IMDb user comments for
Return to Oz (1985) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 17:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

168 comments in total

---

56 out of 66 people found the following comment useful :-
Dark, disturbing, captivating... where did the first movie go so wrong?, 19 February 2001

Author: stufff (stufff2@hotmail.com) from Miami

The first time I saw this movie I was about 6 or 7. It really scared me, I remember having nightmares of Mombie for weeks... I also remember rewatching it week after week. Now 10 years later I've rediscovered it and it's still chilling. Not because it was meant to be a horror, but because the imagery and plot is so vivid and captivating I can't help but feel like I'm really drawn into another world. Very few movies have done that for me... this is right up there with movies like Willow, Labrynth, and The Neverending Story. If you like musicals, bright colors and munchkin's dancing around, then stay away from this one, but if you want to go on a journey of pure imagination that will leave you breathless on the edge of your seat, rediscover Oz for yourself!

---

43 out of 48 people found the following comment useful :-
Yep, dark and disturbing, 19 August 2005

Author: ptb-8 from Australia

After reading about 40 of the other comments here, all of whom say RETURN TO OZ is dark and disturbing, I will make a different comment. In the early 80s Disney certainly were off the cash trail with a range of films, each expertly produced, that were box office disasters. One may recall SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES, TRON, THE BLACK CAULDRON, ONE MAGIC Christmas and a few others that had much to offer any thinking crowd,and each had special effects that were quite astonishing. Disney were in a very bleak period and the films, attempting to reflect perhaps a more mature or even grown up perspective chose, oh dear I have to say it: a dark and disturbing theme. At the time of release every critic bleated at the grim and melancholy tone of RETURN TO OZ, and sadly themselves neglected to celebrate the original book look, a choice Disney execs applauded themselves for. One Exec infamously said to us theatre owners: "We're going for the Frank L Baum book illustrations and nothing like that 1939 vaudeville thing". Oh dear, I thought at the time. You mean the world's most popular kids film? Well. $27 million dollars later in production costs returned maybe a quarter in theatre film rentals and RETURN TO OZ for all its merit and lavish production care and superb scary special effects....was consigned to the Disney dud bin. At the time I was irritated by the fixed goony expressions on Jack Pumpkinhead and the Scarecrow (loved Tik-tok, though, a fascinating and completely compelling design and movement piece) This time around I didn't mind it and actually appreciated the fact that they were 'book' expressions. Viewed 20 years later on a Disney DVD of dubious quality, I have to say it is a film more suited to these dark and disturbing times and if released today would certainly get a better reception and better crits...and possibly make a lot of money. I think the world is tuned into this type of family film more now than in the Flashdance 80s. The production values of RETURN TO OZ are simply breathtaking. Scene after scene perfectly realised: the green walled horror of the psychiatric asylum in reel one, the amazing claymation of the Gnome King, and especially the glittering halls of Mombi's castle. One genuinely screamworthy scene in the hall of Heads with a headless Queen rushing about in a nightmarish vision is almost only for adults, so intense is it's genuine horror. The glittering climax of a restored Emerald City is a triumph of green and silver/gold set design, I defy any viewer not to rewind it several times just to see each and every part. Yes nominated for 5 Oscars, it won none and vanished for 20 years. The no-marquee name Fairuza Balk didn't help the public embrace, no matter how exquisite she is. At least she wasn't named Soleil Moon Fry. In the same class as The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth, RETURN TO OZ now deserves its place there as part of a trilogy of superbly crafted fantasy for smart kids and astonished adults. That 'vaudeville thing' it certainly isn't. But not a failure either. The DVD is lacking trailers and production material that should and could be included. Bad Disney! Good film! I also defy any viewer not to shriek with laughter at the Gnome King revealing he is wearing the ruby slippers, a sly joke well presented.

---

39 out of 43 people found the following comment useful :-
When all you can do, is return to Oz..., 3 November 2000
Author: David, Film Freak from Palmerston North, New Zealand

As a young kid, The Wizard Of Oz was one of my favourite-est movies in the world. The movie was bright, colourful, cheerful, happy and undoubtedly saccharine. And while it was a Box-Office smash and collected millions of Oz fans worldwide, it displayed nearly none of the points that made the book series so successful. So when after viewing Return To Oz, I was extremely happy.

While thousands blasted the film calling it 'dark' and even 'scary', I thoroughly enjoyed it. New characters, magic powders, creepier witches, talking chickens and flying couches - what more could an imaginative youngster want?!

Faruiza Balk portayed Dorothy Gale exceptionally well, and at times, takes on Judy Garland's version so similair, it's scary! Return To Oz was, I mean, is, better than the original, because it was more based on the books, whereas The Wizard Of Oz was a cross between the original book, bittersweet sets and a symphony orchestra.

While some disagree, I believe that 'Return' was not all a weak sequel, but more of a non-sequel sequel, which had little to do with the original, and had an exciting, haunting, script, which worked really well.

Well it's been about 10 years since I first saw Return To Oz, and I still think that it's one of the best children's movies ever made (however scary) and it's in everyone's best interests to rent it out - even if you hated it's predacessor.

---

44 out of 53 people found the following comment useful :-
Very Underrated Classic, 28 August 2002
Author: Big Movie Fan from England

There have been many people since this film came out who have tried to compare it to The Wizard of Oz. I don't think you can compare the two films and neither film is better than the other. They're both fantastic.

This is an enjoyable movie which can be enjoyed time and time again. Dorothy returns to Oz and teams up with Tik-Tok (a robot), Jack Pumpkinhead (a pumpkin man obviously) and the Gump (don't ask)to battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi. There's plenty of fun throughout as Dorothy and friends battle the likes of the wheelies and all manner of creatures.

The finale is perhaps one of the best ever for a fantasy film. Yes, it really is that good as Dorothy and friends meet up with the Scarecrow and battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi.

The original Wizard Of Oz was a timeless classic still talked about today. It is no exaggeration to call Return To Oz a classic movie either.

---

31 out of 36 people found the following comment useful :-
Not a sequel, judge it on it's own merits., 26 April 2002

Author: JohnIL

Despite the title, this is not a sequel to the classic film that everyone loves. This is a different story about Dorothy and OZ that is actually more faithful to the series of L. Frank Baum books than the Judy Garland film was. Tik-Tok, Jack Pumpkinhead, Mombi, the gnome king, and the wheelers were as much a part of the original stories (published in the very early 1900's) as the scarecrow and tin man were. I understand why some people don't like the movie as I didn't the first time I saw it. No film that trashes emerald city and has Dorothy recieving shock treatment is going to make fans of the first film very happy.

However on my second veiwing years later it was nice to get an idea of the much darker vision that the author of the books had created. He created an OZ that had a very scary side to it, but ultimately good would always triumph. Although this isn't a film for kids under 8 years of age, I believe most kids would probably like it. I do think the special effects could have been a little better, as this was made in 1985. And I wish that they would have had Dorothy interact more with the scarecrow, lion and tin man.

If you only want to see more of the first film then I wouldn't recommend this, otherwise enjoy.

---

25 out of 31 people found the following comment useful :-
Not that bad ( in fact pretty good), 12 February 2005

Author: Jenna from United States

I saw this for the first time when I was under ten and wasn't scared at all. In fact I loved it, but because it was on television I forgot about it for a long time. I recently rediscovered the movie and even as an adult I still love it. Yes, the movie is considerably darker the Wizard, but in my opinion it is a better and more interesting story. In light of the violence in movies today I do not think it is out of the question to allow a ten year old to see it and if you are a teenager or older I would certainly recommend this film. If you found Wizard of Oz too cutesy for your taste you may be pleasantly surprised by this underrated film.

---

20 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-
We're off to see the Sequel, the wonderful sequel of Oz…, 12 December 2005

Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls

Cherubic Dorothy Gale is catapulted back to the magical world of Oz in this enchanting, but very atypical Disney Production that got released 46 years after Victor Fleming's original (none of the original cast-members lived long enough to ever see this sequel!). In the story, however, only six months have passed since Dorothy was brought to Oz by a tornado. During some medical tests, performed because she keeps talking about her unbelievable journey, a mysterious girl helps Dorothy escape from the hospital and back to Oz for a new adventure! The screenplay, based on two L. Frank Baum novels at once, introduces a large amount of imaginative new characters that are either Dorothy's loyal friends…or malicious new enemies. It soon becomes clear that she was called back to Oz for a reason, as the evil Nome King has turned everyone to stone and the mad Princess Mombi is after more human heads for her collection. Despite the presence of a talking chicken, this is a frighteningly grim and obscure fantasy tale, perhaps not even suitable for the typical Disney-target groups. The events and characters in "Return to Oz" are often quite macabre (decapitation for a hobby, eerie guys on wheels…) and the tone of the film is heavier since there isn't any singing and dancing going on. Perhaps a little too scary for the smallest children but "Return to Oz" nonetheless is a compelling and spontaneous adventure, highly recommended to those who like their fairy-tales sinister. The special effects are really terrific, with stunning stop-motion animations and some very engaging mechanical machinery (Tic-Tok!). The young Fairuza Balk is an unbelievably convincing follow-up to Judy Garland! The talented Piper Laurie ("Carrie") is regretfully underused, though. This film, along with "The Dark Crystal" and "The Neverending Story", was a huge favorite of mine when I was young and they seemly only got better with years. Good stuff.

---

21 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
An excellent, dark take on the children tale, 16 November 1998
Author: Dan Newton (dnewton@titan.liu.edu) from Cheshire, CT

Be warned: this film may be found a little too frightening for the young ones. It's a shattered vision of the Land of Oz with the jovial munchkins conspicuously absent, and it opens with Dorothy in an insane asylum (!). What's surprising to me is I rented this film with the mindset that it was going to be complete trash, that a sequel to "The Wizard of Oz" was blashphemy. I stand corrected. This adaption is an effectively satisfying interpretation of the popular children's story. Child actress Fairuza Balk (now in such crap like "The Waterboy") is a very convincing Dorothy Gail, more so than Academy Award winner Judy Garland in the original. But it's the little things that keep you entertained: a severed trophy head, brought to life, quips, "If I had a stomach, I know I'd be sick!" when free-falling through the air; the evil Princess Mambi has an interesting collection on display in her palace; and the realization that the cause of Oz's decline into this dismal state may be directly attributed to Dorothy's departure in the prequel. One disappointment: Toto is left behind in favor of a talking chicken. I know, I know . . .

Grade: B

---

21 out of 28 people found the following comment useful :-
A classic in its own right., 3 October 2001
Author: nytesprite (nytesprite@hotmail.com) from Boston, MA

In this movie adaptation of L. Frank Baum's classic books, Dorothy, who has returned home to Kansas after her adventure in Oz, has trouble readjusting to life after the tornado and her infamous journey. Naturally, no one believes Dorothy's tale, and when Dorothy suffers insomnia, a desperate Aunt Em enlists the aid of a doctor at a medical clinic who, unbeknownst to Dorothy and Aunt Em, performs harmful experiments (nothing graphic -- it's just suggested) on children. In the midst of a rainstorm, Dorothy escapes the clinic to the nearby river, and floats to freedom in a chicken coop, only to awaken in the morning to find herself once again in the mystical and magical world of Oz. Once there, however, Dorothy is soon horrified to realize that the land is in peril, and is now controlled by an evil tyrant of a king. Now it's up to Dorothy to once again save the land she has come to love.

Those wishing to see this movie should most definitely know that it is in no way a continuation of the events of the 1939 classic, and the two should not be compared, for while they share some of the same characters, each is a classic in its own right. The differences are definitely apparent. The Judy Garland classic varied in many ways from the original books, while Return to Oz stays true in a greater way to Baum's original writing. In Return to Oz, Dorothy is a young child -- I'm not sure if her age is ever mentioned, but she appears to be around 10 or so. You may in fact recognize the face -- it's Fairuza Balk, who has appeared in many recent films such as The Craft and The Waterboy. The Scarecrow, Tinman, and Cowardly Lion are featured, but only the Scarecrow has even a mentionable role. There are, however, a number of loveable characters introduced in this film: Tik-Tok, a mechanical man, Jack Pumpkinhead, whose name pretty much says it all, and my personal favorite -- Ozma, the sweet and lovely Queen of Oz. Then there's the deliciously villanous Princess Mombie, who has a collection of stolen heads which she wears to suit her moods, and is played to near-perfection by the talented Jean Marsh, whom you may recognize as Queen Bavmorda from Willow (another fantasy classic that is a must-see). Topping the newcomers list is the Nome King, who is responsible for the things that have gone horribly awry in the land of Oz. Those who view this movie must do so without any preconceptions or expectations. It is NOT a sequel and should not be viewed as such. The producers of the film chose wisely in making this film instead of the original Wizard of Oz story -- the "remake" wouldn't have stood a chance against the classic 1939 version. Instead, it gives more to those who fell in love with the land of Oz and wished they could see "what happens next." Adults and older children who watched Wizard of Oz as tots may feel the story is inconsistent with the first film, and parents should take caution in showing it to younger children -- the creepy Wheelers, Princess Mombie, who is briefly headless -- her scene of yelling heads is also a little creepy, and the Nome King, who is, well, he's just a bad guy. Before showing this film to children, parents should really try to emphasize to children that the film is just a story, the characters are fictional, etc. When viewers know what to expect (and what not to expect), it will be a thoroughly enjoyable film experience for the whole family -- and yes, I would advise parents and children watching together. Personally, I'm confident that Return to Oz will become an instant classic for many generations to come.

---

16 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :-
take it from one who experienced this movie at the right age, 22 October 2000
Author: (imbatman@holly.colostate.edu) from dust of the earth

Return To Oz was the first horror film i ever saw, and i love it today just as much as i did when i was 5. yes, i do believe Return To Oz is a horror, but one that children should see. it is horror just as the brothers Grim are horror. it is horror because everything in the eyes of a child can be very frightening. and yes, i do believe this horror is better than The Wizard of Oz, despite what all my contempories might believe. as a kid, i could not get over the fact the Judy Garland was too old, that they would not stop singing and dancing. come on, this was my childhood, i needed a good rush, not a bunch of eye-candy and disturbing munchkin voices. little dorothy walking down a corridor of decapitated head in ornate display cases, afraid that she might wake them, that the decapitated body would come in search of her in her terrifying gothic splendor-this moment has stayed with me, has always frightened me, but i'm glad that i experienced it, it is healthy for a child to be afraid, humility is something everyone needs to embrace, and this film with its lush terror and build up to a phenomenal climax as apocolyptic as anything today still inspires me toward something the silly set pieces and hammy emotion of Wizard of Oz, cannot do. Return to Oz is a lost masterpiece, terrifying, energetic, creative, and wonderful.

---

---

Page 1 of 17:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Amazon.com summary
Ratings	Awards	Newsgroup reviews
External reviews	Parents Guide	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history