The Wiz

This film bombed on its official release for one reason, and for one reason only--it was rated G. During the seventies, hardly anyone DARED to go see a G-rated film because it was considered the epitome of uncool. Fortunately, this film finally went on to gain an impressive audience later on when it was rediscovered in the wake of Jackson mania and has finally been selling its worth. Many these days go berserk trying to dissect it due to these modern "politically correct" times: is it meant to be a spoof, or maybe a "blaxploitation" film? Hey, forget all that nonsense! Gather your childen, kick back and enjoy THE WIZ for what it is--the most daringly imaginative adaptation of the classic children's story ever committed to film.

Roger Ebert, not one of my favorite film critics, surprised me by giving a wonderful (and dead-on accurate) positive review of the film. Some out there think of it as a dated 70s pop/disco/funk/soul feature, but these days that "retro" feel adds to its charm in my opinion--it reminds me of an innocent time from my youth.

I saw this in the theaters as it was first released when I was a child and I've loved it dearly ever since. It has Diana Ross playing Dorothy as a 24-year-old Kindergarten schoolteacher (which I always thought was a charming idea!) with a wide-eyed innocence that is truly touching. Michael Jackson gives a delightfully whimsical performance as the scarecrow, Quincy Jones uses his musical production genius to create a really fantastic and drop-dead gorgeous soundtrack... and in case you're still not convinced, this film is the most expensive movie musical ever made, and WOW, does it ever show! The visuals are imaginative and brilliant, and you'll never forget them.

And best of all, it's been re-released on DVD and the soundtrack on CD! Deservedly so! Now let's all get out there and whoop it up for THE WIZ!

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.

Let me establish a few things at the start: 1) I love disco, soul, and R&B, 2) I love the '70s, 3) I love bad movies, 4) I have a healthy admiration for Diana Ross and Michael Jackson, as well as many of the other luminaries in this film. All that said, this film is APPALLING IN EVERY RESPECT!

I knew this movie was poorly regarded, and I expected to like it anyway (I'm certainly not sorry I've seen it) but the ratio of potential to realization is like 100:1. I'm really surprised it has so many defenders on this site. Let's discuss:

Yes, many people have said that Diana Ross is too old. What's not mentioned is that she looks TERRIBLE! She looks like a refugee! Also, she just has the wrong voice for this part. Stephanie Mills had a strange, nasal voice, but she was a BELTER, and you need a belter for these songs. Poor Diana and her thin voice just couldn't cut it, and she had no physical charm to fall back on. Oh dear.

I was really surprised how lame the musical renditions and sound quality were. I have surround sound, and I just couldn't believe how muffled and distant the sound was. And, in my opinion, ALL of the musical performances were misfires. You could see how many of the songs could have been good in a good performance, but those just weren't to be found here.

Many people single out Lena Horne's performance as fantastic, but to me, like the rest of the movie, she was BADLY misused. Lena Horne is a nuanced jazz singer, so to hear her try to go all low-down gospel was rather painful, especially with her impeccably-enunciated "Woo! Yeah!"'s. She also looks utterly ridiculous.

I didn't get much of a sense of the old Michael Jackson we all used to love between the layers of makeup and the lack of focus of the movie and scenes.

I love how Dorothy alternates between being worried that Toto is out of her sight for even a moment because he is so precious to her, and completely forgetting about his existence for long periods of time.

Also, apparently the scarecrow's owner shredded the works of the great philosophers (or at least his copy of Bartlett's Famous Quotations) to stuff his scarecrow with?

And WHAT is happening in the sequence where the subway comes to life and attacks our heroes? WHAT is that? Also, the cowardly lion doesn't get much of a character arc, does he? One scene he's going on about how he doesn't have any courage, the next he's ferociously defending Michael against the saber-toothed garbage cans.

Now think about that: saber-toothed garbage cans. Hmmm.

I understand that during this movie our quartet go through tableaux of the issues affecting blacks in the 70's, fine... so then what's with the emerald city scene where the Wiz dictates fashion to the people below? Am I to understand that one of the major cultural issues African-Americans faced in the 70's was the tyranny of imperious fashion designers?

I was surprised that of all the things they kept from the original Wizard of Oz film, they jettisoned the device that Dorothy is just dreaming about all the people she knows, and at the end there's no "And you were there, and you were there, and you were there" scene.

I was kind of stupefied by how HUGE some of the sets were. Many looked like actual NYC locations that they has just laid a yellow-brick floor on. I would love to know if they actually did that, or just built these enormous sets.

Well, that's it! This film is not a total waste of 2 hours, but it is... quite an oddity.

--- Check out my website devoted to bad and cheesy movies at: www.cinemademerde.com

I remember hearing about this, but finally thanks to Netflix, I now experienced The Wiz. This actually was a gigantic production and is a black urban 1970's take on The Wizard Of Oz. The result is a interesting and out and out insane experience. The combination of social commentary, fantasy and theater might not always land as what was probably intended, but it does make for a unique and interesting experience. I normally hate musicals, but this is a Motown production so I really enjoyed that aspect of the film. Michael Jackson and Diana Ross also appear here and have memorable, iconic performances. The rest of the cast is filled with classically trained theater actors . The music and dance choreography was first rate. The sets and costuming were really impressive and while the film was aiming for a highbrow approach, the film plays out in a really campy way. It's understandable that this movie initially bombed at the box office, but also that it got appreciated later and is a cult classic. There really is not anything like The Wiz.

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?