Dorothy Gale viene spazzata via da una fattoria nel Kansas nel mondo magico di Oz in un tornado e si imbarca in una missione con i suoi nuovi amici per vedere il Mago che può aiutarla a torn... Leggi tuttoDorothy Gale viene spazzata via da una fattoria nel Kansas nel mondo magico di Oz in un tornado e si imbarca in una missione con i suoi nuovi amici per vedere il Mago che può aiutarla a tornare a casa ed anche aiutare i suoi amici.Dorothy Gale viene spazzata via da una fattoria nel Kansas nel mondo magico di Oz in un tornado e si imbarca in una missione con i suoi nuovi amici per vedere il Mago che può aiutarla a tornare a casa ed anche aiutare i suoi amici.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Vincitore di 2 Oscar
- 16 vittorie e 14 candidature totali
- The Munchkins
- (as The Munchkins)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Munchkin
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Riepilogo
Recensioni in evidenza
This is the Movie of All Time, folks--a status achieved during its long run as a huge annual TV event during that classic era whose programs now show up on TV Land network. In the 1970s, Peter Marshall once read the answer on Hollywood Squares as to the program seen more times by more people than anything else ever shown on television. It was "Oz." Likewise, no movie has the hold on popular culture that this one does. What lion character ever since (i.e., Snagglepuss) hasn't been an impersonation of Bert Lahr going, "Put 'em up, put 'em uuuuup!"
Few musicals offer an equal combination of lovable music and engaging story. Perhaps "The Sound of Music." Hard to think of many Hollywood musicals where the story gets as serious as it does here when the Witch informs Dorothy that, "The last to go will see the first three go before her...and her mangy little dog too!" Yikes! In contrast, even the best of other Hollywood musicals seem to serve up fluffy, forgettable story lines that are mere backdrop to the song numbers that typically put the plot on hold.
I can't say that "Oz" doesn't have technical flaws or story element inconsistencies. It's just that the astonishing production values all around so overwhelm the shortcomings. The tornado sequence is a 1939 special effects tour de force--incredible. And the Nutcracker-quality musical score offers songs tastefully interwoven with the action. Certain numbers like "Merry Old Land of Oz," I never get tired off, though I like each of the songs.
Oz should be viewed in the lightness of spirit that it deserves. I mean look, we have Frank Morgan as the Emerald City gatekeeper, then seconds later as the cabbie with the Horse of a Different Color, then the Wizard's palace guard, and then the voice of fire-and-smoke Wizard of Oz who bellows, "Step forward, Tin Man!" What other film could put an actor go through 4 quick-changes within 10 minutes to such an endearing result? "Oz" is as magic as those sparkling ruby shoes.
The early Technicolor process utilized triple nitrate negative strips--separately recording each primary color in light. This was done due to the lack of a suitable "color film" in 1939. That would quickly change--but films from years following suffered from hues that faded with the years, even original negatives. Because "Oz" was actually filmed on a black-and-white base film, the negatives never faded. So now we have home videos/DVDs of breathtaking color quality. Now, the tinted filters in the cameras that separated the colors onto the negative strips meant that intense illumination was required, rendering the filming experience miserably hot for the actors involved, especially Lahr. But they all hold up amazingly well.
"Oz" has a valuable message. As the pop group America once said, "No, Oz never did give nothin' to the Tin Man....that he didn't, didn't already have." If we have truly search, we can find within us--or create through trial, like the Lion's courage--what we think we most lack. The Wizard (like the Lord) helps those who find help within themselves.
I feel sorry for the Almira Gulches who can't treasure this film experience. They need to visit the Emerald City to get their own ticking Testimonials and find their hearts.
Didn't bring your broomsticks with you? Well, I'm afraid you'll have to walk.
There's no doubt that part of the appeal of the story and the characters comes from them being such old friends to so many cinema fans, but there are also good reasons why they have endured for so long, and have been able to hold up even after becoming so familiar. Although Dorothy is not a particularly complex character, she represents an innocent but deep yearning that is easy to identify with. Likewise, the 'Oz' characters are bizarre enough to remain interesting, but there is a core of substance that again is easy to believe in. Who does not feel that he or she could use at least one of the things that Dorothy's friends want?
The adaptation from the original story is done quite well, making fine choices for the characters and episodes that would work on film. The settings and visual effects may not impress the devotees of today's computer imagery, but in their time they certainly demonstrated a great deal of skill and planning, and even now, in their own way they are more believable than are most of the computer tricks that have become so overused.
The popular story has also been used for a number of more recent adaptations, and some of them have had some good points of their own. But this Wizard remains by far the most wonderful of the versions of the classic tale.
The cast could not be improved upon. The quivery-voiced, solemn-faced Judy Garland will always be Dorothy, the little lost farm girl on the road to Oz, clutching her beloved Toto (impressively portrayed himself by the female canine performer Terry, the terrier). It seems inconceivable that MGM had originally wished to cast Shirley Temple in the role, as Temple's doe-eyed, cutesy-voiced shtick would have been a catastrophic ill-fit for the tone of this picture. Conversely, Garland is perhaps the screen's quintessential woman/child; always seemingly just one step away from reaching full emotional maturity. It is her sadness that transfixes viewers to the screen, the exact same quality that made the film's most memorable Harold Arlen/E. Y. Harburg number "Over the Rainbow" into one of the most exquisite marriages between artist and song ever to be recorded.
The remainder of the cast is similarly exceptional, many of whom perform perfectly even under the most debilitating make-up and costumes. Frank Morgan is marvelously versatile in no less than five roles, the insanely energetic Bert Lahr mugs brilliantly, the handsome Jack Haley swoons sweetly, Billie Burke lends the film an ornate ethereality, and Ray Bolger's gravity-defying physical presence nearly steals the entire picture on several occasions. Perhaps most notable is former schoolteacher Margaret Hamilton's transformation into the wickedest of wicked witches, which certainly remains among the vilest and most terrifying portrayals of full-throttle evil ever to be seen. No matter how it is analyzed, scrutinized, or satirized, the 1939 production of THE WIZARD OF OZ is a top-notch example of how to turn a great story into a fabulous, milestone of a film.
I guess the part that "gets" me about the movie is how the writers made it pretty plain that the Scarecrow, Tin Man, and Cowardly Lion really already had what they thought they were missing; that their respective problems were in misapprehending their own complete natures. That's a powerful statement for many of us. I found myself most touched in scenes where the Scarecrow was showing wisdom, the Tin Man feeling deeply ("...when I think of Dorothy in that awful place..."), and the Lion...well, maybe accomplishing this effect was harder in his case...what *is* true courage?
Anyway, if you're reading this here, you must be a movie weenie, and you've no doubt already seen the movie, so I'm not going to recite the usual "go see this movie" mantra.
I was just very touching to see this movie again, at this phase in my life.
I will mention a few more things about how I now see this movie as a "growed up" (I'm almost 50): It's interesting how you can see the production values of the time; the lot sets and special effects and so forth. This movie is a powerful example of how a good story overcomes limited means in other areas.
People who look back with disdain on the low-tech chintz of old movies can see in TWoO the magic ingredient; narrative solidity. And I'm not a pollyanna about this: I'm sure the underlying reality behind its making is rife with horror stories of expert disagreement, rewrites, discarding, jerryrigging, and the rest of it. But in the end, something like narrative love won out; and that's the important thing.
Oh: And having Harold Arlen write the music was good luck indeed. And orchestrations which cleverly appropriated very tasty new ideas in composition (polymodalism, non-standard phrasings, etc.) didn't hurt, either!
Geez, this movie is such a little universe....I'd better stop here.
Not only is "The Wizard of Oz" a charming, addictive classic, but it's one of the best-cast films ever. Putty-limbed Ray Bolger ("Some people without brains do and AWFUL lot of talking, don't they?"), over-the-top Bert Lahr (I haven't any courage at all, I even scare myself!"), and boyishly charming Jack Haley ("Now I know I have a heart, 'cause it's breaking.") are pitch-perfect in their respective roles as the Scarecrow, the Cowardly Lion, and the Tin Man. All three were vaudeville vets, and they infuse their roles with both theatrical shtick and warmth. Billie Burke is memorably twittery yet poised as Glinda the Good Witch, and who can possibly forget Margaret Hamilton's cackling, gleefully evil performance as the Wicked Witch of the West? Hamiltion's iconic, villainous image is so emblazoned in our minds, that it's easy to forget she was a former kindergarten teacher and future animal rights activist! As superb as the cast is, however, "The Wizard of Oz" belongs to the young Judy Garland. Garland makes Dorothy a very real character that we can all relate too, whereas any other actress would have made her one-note and whiny. She believably plays an ordinary girl in an extraordinary place, her lovely brown eyes wide with awe and wonder. And that singing voice! Long before Garland's voice became tinged with tremulous desperation due to age and hard living, the true beauty and purity of her voice comes through in "Oz". Garland sings "Over the Rainbow" so simply, without a trace of theatrics, and you're swept away just the same. It's spellbinding, seeing someone so young have the presence and talent to hold a movie in the palm of her hand. "The Wizard of Oz" will remain the ultimate escapist classic for generations to come, and it will always be one of my favorites. It's comforting, familiar, why... it's just like home.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizJudy Garland found it difficult to be afraid of Margaret Hamilton, because she was such a nice lady off-camera.
- BlooperAfter the Wizard gives the Scarecrow his diploma, he says, "The sum of the square roots of any 2 sides of an isosceles triangle is equal to the square root of the remaining side." This is a misstatement of the Pythagorean Theorem, which is, in fact, about right triangles and not isosceles ones. However, this statement is not true about any triangle, and so it is completely wrong.
- Citazioni
Dorothy: How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
The Scarecrow: I don't know! But some people without brains do an *awful* lot of talking, don't they?
Dorothy: Yes, I guess you're right.
- Curiosità sui creditiToto is listed in the end credits as being played by Toto, when he was actually played by a female dog named Terry.
- Versioni alternativeFrom 1968 to 1984, on NBC-TV and CBS-TV airings of the film, the film was edited to sell more commercial time. As the amount of commercial time on network television gradually increased, more scenes were cut. According to film historian John Fricke, these cuts started with solely a long tracking shot of Munchkin Land after Dorothy arrives there. The rest of the film remained intact. Also according to Fricke, more wholesale cutting of the film took place when CBS regained the TV rights in 1975. By the 1980s, the other excised shots included: the film's dedication in the opening credits, continuity shots of Dorothy and Toto running from the farm, establishing shots of the cyclone, the aforementioned tracking sequence in Munchkin Land, the establishing shot of the poppy field, and tiny bits and pieces of the trip to the Wicked Witch's castle. CBS, which had shown the uncut version of the film in 1956, and again from the films first telecast until 1968, finally started to show it uncut again beginning in 1985, by time-compressing it. Network airings in the 1990s were uncut and not time-compressed; the film aired in a 2-hour, 10-minute time period.
- ConnessioniEdited into Assalto al cielo (1950)
I più visti
- How long is The Wizard of Oz?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- El mago de Oz
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Stage 28, Sony Pictures Studios - 10202 W. Washington Blvd., Culver City, California, Stati Uniti(Witch's castle drawbridge; Wash and Brush Up Company; Witch's entrance hall; Witch's tower room; Yellow Brick Road montage song)
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 2.777.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 24.668.669 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 5.354.311 USD
- 8 nov 1998
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 25.637.669 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 42 minuti
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1