FrogGlace In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Osmosis Iron This trip back to Oz is great, but it's not as "happy go lucky" you might expect... The older Dorothy has been through some bad times and so is Oz. The creatures, environments and overall vibe is noticeably darker. It's a cool contrast and works well, the new characters both good and evil look great and have interesting personalities. A great fantasy story for sure, just maybe not for the really tiny kids!

bowmanblue Yes, we all know the first film - The Wizard of Oz - it was big all that time ago in 1939 and it's still as enjoyable today. Yet, somehow the long awaited (well 1985) sequel 'Return to Oz' never real set the box office alight. It could be thought that that makes it a bad film, however, that couldn't be further from the truth.It's about Dorothy (not Judy Garland, obviously) and her adventures as she's drawn back a second time to the magical land of Oz. Perhaps the main difference is the tone of the film. The 1939 epic was all blatantly filmed in a studio. It could have been a stage show, simply converted to film for all we knew, whereas the sequel is all filmed on location, automatically giving it a more realistic feel.It also drew criticism for NOT having any of the other cast members back. Yes, the Scarecrow, Cowardly Lion and Tin Man are all in it (technically), but their screen time amounts to little more than extended cameos. Instead, we're treated to a new set of weird and wonderful helpers, who go about aiding Dorothy in her quest to defeat a new baddie (the Gnome King).Apart from the fact that it's Oz and the central character is Dorothy, there are few similarities between the two films, leaving some to wonder what sort of sequel this is.But don't be put off. It may be a different type of magical adventure, but it's still a very good one. Fairuza Balk has the difficult task of being the new Judy Garland, but she puts on a good performance as the small, vulnerable girl, lost in a much more nasty place than (the slightly older) Judy Garland had to survive in.If you're a fan of fantasy films (and of course the original) then you should enjoy this. Just don't expect the happy-go-lucky feel of Oz's predecessor. It's worth returning to Oz, just to see this.

reddragonhero17 When I first heard of this movie, I was expecting, like everyone else something bright and cheerful just like its original. However, I was surprised at what was in this that was actually creepy yet I still found it enjoyable despite what critics said about this. Even though this movie did give me nightmares for days (I was nine at the time I saw it) there was a magnet in this movie that had me coming back to it. The well designed sets and imaginative characters and the feel that is much closer to L. Frank Baum's works (even though I did not read them) made it more enjoyable than the original. The character that freaks me out the most? The Nome King and his Nomes. The idea of some demonic face peering at me from a wall or rock just gives me the feel of paranoia. Despite its creepy vibe, I would recommend it for the brave and adventurous (if not very young) of audiences.

Hollywood_Yoda "Return to Oz" was the Disney Company's first attempt at a sequel or prequel to the classic 1939 film, "The Wizard of Oz." It resembles nothing of the MGM classic and is almost no comparison in regards to achievement or style. Nonetheless the film has been endured as a family-friendly version of Oz and has achieved cult status. "Return to Oz" is the black sheep of the Oz film family in this writer's eyes.In honor of Roger Ebert, who passed earlier this week, I would give this film one thumbs up, as it sparked my interest enough to watch it, but not enough to take it seriously after seeing the 1939 classic it is a sequel of. It has a hint of Disney magic, but nothing full flair like many Disney adaptations today, such as "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" or the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. However, "Return to Oz" does build on a classic and that is why it is still remembered today.I was only glad to hear that Disney Corp had decided to make "Oz the Great and Powerful" as a prequel to the 1939 classic. May it stand the test of time like "The Wizard of Oz" has for many generations to come.