Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

MartinHafer You really have to look at "The Patchwork Girl of Oz" in context, otherwise you'll just dismiss it as a dull and incomprehensible movie. But, back in 1914, it was a rather impressive tale--but one that even audiences back then probably struggled to understand unless they'd read the Frank Baum story. Heck, I tried watching it was was TOTALLY confused until I read a summary of the story on the internet! That's because the narrative is really scant--with almost no intertitle cards. Instead, it's shown as a series of tenuously connected vignettes which are described on the card and then acted out...as was the style up until about 1914 or a bit later. It comes off almost like a slide show that is acted out for the audience! This certainly is NOT all that entertaining and too often the characters just cavort about aimlessly or do acrobatics instead of acting--and it comes off pretty poorly. BUT, again, it was pretty much the style of the day. The ladies in the film and sets and 'magic' were pretty similar to the work done a decade earlier by the groundbreaking French film maker Georges Méliès. By 1914, these amazing effects and story telling really were a a bit passé--definitely on their way out--which might explain why the film was a critical flop--that, and the fact that the audience probably had no idea what was occurring on screen! Interesting from a historical perspective and having excellent production values for the time, but still very easy to skip unless you adore very early silent films.

Snow Leopard The enjoyable story and characters in "The Patchwork Girl of Oz" makes it a fun movie to watch, and it is also pretty resourceful for its era. It does have a lot of rough edges and shows some signs of age, but its energy and creativity more than make up for those. As with all of the Oz features made by L. Frank Baum's own studio, it shows his influence in the way that the fantasy world of Oz is brought to life with enthusiasm.As with most of Baum's Oz stories, it has plenty of oddball characters and offbeat developments. A couple of odd casting choices add to the curious feel, with Pierre Couderc making Scraps look much like a male, and Violet Macmillan making Ojo seem more like a young girl. But they and the rest of the cast give their characters plenty of life, which really is more significant in a movie like this. As in the other Oz movies in the series, Fred Woodward also gets to perform a number of his costumed animal characters.The story is one of Baum's most creative ones, telling a complex story in which the agendas and motivations of many different characters come into conflict. This adaptation is imaginative in using a lot of different techniques to reproduce the look of the characters, the magical events, and the hectic activity.Much of it works rather well, and all of it represents a very good attempt for its time. Very few film-makers of the era ever tried to make a full-length picture out of such challenging fantasy material, and even if it has a fair number of rough edges, it remains a worthwhile and entertaining effort.

FieCrier Quite an enjoyable movie. I'd seen it twice before (in the Origins of Film box set), and watched it again with my grandmother who was born the year it was released. L. Frank Baum produced, and was evidently on the set with the director.A young boy named Ojo (played by a woman) lives with his Unc Nunkie, and they've run out of food. They decide to go to Oz, where there is always more than enough food.On the way, they encounter a wizard who's been working on a potion for six years to create life. His wife, using a magic wand, assembles a human-size patchwork doll to use the potion on. It won't have brains, since that makes for better servants says the wife. Ojo decides to mix up some magic brains and surreptitiously put them in, however. After the Patchwork Girl (played by a man) is brought to life, there's an accident that results in the wizard's wife, Unc Nunkie, and the Munchkin lover of the wizard's daughter being petrified. Munchkins in this film are not little people, though they do wear different costumes.Ojo, the Patchwork Girl, the wizard, his daughter and her friends must go out to collect ingredients for an antidote: three hairs from a Woozy's tail, a six-leaved clover, and a gill of water from a Dark Well. The daughter has her father shrink her petrified boyfriend down to doll size, since she can't be without him.On the way, they meet one-legged Hoppers, tribal Tottenhots, and jolly Horners. They encounter a maid of Oz who helps them, but who also develops a liking for the petrified Munchkin.The sets are simple, yet nicely establish a fantasy world. Costumes are good too. The wizard character is stooped and knock-kneed (possibly from stirring a potion for six years with his hands *and* legs?). The Woozy is neat, a big boxy cat played by Fred Woodward, who specialized in animal roles (he does several others in this movie). Despite being a simple costume, it seems more real than some CGI creations.The Wizard of Oz, the Tin Man, the Scarecrow, and the Cowardly Lion show up towards the end. The original mission to obtain food is forgotten by that point!It's a cute movie, and I suspect that despite being silent (with musical score added) and black and white, and ninety-one years old that it would still delight small children.

Eegah Guy Anybody who has seen THE WIZARD OF OZ (and who hasn't) should check out this earlier silent story from the Land of Oz. Don't expect the same story though as the Scarecrow, Tin Man and Cowardly Lion only show up at the end of the movie. The Patchwork Girl resembles an acrobatic Bozo the Clown with dreadlocks and a hoopskirt. Other bizarre creatures that show up include the Woozy (a sort of cardboard-box/cat creature) and the scary but lonesome Zoop.