New Line Cinemas is working on a new adaptation of L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Deadline reports that the studio has tapped Nicole Kassell (who directed several notable episodes of HBO’s Watchmen) to helm the film.
According to Deadline, New Line is looking to “re-imagine” the original book, and it conducted an extensive search for a director to take on the project. “They liked what they saw in how Kassell acted as a meticulous world-builder in overseeing every step of the Watchmen production, setting the show’s striking visual tone with no detail overlooked and weaving visual cues from the panels of the comic into the series as delicate Easter eggs for fans.”
In a statement, Kassell says that she’s “exhilarated and humbled” at the opportunity, and notes that she’ll be re-imagining the story: “The opportunity to examine the original themes — the quest for courage, love, wisdom and home — feels more timely and urgent than ever.”
Baum wrote the first novel in 1900, and followed it up with thirteen additional books that explored other parts of Oz and introduced a number of new characters. Memorably, the book was the basis of the 1939 film starring Judy Garland (pictured above), but that film was just the tip of the iceberg—the first film adaptation came in 1910, and there’s been dozens of other film and television adaptations of the novels over the years. Deadline points out that because New Line is part of Warner Bros., Kassell will be able to draw on elements that defined the 1939 film, like Dorothy’s Ruby slippers.
What seems likely here is that the studio is positioning the project as a potential new franchise—
should this initial film succeed, there would be plenty of additional material for Kassell or another filmmaker to mine for future films or streaming shows. Now that it’s launched HBO Max, we’ve seen that Warner Bros. and its parent company AT&T have been working to build up its library of content, ordering a ton of spinoff shows for its upcoming films, like The Batman, Dune, Suicide Squad, and more. A return to Oz would be another major, recognizable title to add to that growing catalog.
While I am all for another weird Oz movie, the idea of this launching a new franchise is exhausting and kills any enthusiasm I might have had for it.
Please don’t make it grounded or gritty or anything like that though, or whatever Emerald City was trying to be either.
Important point- will we be discussing the fact that Dorothy spends a good chunk of the book walking around with the Mark of Cain on her forehead?
Oh, dear.
On one hand, I’m not at all opposed to fresh treatments of literary and/or cinematic classics. But the great trouble with Oz is that the only truly successful straight-ahead screen adaptation it’s ever had has been the 1939 film, which gets Baum almost entirely right except the part where it goes off the rails at the climax by dismissing Oz as a dream.
One or two of the animated features come close from a tonal standpoint, but nearly all of the critical and commercial successes where cinematic Oz is concerned have already been “re-imagined” iterations – Tin Man and Emerald City are the best-known, neither Oz the Great and Powerful or Return to Oz quite met their box office targets, and most of the animated versions have been well-intentioned but off the mark. Likewise, the most commercially popular Ozian material in print form has been sharply turned toward the grimdark, from Wicked to Dorothy Must Die.
I don’t think we need more grimdark or “grown-up” Oz. I think what would go over best, especially right now, would be a straight-up, honest, uncomplicated Oz story calibrated to the tone and style of the original books. A good case could be made for starting with Baum’s second Oz story (The Marvelous Land of Oz), rather than the first, to avoid direct comparisons to the 1939 movie, but the farther New Line ventures from the source material, the less I like their chances of launching a successful franchise.
Yes! At last an opportunity to tell the true story of Glinda the “Good” Witch. Watch as they reveal her villainy for the world to see at last! The signs are all there in the original Wizard of Oz if you are willing to see.
Here are the phrases that should mark this “AVOID”:
Look, either you believe in the source material enough to put the work in to be a great adaptation, or you thumb through your list of dormant IPs and decide something can be exploited. This seems like the latter.
There are two main reasons no other Oz adaptations have been successful, 1) The 1939 film so altered the story that you can’t really adapt anything that follows in any continuous way, and 2) There is no audience that has seen the 1939 film and liked it that wants anything that isn’t the 1939 film. There is no where to go but down with this.
And, seriously everyone, go read the books. Flaws and all, there is a reason they’ve stayed popular for 120 years.
Rant over.
They could always go for a shot-for-shot remake of the 1925 Larry Semon version.
The other thing that occurs to me is that if the first movie is a success and they go forward in the Oz Cinematic Universe, pretty quickly in the books you get to Ozma who I’m pretty sure Baum wouldn’t have called trans* but…
And that’s going to be an interesting conversation.
Reimagine is corporate speak. Any new attempt to do Oz is going to establish a specific esthetic, whether it borrows from the original illustrations or the the MGM-ization of the 1939 movie or series off on its own.
The 1939 movie is separate enough that a straight up adaption of the John R. Neill esthetic or the Denslow illustration of the original gets to be called a re-imagination.
I am cautiously pessimistic
I loved all of the Oz books as a kid and hated pretty much every version of it past the 1939 version. I wouldn’t mind at all an adaptation close to the books. Oz is a big place and there are plenty of adventures to be had there! If this is another gritty movie of another fantasy crapsack world, count me out. Like other commenters have said, I’d like a fun adventure that makes me feel like a kid again, not another Game of Thrones. I do hope they actually end up focusing on courage, love, wisdom and home.
There’s so much potential here and yet almost every adaptation has been a let down. Another gritty re-imagining full of dread. Which has nothing to do with the original books. How about READING them New Line? You might be pleasantly surprised. I’m still waiting for an adaptation that appreciates all the wonder and fun of the books.
Found a picture of the re-imagined Dorothy.
@14, not gonna lie, I’d watch that movie.
Ugh. I wish the Hollywood Industrial Complex would have an original idea every once in a while.
@7 I am reminded of Disney’s RETURN TO OZ with Fairuza Balk that was released in the 1980’s. It faithfully captured much of the aesthetic of the original illustrations to create a gorgeous Art-Nouveau/Steampunk vision of Oz much more in keeping with the time at which the books were written, and it delved deep into the books to introduce more of Baum’s imaginative characters and creatures, and it was a huge box-office flop. I saw it at a Saturday matinee and there were maybe five or six other people in the theater. I do seem to remember that the movie was praised highly by longtime fans of the original books, and Harlan Ellison gave it a rave review in F&SF (he called it a “masterpiece”), but beyond that, it was just “not-Judy Garland version” so the vast majority had no interest in it. I believe RETURN TO OZ may be available on Disney+ if anyone’s interested.
@16- I really enjoyed The Lighthouse. Last movie I went and saw in theaters, and not really very much like anything else I’ve seen.
Return to Oz is the only thing that has come close to capturing the spirit of the books and marrying it to the spirit of the ’39 film. I consider myself a bit of an Oz purist, so I’m liable to not like whatever we get. I would be happy with an honest attempt at a straight adaptation of the books, not the first one, but the series. Oz in all its wonder is a cheerful, weird, and sometimes terrifying place already that is rife with great characters and good stories without the need to update, reimagine, or otherwise subvert things for a modern audience.
Nobody can die in Oz. Even if you were to chop someone up into little bits, all of the little bits would still be alive. Do you really need a gritty reboot when you have the existential horror of that hanging over anything.
@19 – Can you imagine an adaptation of The Tin Woodman of Oz, which explores that concept in detail? I adore the Oz books and always have, but a faithful adaptation of that particular book might be too much for me to take, in all honesty.
I was never particularly fond of the 1939 movie, mostly because I hated having a moral shoved down my throat as well as the fact that they turned Oz into a dream (the “is it or isn’t it a dream?” bit of Return to Oz always bugged me as well, especially when in every other way they hewed so well to the books), and would love to see something that does take up the wryly funny and weird and delightful tone of the books, but I’m not holding my breath. Still, we’ll see! Maybe they’ll decide that all of that is exactly what the world needs right now.
@9: I’m reminded that Blue Delliquanti’s stunning three-part graphic novel O Human Star plays around a bit with (among many other things!) trans experiences and a minor/subtle thread of Oz references. Highly recommended to, well, anyone really, but especially if that’s of interest.
Why?
I agree with pjcamp. What’s the point?
Not really a remake, but “Australia” (2008 Nicole Kidman/Hugh Jackman movie) intentionally parallels the 1939 movie, which was in theaters at the time the movie was set.