It covered the first, second, third, and sixth books, though as it went along it got farther and farther away from the source material. It was still fun, though.
@haziqhakim5995 The 1910 movie mostly covered the first book; there were one or two elements of later books, but then there were only five books at that point. And we do still have the first reel.
The 1986 anime will always be my favorite! The original Japanese score is so stunning (not the rewritten Canadian score) and the art direction is so colorful and timeless.
i hope one day the 1986 version gets a full HD release of the original japanese version with a download for the original score as well- it's lovely and emotional, and the intro theme for the japanese version is so catchy with fun visuals to match.
The Dutch version of this series has the same intro as the Japanses version and the same sounds effects thats makes the series even more fun to watch, i hope a full HD release from the Dutch version gets a dvd release too but for now i have to do it with the French dvd release but it has the same intro as the US cartoon version.
In terms of best to worst, I rank them as: 1: 1986 anime 2: 1982 anime and 1939 live action movie tied (if you took bits and pieces from both you'd have an excellent movie) 3: 1991 cartoon
The 1986 version is the winner for me. The story doesn´t feel rushed, like in the other animated versions. It´s actually very slow-paced. But for me as a child, that only helped me to get sucked into the story. The animations combined with the suspence music created some really strong moods. And Tip/Princess Ozma (my favorite character) wasn´t even included in the other versions. Portraying Emerald City as a white skyscraper, is something I don´t understand. But it sure is original. I´m from the Netherlands, so I grew up with the Dutch version. It´s the same as the original Japanese, only the Dutch voice actors added a lot of puns, which made it even more fun to watch. (Like auntie Em singing ´Somewhere Over The Rainbow´ while cooking). I was lucky enough to finds all 52 episodes, so I have something nice to show to my kids.
The version that I have is a bit rushed though because it was originally a TV series but was shortened to feature film length for the home video release...the show is longer and contains much more material from the books, it's available free with ads on the Cocoro app! Or here: th-cam.com/play/PLwHT6S3CnpERlkHxl-PpLafhwrlvCgTsV.html
In the book, the "Emerald City" was really just plain white. It was given the illusion of being "emerald" because all the occupants were forced by the Wizard to wear green spectacles, which were locked onto their heads day and night. The '86 anime got the white part right, but curiously omitted the green spectacles part.
Funny how all animated versions decided to depict the Good Witch of the North and the Good Witch of the South as different characters, portraying one of them as an old stocky lady and the other as a young slender one, while the live-action film famously merges the two characters into one, Glinda.
The animated versions were being true to the book, in which the Good Witch of the North was a sweet little old lady and Glinda, the Good Witch of the South, was beautiful and graceful. What they really did in the MGM film was to flip-flop the two.
live action glinda is so unhelpful. “Haha lesson of the day learned through a journey and friends along the way” SHE LEARNED HER LESSON THE MOMENT SHE SAID “i want to go home”! JUST SHOW HER HOW TO USE THE STUPID SHOES. the 1986 version is mischievious in a good way, the fitst time we meet her she is a divine beautiful figure then later dorothy asks her for help with general gingivitus and mombi. she all like “you two are being very naughty cease your actions at once.” “oh yeah what are you gonna do about it” then she turns into a bunch of storm clouds with an evil maniacal villan laugh and scares the piss out of them
@@JohnnyProctor9 The book's main problem is that Dorothy is a Mary Sue, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end. The 1939 version developed her character by expanding on Kansas, eliminating the unnecessary and overtly-long filler trek to see Glinda (which having that bit of filler be part of the plot makes no sense film-wise because Dorothy's obstacle in the book is getting home whereas in the movie it's the Wicked Witch of the West, and if they had the second trek in the movie, it would add an unnecessary second obstacle), and giving Dorothy an emotional core and making her friends in Oz and family in Kansas tie her ends together in the end.
As a fan of this story, I will always love the book first and foremost, as it introduced me to it, thanks mom. But I know for most the 1939 film is where they first heard of it, and many think it originated as a movie. I always loved the 80s' animes and *The Wiz* which are easily more faithful to the source. One of them updates the setting, but the events of the plot follows the book more closely, and the 86 one is the only one to include the trip South to see Glinda. Similar things can be said about Roald Dahl adaptations, Many have been made into film, and several have been adapted twice, and two of them were done more faithfully the second time than they were the first.
@@MaskedMan66 For the most part, the 1939 version's mostly accurate to the first half, except the Kansas beginning, which expands on it to give Dorothy an emotional core to her character, which Baum's Dorothy did not have. Also, Dorothy in the end of the movie realizes that her family and the farmhands in Kansas give her a cohesive whole, which is something that Baum's Dorothy also lacked. Plus, the 1939 version makes the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman, and Lion's rewards make more sense, since in the book, they already had what they were wanting, so why give them fake versions of what they already have when you could give them things to show what they already had in the first place? Also, Dorothy is a Mary Sue in the book, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end.
@@TheRealJames76 "Emotional core?" "Cohesive whole?" All Baum was after was telling a good story, not providing grist for a literary consortium. Dorothy was just a good girl, that's all, a model for good behavior for his readers, though hardly perfect; the reason she threw the water at the Wicked Witch was that she lost her temper when the Witch nabbed one of the shoes. As for the Wizard's gifts, he gave them to the three companions because they insisted he give them something. And since the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman were manufactured in the first place, their manufactured brain and heart were scarcely "fake." As for the literary Lion, he would not have been satisfied with a medal; he wanted the kind of courage that made one forget he was afraid, and having taken the drink of "courage," he believed, at least for a time, that he had that kind of bravery. Nevertheless, when he made his second appearance in the Oz canon (in the third book), he was cowardly again, though still possessing that inner courage he always had-- and which sometimes did make him forget his fear.
@@TheRealJames76 "Emotional core?" "Cohesive whole?" What word salad is this? The gifts given by the Wizard in the book are on point, especially the Scarecrow's brain. There's nothing fake about his brain or the Tin Woodman's heart; since they're artificial themselves, it stands to reason that their gifts also be manmade. The Lion's gift is a straight-up pun; I expect you've heard of "Dutch courage." Dorothy is an ordinary girl who is sensible, but in no way perfect. A perfect character would not need any help, but Dorothy would have had to turn back at the first chasm on the Road of Yellow Brick if the Cowardly Lion hadn't been there to carry her over it.
To the first book, certainly. But as the series went on, covering the second, third, and sixth books, it started straying from the source. It was still a fun show, though.
@@MaskedMan66 - Still the closest film adaptation though, compare it to that "Return to Oz" or "Journey Back to Oz" garbage some time...the Marvel graphic novel version is spot-on though if you want something in between, I wish that they'd animate it.
@@JohnnyProctor9 Neither of those films is garbage, and RtO is in fact the closest anyone has got to Oz as created by L. Frank Baum, right down to the character design and architecture, which was all based on the illustrations of John R. Neill. RtO is also not meant as a straight adaptation; it combines elements of the second and third Oz books. Baum did that sort of thing himself when he made a movie called "His Majesty, The Scarecrow of Oz," which was a mashup of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and "The Scarecrow of Oz."
@@MaskedMan66 - I disagree, RtO combined Mombi and Languidere into one character and made Ev into Oz...the anime just tamed down Languidere and the Wheelers to make them less scary for kids. Also the character design of the Nome King was closer to the books in the anime than in RtO...and Ozma was originally Tip in the anime too, and the anime had General Jinjur and her story arc as well.
@@JohnnyProctor9 It's Langwidere, and what are you "disagreeing" with? I didn't say anything that wasn't factual. And... "tamed down Languidere (sic) and the Wheelers to make them less scary for kids???" Kids had no problem with the characters as depicted in the books, so why would a cartoon have bothered them?
@@MaskedMan66 So Dorothy had blonde hair in the book? In the other adaptations Dorothy had brown or red hair. Dorothy in the 82 version looks like Alice kinda.
@@cory3171 That is because a lot of adaptations take their cues, not from the books, but from the MGM movie. In the illustrations by W.W. Denslow in the first book, Dorothy's hair color is indeterminate because none of the pictures is in full color, but from the second book onward, the art of John R. Neill left no doubt that Dorothy was a golden haired child. The funny thing about Alice is that her real-life inspiration, Alice Liddell, was a brunette.
Oh, by the way, the MGM movie isn't the original, it's the third movie version of the first Oz book. The first was in 1910, and the second one in 1925.
The 1986 version is the most faithful to Baum's original book plot and the two good witches, Glinda and the good witch of the north, are not combined into one like in the 1939 version. Also, the adventures of Dorothy in the south are included only in the 1986 version. However, I like all versions.
MGM basically just flip-flopped the regions of Glinda and Tattypoo. Since America was still Oz-savvy in 1939, audiences most likely figured that Tattypoo ran the South in MGM's version of Oz.
Funny thing about the 1982 version, the Japanese voice role of the Wizard also does his dub role in the 1939 film. And he does a variety of many Disney Dub roles as well.
@@forrestdupre9916 I wouldn't say so, especially given that it's set in the modern day and takes the MGM "dream" tack. The two anime productions are very close in narrative to the book.
Magic, excitement, enchantments, wonders, imagination, music, action, fantasy, thrills, and adventures. The Wizard of Oz and The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, they’re all incredible. I love them. Uh-huh, I watched The Wizard of Oz (1939 and 1991), but never the ones in anime. Things like that I’ve never seen in my whole life. Nothing ceases to amaze me with magic. I never give up believing in fairies and magic with all my heart because I still refuse to grow up, and forget about the precious things I knew, especially those from my childhood. No growing up, yuck! I am like Peter Pan and have his youthful spirit. My one and only wish is to keep the magic alive for all time. And I also wish to be a fairy to stay strong, childlike, young, and beautiful forever and ever like Tinker Bell, and the other fair folks. Somewhere over the rainbow. Think happy thoughts to make you fly. All it takes is faith, trust and pixie dust 💫✨⭐️🌟🌌🌠🎶🎼🎵🧚🧚♀️🧚♂️
For anyone wondering, the 1991 version is a Golden Films "masterpiece". The same people that did the Handsomeback of Notre Dame as a cheap cash grab released around the same time as the Disney movie.
I prefer the 1939 and 1986 versions, but I like the 1982 version, which I just discovered today. Although, it makes Dorothy look a bit like Alice In Wonderland, and Toto looks a lot like Jock of "Lady and the Tramp".
@@JohnnyProctor9 Where did you get it from? I recorded it all on VHS when it ran on T.V. a few years ago, but just at the moment I've nothing to play it on.
@@MaskedMan66 - Okay, sorry...let me clarify, I have the feature-length home video releases of the series in the DVD boxed set. It's sadly abridged, but all I could find on Amazon...I've seen pirate copies of the TV series floating around here and there though, but I just watch it with ads on Cocoro or TH-cam. My daughter's only 3, so she prefers the abridged version anyway...she doesn't have the patience to binge-watch much yet besides Steven Universe, Peppa Pig, Miraculous Ladybug, or the Super Mario Bros Super Show.
@@JohnnyProctor9 Ah, so you have the movie compilings; yes, that was my intro to the series. I got those from the library and enjoyed them. I've also seen an episode or two of the series in the original Japanese. Regarding "Peppa Pig," years before that show was made, I met one of its cast members, namely Brian Blessed, who plays Grampy Rabbit. :-)
In the original 1900 1st edition of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz",Dorothy is a brunette.WW Dennslow is the original illustrator.After that 1st book & from then on, Dorothy is drawn as a blonde.John R Neill illustrated the next 35 books in the Oz canon.And most Oz fans consider John R Neil's illustrations as to what the Oz characters actually look like.With 35 books to his credit,his illustrations have become synonymous. Interesting note;MGM actually tested Judy Garland in a blonde wig,before deciding to go with her more natural look,which would better resemble the original WW Dennslow illustrations.
@@charlesarnold1953 Denslow didn't do any full-color pictures, just tinted ones, so Dorothy's hair color wasn't 100% determined. The reason they chucked the blonde wig (which Judy enjoyed wearing) was so that Judy would look like herself, this being her breakout role and all. 🙂
In 1983 - 1989 Polish studio Se-ma-for ma did amimated series about OZ... It was puppet animatorom and 13 epizodes :) In my opinion was a pretty cool series... :)
It still got further and further from the material as it progressed. The book's main problem is that Dorothy is a Mary Sue, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end.
The MGM film isn't the original; that honor belongs to the Selig Company's feature film _The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,_ made in 1910 and starring Bebe Daniels as Dorothy.
Very interesting, but I don't like the music. I would also hazard to say (and meaning no disrespect) that too much time was spent on the Wicked Witch's demise.
@@JohnnyProctor9 You clearly have no taste in good Oz movies if you think that the 1939 version is garbage. Comparing and contrasting the book from the movie is an apples-to-oranges comparison.
I've been looking for an animated version of The wizard of Oz, it isn't any of the ones that are shown in the video. I remember it had a kind of anime style. I used to watch it in a disk that came with other animated shorts like Felix the cat or ants in the plants.
The 1982 version's Dorothy looks like Alice, I really like Dorothy's design in that cartoon though. And oh my god the 1986 anime is so colorful and beautiful. 😍
@@curtthegamer934 Fun Fact: Just as the movie Annie, Aileen Quinn, played Dorothy in the anime movie, Broadway's original Annie, Andrea McArdle, played Judy Garland in a T.V. movie!
There was a comic book crossover which took place across three issues of the DC comic "Captain Carrot and His Amazing Zoo Crew." It was called "The Oz - Wonderland War," and featured characters from both Alice books and many of the Oz books. Alice herself wasn't present, because her adventures had taken place 45 years before Dorothy ever went to Oz, so she was grown up and out of the picture, though the creators realized after the comic story was completed that they could have used Mary Ann, the White Rabbit's housemaid, who looked like Alice.
@@cory3171 Oh, friends, without a doubt! 🙂 Dorothy makes friends wherever she goes. The thing is that Alice is considerably older than Dorothy; her adventures in Wonderland and Looking-Glass Land happened 45 years before Dorothy made her first journey to Oz. But I'm sure they'd like each other, and probably have a grand time telling each other about their adventures.
I told my wizard wizard of oz is from 1930s and she thought it a 90s 😂 I wonder if she talking about anamation cause she didn't mention about the anamation 😂
The 1986 version continued on with the plot lines of other books in the series, which is the main reason why I love it as a kid.
It covered the first, second, third, and sixth books, though as it went along it got farther and farther away from the source material. It was still fun, though.
Yeah.
@haziqhakim5995 The 1910 movie mostly covered the first book; there were one or two elements of later books, but then there were only five books at that point. And we do still have the first reel.
The 1986 anime will always be my favorite! The original Japanese score is so stunning (not the rewritten Canadian score) and the art direction is so colorful and timeless.
Their Glinda was my favorite
does anyone know where you can download the score from 🥲
The Canadian score is fun too.
And you're right about the Japanese OST (it's also used in the Hebrew version)
4:33 4:35 4:38 4:42 4:47
i hope one day the 1986 version gets a full HD release of the original japanese version with a download for the original score as well- it's lovely and emotional, and the intro theme for the japanese version is so catchy with fun visuals to match.
The Dutch version of this series has the same intro as the Japanses version and the same sounds effects thats makes the series even more fun to watch, i hope a full HD release from the Dutch version gets a dvd release too but for now i have to do it with the French dvd release but it has the same intro as the US cartoon version.
The 1982 adaptation was the first anime I ever saw. I was 6 years old.
Eddie Miller my first anime was Kirby: Right Back At Ya
The 1986 and 1982 and 1991 is kinda creepy but I like the 1932 so much effort that one
Same but it was 1986, it was my first anime but I don't remember how old I was, I had the dvds
And you are old LOL
Actually, I turned 6 years old in 2001.
In terms of best to worst, I rank them as:
1: 1986 anime
2: 1982 anime and 1939 live action movie tied (if you took bits and pieces from both you'd have an excellent movie)
3: 1991 cartoon
The 1986 version is the winner for me. The story doesn´t feel rushed, like in the other animated versions. It´s actually very slow-paced. But for me as a child, that only helped me to get sucked into the story. The animations combined with the suspence music created some really strong moods. And Tip/Princess Ozma (my favorite character) wasn´t even included in the other versions. Portraying Emerald City as a white skyscraper, is something I don´t understand. But it sure is original.
I´m from the Netherlands, so I grew up with the Dutch version. It´s the same as the original Japanese, only the Dutch voice actors added a lot of puns, which made it even more fun to watch. (Like auntie Em singing ´Somewhere Over The Rainbow´ while cooking). I was lucky enough to finds all 52 episodes, so I have something nice to show to my kids.
The version that I have is a bit rushed though because it was originally a TV series but was shortened to feature film length for the home video release...the show is longer and contains much more material from the books, it's available free with ads on the Cocoro app!
Or here: th-cam.com/play/PLwHT6S3CnpERlkHxl-PpLafhwrlvCgTsV.html
In the book, the "Emerald City" was really just plain white. It was given the illusion of being "emerald" because all the occupants were forced by the Wizard to wear green spectacles, which were locked onto their heads day and night. The '86 anime got the white part right, but curiously omitted the green spectacles part.
@@wesltall1 Ah, another mystery solved. Thanks!
@@JohnnyProctor9 Yes I know they made a shortened rushed version as well. But I already have the original series. Thanks anyway.
@@asthemoonturns - That's cool...is there a legit way to purchase the TV series now? Oh...maybe only in Dutch then?
Funny how all animated versions decided to depict the Good Witch of the North and the Good Witch of the South as different characters, portraying one of them as an old stocky lady and the other as a young slender one, while the live-action film famously merges the two characters into one, Glinda.
The animated versions were being true to the book, in which the Good Witch of the North was a sweet little old lady and Glinda, the Good Witch of the South, was beautiful and graceful. What they really did in the MGM film was to flip-flop the two.
Not funny, they were based on the book, the 1939 version was mainstream garbage simplified for idiots...
live action glinda is so unhelpful. “Haha lesson of the day learned through a journey and friends along the way” SHE LEARNED HER LESSON THE MOMENT SHE SAID “i want to go home”! JUST SHOW HER HOW TO USE THE STUPID SHOES. the 1986 version is mischievious in a good way, the fitst time we meet her she is a divine beautiful figure then later dorothy asks her for help with general gingivitus and mombi. she all like “you two are being very naughty cease your actions at once.” “oh yeah what are you gonna do about it” then she turns into a bunch of storm clouds with an evil maniacal villan laugh and scares the piss out of them
@@JohnnyProctor9 The book's main problem is that Dorothy is a Mary Sue, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end. The 1939 version developed her character by expanding on Kansas, eliminating the unnecessary and overtly-long filler trek to see Glinda (which having that bit of filler be part of the plot makes no sense film-wise because Dorothy's obstacle in the book is getting home whereas in the movie it's the Wicked Witch of the West, and if they had the second trek in the movie, it would add an unnecessary second obstacle), and giving Dorothy an emotional core and making her friends in Oz and family in Kansas tie her ends together in the end.
@@JohnnyProctor9 Troll.
The music that is playing is the Main Titles to James Franco Oz the Great and Powerful
As a fan of this story, I will always love the book first and foremost, as it introduced me to it, thanks mom.
But I know for most the 1939 film is where they first heard of it, and many think it originated as a movie.
I always loved the 80s' animes and *The Wiz* which are easily more faithful to the source. One of them updates the setting, but the events of the plot follows the book more closely, and the 86 one is the only one to include the trip South to see Glinda.
Similar things can be said about Roald Dahl adaptations, Many have been made into film, and several have been adapted twice, and two of them were done more faithfully the second time than they were the first.
"More faithful" does not always equal "better". Look at The Shining mini series, for instance.
@@TheRealJames76 At what point did I say this?
@@TheRealJames76 "Better" than what? A faithful adaptation can be brilliant if done right.
The anime series from 1986 is my favorite! The story line is a bit modified but that's making it so Good!
1939 will always be my favorite!
Mine as well, though of these four it's actually the least accurate to the book.
@@MaskedMan66 For the most part, the 1939 version's mostly accurate to the first half, except the Kansas beginning, which expands on it to give Dorothy an emotional core to her character, which Baum's Dorothy did not have. Also, Dorothy in the end of the movie realizes that her family and the farmhands in Kansas give her a cohesive whole, which is something that Baum's Dorothy also lacked. Plus, the 1939 version makes the Scarecrow, Tin Woodman, and Lion's rewards make more sense, since in the book, they already had what they were wanting, so why give them fake versions of what they already have when you could give them things to show what they already had in the first place?
Also, Dorothy is a Mary Sue in the book, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end.
@@TheRealJames76 "Emotional core?" "Cohesive whole?" All Baum was after was telling a good story, not providing grist for a literary consortium. Dorothy was just a good girl, that's all, a model for good behavior for his readers, though hardly perfect; the reason she threw the water at the Wicked Witch was that she lost her temper when the Witch nabbed one of the shoes.
As for the Wizard's gifts, he gave them to the three companions because they insisted he give them something. And since the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman were manufactured in the first place, their manufactured brain and heart were scarcely "fake."
As for the literary Lion, he would not have been satisfied with a medal; he wanted the kind of courage that made one forget he was afraid, and having taken the drink of "courage," he believed, at least for a time, that he had that kind of bravery. Nevertheless, when he made his second appearance in the Oz canon (in the third book), he was cowardly again, though still possessing that inner courage he always had-- and which sometimes did make him forget his fear.
@@cory3171 And?
@@TheRealJames76 "Emotional core?" "Cohesive whole?" What word salad is this?
The gifts given by the Wizard in the book are on point, especially the Scarecrow's brain. There's nothing fake about his brain or the Tin Woodman's heart; since they're artificial themselves, it stands to reason that their gifts also be manmade. The Lion's gift is a straight-up pun; I expect you've heard of "Dutch courage."
Dorothy is an ordinary girl who is sensible, but in no way perfect. A perfect character would not need any help, but Dorothy would have had to turn back at the first chasm on the Road of Yellow Brick if the Cowardly Lion hadn't been there to carry her over it.
My favorite is hands down, the 1986 anime adaptation! I feel like it’s the most faithful to the books.
To the first book, certainly. But as the series went on, covering the second, third, and sixth books, it started straying from the source. It was still a fun show, though.
@@MaskedMan66 - Still the closest film adaptation though, compare it to that "Return to Oz" or "Journey Back to Oz" garbage some time...the Marvel graphic novel version is spot-on though if you want something in between, I wish that they'd animate it.
@@JohnnyProctor9 Neither of those films is garbage, and RtO is in fact the closest anyone has got to Oz as created by L. Frank Baum, right down to the character design and architecture, which was all based on the illustrations of John R. Neill. RtO is also not meant as a straight adaptation; it combines elements of the second and third Oz books. Baum did that sort of thing himself when he made a movie called "His Majesty, The Scarecrow of Oz," which was a mashup of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and "The Scarecrow of Oz."
@@MaskedMan66 - I disagree, RtO combined Mombi and Languidere into one character and made Ev into Oz...the anime just tamed down Languidere and the Wheelers to make them less scary for kids. Also the character design of the Nome King was closer to the books in the anime than in RtO...and Ozma was originally Tip in the anime too, and the anime had General Jinjur and her story arc as well.
@@JohnnyProctor9 It's Langwidere, and what are you "disagreeing" with? I didn't say anything that wasn't factual. And... "tamed down Languidere (sic) and the Wheelers to make them less scary for kids???" Kids had no problem with the characters as depicted in the books, so why would a cartoon have bothered them?
I liked the 1939 Original and the 1982 Anime but I had never seen this version 82 but it must be cute and beautiful to watch this version 😍💖😁.
The '82 version is very cute, and for once, Dorothy has her proper hair color.
@@MaskedMan66 So Dorothy had blonde hair in the book? In the other adaptations Dorothy had brown or red hair. Dorothy in the 82 version looks like Alice kinda.
@@cory3171 That is because a lot of adaptations take their cues, not from the books, but from the MGM movie. In the illustrations by W.W. Denslow in the first book, Dorothy's hair color is indeterminate because none of the pictures is in full color, but from the second book onward, the art of John R. Neill left no doubt that Dorothy was a golden haired child.
The funny thing about Alice is that her real-life inspiration, Alice Liddell, was a brunette.
Oh, by the way, the MGM movie isn't the original, it's the third movie version of the first Oz book. The first was in 1910, and the second one in 1925.
this is my favourite video of my life
1986's is my childhood, and I watched 1939's at my 20s, also love it
Holy shiet.... The 1939's quality is actually better...
It's remastered in HD many times so that explains the astounding quality of the movie. :3
Tanmay Patel you can watch it in 4K 3D IMAX in some theatres
Probably still had a bigger budget than the others.
no
@@JonCombo Close to 3,000,000 bucks.
4:21 I Believe I Can Fly! I believe I can touch the Sky!
I don't know why but I nearly cried when this video was over
is very cool how in the original when Dorothy came back to the real world is in black and white again, nice detail.
That wasn't the original. That was the third big-screen version of the story, and the eighth Oz-based movie.
i remember watching the 1991 version as a kid and tried finding it everywhere, so much nostalgia
The 1986 version is the most faithful to Baum's original book plot and the two good witches, Glinda and the good witch of the north, are not combined into one like in the 1939 version. Also, the adventures of Dorothy in the south are included only in the 1986 version. However, I like all versions.
MGM basically just flip-flopped the regions of Glinda and Tattypoo. Since America was still Oz-savvy in 1939, audiences most likely figured that Tattypoo ran the South in MGM's version of Oz.
Funny thing about the 1982 version, the Japanese voice role of the Wizard also does his dub role in the 1939 film. And he does a variety of many Disney Dub roles as well.
Awesome! Thanks for putting this together!!
The Cowardly Lion is my favourite
The Tin Man is my favorite
The 1986 Tv show was a GEM.
1939's probably the best.
But not the most faithful to the source material. The two animes came a lot closer.
Yup except it is very old probably made before the war if I’m mistaken
@@createmakeandplay7008 What's that got to do with anything? I mean, the very first movie version of "Wizard" was made in 1910.
@@MaskedMan66 Actually The Muppet version is the most accurate.
@@forrestdupre9916 I wouldn't say so, especially given that it's set in the modern day and takes the MGM "dream" tack. The two anime productions are very close in narrative to the book.
I really enjoyed the Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a kid.
Yeah.
Its so cool watching them side by side
I love the 1986 version, that's the best adaption to me.
Magic, excitement, enchantments, wonders, imagination, music, action, fantasy, thrills, and adventures. The Wizard of Oz and The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, they’re all incredible. I love them. Uh-huh, I watched The Wizard of Oz (1939 and 1991), but never the ones in anime. Things like that I’ve never seen in my whole life. Nothing ceases to amaze me with magic. I never give up believing in fairies and magic with all my heart because I still refuse to grow up, and forget about the precious things I knew, especially those from my childhood. No growing up, yuck! I am like Peter Pan and have his youthful spirit. My one and only wish is to keep the magic alive for all time. And I also wish to be a fairy to stay strong, childlike, young, and beautiful forever and ever like Tinker Bell, and the other fair folks. Somewhere over the rainbow. Think happy thoughts to make you fly. All it takes is faith, trust and pixie dust 💫✨⭐️🌟🌌🌠🎶🎼🎵🧚🧚♀️🧚♂️
Dude... thanks for posting, hope you start to continue posting stuff again Soon✌️🌞⚜️💚🦋
For anyone wondering, the 1991 version is a Golden Films "masterpiece". The same people that did the Handsomeback of Notre Dame as a cheap cash grab released around the same time as the Disney movie.
"Handsomeback??" What are you talking about?
@@MaskedMan66 I'm talking about Golden Films' terrible adaptation of Hunchback in which they decided to make the titular character handsome.
@@ExtremeWreck Not as hideous as usually depicted, but still deformed, and therefore in that time and place, an outcast.
@@MaskedMan66 th-cam.com/video/XJu0kQbTNIk/w-d-xo.htmlm52s
1939 and 1982 both are always gonna be my Favorite
There's no place like home 👠
I want a Silver Shoes emoji for fans of the original books...
I love the one from 1939 and 1986
I prefer the 1939 and 1986 versions, but I like the 1982 version, which I just discovered today. Although, it makes Dorothy look a bit like Alice In Wonderland, and Toto looks a lot like Jock of "Lady and the Tramp".
The Wizard of Oz in 1939 is good
I remember seeing an episode of the 86 version on VHS once
I've seen the whole series.
@@MaskedMan66 - I own the whole series on DVD...
@@JohnnyProctor9 Where did you get it from? I recorded it all on VHS when it ran on T.V. a few years ago, but just at the moment I've nothing to play it on.
@@MaskedMan66 - Okay, sorry...let me clarify, I have the feature-length home video releases of the series in the DVD boxed set. It's sadly abridged, but all I could find on Amazon...I've seen pirate copies of the TV series floating around here and there though, but I just watch it with ads on Cocoro or TH-cam. My daughter's only 3, so she prefers the abridged version anyway...she doesn't have the patience to binge-watch much yet besides Steven Universe, Peppa Pig, Miraculous Ladybug, or the Super Mario Bros Super Show.
@@JohnnyProctor9 Ah, so you have the movie compilings; yes, that was my intro to the series. I got those from the library and enjoyed them. I've also seen an episode or two of the series in the original Japanese.
Regarding "Peppa Pig," years before that show was made, I met one of its cast members, namely Brian Blessed, who plays Grampy Rabbit. :-)
Maybe you should have also showed The Wiz. That name could be misinterpreted.
Though it's not on here, I also like best the Tom & Jerry films that are based off of the 1939 film.
nice comparisons.
Very well done!!In the book series after the original book,Dorothy is a blonde.
And really in the first book as well; there are no color images showing otherwise.
In the original 1900 1st edition of "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz",Dorothy is a brunette.WW Dennslow is the original illustrator.After that 1st book & from then on, Dorothy is drawn as a blonde.John R Neill illustrated the next 35 books in the Oz canon.And most Oz fans consider John R Neil's illustrations as to what the Oz characters actually look like.With 35 books to his credit,his illustrations have become synonymous.
Interesting note;MGM actually tested Judy Garland in a blonde wig,before deciding to go with her more natural look,which would better resemble the original WW Dennslow illustrations.
@@charlesarnold1953 Denslow didn't do any full-color pictures, just tinted ones, so Dorothy's hair color wasn't 100% determined. The reason they chucked the blonde wig (which Judy enjoyed wearing) was so that Judy would look like herself, this being her breakout role and all. 🙂
In 1983 - 1989 Polish studio Se-ma-for ma did amimated series about OZ... It was puppet animatorom and 13 epizodes :)
In my opinion was a pretty cool series... :)
Is it on TH-cam? I'd like to see that.
@@MaskedMan66 - Same here, got it on video? Could you rip it and upload it?
@@MaskedMan66 Here you are.th-cam.com/video/5rOF8_C8vhY/w-d-xo.html
@@kacmac2340 Thank you! It looks like a lot of fun. 🙂
1986 was BY FAR the best quality adaptation and closest to the book!
THE MUPPET VERSION IS MOST ACCCURATE
It still got further and further from the material as it progressed.
The book's main problem is that Dorothy is a Mary Sue, given how she's 100% perfect and has no emotional core or cohesive whole to tie her ends together in the end.
@@forrestdupre9916 Wasn't 100% accurate. Read the replies to your previous comment on that one other comment.
@@forrestdupre9916 Not by a long shot.
@@TheRealJames76 Will you quit it with the "Mary Sue" garbage? Dorothy was just a good, well-behaved child Baum presented as a role model, that's ALL.
I like the 82 version, thought I agree nothing tops the original
The MGM film isn't the original; that honor belongs to the Selig Company's feature film _The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,_ made in 1910 and starring Bebe Daniels as Dorothy.
Whoa Nice
Very interesting, but I don't like the music. I would also hazard to say (and meaning no disrespect) that too much time was spent on the Wicked Witch's demise.
The 1986 is the only adaptation of oz i saw has a kid and used to both fascinate and terrifie me as a kid
The cyclone scene in the 1986 version was pretty intense, looking back at it gives me nostalgia.
I own all four and like them just as much.
My favorite is the Tom and Jerry one!
The 1939 movie may be the most whimsical, but the 1986 anime will be my favorite version ^^
Did you put Wizard of Oz tom and jerry
You Forgot The Tom & Jerry Verison
And the Muppet version
I don’t think the Tom and Jerry version counts since it’s basically an abridged animated version of the 1939 movie.
I don't think this person forgot anything; the purpose was to compare these four specific versions. Let's face it: there are dozens of adaptations.
@@MaskedMan66 what about The Wiz?
@@forrestdupre87 What about it?
Wizard of Oz (1939) was achieve 100% Rotten Tomatoes
I'd call it 100% rotten personally...
@@JohnnyProctor9 You clearly have no taste in good Oz movies if you think that the 1939 version is garbage. Comparing and contrasting the book from the movie is an apples-to-oranges comparison.
@@TheRealJames76 He's a troll; just ignore him.
So?
you forgot the 1999 the wizard of the emerald city.
That one is a sequel to these the ones shown here are from the original book
Oh
This is a comparison of four specific versions; nothing was forgotten.
I've been looking for an animated version of The wizard of Oz, it isn't any of the ones that are shown in the video. I remember it had a kind of anime style. I used to watch it in a disk that came with other animated shorts like Felix the cat or ants in the plants.
Would it be this one?
th-cam.com/video/lDrlvY6Izbo/w-d-xo.html
@@MaskedMan66 it is! Thank you very much!
@@sopadepulpo4113 You're welcome! :-)
@@MaskedMan66 - OMG that one is HORRIBLE quality AND SHORT!
@@JohnnyProctor9 It's just fun, that's all, and of course it's short; it's from a series that told fairy tales very briefly.
Am I in the right to say I feel old having seen all of these? xD
You make the choice.
Oz is all about being forever young. 🙂
1986 Big time!!!!
I will always love 1939 Judy garland is amazing
There's no place like home 😌😌😌😌
You Forgot 1925 Verison
They chose four out of dozens.
The 1982 version's Dorothy looks like Alice, I really like Dorothy's design in that cartoon though. And oh my god the 1986 anime is so colorful and beautiful. 😍
Finally someone said that her dress in 1982 looked like Alice I thought I was the only one
Dorothy is blonde in the books.
Nice music
Music:Danny Elfman(2013)
Lyrics: Stephen Schwartz(2003)
Directed by:Sam Raimi and Jon M.Chu
!986 are the best
I remember the 1986 version
Nós vamos ver o Mágico. O Mágico Mundo de Oz
I Love The Wizard of OZ
Can you do Poltergeist 2015 Vs 1982?
can you give me a link to each one?
1939 and 1986 ❤️
1995
1885-1905
All version was using Toto to reveal the wizard instead Tom and Jerry did(in Tom and Jerry version)
That's because Toto was the one who revealed it in the original book.
Tom and Jerry are not part of the actual story.
@@MaskedMan66 - It was a pretty good adaptation for kids though, as was the Tom & Jerry Willy Wonka adaptation...
I Never Heard Of The 1982,1986 & 1991 Animation Film & TV I Only Saw The 1939 Version
You forgot the wiz
There are dozens of adaptations.
MaskedMan66 damn I hated the wiz anyway
@@nolife719 Your loss, mate; stage and screen it's a great adaptation.
@@MaskedMan66 - Well, it's better than that Sci-Fi Channel Tin Man rubbish anyway, and better than the 1939 musical IMO...
I wonder what would it be like if I play pink Floyd's dark side of the moon on the 1982 version of oz
“For those who own ‘Dark side of the Moon’ press ‘play’ now”
I like the 1939 and the 1986 the best
1939 classic. Out of caroons i think 1982 is the best one.
U mean cartoon u 6 year
Old
Name of the Music PLEASE
Heard that music from a Disney logo
Interesting comparison combination ... but the music of Disney's "Oz;G&P" is very unmemorable and forgettable.
SamAM16 true should’ve been somewhere over the rainbow
It's good, but it's too "Harry Potter" in my opinion. I watched this with the sound off and listening to Lisa Lougheed's song "Run With Us."
@@maxmusic5380 "Over the Rainbow" is too short for this video, I think.
I personally think the score is beautiful.
Sure this has been asked previously but can someone tell me what the one in the bottom right corner is
The OP explains everything in the description. 🙂
1986 did the move wrong at 4:17
Why did only one of them get it right with Dorothy being blonde? The '86 version got so much right too...
Probably because people are trapped in the MGM paradigm. The Dorothy in the lower right hand version even sounds like Judy Garland.
You forgot the Tom & Jerry version!
That’s because it’s basically an animated version of the 1939 film
1982, The girl who played for Dorothy sounds familiar.
It's the 1982 Annie actress
Aileen Quinn, who played Annie Warbucks in the 1982 movie _Annie._
@@curtthegamer934 Fun Fact: Just as the movie Annie, Aileen Quinn, played Dorothy in the anime movie, Broadway's original Annie, Andrea McArdle, played Judy Garland in a T.V. movie!
But which one is faithful to the frank oz book
The most faithful is the anime series.
why does the 1939 one look better than the 1991 one?
오즈의 마법사
I've seen all except 1991.
Quadparison
Why nobody made adaptations of "Wizard of Oz" fused with "Alice in Wonderland"?!!
There was a comic book crossover which took place across three issues of the DC comic "Captain Carrot and His Amazing Zoo Crew." It was called "The Oz - Wonderland War," and featured characters from both Alice books and many of the Oz books. Alice herself wasn't present, because her adventures had taken place 45 years before Dorothy ever went to Oz, so she was grown up and out of the picture, though the creators realized after the comic story was completed that they could have used Mary Ann, the White Rabbit's housemaid, who looked like Alice.
@@MaskedMan66 Ok.
I still wonder if Alice and Dorothy will be friends or enemies, probably more likely to be best of friends.
@@cory3171 Oh, friends, without a doubt! 🙂 Dorothy makes friends wherever she goes. The thing is that Alice is considerably older than Dorothy; her adventures in Wonderland and Looking-Glass Land happened 45 years before Dorothy made her first journey to Oz. But I'm sure they'd like each other, and probably have a grand time telling each other about their adventures.
Wrong Year It’s 1990 Not 1991
1939 has so many different stuff
Because it's garbage and not true to the books...
@@JohnnyProctor9 ok, L.Frank Baum made stage plays about his books and most of them strayed very far from the source material 😪
@@issabustamante6749 Well said! His widow certainly enjoyed the 1939 movie.
1939 Is The Best 1one
Es el fin más feliz
I told my wizard wizard of oz is from 1930s and she thought it a 90s 😂 I wonder if she talking about anamation cause she didn't mention about the anamation 😂
You forgot 1985.
What That From?
This was made to compare these four specific versions.
l'm just like 1991
Oz