During the course of our relationship I have “forced” Anna to watch several movies that she had absolutely no interest in, thus resulting in several treacherous crossroads for us to navigate. And even with huge successes like The Descent, Fight Club and American Movie, it has still proven to be quite the struggle to convince her that my love of a particular film might actually translate into being worth her time to view it. Recently such an event happened involving Slither.
Now when Slither was released about 2 years ago we had been dating for several months and my birthday was fast approaching. I had gotten some passes to an advance screening of the film that was to occur on my birthday. Now, with a March birthday it can be a bit of a struggle to find even a competent birthday film, so I was quite excited at the prospect of watching a halfway decent horror comedy as my own personal birthday present to myself.
Now neither or us can remember the details, (Well I can, but she denies them, so I have found it best to remain silent for the time being) but some sort of argument occurred on the way to the theater and our plans were abruptly dashed as a result. Sure enough, the film had a short, but financially successful, release and was pulled before I ever had a chance to see it.
So when Slither was finally released on DVD I made sure to buy it sight unseen because I am passive aggressive like that. Anna, of course, refused to watch the film on some ridiculous principle; i.e. she thought it looked stupid. So for two years I have tried to skillfully slide Slither into her good graces in the hope that she would finally give it enough of a chance to sit down and actually judge the film on its own merits, rather then the cover art. Unfortunately, each time I broach the subject I am quickly rebuked. Little did I know that all it would take to convince her to watch Slither is her friend Adam telling her “You would like it.” And like that, two years of lobbying are flushed down the drain. So when I was faced with a similar dilemma with Return to Oz I decided on a different approach.
Now it is easy and justifiable why someone might dismiss Return to Oz at first glance, namely because it is a Disney film. A name that for most discerning animated film fans conjures up the distasteful idea of rigidly formulaic fare, that refused to challenge children, and perhaps even worse, panders to parents. But in 1985 this was not quite the case, as Michael Eisner had just assumed leadership of the vaunted brand, and not yet imposed his will, and let us not forget Jeffrey Katzenberg’s influence on the “Disney formula” either, on the company. So in 1985, two of Disney’s most critically derided, yet fascinating films were released. The Black Cauldron and Return to Oz.
Not long after I started up this website I began mentioning Return to Oz as a film that I wanted Anna to watch. I hadn’t seen it in sometime, but I vividly remember certain parts of the film, and knew the oddly creepy style of the film would appeal to her quite a bit. So once I decided that I would review Return to Oz for the site I began a subtle marketing campaign. I started to mention the film a bit more often during conversations, and in one particular instance I made sure to bring up the film when we were hanging out with a group of our friends. Sure enough they started chiming in on how much they fondly remembered the film, and every single one of them made sure to mention the dreaded Wheelers. Anna, evidently powerless to resist the power of suggestion, acquiesced and gave the go ahead that she would watch the film. Sure enough, she liked what she saw.
Return to Oz is an interesting film primarily for its surprisingly dark content. The film opens with Dorothy (Fairuza Balk) struggling with sleeping at night since her return from Oz, and her Aunt Em (Piper Laurie) deciding the only recourse is to take Dorothy in for electro shock therapy. During a nightly thunderstorm a young girl (Emma Ridley) helps Dorothy escape the clinic, only to seemingly drown when they attempt to escape on a makeshift raft. Dorothy then awakes the next morning to discover herself back in Oz, only a terribly different Oz then the one she remembers. The Yellow Brick Road has been destroyed, the Tin Woodsman and the Cowardly Lion along with all the inhabitants of the Emerald City have been turned to stone, and the Deadly Desert looms on every horizon. Soon Dorothy finds herself being chased through the wreckage of the Emerald City by the Wheelers, and is barely able to find safety in a small room that houses the Royal Army of Oz, a clockwork robot named Tik-Tok.
But Dorothy’s troubles do not end there. With the help of Tik-Tok she is able to discover that the Emerald City is now being run by the dreaded Princess Mombi (Jean Marsh, who would later frighten children again in Willow as the dreaded Queen Bavmorda), and evil witch that has 31 interchangeable heads she keeps stored in her castle. Mombi then informs Dorothy that the Nome King (Nicol Williamson) has captured the Scarecrow, and made himself ruler of Oz. She then locks up Dorothy, leaving her to figure out how she can rescue the Scarecrow and save Oz, and only with the help of Tik-Tok, Jack Pumpkinhead, the reanimated head of a Gump and her talking chicken Billina.
With such an odd and twisted plot, and nary a musical number in the entire film, it is quite easy to see why the film wasn’t a hit with either audiences or critics when it was released. Inevitably and unfairly compared to the 1939 classic, Return to Oz offered up something vastly different then what was expected of it. I was a dark and challenging fantasy tale, far removed from the whimsical feeling of the original. Not helping matters was Balk’s portrayal of Dorothy, in which she impressively mimics Judy Garland’s delivery, thus only bringing about the inevitable comparisons. And while Balk was much closer to the intended age of Dorothy during filming, she was nine years old at the time of filming; it isn’t easy to follow in the footsteps of a beloved actress like Garland.
But while The Wizard of Oz is well renowned for its special effects, Return to Oz finds a way to completely separate itself from the earlier film, and in almost all instances, produces work that is vastly superior. While the darker tone of the film is present even in the opening moments at Dorothy’s farm, the film truly lets loose once it enters the magical world of Oz. The Wheelers are the most iconic element in the film, with their ear-splitting shrieks, bright colors and unusual physical features. They race around Oz like a pack of jackals, and it is easy to see why they are so easily recognizable to anyone who has watched the film. The Wheelers are horrifyingly exciting, much to parents dismay.
But the standout of the film is clearly the claymation work found throughout much of the film. Turning simple rocks into literal rock faces, these sequences will dazzle any viewer with their innovation and their wit. When the Nome King is finally revealed, he is as frightening and life like as one could ever imagine a mountain could be. And while the claymation sequences are deeply integral to the Nome King becoming such a terrifying character, equal credit goes to the great Nicol Williamson for his performance. Williamson chews up scenery as easily as a Rock Biter, crafting a character that might be even more fascinating and scary then any he has ever created. If you subscribe to the theory that a story is only as great as its villain, then Return to Oz is truly a gleefully sadistic masterpiece.
But the amazing practical effects don’t end there. Return to Oz also relied on the brilliance of members of The Jim Henson Company (Brian Henson in particular) for much of its special effects, seamlessly mixing a live chicken with an animatronic chicken to create Bellina, the arch enemy of all Nomes, while also using puppetry for the Gump and Jack Pumpkinhead. The end result is effects that stand up incredibly well over time, and are easily the equal, if not sometimes superior, to their own work in the landmark fantasy films Labyrinth and The Dark Crystal. It is easy to see why the film eventually garnered an Academy Award nomination for Visual Effects.
Return to Oz is a decidedly different children’s film, with its dark themes and horrific moments it is not the typical candy coated fare released in American theaters. But it is this unique aspect of the film that makes it both so memorable and endearing. Return to Oz is a film that challenges its viewers, both young and old, and attempts to create a fascinating fantasy world that will be both remembered and revisited by the viewer. And while some special effects driven children’s fantasy films of the 80’s haven’t held up well over time, I’m looking at you The Neverending Story, Return to Oz is a film that has not only aged well, but has become even more enjoyable with each viewing.
