THE WIZ: 2015 NBC LIVE MUSICAL — Page 56

So then don't watch it dude.

Hamilton22 said: "So then don't watch it dude. "

Wow? Really Hamilton22, that's all you have to write after your misguided, ill-informed and blatantly ignorant take on the character of Dorothy?

Face it. You were corrected of your ill-informed and misguided take on the character and what she represents.

You have been left with egg on your face. So why don't you step away from your keyboard and enjoy that piping hot slice of humble pie that you have been served, because at this point anything you post in this thread is just going to come off as laughable, "dude."

Oh shut up.

Lol liar. No one has done as much bitching as you have about this production. Giving your opinion on things is fine but the way you have lashed out at this production is quite childish and reminds of 6 year old crying when they didn't get their way "They didn't do the wiz the way I wanted it" "They didn't do this" "They can't change this!". I like you bestbars but you've been quite embarrassing on this thread.

Anyone know if the making of the wiz special is online yet? I didn't get a chance to watch it yet.

Thanks, Carlos! I'll watch it when I get home from work.

Thank you besty.

Jimmycurry, I didn't think of it like that. I did see that Bestbars is an expert on the wiz and that he has written books related to Oz. So I guess I can understand why him and others are freaking out about this broadcast cause they don't want it to be like the disastrous wiz film. Perhaps I was too hard on besty12. I'm not an idiot, I know best12 is incredibly smart and well educated on the topic of the wiz/oz. It just seemed like he was attacking every little thing the production has done. But I guess when you have the knowledge he has, it's hard to sit back and watch people ruin his baby.

Thank you for enlightening me. And thank you for doing it in a kind way.

.

Updated On: 11/30/15 at 11:22 AM

best12bars said: "You're a waste of good HTML."

Is BWW really the best example of good HTML though? It's serviceable at best...

perfectliar said: "best12bars said: "He's completely wrong for this project if that's his approach. And he thinks the flying monkeys are racial (?!?) so he changed them to Winged Warriors?!?"

The article reads like it was Leon's idea to change the monkeys, and Harvey just came up with the new name.

"

I believe that is correct, and it makes sense. The flying monkeys are perfectly fine in The Wizard of Oz. However, it is borderline offensive in an all-black production revival of The Wiz. I can see it being used to make a statement in the 70s, but it's quite unnecessary and incendiary in the climate of 2015. The production and it's brilliance would be marred seemingly unintentional racist tropes. Cultural consideration was given to Native Americans in the revival broadcast of Peter Pan, so why shouldn't it be afforded to African Americans as well? As a black man, I support the change.

Of course I have a passion for this project in particular. And here's a shock. Everyone who posts here has passion for certain projects too, or you wouldn't be contributing to the boards.

I really only have one "rule" when it comes to adapting Oz-related stories (which I have done myself). Honor the source material. Don't think you're smarter or better or cleverer than L. Frank Baum, because you will lose that bet. You're not. Neither am I. His story has resonated for over a century now for a reason. People are charmed, moved, and inspired by it. It's a true, original, American fairy tale.

"The Wiz," as it appeared on Broadway in 1975, is a beautifully creative adaptation of the Baum story, and in many ways more faithful than the MGM film. But you have to understand that what I mean by "faithful" is "faithful to the intent." There are no afro-wigged dancers as the Yellow Brick Road, there's no Wizard in platformed shoes and a cape singing a Latin-flavored greeting song. But the intent is the same. In this case, we have an additional "intent" that this particular version is an African-American take on the familiar story. It isn't (or wasn't) just an all-black cast that sang and danced on generic Ozzy sets with a generic Ozzy book and score.

I look at the costumes and sets and listen to the music arrangements and see the glimpses of choreography and direction and ask, "Are they serving the story? Honoring the material? Honoring the all-black perspective on the narrative?" If I answer those questions "no," then yeah, I have a problem with it.

The MGM film, and the 1975 version of "The Wiz" honored the material.

Even "Wicked" as drastic as its changes were (and as drastically different as the book was to the stage show), they both honor the material. We get all of the complex backstory to "Elphaba," but she still comes across as a threatening wicked witch to Dorothy. That hasn't changed. If you spin the story from Dorothy's perspective, it's the same. Maguire just showed us his own creative vision of it told through the witch's eyes, but he did it without altering intent. And Wicked isn't an adaptation of "The Wizard of Oz," it's prequel, just like my own books are "sequels" of sorts, set in our modern world. I didn't crap on the Baum stories. I presented them through the modern eyes of a boy as if he had stumbled into that world (of Baum's) today. I honored the material, but told my own story my own way.

So that's really all I'm looking for. If it's too tall of an order for some, that's fine. That's your opinion. Mine is that you fail if you don't honor the intent of this classic tale.

No, I haven't answered that question a million times, and I'm happy to answer it. Baum's original novel "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" is a children's book. He wrote it "to please a child." The story was (and is) powerful enough that it resonated with adults and children alike in 1900, and continues to do so to this day.

MGM's film version was geared toward general movie audiences, not just children. They took their cue from Walt Disney's "Snow White," which told a children's story from a more widely inclusive perspective that worked for adults and kids. It was more complex and sophisticated.

I say all this to keep it mind if you read Baum's book ... or books. He wrote 14 Oz stories, the first being the one most of us know and love. They were all major events of the day, usually released at Christmastime, and not unlike the "event" of a new Harry Potter book. But Baum's books are for children, so the writing is simple and the narrative direct. The imagination behind them, however, is complex and resonates with people long after they put the books down. That was his genius. And there are little jokes with double meanings that will make adults chuckle while children just accept them without necessarily understanding the puns.

If you give them a shot, maybe you will enjoy them, maybe you won't. I fell in love with them first around the age of five. My mother taught me to read with the help of the Oz books that had belonged to my grandfather when he was a little boy. It was my first understanding of a "legacy" being passed along from generation to generation. Even at five, I got that, especially when I saw my grandfather's name in his own five-year-old handwriting in the front of the books. I related to a relative that I never would meet. He died before I was born, but somehow, we were taking these journeys together. As two kids sharing the same experience many decades apart.

The "point" and purpose of my own modern, action-adventure stories based on Baum's work was to drive readers back to the original material. I show his world of Oz through modern eyes and imagine it as a very real (and often overwhelming) place. Especially through the eyes of a 10-year-old boy in our world.

It's my way of inspiring others to check out Baum's adventures and see them as so many generations have before mine as a wealth of creativity and a rich source of entertainment.

"To please a child." That's why he wrote his books. He definitely pleased this one.

There are quite a few changes, if you mostly know the MGM film as your frame of reference. They beefed up the Kansas scenes, made it all dream, but also tightened the narrative and cut several of Dorothy's adventures to make a 100-minute film. She and her friends don't battle the Kalidahs (they do in The Wiz), they aren't rescued from the poppy field by the Queen of the Field Mice and her minions (they are in The Wiz), and after the Wizard leaves in his balloon, they set out on foot to seek Glinda's help, running into the China Country, the Hammerheads, etc. More to the story than what you know via MGM.

But the ultimate intent is the same.

Updated On: 11/30/15 at 12:43 PM