ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Sharkflei Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) This is the 1933 Technicolor animated version of the famous "Wizard of Oz". This one only runs for 7 minutes and this is already the first problem. The story is simply too complex to fit it into such a short work. The consequence is that if you are not familiar with either the literary work or the Judy Garland movie, you will have absolutely no idea what is going on story-wise. The evil witch is almost non-existent. Instead, this one includes lengthy sequence of dancing dolls. The animation is okay for 1933, but this is really the only positive thing I can say about this Ted Eshbaugh film. I do not recommend the watch. Thumbs down.

MartinHafer This 1933 version of "The Wizard of Oz" is quite short but it's surprising to see it today because its filmed in lovely color--colors that were quite dramatic for 1933--especially the blues. This appears to be true Technicolor--not the Two-Color Technicolor used in the 1920s and 30s and I was surprised it was in use that early (since it wasn't used in live action films until 1934 and 1935).The film begins in a black & white Kansas and soon a tornado brings Dorothy and her home to Oz--and the film switches to color! I was surprised at this, as this technique was the same one used in the famous 1939 film and appears to have inspired them. As for the story, it's so abbreviated and told without dialog and has little to do with the original novels. So, it's very, very hard to compare this to any other Oz story and you have to accept it for what it is. It's a bit too cutesy for me, but technically speaking it's a marvelous little film. It is certainly not brilliant when seen today, but for 1933 it's awfully good.

Michael_Elliott Wizard of Oz, The (1933) *** (out of 4) Pretty good Technicolor cartoon based on the book. The animation is rather nice and the scarecrow and tin man are pretty funny here as well. This was the first version to show Kansas in B&W and then Oz in color.Magic Cloak of Oz, The (1914) *** (out of 4) The fairies of Oz create a magic cloak, which will give one wish to the person who wears it. Once again the production design is very good here with wonderful and magical sets. The story is quite touching and I'm sure kids would love this version just as much as adults. The highlight of the film is the scene where a horse (played by a human in an outfit) is scratching his butt up against a tree and tries to teach a monkey how to do it.Wizard of Oz, The (1910) *** (out of 4) Nice if strange version of the classic tale. The production values here are actually pretty nice and it's a rather strange trip seeing humans in outfits playing the various animals including the lion.

wmorrow59 Among the special features included with the recent 3-disc DVD release of MGM's 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz is this obscure 9-minute cartoon, produced in Canada and directed by Ted Eshbaugh, whose best- known work is that old time TV perennial The Sunshine Makers. Needless to say, with such a brief running time we can't expect much more than a highlights version of the famous story, but even viewers who approach this short with modest expectations are likely to be disappointed: like so many color cartoons of the '30s this one is a pseudo-Silly Symphony that falls far short of the Disney standard.At first the cartoon looks fairly promising. A petite Dorothy who resembles a Kewpie doll lounges on the porch of her Kansas farm, sighing with boredom, for only a moment or two before the twister arrives and carries her away -- and her little dog, too. Interestingly, after the "storybook" opening credits the animators chose to utilize black & white for the Kansas sequence and then switch to color as Dorothy plummets to the ground in Oz, thus prefiguring the 1939 feature film. Dorothy lands on the Scarecrow (forget about the Munchkins, there isn't time), and they quickly discover the Tin Woodsman frozen in position and free him from his paralysis. The trio then proceed to the Emerald City.Here's where we start to notice the cartoon's flaws. For starters, there's no dialog. Aside from Dorothy's yelp of fright during the twister she never makes a sound, and neither do her companions. They team up and head for the Wizard's palace on some sort of unspoken signal, apparently because that's what they've been programmed to do, but their eerie silence doesn't encourage much viewer sympathy. The filmmakers obviously assumed we were already familiar with the story, but if that's the case then where's the Cowardly Lion? He makes no appearance in this cartoon and his absence is distracting: we keep waiting for him to arrive. And although the filmmakers mysteriously chose to delete a major character, they nevertheless found the time to include two brief, gratuitous musical sequences: a courtship interlude involving woodland animals and then a parade of welcome when Dorothy and her sadly reduced entourage arrive at the palace. The only sign of a witch, incidentally, is a quick shot of a witch-like character seen in silhouette, welcoming Dorothy and her friends to Oz with a big grin! Perhaps the strangest aspect of this version is the characterization of the Wizard of Oz himself: he is presented as a scrawny little man with evil eyes and a sinister chuckle. When Dorothy and her friends come before him he proceeds to intimidate them with what appears to be Black Magic: he summons up some Raggedy Ann-like dancing dolls (for yet another pointless musical interlude), and then causes a few monstrous animals to hatch from eggs. At this juncture we meet a hen who resembles Billina, a character from L. Frank Baum's later series of Oz books. The last portion of the cartoon involves this hen and an egg she has laid which grows to enormous size; meanwhile, Dorothy, the Scarecrow and the Tin Man are reduced to forgotten onlookers. The film ends on a resoundingly anti-climactic note.The animation technique on display here is not at all bad for the period; I was reminded of the cartoons produced in the mid-'30s by Ub Iwerks, the former Disney animator who broke away from Uncle Walt and went into independent production. Like Iwerks' products this one has decent color and good technical effects, but also like Iwerks' products this one is deficient in story, pacing, dialog (as there isn't any) and, most of all, characterization. Only readers of the Oz books and fans of the later film will care at all about the creatures who populate this curious cartoon, and yet they're the viewers most likely to conclude that it's a misfire.