I'm magic

I'm sure the idea for "The Wiz" looked good on paper: a modern, all-black musical retelling of "The Wizard of Oz," with the boroughs of New York subbing in for the Emerald City and environs. Indeed, nothing is wrong with the concept--revisions and re-imaginings can work, and have been part of music theater for almost as long as the genre has existed. But for every "West Side Story," we get something like...well, like this.

Dorothy (Diana Ross) here is a 24-year-old Harlem schoolteacher, and as the story opens we are treated to scenes of her Aunt Em telling her to switch her kindergarten students for high schoolers, move out of the house, and basically get on with her life. But Dorothy doesn't want to, because--well, she's scared, I guess. Certainly not because she finds her current job enjoyable or fulfilling, or is better working with younger kids than with teenagers, or doesn't make enough money to afford the rents in New York City. So it's off to Oz, where she metaphorically sorts out her problems by killing witches and associating with strange men. (One of those strange men, the Scarecrow, is played by Michael Jackson--and you can write your own joke from here.)

It's always irritating when the directors of movie musicals hire actors who can't sing (as in "Paint Your Wagon"), but "The Wiz" proves that hiring singers who can't act is just as bad. Ross makes Dorothy so whiny, ineffective, and unappealing that you simply want to slap her. Jackson's not much better, delivering all his lines in the same breathy monotone--although it is nice to watch him back when he was at the threshold of a productive and memorable music career, instead of the disturbing self-caricature he has become. Everyone else hams it up accordingly, especially Richard Pryor as the title character.

Of course, neither director Sidney Lumet nor writers William F. Brown and Joel Schumacher made things any easier for the cast to begin with. Between the three of them, they leave no point unhit with a sledgehammer, and no stereotype unexploited (the worst: the crows who harass the Scarecrow, who bear a resemblance to the ones in "Dumbo" and who, I'm guessing, are all named Jim). With the exception of a celebratory dance after the Wicked Witch's demise, the choreography is rather bland and photographed in an uninvolving manner. The action frequently drags too long, leaving us looking at the time clock on the DVD player when we should be watching the characters.

There is a great book out there by Gregory Maguire called "Wicked" (which itself is now a Broadway musical). It reimagines Oz in a thoughtful and interesting manner. Read it instead.

Really hard to understand the low rating. I really appreciated this take on a classic tale, and the clever adaptation from rural Kansas to urban NYC. Slow in some spots, but charming and almost haunting (the amusement park, the desolate streets, the street vendor with the scary puppets, etc) with some memorable songs.

look closely at the clever production values as well, especially the Scarecrow who is composed of very distinctly different pieces of garbage (peanut butter cup wrapper nose, mop hair, chicken bucket hat, garbage bag pants, etc.

I give it a 8/10.

I just watched this for the first time, I've was expecting a true spectacle of "bad" cinema. I was surprised to find there is a decent movie here.

Some people have remarked Diana Ross was too old to play Dorothy, OK, well, so was Judy Garland. True. There's really nothing wrong with this musical--The songs are excellent, performed by some great talents. The production design is spectacular (maybe a little dated, but still something to look at). The sets are a little nightmarish looking, true, but I liked that. I reminded me of "Return of Oz", a favorite of mine too. The real problem with this movie is the damn direction and cinematography.

What were they thinking? The Munchkin scene is not only lit horribly (too dark!), but all the musical numbers seem like they're just comprised of master shots. Very few close ups of dancers, other singers, and even main characters. During the "Ease on Down the Road" number Lumet has us staring at Diana Ross and Michael Jackson's back from far away in the distance for two minutes. It felt like I was watching this movie from the cheap seats. Thus, I always felt distanced from the characters and situations, and just couldn't get into the movie.

I read Sidney Lumet's book "Making Movies" and I remember him writing in detail about shooting to get proper coverage. What happened here?

Normally, I feel that it is a travesty to remake an older, classic film (sequels excepted). Profits aside, what is the motive? What is there to add? "The Wiz," however, is one of the few exceptions to my belief. Whereas "The Wizard of Oz" is more of a child's film, the intended audience for "The Wiz" is a few steps above that. Like its predecessor, "The Wiz" is both visually stunning and musically engaging. It compliments the seriousness of its themes and situations--both of which it has in more abundance than its predecessor--with a copious amount of humor. Seldom have I witnessed a more creative work of adaptation than that which is presented by "The Wiz," which is, of course, adapted from L. Frank Baum's "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz." A few others that spring to mind are "Logan's Run" and "The War of the Worlds." I mention these not because they were simply a good translation of book to film, but because they maintained the book's overall story (plot, theme, characters, etc.) while retailoring the environment and/or situation. "The Wiz" focuses on the "black situation." It redresses all of the elements from its source material to meet the needs of its revamped, modern, social subject matter. From the Scarecrow, who represents a pitiable, underachieving product of his environment; to the poppies, which represent drug addiction; to the denizens of Oz, who are ready to follow the latest trend just to be "in;" the story presents its audience with a generalized glimpse at the breakdown of "black" culture and society. Though "The Wiz" does not convey the same childlike wonder, magic, and fantasy that both the original film and the novel do, it translates those elements into more of an industrialized, mechanical, inner city playground. Unfortunately, albeit appropriately, the Oz we witness is through an older Dorothy's eyes. Interestingly, due to her advanced age, the circumstances that befall her must be harsher in order to invoke the necessary change of heart. Unlike the setting in "The Wizard of Oz," which exists in our dreams, "somewhere over the rainbow," the setting in "The Wiz" occupies our nightmares. The contrast between Judy Garland's Oz and her native Kansas is many times greater than that between Diana Ross' Oz and her native New York. The incentive to return home is greater for Diana--even though the colorful lure of a fantasy land is not present--since her Oz may be merely a preview of things to come (back home), if she does not start to make a difference. One of the few things for which I did not care was all-too-recognizable, yet modified New York as Oz. Though the entire film's art direction was brilliant, I found New York to be too distracting and too contemporary to be an adequate Oz. Another subject of distaste for me was the "end of slavery" segment after Evillene's liquidation. The song and dance were nice and full of energy, but the symbolism was too literal and seemed out of place with regards to the rest of the film. I could have also enjoyed a bit more denouement and perhaps even an epilogue about Dorothy's reunion with her family. Three interesting notes: 1) The landscape of Oz in "The Wiz" actually does change after Dorothy intervenes to make a difference; this does not happen in "The Wizard of Oz." 2) While Judy's visit to Oz seems to be concussion-induced, Diana actually appears to visit that fabled land, which is closer to the book. 3) "The Wiz" contains all four witches presented in the book; "The Wizard of Oz" only contains three. Though it seems rather dated today, "The Wiz" is still a fun movie to view, and it contains a number of known (Motown) celebrities.

I liked the movie overall. But I think that it would have been MUCH better if Stephanie Mills had done the lead of Dorothy in the movie. Don't get me wrong, Diana Ross is a accomplished singer and has done a great job in Lady sings the Blues and Mahogany but in all honesty she was just too old to play Dorothy in the Wiz considering Stephanie Mills is the one who actually put that play on the map. If it wasn't for her I probably wouldn't have heard of it much less seen it 3 times. Twice with her (Stephanie Mills).I just feel that Diana Ross just pushed her way into the lead when she wasn't capable of giving 100 percent in the vocals. If anyone has heard Stephanie Mills rendition of Home you would FEEL what I was talking about. Stephanie put her heart and soul into that song where as Diana just whined through it (which drives me insane every time I hear it coming from her). I'm just giving an opinion I know what I like and what I don't like and Diana Ross's performance in this movie to me was just average not outstanding like Lady Sings The Blues or Mahogany.