Dorothy, saved from a psychiatric experiment by a mysterious girl, is somehow called back to Oz when a vain witch and the Nome King destroy everything that makes the magical land beautiful.Dorothy, saved from a psychiatric experiment by a mysterious girl, is somehow called back to Oz when a vain witch and the Nome King destroy everything that makes the magical land beautiful.Dorothy, saved from a psychiatric experiment by a mysterious girl, is somehow called back to Oz when a vain witch and the Nome King destroy everything that makes the magical land beautiful.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Nominated for 1 Oscar
- 6 nominations total
Sean Barrett
- Tik-Tok
- (voice)
Denise Bryer
- Billina
- (voice)
Brian Henson
- Jack Pumpkinhead
- (voice)
Stewart Harvey-Wilson
- Jack Pumpkinhead
- (as Stewart Larange)
Lyle Conway
- Gump
- (voice)
Stephen Norrington
- Gump
- (as Steve Norrington)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Be warned: this film may be found a little too frightening for the young ones. It's a shattered vision of the Land of Oz with the jovial munchkins conspicuously absent, and it opens with Dorothy in an insane asylum (!). What's surprising to me is I rented this film with the mindset that it was going to be complete trash, that a sequel to "The Wizard of Oz" was blashphemy. I stand corrected. This adaption is an effectively satisfying interpretation of the popular children's story. Child actress Fairuza Balk (now in such crap like "The Waterboy") is a very convincing Dorothy Gail, more so than Academy Award winner Judy Garland in the original. But it's the little things that keep you entertained: a severed trophy head, brought to life, quips, "If I had a stomach, I know I'd be sick!" when free-falling through the air; the evil Princess Mambi has an interesting collection on display in her palace; and the realization that the cause of Oz's decline into this dismal state may be directly attributed to Dorothy's departure in the prequel. One disappointment: Toto is left behind in favor of a talking chicken. I know, I know . . .
Grade: B
Grade: B
Most of the comments on this film seem to be from people who saw this when they were little, and haven't been able to forget it. The imagery of this film lingers long after first view, and its marked stylistic and thematic differences to Wizard Of Oz have a hypnotic effect on a certain type of viewer.
In Return, the central theme is one of deep unhappiness with reality and a wish to return to fantasy, where as Wizard focuses more on the concept of "there's no place like home". I admire and am still deeply effected by this film because, in some ways, it is braver than Wizard. It isn't afraid to deal with the conflict - that the misery of a grey Kansas is very real.
It expresses a rippling dissatisfaction that seems more in keeping with Baum's original works, and is all the more satisfying for it. In particular, I enjoyed the parrallels between the real world and Oz- for what it suggests about our world- and the Nome King's conversation with Dorothy. For a children's film, there is great depth in both, and most of the film can be interpreted on several different levels. The implications of the corridor of heads alone is enough to send any first year pysch/lit student into a whole mess of garbage.
But don't be fooled. This also an excellent children's film, that deserves more attention than it got.
In Return, the central theme is one of deep unhappiness with reality and a wish to return to fantasy, where as Wizard focuses more on the concept of "there's no place like home". I admire and am still deeply effected by this film because, in some ways, it is braver than Wizard. It isn't afraid to deal with the conflict - that the misery of a grey Kansas is very real.
It expresses a rippling dissatisfaction that seems more in keeping with Baum's original works, and is all the more satisfying for it. In particular, I enjoyed the parrallels between the real world and Oz- for what it suggests about our world- and the Nome King's conversation with Dorothy. For a children's film, there is great depth in both, and most of the film can be interpreted on several different levels. The implications of the corridor of heads alone is enough to send any first year pysch/lit student into a whole mess of garbage.
But don't be fooled. This also an excellent children's film, that deserves more attention than it got.
I honestly do think this is under-appreciated. I know it is more sombre in tone than the 1939 classic, but that's not a bad thing at all. The film does look beautiful, with lovely sets and costumes, and the special effects work is some of the best of its kind of any family film of the 80s or of any decade, Tick-Tock and the Nome King are brilliantly designed. Return to Oz, with its very imaginative storytelling- seen in memorable scenes like with the heads- and enchantingly dark atmosphere, also has enough magic to engage the viewer, well to me it does anyway. The climax is chillingly effective, though Nome King did seem to be defeated too easily. Fairuza Balk is excellent as Dorothy, charming, sincere and even adorable. Many have complained that Balk is too young for the character, but in the 1939 musical Judy Garland was nearly 17 when in the book Dorothy is about 12. I also loved the music score and the cinematography, which was both dreamlike and nightmarish. Another mention should go to Nicol Williamson in the duel roles of Dr Worley and the Nome King(who may be a bit too scary for young viewers, likewise with the character of Mombi), he did a truly wonderful job in both roles, particularly the latter where he was threatening in an understated way. Also to Pumpkinhead, who a number of times, came close to stealing the show, and Tick-Tock, whose personality is perhaps the most colourful of all. The only character I didn't care for was the chicken, who is annoying at times and not really that necessary. Overall, this is a truly excellent film, that I think deserves a lot more recognition. 9/10 Bethany Cox.
There have been many people since this film came out who have tried to compare it to The Wizard of Oz. I don't think you can compare the two films and neither film is better than the other. They're both fantastic.
This is an enjoyable movie which can be enjoyed time and time again. Dorothy returns to Oz and teams up with Tik-Tok (a robot), Jack Pumpkinhead (a pumpkin man obviously) and the Gump (don't ask)to battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi. There's plenty of fun throughout as Dorothy and friends battle the likes of the wheelies and all manner of creatures.
The finale is perhaps one of the best ever for a fantasy film. Yes, it really is that good as Dorothy and friends meet up with the Scarecrow and battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi.
The original Wizard Of Oz was a timeless classic still talked about today. It is no exaggeration to call Return To Oz a classic movie either.
This is an enjoyable movie which can be enjoyed time and time again. Dorothy returns to Oz and teams up with Tik-Tok (a robot), Jack Pumpkinhead (a pumpkin man obviously) and the Gump (don't ask)to battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi. There's plenty of fun throughout as Dorothy and friends battle the likes of the wheelies and all manner of creatures.
The finale is perhaps one of the best ever for a fantasy film. Yes, it really is that good as Dorothy and friends meet up with the Scarecrow and battle the evil Nome King and Princess Mombi.
The original Wizard Of Oz was a timeless classic still talked about today. It is no exaggeration to call Return To Oz a classic movie either.
After reading about 40 of the other comments here, all of whom say RETURN TO OZ is dark and disturbing, I will make a different comment. In the early 80s Disney certainly were off the cash trail with a range of films, each expertly produced, that were box office disasters. One may recall SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES, TRON, THE BLACK CAULDRON, ONE MAGIC Christmas and a few others that had much to offer any thinking crowd,and each had special effects that were quite astonishing. Disney were in a very bleak period and the films, attempting to reflect perhaps a more mature or even grown up perspective chose, oh dear I have to say it: a dark and disturbing theme. At the time of release every critic bleated at the grim and melancholy tone of RETURN TO OZ, and sadly themselves neglected to celebrate the original book look, a choice Disney execs applauded themselves for. One Exec infamously said to us theatre owners: "We're going for the Frank L Baum book illustrations and nothing like that 1939 vaudeville thing". Oh dear, I thought at the time. You mean the world's most popular kids film? Well. $27 million dollars later in production costs returned maybe a quarter in theatre film rentals and RETURN TO OZ for all its merit and lavish production care and superb scary special effects....was consigned to the Disney dud bin. At the time I was irritated by the fixed goony expressions on Jack Pumpkinhead and the Scarecrow (loved Tik-tok, though, a fascinating and completely compelling design and movement piece) This time around I didn't mind it and actually appreciated the fact that they were 'book' expressions. Viewed 20 years later on a Disney DVD of dubious quality, I have to say it is a film more suited to these dark and disturbing times and if released today would certainly get a better reception and better crits...and possibly make a lot of money. I think the world is tuned into this type of family film more now than in the Flashdance 80s. The production values of RETURN TO OZ are simply breathtaking. Scene after scene perfectly realised: the green walled horror of the psychiatric asylum in reel one, the amazing claymation of the Gnome King, and especially the glittering halls of Mombi's castle. One genuinely screamworthy scene in the hall of Heads with a headless Queen rushing about in a nightmarish vision is almost only for adults, so intense is it's genuine horror. The glittering climax of a restored Emerald City is a triumph of green and silver/gold set design, I defy any viewer not to rewind it several times just to see each and every part. Yes nominated for 5 Oscars, it won none and vanished for 20 years. The no-marquee name Fairuza Balk didn't help the public embrace, no matter how exquisite she is. At least she wasn't named Soleil Moon Fry. In the same class as The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth, RETURN TO OZ now deserves its place there as part of a trilogy of superbly crafted fantasy for smart kids and astonished adults. That 'vaudeville thing' it certainly isn't. But not a failure either. The DVD is lacking trailers and production material that should and could be included. Bad Disney! Good film! I also defy any viewer not to shriek with laughter at the Gnome King revealing he is wearing the ruby slippers, a sly joke well presented.
Did you know
- TriviaThe movie is based on the second and third of L. Frank Baum's Oz books: "The Marvelous Land of Oz" and "Ozma of Oz". Elements from the former include the introduction of Jack Pumpkinhead, the witch Mombi and her powder of life, the conquest of the Emerald City, the escape by flying sofa, and the search for Princess Ozma. From the latter comes the return of Dorothy, the talking chicken Billina, the Wheelers, the discovery of Tik-Tok, a princess with interchangeable heads, the introduction of the Nome King, and the ornament room.
- GoofsTik-Tok's thinking mechanism is activated by winding the key under his left arm, and his talking is activated by winding the one under his right arm. However, when he asks Dorothy to wind his thinking key before entering the ornament room, she winds the one under his right arm.
- Quotes
Jack Pumpkinhead: If his brain's ran down, how can he talk?
Dorothy: It happens to people all the time, Jack.
- Alternate versionsWhen it was aired on the Disney channel, the following were cut: When "Ozma" unties Dorothy from the bed in the doctor's room, the line where she tells Dorothy that the screaming patients are locked in the cellar is cut. When Dorothy first visits Mombi, much is cut. A lot of shots of the heads behind the glass are cut, and so is a lot of footage when Mombi puts on her head. Because of this, a line is cut where she asks Dorothy how she looks, and Dorothy tells her she looks beautiful. In the TV version, it cuts straight to the line, "And just who might you be?" When Mombi wakes up, many shots of the screaming heads and EVERY shot of the headless Mombi trying to get Dorothy is cut. A few seconds of footage of the Nome King's death are cut, including when his eye turns to stone, and some of the "poison" shots.
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Oz... un mundo fantástico
- Filming locations
- Salisbury Plain, Wiltshire, England, UK(Kansas scenes)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $11,137,801
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $2,844,895
- Jun 23, 1985
- Gross worldwide
- $11,140,134
- Runtime
- 1h 53m(113 min)
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content