THE WIZARD OF OZ: 2 and 3-Disc on October 25th, 2005 (1 Viewer)

[ScottR]

The biggest problem I have with the three-disc set is its over emphasis on the Wicked Witch. After all, the story is really about Dorothy and her comrades.

 

[PaulP]

High-resolutions cover art via DVD Town:

 

[Jing_B]

Right you are! A image of Dorothy, Scarecrow, Tin Man and Lion with Toto would be perfect. The witch dies halfway through the movie.

 

[JohnMor]

It doesn't surprise me, however, given the popularity of Wicked right now.

 

[Paul_Scott]

the witch/crabtree hangs over the story just about the whole time- that's why i think the (main)characters enveloped by her shadow was a grand conception.

the ruby slippers on the yellow brick road pointing in the direction of a distant emerald city, for me, gives off a good sense of ...expectancy...and maybe a slight bit of hesitency, for what all could lie in that journey ahead.
i find it a very interesting from a conceptual pov, and love the way it attempts to channel a mood rather than just provide a nice predictable struzen-esque montage of all the principals in their colorful costumes. to me, that's been beaten to death in the last 20 years.
i find something like this far more unexpected and creative.
but i'm not enchanted with the use of the 'ruby slipper' type style or font choice for the title- or the negative space below the the shoes and title.
the overall composition needs a little massaging.
i would give it a A for concept but a C(maybe B-) for execution.
the attempt at photo realism (for the figure) may be the bigger problem though. it might have worked better if the whole image had a more consistent 'illustrative' look to it.

 

[Roger Rollins]

I dont agree, but FYI: The witch dies about 10 minutes before the finale. :wink:


WB's art for this new Oz seems very appropriate to me. As a cinephile, and Oz fan, of course I'll go for the 3 disc set.

The 2 disc set is obviously aimed more at the mass-audience, and has a cover that is similar in its more "conceptual" approach to that of Disney's wildly successful MARY POPPINS of last year.

Remember, they need artwork that will "pop" on the shelf, and really stand apart from the crowd. And ANYTHING is an improvement from the horrid snapper package they put out in the late '90s.


The 3 Disc art uses the original main-title lettering, and is very classy. I am impressed with it, but not surprised, as WB continues to show why they are the best in the biz.

 

[Brenton]

I think I find myself agreeing with the sentiments of most of you.

Personally, I think the art on the two-disc version was a good idea, but it utterly fails because to me it looks like a computer graphic as opposed to a painting or a photo. Earlier, someone said that it looks like the poster for a school play, and I couldn't agree more. Also, the fact that Dorothy is standing and not walking, and that she appears alone gives it kind of a feeling of the Emerald City being scary or intimidating, and this couldn't be farther from the way it was portrayed in the film. And the title is just horrible. The appearance of "ruby" letters is clever, but the font is hideously boring. I am only thankful that this is not the version I will be buying.

As for the three-disc version, the lettering on the title is PERFECT. I said myself earlier in this thread that I hoped they would use a lettering that evoked the style of the on-screen title card, and THEY DID! It lends a certain classiness typical of any film made during the golden age of Hollywood (which is another reason why the two-disc cover falls flat). One complaint that I can think of is that the crystal ball is not the same crystal ball that appears in the film (it's far too small), but this really doesn't bother me at all. One thing that DOES bother me a LITTLE is that Dorothy and her friends appear to be simply a digital cut-out from a photo instead of blending a little into the environment of the crystal. The fact that the Wicked Witch's profile appears only in shadow and that her hands are all that's really visible is a clever idea.

 

[Damin J Toell]

It was when Murnau did it in Nosferatu, at least.

DJ

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

Pretty cunning of Warners - release the two-disc with bad cover art so that more people are motivated to buy the three-disc.

Love the three-disc art. It's pretty much perfect. I really did not like the original poster art that was included earlier in this thread, so am glad they haven't gone with that. Insead, they've gone with a striking image that is most evocative of the film. Well done to whoever made it.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

For some reason the 2-disc cover looks like a DTV sequel or an alternate made-for-tv movie adaptation or something...

 

[Josh Simpson]

Thank you so much Warner! I'll be buying the three disc and selling the current disc I have this weekend.

 

[Ruz-El]

I too prefer the 3 disc cover art. What I like about the 2 disc set is it's so iconic and simple. You could remove the titles and know exactly what you are buying with the simple image of the Ruby slippers, the yellow brick road and the emerald city. Great idea, in my opinion.

 

[Marvin]

I don't see anything wrong with the two disc cover. It looks fine to me.

But I'll be getting the 3 disc version for reasons other than the cover art.

 

[Patrick H.]

That was the first thing that sprang into my head when I saw that art, too! Since the green lady is experiencing a bit of a revival at the moment, can't blame them for cross-promoting. I find both covers rather creative, actually, although the 3-discer is far more classy and clever. Instant buy right there.

 

[Travis Hedger]

I never picked up the first round and now I am glad. I will happily pick up the 3 disc set.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Both covers look like something Criterion would put out. Terrific!

 

[Brian Kidd]

I'll be getting the three-disc set for the Baum material and the new transfer of the feature. The rest of the supplements are almost identical to the last release.

 

[Richard M S]

I find the cover art for the three disc set truly striking, it definitely catches the eye and it is new and modern. However as was previously mentioned, the close-up on those leg pores on the two disc set are a major turn-off.

I still want to know exactly what the outtakes and deleted footage consists of, in prior special edition releases, Warners found great stuff never before seen for The Bandwagon, Casablanca, and especially Robin Hood. Even the cut footage/scenes from Oz is famous.

And I am happy John Lahr is contributing to the audio commentary, I almost always enjoy his criticism and occasional articles in the New Yorker (I say "almost" because I think his recent Billy Elliot review was way too harsh, IMO .)

 

[Amy Mormino]

It is interesting that Warners seemed to put aside their general policy of using poster art on this release. That said, the three disc is striking and atmospheric.

As for the deleted scenes, I doubt they've found anything new since the previous release or they would be promoting that fact more. I recall that the most substantial deleted scene was the Scarecrow's extended dance (fun but it would have slowed the movie down) and the audio from the "Jitterbug" cut sequence.

I wasn't going to buy this but the silent movies and Baum-related material will force me to go for the three disc and give my old one to my dad. Damn you (and bless you)Warners for making me spend more money on your products!

 

[ScottR]

I think there are two main reasons why WB is not using the original artwork:

1. The original art isn't all that great
2. Something more creative has to be made, seeing as how the film has enjoyed countless reissues on various home video formats. Oz and Wind are the Crowned Jewels of WB's library and they must be presented and marketed as such.