The Wizard of Oz (1925): An Odd Movie Based on the Classic Story

The Wizard of Oz has been made into numerous movies over the years. There have been silent versions, animated variations, and, of course, the Judy Garland version from 1939 that has deservedly been hailed as a movie classic. Fourteen years before that film came along, however, there was another film version based on Frank L. Baum's classic story, but it would throw away virtually everything associated with the book in favor of a different plot and slapstick comedy. Released in 1925, this version of The Wizard of Oz has a plot that had the potential to be interesting, but it is all but completely overshadowed by the film's attempt to essentially become an overlong comedy short.

The film's story is told by a toymaker to his daughter, and right away, it is apparent that this version of The Wizard of Oz is certainly not the one that everyone grew up with. To begin with, we start in Oz, which is under the rule of Prime Minister Kruel, who certainly lives up to his name as he causes pain to the people. It turns out the the rightful ruler of Oz had vanished when she was an infant, and everyone wants her found right away. Naturally, Kruel does not want this to occur, and plans to do everything possible to prevent the princess from taking over Oz.

Meanwhile, in Kansas, we meet Dorothy, a young girl living on the farm with her Aunt Em and Uncle Henry. Em is sweet and loving, while Henry is cruel and somewhat abusive. Also on the farm are a trio of farmhands, one of whom is played by Oliver Hardy, before he collaborated with Stan Laurel. Aside from Snowball, an African American farmhand, none of them are given names. One particular farmhand is the apparent star of the film, as his name appears on the opening title card. His name is Larry Semon, and he thought it would be a good idea to change the classic story into a film where he would show off as many comedic sketches as possible.

This is where one of the film's biggest flaws show up: too often, there are scenes which are made to provide comic relief, but they go on for too long and do little, if anything, to advance the plot. Case in point: Semon finds himself in a series of comic routines from having a hen lay an egg on his face (and since the film is in black and white, the yolk is black!) to having a duck swipe a lolly pop from him and spitting in his face. These gags are nothing that has not been seen in various cartoons, and may have fit well in short subjects, but they merely slow down the proceedings here. Having rapid fire gags in a movie can work-Airplane pulled it off beautifully-but here, the skits seem to detract to the story rather than add to it.

After a while, we get back to the story as Em shares a secret with Dorothy: years ago, she and Henry found a baby on their doorstep, along with an envelope with instructions that it should be opened when the child turned eighteen. The infant in question is Dorothy, and needless to say, she is interested about finding out who she really is. When her birthday comes along, however, she is in for some big trouble courtesy of Wikked, Kruel's adviser, and his minions.

Wikked has orders to prevent Dorothy from reading the papers anyway he can, going as far as to try and kill her by hoisting her into the air and burning the rope to which she is tied so that she might fall to her doom. Despite some close calls, Dorothy is saved and the papers are protected. Then at about the halfway mark of the film (which is a little over 90 minutes or so long), we finally get to see the tornado that whisks Dorothy to Oz. In this version, it is not just Dorothy who goes to Oz, but also Henry and the three farmhands. Em is never heard from again, nor do we learn what her fate is. This is one glaring plot hole, but it is not the only one. The first half of the film also features a love triangle between Dorothy, Semon, and Hardy, but this is all but completely forgotten about after they reach Oz...

...which, judging from the Kremlin-style roofs, is actually located in Russia. Soon after their arrival, Dorothy and the others learn that the young girl is actually the Princess of Oz, who is destined to become its ruler on her eighteenth birthday. Then Semon and Hardy run from Kruel's minions and end up disguising themselves as the Scarecrow and Tin Woodsman, respectively. I kid you not: instead of individual characters that Dorothy meets, these people are actually the farmhands in disguise. For the record, there is no wicked witch, good witch, Munchkins, or flying monkeys in this version of Oz. Poor Toto does not have a chance to make even a cameo appearance, either. I know that certain liberties with a story tend to be taken when adapting it to the big screen, but having the Scarecrow and Tin Woodsman turn out to be the farmhands in disguise pretty much ruin the sense of wonder that Oz was always meant to have.

It gets worse: after Semon and Hardy are apprehended on the belief that they kidnapped Dorothy, it is Semon who is sent to the dungeon after Hardy betrays him. Both Hardy and Henry work for Kruel, while Dorothy meets Prince Kynd, with whom she falls in love. In the dungeons, the plot, such as it is, really takes a back seat for the most part in favor of extended comedic sketches. At one point, Semon hides from Kruel's minions underneath boxes, and in true cartoon fashion, he magically teleports from one box to another. It is a neat sketch, but goes on far too long. In the meantime, Snowball, who is also in the dungeon, receives aid from the Wizard of Oz himself, who serves Kruel, but secretly wishes for him to be overthrown. As he is unable to perform any real magic, he gives Snowball a Cowardly Lion disguise so that he may blend in with the other lions in the dungeon. It is as if the filmmakers were compelled to throw in the lion in such a lame way merely to emphasize that this was an adaptation of The Wizard of Oz. The lion disguise leads to another predictable, and seemingly overlong, skit in which Semon ends up in the lion cage and thinks that a lion is Snowball in disguise, when in fact it is actually a real lion.

Semon manages to escape in time to rescue Dorothy and Kynd from Kruel, who then admits it was he who took Dorothy to Kansas as an infant all those years ago so that she may be protected from court factions. It is also revealed that Dorothy and Kynd are intended to become a couple, though Dorothy has only just met the prince. As for Semon, he finds himself being pursued by Kruel's guards. He manages to escape by grabbing onto a rope ladder on a plane piloted by Snowball. Then we get to an ending that had me going "What the heck?" the first time I saw it.

As Semon holds onto the ladder, it breaks, and he finds himself plummeting to his doom. Then the scene cuts back to the toymaker's house, where a scarecrow doll falls off a chair, awakening the young girl. She is scared, but the toymaker comforts her, and she heads upstairs to try and go back to sleep. Then he opens up the book, and we learn that Dorothy and Kynd lived happily ever after. Even though they barely know each other.

I have seen endings that make me wonder what the filmmakers were thinking when they came up with them, but this one takes the cake. Why have Dorothy be put on the fast track to falling in love with a prince? What was up with having Semon fall to his death? Perhaps these problems could be chalked up to the fact that the movie had a troubled production history, and Chadwick Pictures, which was responsible for the film, ended up going bankrupt as a result.Maybe the filmmakers felt that they were running so low on money that they just slapped together an ending that brings some closure, but also results in some head scratching on the audience's part. At any rate, the ending is the final nail in the coffin for a promising alternative version of such a beloved tale.

This film could and should have been a great version of The Wizard of Oz...maybe even going as far as to rival the 1939 version to some extent. The idea of having Dorothy being a princess from the land of Oz is an interesting one rife with possibilities, but the plot took a back seat to the comedy routines, and was not as well developed as it could have been. Plot holes are opened up and never resolved; the comedy bits are overlong, not always funny, and do little to advance the plot; and the overall lack of a sense of wonder makes this version far inferior to other film adaptations (and not just the 1939 version) of the classic story. The ending is bizarre and borders on having been rushed. Thus, the potential for making this into a great film was wasted.

Does the film have any merit? There are some special effects which were neat for their time, and as mentioned, the comedy skits are sometimes funny, if overlong. The acting is all right, and some of the dialog is so bad it is hilarious to a modern audience. Quotes such as "Do your stuff, Wizzy!" and "Don't you see them, egg? Meet Mr. Ham." are cheesy, but then it seems that it was commonplace for some dialog in silent films to be somewhat corny. As a whole, however, the film leaves a lot to be desired. Some of the public domain DVD versions, with mediocre narration and out of place music, make the whole experience even worse. Overall, the film should be seen by die hard Wizard of Oz fans so they can see how not to make a film version of a wonderful story. It had potential, but it was wasted so that it could become a comedy with only a little bit of plot added to the mix.