IMDb रेटिंग
5.7/10
1.8 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंAn early version of the classic, based more on the 1902 stage musical than on the original novel.An early version of the classic, based more on the 1902 stage musical than on the original novel.An early version of the classic, based more on the 1902 stage musical than on the original novel.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Okay, it's important to point out that you can't compare this movie at all to the 1939 classic--and for so many reasons. Film was just in its infancy in 1910 and full-length movies meant about 10-20 minutes. Sets and costumes were simple and often looked like they were taken right off the stage of a high school play. And, writing and acting as we know of them today, just wasn't invented yet. So I cut the early films a lot of slack and praise movies that actually had decent production values and provided some entertainment into the 21st century--most early films fail on both these counts.
The movie isn't really based on the books but on a stage musical and this at times is pretty obvious--especially when the characters start dancing for no apparent reason at all! But, aside from this odd way of telling the story, it's an adorable and interesting film--particularly as it has people in animal costumes throughout (not just the lion). It just seems very cute and makes watching this historical picture a lot easier! By the way, despite the good production values, this film is not as good as some of the full-length films by the Frenchman, Georges Méliès. His 1902 LE VOYAGE DAN LE LUNE has even better sets and tells a more coherent and watchable story--hence that is why it is rated as a 10 by me and this one only an 8.
The movie isn't really based on the books but on a stage musical and this at times is pretty obvious--especially when the characters start dancing for no apparent reason at all! But, aside from this odd way of telling the story, it's an adorable and interesting film--particularly as it has people in animal costumes throughout (not just the lion). It just seems very cute and makes watching this historical picture a lot easier! By the way, despite the good production values, this film is not as good as some of the full-length films by the Frenchman, Georges Méliès. His 1902 LE VOYAGE DAN LE LUNE has even better sets and tells a more coherent and watchable story--hence that is why it is rated as a 10 by me and this one only an 8.
"The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" is the earliest existing film of the over 60 movies adapted from the 1900 L. Frank Baum book. And that tally doesn't include subsequent television and live stage presentations. The released Oz movie on March 1910 was produced by the Selig Polyscope Company out of Chicago and adopted many of the elements from the 1902 Wizard of Oz play.
Selig was able to make the movie using the Baum book because the company was involved in the author's "The Fairylogue and Radio-Plays," a combined play/vaudeville act/movie production in 1908. (The short Selig movie played during this production has been lost). After a disastrous two months, the act bankrupted Baum, giving Selig the rights to use his Oz characters and story. Besides the "Wonderful Wizard of Oz" movie, Selig immediately made three Oz sequels within 1910--all three now lost.
In this first 1910 Selig movie, Imogene the Cow, not portrayed in the Braun book, takes the place of Toto. Imogene is a person in a cow costume while Toto the dog could not be asked to be on the 1902 stage for a couple of hours and behave. Toto does make a brief appearance in this movie, but the cow dominates as a companion to Dorothy. Also, the scarecrow is discovered by Dorothy before the tornado and accompanies her to the Land of Oz. Another added element to the movie over the play was the extended role of the Wicked Witch of the West. Just like the Judy Garland 1939 classic, Dorothy has to confront the witch to get her wish from the Wizard. But instead of water shrinking the witch, water thrown at her simply makes the witch disappear.
And it appears the cast is dancing to some music. The 1902 play did havemusic to which accompanied the actors' dance numbers--but since film hadn't advanced enough to play sound, there is no songs heard on the movie that choreograph the cast.
Selig was able to make the movie using the Baum book because the company was involved in the author's "The Fairylogue and Radio-Plays," a combined play/vaudeville act/movie production in 1908. (The short Selig movie played during this production has been lost). After a disastrous two months, the act bankrupted Baum, giving Selig the rights to use his Oz characters and story. Besides the "Wonderful Wizard of Oz" movie, Selig immediately made three Oz sequels within 1910--all three now lost.
In this first 1910 Selig movie, Imogene the Cow, not portrayed in the Braun book, takes the place of Toto. Imogene is a person in a cow costume while Toto the dog could not be asked to be on the 1902 stage for a couple of hours and behave. Toto does make a brief appearance in this movie, but the cow dominates as a companion to Dorothy. Also, the scarecrow is discovered by Dorothy before the tornado and accompanies her to the Land of Oz. Another added element to the movie over the play was the extended role of the Wicked Witch of the West. Just like the Judy Garland 1939 classic, Dorothy has to confront the witch to get her wish from the Wizard. But instead of water shrinking the witch, water thrown at her simply makes the witch disappear.
And it appears the cast is dancing to some music. The 1902 play did havemusic to which accompanied the actors' dance numbers--but since film hadn't advanced enough to play sound, there is no songs heard on the movie that choreograph the cast.
The costumes and plot are from a stage performance of this classic. It is disjointed and sparse in its portrayal of the story of Dorothy Gale. All the regulars are there, even though we don't get to know them very well. I've not read the book, so are the brain, courage, and heart a part of the story. Also, what about the duplicity of the Wizard. All that aside, it is a memorable thirteen minutes. There are even song and dance numbers (though there is no sound). It was interesting to see Toto transformed into a huge dog so he could protect Dorothy. The scarecrow is the star of this adaptation. He has all the loose and frantic movies of his successors. The plot is a bit dense. It could have used a bit more of an acceptable story line.
In some ways, I found this 1910 silent version of 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' more entertaining than the big-budget MGM remake. And in some ways, this silent version (made while L Frank Baum was still alive and writing more Oz novels) is more faithful to Baum's source novel (and its sequels) than the MGM movie was. More significantly for historical purposes, this silent film preserves some aspects of the hugely popular 1903 stage musical based on 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz', which deviated significantly from both the novel and the later MGM movie.
In the novel, Toto's single most important function is to be a sounding-board for Dorothy, so that she can express her thoughts aloud without talking to herself. In the stage musical (unlike MGM's version), it was impractical to have a trained dog performing various cues, so Toto was written out. Instead, for the stage musical, Dorothy's companion in the cyclone ride from her Kansas farm to Oz was Imogene the cow, played by two panto-style actors in a cow costume. In this movie, we see several 'animals' (including Imogene, and the Cowardly Lion) which are very obviously played by actors in costumes. Toto appears very briefly as a real dog, to be transformed almost immediately by Glinda into an actor in a dog cozzie, courtesy of a Melies-style jump cut. Refreshingly, Dorothy is actually played here by an age-appropriate little girl (more about her later), rather than a too-old teenage Judy Garland in a bust-suppressor.
In the stage musical based on 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz', the star performers were the comedy team of Fred Stone and David C Montgomery as the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman; they sang comic songs such as "Hurrah for Baffin's Bay" and performed specialities, notably a 'black art' routine in which Stone assembled the various pieces of Montgomery's disconnected Tin Woodman. (After starring in this stage musical, Montgomery died young; Fred Stone went on to play Katharine Hepburn's father in 'Alice Adams'.) Here in this silent film of the stage musical, there's not much singing, but we do see the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman performing a comical dance. The Scarecrow does a very impressive back handspring, made even more impressive because he immediately segues from this into a weird crawling dance with the animal actors. I was astounded to learn that this acrobatic Scarecrow was Robert Z Leonard, a vaudeville performer who'd worked with Lon Chaney, and who later had a long successful career as a film director, well into the talkies era. (He directed Judy Garland and Liza Minnelli in 'In the Good Old Summertime', among other credits.) One tableau sequence in this silent movie puts Dorothy and the Scarecrow in a forest where the trees have sinister faces; I wonder if this sequence inspired the talking-tree sequence in the MGM film. Elsewhere in this 1910 film, we see that Oz has some black residents ... in loincloths, escorting camels.
The charming and delightful Dorothy in this silent film, as I was pleased to discover, is Bebe Daniels, who later did much to inspire British radio audiences during the Blitz. Here, she performs a delightful dance. The nimble Tin Woodman is played by Alvin Wyckoff, who later became a movie cameraman. There are a couple of very impressive stage sets with ensembles of chorus girls in pageboy outfits, and the Melies-like entrance to the Emerald City looks like an enormous human face. I was hugely impressed with the flying effect used here for the villainous Momba the Witch (no, not Mombi from the Oz books: this is Momba with an 'a') and also used here for Glinda; the Glinda in this movie looks vastly more impressive than Billie Burke did as Glinda with that wastebasket on her head. In this silent version, when Dorothy uses a bucket of water to dissolve the wicked witch, I found the results more impressive than what happened in the MGM version. I'll rate this 1910 movie 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' a full 10 out of 10. I wish they had filmed the complete stage musical, even without sound.
In the novel, Toto's single most important function is to be a sounding-board for Dorothy, so that she can express her thoughts aloud without talking to herself. In the stage musical (unlike MGM's version), it was impractical to have a trained dog performing various cues, so Toto was written out. Instead, for the stage musical, Dorothy's companion in the cyclone ride from her Kansas farm to Oz was Imogene the cow, played by two panto-style actors in a cow costume. In this movie, we see several 'animals' (including Imogene, and the Cowardly Lion) which are very obviously played by actors in costumes. Toto appears very briefly as a real dog, to be transformed almost immediately by Glinda into an actor in a dog cozzie, courtesy of a Melies-style jump cut. Refreshingly, Dorothy is actually played here by an age-appropriate little girl (more about her later), rather than a too-old teenage Judy Garland in a bust-suppressor.
In the stage musical based on 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz', the star performers were the comedy team of Fred Stone and David C Montgomery as the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman; they sang comic songs such as "Hurrah for Baffin's Bay" and performed specialities, notably a 'black art' routine in which Stone assembled the various pieces of Montgomery's disconnected Tin Woodman. (After starring in this stage musical, Montgomery died young; Fred Stone went on to play Katharine Hepburn's father in 'Alice Adams'.) Here in this silent film of the stage musical, there's not much singing, but we do see the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman performing a comical dance. The Scarecrow does a very impressive back handspring, made even more impressive because he immediately segues from this into a weird crawling dance with the animal actors. I was astounded to learn that this acrobatic Scarecrow was Robert Z Leonard, a vaudeville performer who'd worked with Lon Chaney, and who later had a long successful career as a film director, well into the talkies era. (He directed Judy Garland and Liza Minnelli in 'In the Good Old Summertime', among other credits.) One tableau sequence in this silent movie puts Dorothy and the Scarecrow in a forest where the trees have sinister faces; I wonder if this sequence inspired the talking-tree sequence in the MGM film. Elsewhere in this 1910 film, we see that Oz has some black residents ... in loincloths, escorting camels.
The charming and delightful Dorothy in this silent film, as I was pleased to discover, is Bebe Daniels, who later did much to inspire British radio audiences during the Blitz. Here, she performs a delightful dance. The nimble Tin Woodman is played by Alvin Wyckoff, who later became a movie cameraman. There are a couple of very impressive stage sets with ensembles of chorus girls in pageboy outfits, and the Melies-like entrance to the Emerald City looks like an enormous human face. I was hugely impressed with the flying effect used here for the villainous Momba the Witch (no, not Mombi from the Oz books: this is Momba with an 'a') and also used here for Glinda; the Glinda in this movie looks vastly more impressive than Billie Burke did as Glinda with that wastebasket on her head. In this silent version, when Dorothy uses a bucket of water to dissolve the wicked witch, I found the results more impressive than what happened in the MGM version. I'll rate this 1910 movie 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' a full 10 out of 10. I wish they had filmed the complete stage musical, even without sound.
Although it is a rather unrefined movie, it's still fun to watch this early film version of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz", and it has plenty of energy and ingenuity that make up for its rough edges. It is certainly of interest historically, and for anyone who enjoys the films of the early 1900s, it also works well enough as entertainment.
The story differs considerably both from the book and from the well-known 1939 classic, in large part because it was adapted from a stage production of the story, rather than from the original novel. But most of the characters are easily recognizable, and it's also quite interesting to see a very young Bebe Daniels as Dorothy.
The scarecrow and the tin man probably get the best roles, and in a number of scenes they engage in some amusing antics, making it worth looking for them even when they are not the main focus. It's apparently uncertain who played the scarecrow, which is too bad, because he is pretty funny, and his performance is not unworthy of being compared with Ray Bolger's performance in the wonderful Judy Garland version.
The adaptation does have a very stage-like look, but given that approach, most of it works all right. Some of the camera effects are pretty good for 1910, and even the ones that seem more obvious are at least interesting to watch.
In watching this now, it probably benefits from the endearing qualities of the Oz characters, which are so familiar from other sources. But its original audiences probably enjoyed it as well for its own sake, since it has plenty to offer, and it tells the story with lots of liveliness.
The story differs considerably both from the book and from the well-known 1939 classic, in large part because it was adapted from a stage production of the story, rather than from the original novel. But most of the characters are easily recognizable, and it's also quite interesting to see a very young Bebe Daniels as Dorothy.
The scarecrow and the tin man probably get the best roles, and in a number of scenes they engage in some amusing antics, making it worth looking for them even when they are not the main focus. It's apparently uncertain who played the scarecrow, which is too bad, because he is pretty funny, and his performance is not unworthy of being compared with Ray Bolger's performance in the wonderful Judy Garland version.
The adaptation does have a very stage-like look, but given that approach, most of it works all right. Some of the camera effects are pretty good for 1910, and even the ones that seem more obvious are at least interesting to watch.
In watching this now, it probably benefits from the endearing qualities of the Oz characters, which are so familiar from other sources. But its original audiences probably enjoyed it as well for its own sake, since it has plenty to offer, and it tells the story with lots of liveliness.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाMany of the costumes and much of the make-up in this film resemble those used in the 1902 Broadway musical "The Wizard of Oz". None of the songs in this show, however, were used in The Wizard of Oz (1939).
- गूफ़When Glinda appears, you can clearly see the actress jerking into position when the harness has stopped pulling her up.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in The Hollywood Road to Oz (1990)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि
- 13 मि
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.33 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें