The Wizard of Oz (Remake)

[Rezzo]

Wizard of Oz Meets Spawn?

Warner Bros. is teaming up with Todd MacFarlane to re-imagine Dorothy, Scarecrow, Lion and the Tin Man…oh my!

It was just a matter of time before someone would decide to remake the Wizard of Oz. WB and Todd MacFarlane are teaming up to bring Oz to whole new generation.

Variety had the announcement today,

Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow Pictures are teaming on "Oz," a revisionist take on the L. Frank Baum books that hatched "The Wizard of Oz."

Project was acquired based on an idea by Todd McFarlane that was fleshed out and pitched by Josh Olson ("A History of Violence").

Olson will write and McFarlane will produce with Thunder Road’s Basil Iwanyk. Rick Benattar ("Shoot ’Em Up") is exec producer.

McFarlane told the trade publication,

"My pitch was ‘How do we get people who went to ‘Lord of the Rings’ to embrace this?’ " McFarlane said. "I want to create (an interpretation) that has a 2007 wow factor. You’ve still got Dorothy trapped in an odd place, but she’s much closer to the Ripley from ‘Alien’ than a helpless singing girl."

 

[Catman]

Lets add this to list of pointless remakes.

 

[SuperFerret]

I want something like the book, dammit! Dark, but still with that innocence intact.

 

[Speedball]

So...It's gonna be like the book then?

 

[Catman]

I want something like the book, dammit! Dark, but still with that innocence intact.

So...It's gonna be like the book then?

I have never read the book.

 

[Orko Is King]

Noooooo! I want a movie like the book, not MacFarlane's ****ed up toys.

 

[Speedball]

I have never read the book.

I had a copy illustrated by Hildebrandt. They were gorgeous paintings, and some were pretty violent. One picture had the Tin Man cutting off the head of one the Wicked Witch's wolves. The flying monkeys were pretty scary too.

 

[Catman]

I had a copy illustrated by Hildebrandt. They were gorgeous paintings, and some were pretty violent. One picture had the Tin Man cutting off the head of one the Wicked Witch's wolves. The flying monkeys were pretty scary too.

woah!

 

[K.B.]

Flying monkeys are ALWAYS scary....

Could be interesting if they used the toy's he made a few years ago and if no one has read the original book then go out and find it cuz it is a worthwhile read and about as far from the movie they did make as you could get.

 

[Catman]

as far from the movie they did make as you could get.

Thats the problem, however. The movie was made back in 1939! Its what most people think of when you mention Wizard of Oz. I think people would be disturbed by the image of Tin Man cutting of a wolves head.

 

[Warhammer]

I'm not interested.

 

[thedeadite]

I have been hoping for a more faithful adaptation for a long time now. Maybe McFarlane could help pull this off (even if he's just a producer). This has me wanting to read the book again though, considering it's been almost 15 years or more since i have.

 

[Tempest19]

Off the hook, lol. Could be good. But, wonder how they will do press for the film. Make a remake of a horror film, easy. Make a remake of a "classic", easy. Make a 'remake' of a "definining classic"- wonder how people will respond.

 

[Webhead2006]

well this was one movie i thought was never going to get a modern/remake take to it. Hopefully it be will more like the classic book and all that.

 

[Joker]

Wow, I'm actually excited for something Todd MacFarlane is doing...did I fall through a timewarp and land in 1995???

 

[Webhead2006]

?.?

 

[K.B.]

Wow, I'm actually excited for something Todd MacFarlane is doing...did I fall through a timewarp and land in 1995???

LMFAO.........*wipes tear* so true.

 

[Mr. Credible]

wow.


that sounds awesome!

 

[Majik1387]

Why don't they just go with American McGee's Oz?
They're making the Alice game a movie.

EDIT: NVM, forgot the game was never made.

 

[Catman]

did I fall through a timewarp and land in 1995???

yes, yes you did.

 

[Tempest19]

Thats the problem, however. The movie was made back in 1939! Its what most people think of when you mention Wizard of Oz. I think people would be disturbed by the image of Tin Man cutting of a wolves head.

t:

LMAOL. I can just picture that and only way to describe it- "wicked awesome!" (pun not intended)

Also hope the Lion says this line or something along the last line in this passage:

"Are you the Cowardly Lion?" she inquired. "Are you Dorothy's friend?"

"Yes'm," answered the Lion, meekly. "Dorothy and I are old chums and are very fond of each other. I'm the King of Beasts, you know, and the Hungry Tiger and I serve Princess Ozma as her body guards."

"To be sure," said Aunt Em, nodding. "But the King of Beasts shouldn't be cowardly."

"I've heard that said before," remarked the Lion, yawning till he showed two great rows of sharp white teeth; "but that does not keep me from being frightened whenever I go into battle."

"What do you do, run?" asked Uncle Henry.

"No; that would be foolish, for the enemy would run after me," declared the Lion. "So I tremble with fear and pitch in as hard as I can; and so far I have always won my fight."

"Ah, I begin to understand," said Uncle Henry.

"Were you scared when I looked at you just now?" inquired Aunt Em.

"Terribly scared, madam," answered the Lion, "for at first I thought you were going to have a fit. Then I noticed you were trying to overcome me by the power of your eye, and your glance was so fierce and penetrating that I shook with fear."

This greatly pleased the lady, and she said quite cheerfully:

"Well, I won't hurt you, so don't be scared any more. I just wanted to see what the human eye was good for."

"The human eye is a fearful weapon," remarked the Lion, scratching his nose softly with his paw to hide a smile. "Had I not known you were Dorothy's friends I might have torn you both into shreds in order to escape your terrible gaze."

 

[dark_b]

pathetic.

why not make something new and original? why hollywood....why?

 

[Mr. Credible]

dude... the whole "hollywood's out of ideas" thing is getting very, very old. just stop it, hm?


"hollywood" makes hundreds and hundreds of movies every year, and maybe 5 of them are remakes. i'd hardly call that out of ideas.

 

[Galactus]

"hollywood" makes hundreds and hundreds of movies every year, and maybe 5 of them are remakes. i'd hardly call that out of ideas.

Rank Source Movies 2007 Gross Tickets Share
1 Original Screenplay 219 $2,073,281,875 316,531,582 31.49%
2 Sequel 22 $1,644,508,641 251,070,020 24.97%
3 Based on Book/Short Story 52 $1,253,055,888 191,306,240 19.03%
4 Based on TV 7 $533,036,202 81,379,572 8.09%
5 Based on Comic/Graphic Novel 3 $380,527,782 58,095,844 5.78%
6 Based on Real Life Events 98 $340,506,169 51,985,682 5.17%
7 Remake 11 $270,737,985 41,334,042 4.11%
8 Based on Musical 1 $66,301,561 10,122,376 1.01%
9 Based on Play 9 $14,502,483 2,214,119 .22%
10 Based on Game 2 $8,130,314 1,241,269 .12%

They're maybe not completely out of ideas, but with only a little more than 30% of all the tickets sold this year so far are for original movies I think the movie business is in a quite sad state.

 

[Mr. Credible]

fair enough, but how many original movies can you make year after year after year before you have to resort to making sequels and remakes and book adaptations and what not?

but still, of all the movies made every year, 4% really isn't a terrible ratio.