adaptations of oz

some stuff that I love/think is neat in The Wizard of Oz book, that was left out of the movie/almost every re-make

Don’t get me wrong, I really like the 1939 movie cause it’s colorful and pretty, the songs are awesome, and it’s a hollywood classic. However, these are just some things that I loved in the book, but everyone ignores since they weren’t in the 1939 version. 

Dorothy:

In the book she’s a very little girl, around 8-10, and I always liked that, and I’ll always see her as a little girl. Judy Garland was a really good Dorothy, but she was still a teenager. I know it was made over 70 years ago but I still think they should have cast Shirley Temple like they were planning. 

The witches:

In the original book, The good witch of the north, and Glinda the good with of the south, are two different characters. The witch of the north is the one who gives Dorothy the silver slippers, and all she knows is that they’re magic. It’s Glinda who comes in at the end and tells Dorothy she can use them to get home. It makes a whole lot more sense than Glinda knowing what they can do the whole time.(Also I really like Wicked and want to see it live eventually, but in my mind it’s basically it’s own thing)

Nick Chopper: 

The tin woodsman has a backstory! A really good one that ties in with the rest of the story. He used to be a regular man named Nick Chopper and he was engaged to a munchkin girl, but the lady who the girl worked for didn’t want her to get married. So she made a deal with the witch of the east and she enchanted his axe. His axe ended up cutting off each of his limbs but he was helped out by Ku-Klip the tinsmith and he kept replacing his limbs. Eventually the axe cut off everything and he became the tin woodsman. He was so upset that he didn’t have a heart anymore that he felt like he couldn’t love his fiancee without one. 

His backstory is really cool and (won’t apologize for the pun) heartbreaking. It’s lame to me that it’s never really used, and it’s a shame because it gives him motivation to want a heart again. 

The Kalidahs:

These are super horrifying beasts that live in the Kalidah forest, and they litteraly kill and eat anything they can. I see people adding in a lot of beasts and characters into Oz to make it more scary and grown up, and I don’t see why you’d do that but leave these guys out. The run in with them is how we learn that The Cowardly Lion has courage, because he crosses a log bridge to get away from them even though he’s scared. 

The Emerald City isn’t made of Emerald:

Okay so this is way easier to do in a book or black and white comic than it is to do in a movie or tv show. But, in the book before anyone can see inside the city, they need to put on green glasses so the brightness of the emeralds won’t “hurt their eyes”. Then at the end when we find out about the Wizard, they take the glasses off and they(and the audience) learns that like the Wizard, the whole city is a sham. It’s not made of emerald, it’s all just white and plain. That part of the book had a really great lesson to /litteraly/ not look at the world through rose colored glasses. It’s probably one of my favorite things that get left out. 

Ozma and Dorothy are gay as hell:

Lookit these lesbians. Bein lesbian… Ozma(a cannon trans girl btw) doesn’t come into the picture until later books, and it takes a few years for Dorothy to come back to Oz but lookit these 1900s gays in these official illustrations. 

Oh, and Dorothy and the gang get rescued from the poppy field by a gang of field mice this is their queen:

Anyway, I do like the movie, and I love the Muppets version since they got a lot from the books. I just wish there was an adaptation that used the cannon stuff that’s neat instead of trying waaaayyyy hard to not be the 1939 movie. But it seems like the adaptations are just adaptations of the movie and don’t take anything from the books. Cause L Frank Baum wrote 14 of them with trolls, wheelers, frankenstein monsters, princesses, endless deserts where if any part of you touches it you turn to sand, more witches, sky fairies, and most importantly lesbian princess girlfriends! 

Okay so when I was a kid there was this musical adaptation of The Wizard of Oz simply called The Wizard. They relaunched this show a few years ago with a new cast, and everything looks fine except for the Tin Man

All of these classic costumes, and then we have this fucking cyborg straight out of a Steampunk Star Trek AU in there.

He doesn’t just lack a heart, they straight up reprogrammed his emotions.

literally the lowest bar i can set for the wicked movie is that we finally get black Fiyero instead of this white-washed hellhole we live in with the musical. but i’d be 0% surprised if they manage to limbo under that one too.

The Scarecrow and Tin Man from the first stage adaptation of The Wizard of Oz, 1902, Chicago.

L. Frank Baum wrote The Wonderful Wizard of Oz while living in Chicago. As the story goes, while working at the Evening Post across from the Art Institute, Baum was inspired by the statues he saw on Michigan Ave to create the Cowardly Lion.

Please, don’t let the movie version of “Wicked” be like the musical. This is a tremendous opportunity to explore some aspects that were ignored by the musical.
The book has a lot of depth and layers of political, social, moral and psychological complexity, all lost in the musical adaptation. It’s a dark book that was not written for children, so, unlike the musical, the movie should be made focusing on an older audience that would be able to grasp the book’s message.

So, remember when I gave people a head’s-up about some guy making sockpuppet accounts because he didn’t like that people theorized that a character on a Disney cartoon might be trans?

I’ve seen a couple arguments this guy has made to the tune of “Disney would NEVER make a character trans and/or gay”, and…I feel I gotta be the bearer of the following news.

(Bear in mind, I am not saying this means we’re 100% for sure gonna get confirmation of Trans Marco, I’m just offering a counter-argument. I don’t know what the writers are up to any more than the rest of you.)

1. LGBTQ+ representation has seen a big surge in American kids’ entertainment, including some Disney properties. Obviously the biggest example is Steven Universe, which features several examples of gay/bi characters (i.e. Pearl, Rose Quartz, Ruby and Sapphire) , or characters that don’t fit in the gender binary (i.e. Stevonnie). We also have Legend of Korra ending with two women being paired off romantically, Gravity Falls confirming that Blubbs and Durland are a couple in its last episode, and more and more instances of same-sex parents popping up in cartoons and live-action kids’ shows. Hell, remember when it was a big deal that the Disney Channel show Good Luck Charlie featured a character with two moms? And I’m not even listing every example on TV right now, let alone entertainment in general (hello, ParaNorman)

2. Disney is not quite as conservative as you think. While there have been instances of creators getting requests to hold back on some things (just ask Alex Hirsch), I think Disney is very slowly dipping its toes into more progressive waters, with the only major setback being possible censorship in foreign markets (and really, it’s Disney, they’ve got enough money to not worry about that). On top of that, everything I’ve heard about working at the company itself indicates a very LGBT-friendly workplace environment. I’m not saying they’re perfect in this aspect, but it sounds like they’re trying.

3. Trans characters can exist in kids’ entertainment without bringing up genitals or whatever you’re worried about. I’d like to turn part of this argument over to Charlotte Finn at Comics Alliance, who, like many people, sees transgender overtones in the character of Tip/Princess Ozma in L. Frank Baum’s Oz books. She was inspired to write about this after reading the graphic novel adaptation of Land of Oz put out by Marvel (again, a Disney-owned company!), and pointed out how a character written over 100 years ago in a book for children very closely matched a usual transgender experience:

One way that Marvelous Land of Oz is not out of date, however, is with the fate of the central character, Tip — who turns out to be the most important person in the narrative, since Tip is actually Princess Ozma, transformed to look like a boy in order to be kept hidden. This happened to her as an infant, so yes, Ozma is literally assigned ‘male’ at birth, a transgender term for the gender they tell a person they are based on sexual characteristics shortly after being born. (In this case it’s a wicked witch instead of a doctor who’s great once you get to know them, but still.)

Upon this revelation, Tip/Ozma goes through denial, then quickly realizes that this is what’s meant to be, and all of Tip/Ozma’s friends treat her with acceptance and kindness. The vast majority of the Emerald City is glad to have Ozma as their sovereign, once she returns to reclaim the throne from General Jinjur. So really, this plot point in The Marvelous Land of Oz hasn’t aged at all and is not only ahead of its time, but ahead of ours.

A frequent defense of the regressive nature of many fantasy worlds is that they take place in Ye Olde Medieval Times But Let’s Add Magic, and therefore outdated attitudes just come with the territory. The Marvelous Land of Oz takes a different path, and postulates a world where the presence of the strange and unusual makes us more tolerant, not less so. In a world where your best friend is made out of straw and you got indigestion from a wishing pill activated by numbers, finding out that you’re not the boy everyone said you were supposed to be is small potatoes in comparison.

Honestly, if kids in the 1900s could handle this sort of plot twist, I think kids today are more than capable.

So yeah, just my two cents. Again, not saying anything’s for certain in regards to any trans theory regarding any cartoon character right now, but I like giving a little food for thought, and I’ll take any opportunity to defend how progressive kids’ shows can really be.

4

Hollywood Cartoons go to color (1930-1938)
It should be noted that between 1932 and 1935, Walt Disney had exclusive rights to the 3-strip Technicolor process, thus everyone else had to settle for a two-color process for the time. Animator Ted Eshbaugh made a 3-strip Technicolor adaptation of The Wizard Of Oz in 1933, but since it wasn’t properly licensed by the Technicolor company, it was released in black and white.

Return to Oz Review

Okay let me start off by saying how I ended up watching this movie in the first place. A few months ago I got this book from Seven Seas publishing which included both the original Wizard of Oz and it’s sequel the Marvelous Land of Oz with brand new manga style illustrations. I strongly recommend picking it up as the illustrations included are adorable and full of charm (and don’t worry the story is kept entirely intact). While I had read the original Wizard of Oz book a couple of times before this, I had never read any of the books after that for some reason I just never thought of looking at the rest of the series, but since Marvelous Land was included in this book I decided to give it a read and surprisingly I think I enjoy it more than the original Wizard of Oz book. I still love the first book but Marvelous Land just has so much more in it, there’s more characters, more humor, more of Oz is explored, and we get to see what happened after Dorothy went back home. This then brought up my curiosity about the Disney film Return to Oz. This movie has earned quite the reputation as being one of the most horrifying children’s movies of all time, which is particularly why I avoided seeing it for most of my life considering I was a complete fraidy cat. However after reading Marvelous Land I remembered reading that this movie took elements from both Marvelous Land and the third book Ozma of Oz to create the story, and being the one of the biggest Disney nuts on the planet I was curious to see how Disney would adapt Marvelous Land to the screen, though before seeing the film I did read Ozma of Oz so that I see how elements of that book were done as well.


Before I go into detail about the film one thing I want to make perfectly clear is that despite what several reviews and websites might tell you this is NOT a sequel to the 1939 MGM movie musical. Actually while I’m on the subject of the MGM adaptation I still love that movie. While it isn’t completely faithful to the original books it still does it’s job well as an adaption, and manages to stand on it’s own. It’s a fun, uplifting, and charming movie and definitely a classic. However there’s a bit of a problem with that. Nowadays when people mention Wizard of Oz the first thing to come to mind isn’t the book but actually the MGM musical, because of that there seems to be some unwritten law in Hollywood that states all adaptations of Oz must be as close to the MGM musical as possible, leading to some pretty mediocre Oz films. Fans of the books don’t enjoy them because they aren’t faithful to the books, and fans of the MGM musical don’t like them because they all feel like cheap imitations of the movie, and to fans of both they’re bad for both of those reasons. There is so much more to the land of Oz that a lot of people aren’t aware of today and it sucks that most movie companies are like “Nope, it has to be like the MGM one.”


This movie on the other hand does not follow that trend. Okay a few elements are lifted from the MGM musical such as Dorothy’s braids and darker hair and the red ruby slippers (Which Disney had to pay MGM big bucks for because originally they were sliver in the book), but that’s pretty much it. Instead of being a sequel to the MGM musical its a sequel to the original book (well mostly anyway), this causes a few problems in case you haven’t read the original book but I’ll get to that later.


The story begins with Dorothy being depressed and having trouble sleeping because she can’t stop thinking about Oz. This worries Uncle Henry and Auntie Em, who end up taking her to a Doctor that can help her sleep and “get rid of those pesky dreams” through a brand new process known as electric shock therapy… Yes. That is mentioned, and actually almost happens to Dorothy while being in the most unsettling hospital in family film history. Luckily the power goes out before they can start the process and another girl helps Dorothy escape, only for Dorothy to fall into a river during a terrible storm almost immediately afterwords (jeeze, Kanas sure has a lot of bad weather in these stories). Later she wakes up in the land of Oz with a talking chicken named Billina, however when Dorothy gets to the Emerald City she finds it in ruins with everyone being turned to stone and the Scarecrow nowhere to be found, the land said to be ruled by an evil character known as the Nome King. Throughout the movie Dorothy meets up with more unusual characters such as Tik Tok the mechanical man, Jack Pumpkinhead, and a flying couch with a Gump’s head on it (Why are you giving me that weird look), and with her new friends they go on a journey to find the Nome King, rescue the Scarecrow and restore Oz back to it’s former glory.


The story is very well written, it’s not completely accurate to the books it was based on, but out of all of the big screen Oz adaptations I’ve seen this honestly feels the most loyal to the original books. A lot of the new dialogue feels very much like something L. Frank Baum would write. I especially like how the movie handles all of the characters, once again staying true to their original book versions. I absolutely love the characters of this movie, Tik Tock, Jack Pumpkinhead, Billina, the Gump and pretty much every single character that was included. It makes me wish that budget cuts didn’t limit the appearance of other characters in the film as I would have loved to see more of this movie’s versions of the Lion, Tinman, and Scarecrow.

While I’m on the subject of the characters lets talk about the visuals of this movie… I am in love with them. This being before the age where CGI was used for everything (the good old days as it where), every effect here is practical, from the claymation used to bring the Nome King and his minions to life, to the puppetry that brings Jack, Billina, Tik Tok, and the Gump to life. As a puppetry nut I love how the puppets were done here. Their designs look like they walked straight out of the book, heck they even move like how you think they would based on the books descriptions (well okay the Tin Man looks like he could collapse at any second with those skinny legs, but that’s the only issue I have visually). For instance Jack Pumpkinhead was put together with various sticks and ropes, as a result his movements are very off balance. Oh and there’s also this cool effect with Jack where his head can squash and stretch like a cartoon character, I love touches like that! I’ve also gotta give praise to the claymation here. They got special effects master Will Vinton to head the animation on the Nomes it it looks fantastic, there’s this one character who’s just a face on a wall and he’s super expressive, his face morphs with every movement he makes, it just looks so cool!

That being said the movie still has a few issues. Getting the main one out of the way first, I think this movie starts off way too dark and depressing. Not only is Kanas shown as being more boring and colorless, but anytime Dorothy mentions the smallest thing about Oz everybody tells her to stop talking about Oz because they think it’s imaginary. Okay I know adults were more strict with kids back in the time this film takes place, but honestly what’s wrong with a kid having an imagination? Now I don’t mind the dark and spooky stuff that comes later on, but most family films start off a bit more light hearted to ease you into the scary stuff that comes later on (Disney’s Pinocchio is a good example of this). I was actually surprised at how lighter the tone got when Dorothy and Billina finally got to Oz complete with comedic piano music, I was like “well that was a tone shift.” That tone would have been a bit more appropriate to begin the film with Dorothy in Kanas (or at least have her get to Oz sooner).
 This causes another problem which is with most of the Oz stories you want Dorothy to be able to get back home. One thing the MGM musical did was give Dorothy more friends with the farm hands back in Kanas, which not only made Kanas feel more welcoming but gave Dorothy more of a reason to go back home. Here, I think there’s honestly not much reason for Dorothy going back home except for Toto. Kanas just looks so unfriendly in this movie, even with all the scary stuff that happens in there Oz still seems like the more appealing place and she has a lot more friends there, so… Why go back to the family that sent her to electro shock therapy? However that’s probably my only problem with the story that I can think of off the top of my head. 


There’s also the fact that since this is a sequel to the book a few things were referenced in this movie that people wouldn’t nessicarly know about unless they did read it. These elements are given brief explanations so it isn’t too out of left field though. However there’s also the fact that the book and the MGM musical have different tones to the story, thus if people going in expecting something similar to the musical they’re gonna be disappointed and caught off guard. It seems like a lot of studios try to make their own sequels to the original Wizard of Oz while still giving it a new twist or changing elements, but it’s hard for people to get into a sequel story when they haven’t seen the first story and it’s even harder when that universe’s first story doesn’t exist as it’s own movie. Personally I think Disney should have tried to adapt the first Wizard of Oz story before making Return to Oz, but then again I can understand why they went with Return to Oz first as people might just be comparing it to the original MGM musical.


Some people might say, “what about all of the scary stuff that happens in the movie?” and while yes there is a lot of scary stuff I didn’t think it was too horrifying per say. It never went gory or bloody, I felt like a good amount of scary for a family film. I think the reason why Return to Oz flopped back in it’s day was because it just came out before it’s time. Nowadays we have family films like Coraline and ParaNorman, which were much more successful films and featured stuff that was just as scary as what happens in this movie. Now I’m not saying all kids can handle this movie (I would strongly suggest not showing it to little kids), but I think this is the kind of family movie to show to pre-teen crowd nowadays.

Honestly I kind of like when this film gets scary, and I still consider myself a scaredy cat. I particularly like the climax, which is probably the most intense climax I have seen in any Disney movie. While I was watching it I kept on thinking “Come on go quickly” or “Quick around that corner-wait don’t go there!”, its full of suspense even on my second viewing.


Overall I think Return to Oz is a fantasitic movie and I absolutely love it now. It really is a shame that it bombed because I would have loved to see Disney try to adapt more of the Oz books (and I don’t mean new prequels to Oz I mean adaptations of the original stories). I’m honestly surprised that not many studios have tried making more Oz movies in the style of the books. The Oz stories are practically begging to given their own cinematic universe, all of the original books are public domain now so it’s practically gift wrapped for the studios and they do nothing with them except adapting the first book over and over again! -sigh- Maybe someday we’ll get an Oz movie series that gives the Oz books the proper treatment and respect they deserve, until then we’ll always have Return to Oz to return to. If you’re an Oz fan or love family films with a scary edge to them this is certainly the film for you.

Toronto Film Review: ‘Breath’

A pretty complete review.

SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 

Having directed several episodes of his own long-running TV vehicle “The Mentalist,” Aussie actor Simon Baker makes a confident transition behind the camera to feature filmmaking with “Breath,” the tale of two teens’ introduction to surfing under an older man’s tutelage. Baker also plays the adult lead, and co-wrote the screenplay adapted from celebrated Oz scribe Tim Winton’s 2008 novel (his 20th). Though not without its flaws, the movie has authenticity and resonance; there have been plenty of good surfing documentaries, but very few good dramas about the sport — a short list on which “Breath” instantly earns a prominent spot.

Keep reading

so, twelfth grade (or whatever) is coming to an end soon, which is very sad, but there’s GOOD NEWS folks because there are plenty of other webseries out there for you to watch and write meta and fanfiction etc. about, mainly:

@theadventuresofjamiewatson aka tajwash which you’ll DEFINITELY be interested in because eliot aka sebastian stars in the second season as stanley hopkins and everybody loves him. also, there is lots of gay (jamie watson is bi and sherlock holmes is aroace) and sherlock quotes twelfth night several times, you’ll love it. first season is vlog-style, second season is partially tv-style (second season is better), lots of material to watch and relies less on an overarching plot so you can skip around a bit and find your fave sherlock holmes story if you want.

@thegreytarmacroad which completes the TRILOGY of @parafable and is an adaptation of the wizard of oz with lots of gr8 characters and ALSO lots of gay and it takes place in ENGLAND which is funny to me because it’s an american book, meanwhile the rest of us are adapting british books in america ANYWAY give it a go. it maybe technically exists in the same universe as tajwash (and a few other webseries) because two characters have asked each other q&a questions. it’s still airing now (and will be for a while) so you can catch up and then experience some of that anticipation.

@bgpwebseries aka The Blair Goddess Project, which is based off greek myth but not any specific myth because it’s about a new goddess exiled to earth who must learn the true meaning of friendship and if you watch tajwash (see above) you’ll recognize like every other actor in it because they were filmed at the same school and one of the main characters is a genderfluid god who is changes appearances so is played by like ten different wonderful actors and there are fun effects because Blair the goddess does magic. it’s partially vlog-style and takes a bit to really get into the plot but the episodes are quick and easy to watch.

You know, on top of all the ugly racism, this uproar over the televised NBC production of The Wiz is pathetic in a couple of other ways:

1. These geekboys are calling themselves Oz fans, yet they’re apparently under the mistaken impression that The Wiz is a remake of the 1939 film. Jokers wanna act like they’re experts on the Oz canon when they don’t even know it was a book first.

2. On top of that, they’re banging on about fidelity to the source material, evidently unaware that The Wiz actually sticks much closer to L Frank Baum’s novel than the 1939 film does, both in terms of its overall plot and in terms of the specific details of the setting. Meanwhile, the race of most of the principle characters is never specified, so portraying them as black can hardly be regarded as diverging from the text. By their own professed standards (i.e., fidelity to the source material über alles), The Wiz is the superior adaptation.

The Witch of the North and Glinda are separate people

Ever notice how, in the movie adaptation of the Wizard of Oz, Glinda the Good Witch is kind of… awful? She was the first person to meet Dorothy and could have told her how to return to Kansas from minute one, but didn’t. 

Except! In the book, it was the Good Witch of the North who met Dorothy when she landed, and get this: she’s a totally different character, who was described as a cute, chubby, and grandmotherly old lady. 

The Witch of the North didn’t tell Dorothy about the shoes because she actually didn’t know. This one little change from the adaptations makes Glinda a bit awful. 

The Wiz, the all-black cast stage musical, gets this right: the two good witches are different characters.

In a mythology as rich as Oz, it’s kind of amazing how little the Witch of the North was mentioned - she never even received a proper name in all of Frank Baum’s work, and was never a major figure again.

2

May 6th 1919: L. Frank Baum dies

On this day in 1919, the famous American author L. Frank Baum died in Hollywood aged sixty-two. Born Lyman Frank Baum in 1856, he was plagued with health problems in his youth, which prevented him from graduating high school. Baum tried his hand at journalism, business, and chicken farming before turning to children’s writing when he was in his forties. His initial forays were not successful, and Baum received so many rejection letters that he kept them in his own ‘Record of Failure’. He finally broke into the children’s books business when he published his popular collection Mother Goose in Prose in 1897. However, he is best known for his 1900 work The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, which enchanted young readers and sold 90,000 copies in its first two years. The novel told the story of the young Dorothy from Kansas and her adventures in the magical land of Oz, accompanied by a tin man, a scarecrow, and cowardly lion. In 1902, the story was adapted for a Broadway musical - earning an impressive $160,000 - and two years later Baum published a sequel. In 1910, enjoying fame for his Oz books (which ultimately totaled fourteen) and other works under various pseudonyms, Baum and his family moved to Hollywood, attempting to translate his work into film. Influenced by his wife, who was an active feminist, Baum was a supporter of women’s suffrage, and is notable for his early depictions of female protagonists. Baum was widely mourned upon his death in 1919, but the Oz stories continued at the hand of Ruth Plumly Thompson. Twenty years after his death, the famous film adaptation of The Wizard of Oz, starring Judy Garland, was released to great success. L. Frank Baum’s stories continue to entertain children and adults alike.

“I believe that dreams — day dreams, you know, with your eyes wide open and your brain machinery whizzing — are likely to lead to the betterment of the world”

Locked in;

a/n: I have no idea why this came to me it just did. In my head v cute.. written down.. IDK? Hope you enjoy though :) cuter if you imagine they’re not dating but works either way!

Riley x Lucas 
Word Count:
2140

One stormy Thursday afternoon the six friends stay back in the auditorium rehearsing for Abigail Adams adaption of ‘The Wizard of Oz’. It was Farkle who convinced his friends to audition with him and they all landed various rolls in the play. Although, Riley opted out and just signed up to help behind the scenes.

Maya scored the lead role of Dorothy with her stunning rendition of ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow’. 

Smackle was cast as the scarecrow and she continuously reminded everyone how ironic it was that she was looking for a brain when in actuality she’s a genius. 

Farkle joins the quest in search of love as he adapts to the life of a tin man without a heart. 

Zay plays the cutest cowardly lion the Wizard of Oz has ever seen. 

Lucas was thankful that his role as the great and powerful Oz was minuscule and performed behind a curtain for the most part as he wasn’t very confident with his acting skills in front of an audience. 

Rehearsals ran late that day and Riley texted her parents to say she was probably going to crash at Maya’s that night. Lucas had done the same to his parents and said he was thinking of sleeping at Zay’s and going to their early morning baseball practice together. 

When the rehearsals finally wrap up everyone is leaving and Riley takes an armful of things down to the prop room. Lucas assists her with the heap. Riley juggles her items and punches in the code on the door, she enters the tiny room and Lucas follows behind her. 

“Oh no, Lucas!” Riley turns around at the sound of the door clicking behind him. “The door doesn’t open from the inside!” 

Lucas’ looks withdrawn. “S-so we’re locked in?” He stutters. 

Keep reading

Taylor Swift and Lea Michele Cast in Stephen Daldry’s Wicked

From Entertainment Weekly:

The witches of Oz have arrived: country-pop superstar Taylor Swift and Glee veteran Lea Michele have been cast in Universal’s Wicked for director Stephen Daldry. Assuming the roles originated on the Broadway stage by Kristin Chenoweth and Idina Menzel, Swift will star as good witch Glinda opposite Michele’s Elphaba, the legendary Wicked Witch of the West. The film will be based on the long-running Stephen Schwartz musical originally adapted from Gregory Maguire’s Oz novels, with original librettist Winnie Holzman writing the screenplay.

Read the full article here.