WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

d-millhoff I sometimes find myself working very late (early?) hours, and this program comes on when the only other option infommercials.I came across this 1987 Japanese-Canadian production one late night and sometimes have it going in the background when working. Characters are very nicely-drawn, background art lush, voices and soundtrack work well. Production value, overall, is pretty good but the animation is distractingly choppy.If the writing were a little better, it would play like an early Miyazaki production.Compared with some of the other early-morning kids programming crap, this is some pretty decent eye-candy.

nineandthreequarters Before I say anything else, I must make it clear that this review is based on viewing the 90 minute movie version of this cartoon. Since the 'movie' was a splicing together of a series of 10-15 minute cartoons that I haven't seen since the late 1980s, my comments may or may not be truly judging this on its own merits.The nature of the original cartoons perhaps gives the movie version its only real glaring weakness. Since everything was serialised and shown in short blocks, there's a lot that has to be crammed into each episode. So there we are left with Margot Kidder's narration (brilliant as it is - gotta love that woman) and the characters who have to scream out every single thing that they think and feel, and to state the obvious about what's going on. That said, I do believe that child and adult viewers do get to feel for the characters, and the voice artists have the right balance of quirkiness and compassion to be believable.Sadly, as with most screen adaptations of the Oz stories, one of the most important layers of the stories is completely UNDER-stated. This is the quirky social commentary that peppers L Frank Baum's original stories. The real shame is that there are so many events in the cartoon that could use it so strongly. Lion's failure to live up to social perceptions of him, the main winged monkey having a surly New York accent, the crows who recommend to Scarecrow to "find a new line of work", the former mayor of the Winkies who is only safe from the witch because a mayor has no real powers to 'conquer and destroy', and (of course) the discovery that the wizard only has 'power' because the Ozfolk believe in him. I'm not saying that these messages should have been shouted from the Wizard's hot air balloon, but if there had been some effort to have characters respond to or comment on these elements, so much material could have been given extra special depth that wouldn't have detracted from the main focus.The bottom line? It's maybe not the best Oz adaptation, but it's certainly not the worst. There's plenty of magic, plenty of passion, plenty of quirkiness to draw out the right emotions at the right times. It's also one of the Oz films that's more faithful to the original story despite the rapid jumps over certain parts of the story. If you're an Oz fan, check it out but be aware that it leans more towards sentiment than fantasy or comedy.

Leviathan_ I was 6 when I first saw this version of The Wizard of Oz (the full TV series - it has since been split up for video with this one being the 1st part), and I hadn't seen any of the other versions nor even knew it was actually based on a book. Only afterward did I get to find out it was based on a novel (which I still haven't read) and see the Judy Garland version plus the 'Return to Oz' movie released in the 80s.Needless to say my memory is a bit sketchy, however I can remember enjoying this one immensely (my local TV station ran it twice - restating it as soon as its first run finished). One thing 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' has over some of the other versions is its length - it was able to be spread out over many episodes and not have to be crammed into a 2hr movie or something similar.From what I can recall the story was split into 3 parts (though a search on IMDB seems to indicate there are 4 parts - see below*). The first part concerned to most memorable part of the Oz saga - Dorothy getting sucked up by the tornado only to land in Oz, where she meets up with Scarecrow, Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion. They all join together in a variety of adventures as she attempts to get to the Emerald City to meet the famous Wizard who supposedly has the power to return her home. The Wizard instead sends them off to kill the Wicked Witch of the West (which they do) but upon returning it is discovered the Wizard is in fact just a normal man who arrived in Oz via a balloon. When Dorothy misses out on returning home with the Wizard she and her friends end up going to meet Glinda the Good Witch of the South (interestingly every other version has Glinda as being from the North) where Dorothy learns that she only needs to click her magic slippers to return home.The second part involved characters such as the witch Mombi, the usurper-of-the-throne Queen Ginger (the throne had previously been held by Scarecrow after the leaving of the Wizard) as well as the memorable Jack Pumpkinhead and his master/guardian Tip (who later turned out to be Princess Ozma disguised by magic as a boy by Mombi). This part ended with Ozma being revealed and taking her place on the throne of Oz. I have to admit I'm a little hazy on what happened during this part with the exception of Ginger making herself Queen after Dorothy and co escape on a wooden horse (brought to life by Tip with the same magic powder that created Jack Pumpkinhead) as well as the end where Ozma is revealed and crowned.The third part struck me as the strangest (and somewhat boring) part involving Dorothy visiting the land of Ed(?) and meeting characters such as Tick Tock and the Gnome King. This part ended with Dorothy ending up back in Oz and the Gnome King launching an (unsuccessful) invasion of the Emerald City. One of the most memorable parts from this one was the ornament room where the correct ornament had to be chosen lest the person themselves be turned into an ornament ('Return to Oz' used this part too). As I mentioned earlier this part of the story struck me as the weirdest as I never really understood how Ed existed alongside Oz (early on we see Scarecrow, Tin Man, Lion and Ozma walking to Ed (how far is it?) and towards the end we see the Gnome King and his army tunnelling to Oz - I don't know, maybe the book explains this). I was also bored by it a bit as most of the storyline took place in Ed (which is more or less a desert). Fortunately the later sequences in Oz were more enjoyable, especially with the constant girl-fighting between Dorothy and Ozma (who had turned into a bit of a spoiled brat between this part and the last part when Ozma was Tip).All up it was an enjoyable series for me and I have plenty of fond memories of it - I'm actually surprised it's been 16 years since I've seen it as I can still clearly remember many parts of it. I don't know how close it resembles the original novel (which I haven't read as mentioned before) but compared to some of the other attempts at bringing the Oz story to the screen (big and small) this one is good for taking the time to develop a nice, long story with characters who flesh out and grow as the series moves along. Definitely recommended.* On IMDB I have found what appear to be 4 parts of the Oz story which are as follows - 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz', 'The Marvelous Land of Oz', 'Ozma of Oz', and 'The Emerald City of Oz'.All of these were listed as being made in 1987 and appear to have the same crews and cast (voices) for them so I presume these were all the parts that made up the story I remember seeing. I'm not 100% sure of the order however 'Marvelous' has Jack Pumpkinhead on the poster which would suggest its the 2nd part. 'Ozma' and 'Emerald' I'm not too sure about their order but I daresay they made up the later parts.

aaronzombie I have always liked the story "The Wizard of Oz." My first experience with it was of, of course, the 1939 musical with Judy Garland. Next I discovered that Disney had made a sequel titled "Return to Oz," and enjoyed it as well. Then I saw this movie when it first aired on HBO, I think I was 3 or 4 at the time, and I loved it. After that I never saw it again until a few months ago when I bought a copy. I still loved it.Anyway, you already know the story, so here are my likes and dislikes. Good stuff: Good animation, good acting, a well written script, and a pretty fast pace. Bad stuff: The pace lags a bit in the middle, but it picks up again after a little while.**** out of *****. I have yet to see "The Emearld City of Oz," but I have seen and own the other 2 installments and like them also.