in the play whatsoever. The dialog from the different characters is beautiful and elegant and haunting, so to be true to the story you have to keep the language that is used.

So, it's a difficult situation to be in, no plot really to paraphrase or "adapt" with very precise language that needs to be incorporated to keep the beauty of the piece. It is a task that a better filmmaker than TP should have tackled....but it's doubtful that anyone who had the talent AND the juice to make this movie actually would have, so TP is all that's left.

The film is choppy at parts...NOT seamlessly interweaving the added plot-driven dialog with the elegant and colorful soliloquies from the original play. Also, some of the particular poems seem oddly-placed, and out of context.

However, the performance of the pieces did give a meaning that reading the play does not. Pieces that I understood in one way when I read them took on a different and more potent meaning when I saw them being performed in the context of the film. The delivery of most (not all) of the poems and the character portrayals generally was excellent.

There is some overacting (Kerry Washington in particular stood out as overdone to me), and some of Tyler Perry's typical caricatures (if you are a light-skinned man with a high paying job....you are a bastard!), but if I evaluated this movie based on whether my understanding and experience of the text was expanded by this film, I would say it was.

Perhaps if I had seen the performance I would evaluate this film less kindly, but I think that if you come in understanding 1) it is a lofty performance piece being rendered as film, and 2) it has incorporated some of the performance aspect of the play into the film, I think you could appreciate it and enjoy it.

This is one of my all-time favorite movies, although I was not even alive when it came out. I think a lot of the critiques of this movie stem from an expectation that it will be the same as the original. While it derives from the same name and has some of the same imagery, I think people need to understand the films as being essentially different. For instance, the original (although slightly adulterated) Judy Garland version is ultimately an allegory about progressivism and the industrial era, with a surface story about a young girl's search for her identity. The Wiz is ultimately a commentary about African-American life in urban America (including de-industrialization, racism, drug and alcohol abuse, etc.) with a similar surface story--but about a young(ish) woman rather than a girl.

I love the film b/c it is subtle in many ways (in other ways its not) but through much of the dialogue, lyrics, and imagery references a particular experience for these black characters within new york. Its like viewing a parallel universe in which the institutional, cultural, community experiences of this population are made apparent. For instance, Ms. One, the numbers runner (a la Detroit Red---if you know who that is) in the neighborhood, "you can't win" is an indictment on the hopelessness faced by many in the community, the coping mechanisms they unfortunately turn to and an internalization of those feelings of inefficacy. The "poison poppies" are a stand-in for drug abuse, the constant changing of the fashionable "color" once the characters arrived at Oz was a critique of the materialism and failure to prioritize ("gave up two month's feed") that befalls many trying to achieve status through appearance; and then, of course, there is the ubiquitous failure to get a cab--which I am sure no one missed.

I think this movie can be appreciated on many levels. I love the subtlety of some of the imagery (like the fact that the lion's outfit is really a pimp-suit--complete with platform heels) and I just don't think that a remake of this movie would do as good of a job capturing that again.

Its a unique movie--not just a remake of The Wizard of Oz, and needs to be appreciated as such. If you can manage to come into it with a fresh eye, and expect it merely to be a commentary on urban America, then I think this is a film you can really enjoy.

By the way, Michael Jackson is GREAT in this movie (and he looks so cute!!), as is Nipsy Russell ("stuck in a position I had assumed all too often...")and Lena Horne's singing is amazing. I could admittedly do without Diana Ross, but she's not the whole movie.

SOOO many memories. This is actually "before my time" since I'm a child of the 80's, but my mother got me the record, and singing Alligators all around (and Pierre, and Chicken Soup and Rice, and One was Johnny, and pretty much everything on this album!) was all part of my childhood experience. I stumbled across the CD on amazon.com, and started talking about it to my boyfriend, who surprised me with the CD. LOVED IT! Cant wait to share it with my own kids one day. If this is a lovely reminder of your childhood, as it is for mine, I would definitely recommend picking up a copy of the CD--after all, you're in it for the songs, not the images (although those don't hurt, and I suppose brainwashing the next generation to really appreciate Really Rosie may require some visual stimuli).