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. 


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! 

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.


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.


So, Boomerang is going to air a new series based on the Wizard of Oz on their streaming site and…Jeeze this looks so boring.

From the looks and sounds of it, it appears to be based on the original 1939 musical film due to the ruby slippers being present (they were silver in the original book) and the Lion’s voice and personality being very much alike.

Honestly, I’m getting tired of this trend when it comes to Oz adaptions, pretty much every adaption nowadays is based on or tries to be the 1939 film. I love the 1939 film, it’s a classic, but where was it written that this is the only version of Oz that exists? The books are a lot more expansive and have a ton more stories studios could adapt.

Even judging this as an adaption of the 1939 film it has it’s problems, for example:

“and Dorothy is now Princess of Emerald City”

Wait what? How did she become princess? Didn’t Dorothy go back to Kanas in the movie? Did she come back somehow?And if she didn’t go back isn’t she worried about her family? Last time I checked her whole goal in the story was to get back home.

“The Wicked Witch may be trapped”

Trapped? She died. We literally saw her melt. Did she get sent to the phantom zone or something?

The one thing I will compliment the show on: the Wicked Witch’s new sidekick looks adorable (I can’t help it, I have a weakness for cute designs).

Other than that, it looks… Average. Nothing that spectacular, but nothing that terrible either. Still, when you’re trying to convince people to pay for a cartoon streaming service, you gotta have exclusive programing that really grabs people’s attention and this looks honestly… boring.

anonymous asked:

I've seen you rant about how people found Return to Oz scary. Assuming I'm not misunderstanding your dislike for this, I hope you don't mind my asking why you dislike this. I may not have seen the movie, but most of the people I know have seen it say stuff along the lines of "Gosh, this movie scared the crap outta me as a kid and I LOVE IT!"

It’s not so much that people find RtO scary that irks me, because RtO does have scary moments. It scared me as a kid! Some scenes STILL give me chills.

What irks me is people saying things like “this is TOO SCARY to show to kids, EVER!” or “THIS IS ACTUALLY A HORROR MOVIE” etc.

RtO is not, at its core, a horror movie. At its core it is an adaptation of two of the Oz books, and IMO, it reflects this well. RtO has the heart of those books, and all the sweetness of them. There ARE sweet scenes there. You DO get nice moments with Dorothy’s companions and her relationships with them (and their relationships with each other). But the movie also shows just how scary some parts of Oz are–and believe me, there’s stuff in the books that’s worse than what the movie showed. (Hi, Tin Woodman of Oz!)

Granted, the movie did decide to push some of the scarier aspects (for example, there was no electroshock therapy in the books obviously, though that was a thing that could have happened during that time period, and the Nome King was given a scarier interpretation, which I’m fine with since he was a pretty goofy villain in the books). But it’s not like the old musical didn’t do that either. How many kids got nightmares because of the flying monkeys? (My brother did!) The monkeys were not villains in the original book, yet the film decided to make them much scarier. Yet you don’t see people complaining that the old musical is too dark or scary for kids, or that it’s actually a horror film. (…Or well, you do, but most people understand that anyone claiming that Wizard of Oz is a horror film is being absurd, and the idea of its being a horror film is not a widespread opinion.)

When people say “RtO is a horror movie!!” or “RtO is too scary for kids!!” they’re only thinking about the scary moments and ignoring everything else about the movie–the sweet characters, the amazing soundtrack, the incredible practical effects, the gorgeous depiction of Oz, and so on. They’re acting like the rest of the movie does not matter because of the scary scenes.

Or worse, because they’re choosing to view the entire movie as a horror film, they try to find darker interpretations of the sweeter scenes, often fudging details of the film when doing this. For example, SO MANY people view Jack Pumpkinhead as a creep when he’s… not?? He’s a little kid, and acts like a little kid, but he’s a nonhuman so of course he doesn’t look like a kid. I’ve seen other stuff like this too, including people insisting that Oz is Dorothy’s hallucination and that Billina’s staying in Oz meant that she drowned, or something equally absurd.

Also saying “DON’T SHOW THIS TO KIDS” is absolute bullcrap because all kids have different tolerance levels. As I said before, Wizard of Oz gave some kids nightmares, yet you don’t see (many) folks claiming that it’s not a film that should be showed to children. Me, my siblings, and my nieces and nephews all watched this film growing up, and none of us had any problems with it. Would some kids? Sure. But that doesn’t mean it’s not for kids at all.

so tl;dr: People saying it’s a movie with scary moments is fine. People calling it a horror movie or saying it’s too scary for kids rubs me the wrong way and is unfair to the movie.

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.

Emerald City is a show I’m going to miss, but then again I was only really invested in about half of it. I’m not saying I found Dorothy boring (she wasn’t) but I was more interested in the surrounding stories -  West, Tip/Ozma, Jack, Lady Ev.

That being said, it was definitely a much better Wizard of Oz adaptation than others I’ve seen in the past few years. And, yeah, I’m gonna miss it.

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.


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:

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.

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.