O Mágico Inesquecível

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.

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.

Wow.. The reason why this movie is defended is because its overlooked for its value.

#1. It is not a remake of the Wizard Of Oz.The Wizard Of Oz's music is a Classic, so is the Wiz.

#2. The Wiz does try to teach values:

After seeing the movie on a basis i've noticed that it tries to teach:

-Family Togetherness(First Scene of the Movie) -People shouldn't put other people down, otherwise they'll never get __anywhere(When dorothy rescues the crow) -You can always have a heart(Tin Man) [the Wizard of Oz's tin man __relates to the Industry of the Great Depression that needs to grow a __heart] -There's no true courage unless you can stand up for yourself(Lion) -Anything related to Eviline is simple Opression.

There's other symbols as well: Silver slippers instead of ruby. (Silver is rare, very rare for Dorothy's family)

#3. The musician casting for this movie is all Top Notch Motown. Diana Ross, Michael Jackson... every actor was a singer/dancer. You can't beat that in a movie attempting a Broadway approach.

#4. If you just listen to the music instead of hearing it, you would notice the score isn't simple. I have the feeling Quincy Jones has his involvement in it. Also there are way more instruments, more of a get you off your feet feel. "He's the Wiz" from the smooth jazz feel with conflicting and resolving chorus and the switch to march theme. You cannot tell me that is not thoroughly composed! Then the Emerald City Scene, i would rewind that over and over again.

#5. Eviline IMO is a much better bad guy than the Wicked Witch of the West in Wizard Of Oz. She is ugly and mean: someone really hit her with an ugly stick.

#6. "Oh no, not the flying monkeys!"

#7. The crows are breakdancers(at least one of them) from another infamous movie.

-#1. I do know the plots are similar and the characters are similar. However, Motown has a big involvement: the 100% creativity comes from the music and choreography.

-#2. Some people miss the black family jokes. Example the Lion's full name being the name of an actual Mobile Home/Car house except Devile("FleetWood Coupe Devile, Mama had high ideas") she wished to live a luxurious life but can only do so by naming her children by what she desires. You see this in a few children's names. The good thing is there are very few jokes and they are not corny.

-#3. Yes the guy with the puppets did scare me, not to forget tin man being electrocuted and the chomping trashcans.

If you try to look as this movie as a parody(or remake) of the Wizard of Oz you have the wrong idea. When i first saw this movie I try not to think of the Classical Oz - its more of watching a live musical performance. It's michael jackson in his earlier days! His Prime! Not to forget he didn't do a bad job as being the crow! Why do everyone dispise this movie?

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.

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?