I've A Feeling We're Not In Kansas Again (Again)!!

Merrick here...
Evidently targeted for relentless shelling by Reimaginary forces, THE WIZARD OF OZ again faces reinterpretation - this time by the hand of Warner Bros, Village Roadshow, Todd McFarlane, and HISTORY OF VIOLENCE scripter Josh Olson.

McFarlane has a vision of Oz that is a dark, edgy and muscular PG-13, without a singing Munchkin in sight. That was clear with a toy line he launched several years ago that featured a buxom Dorothy and Toto reimagined as an oversized snarling warthog. Olson has something a little tamer, and PG, in mind.

...says THIS ARTICLE IN VARIETY, which goes on to say:

"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." Olson was keeping plot specifics to himself but said the film will be closer to a sequel than a remake.

At least this part is good to hear, I suppose. I have mixed feelings about all of this. 1939's THE WIZARD OF OZ is tied at the #1 spot on my list of all time favorite "I can watch that movie over and over again in a loop and never get tired of it" films. As such, I've no enthusiasm or support for seeing it desecrated or undercut in any way. As far as follow-ups and re-interpretations go, though? I'm aware that the '39 film is actually not terribly faithful to L. Frank Baum's source material, most notably in tone. In fact, in my perception, Walter Murch's much maligned RETURN TO OZ probably resembles the author's intended "vibe" more accurately. I actually liked the film, although many did not. Tik-Tok rocks. If I had to guess, an effort to more accurately (note I did not say "better") capture Baum's approach is the underlying propellant for projects such as this, as well as the Sci Fi Channel's upcoming TIN MAN miniseries. This isn't McFarlane's first run at OZ reinvention. He's had a line of toys (under the moniker "Twisted Land of Oz") for quite a while now, that look something like this. From the sound of the variety article, this edgy nature isn't necessarily the direction the new film will head. Is all of this the result of shameless exploitation of a beloved (and apparently available) property? Or, are these legitimate and soulful interpretations of conceits and archetypes which seem most at home in Baum's rich and compelling environments? We'll see. There were OZ movies before 1939... ...and they'll be more beyond this. Guess we'd better get used to it, for better or worse. Part of me wants to cover my eyes so that I don't have to see all of this happening. But the Geek in me is insatiably curious...it's like watching disaster coverage on TV, or picking at the gooey scab that should've been treated and bandaged days ago. It'll be interesting to see where this goes.