User reviews

The Muppet's Wonderful Wizard of Oz has to be the worst Muppet movie ever to be put on screen. I was heavy with anticipation when the movie started last night only to find the production completely lack of any real energy or elation.

Where the movie fails is simple. The writers and producers are trying too hard to make them funny. If you watch the original three Muppet movies from the 1980's you'll find that the characters are funny to adults and children a like because the stories they were playing through were simple, and original. Adults related to the stories, not because the Muppets were playing adult jokes, but because the Muppets were playing adults.

This movie was touted as being the movie to bring back the adult humor in the Muppet franchise. In the film there is a scene where Pepe the Prawn unknowingly plays with Gonzo's (Tin Man) nipples. The joke was completely distasteful and not funny.

The other problem with the new Television movies are that they rely too much on the main human characters and their 'star appeal'. Why not rely on the Muppets to be Muppets and have the 'star appeal' revolve around them, rather than the other way around?

Overall i was very sad and dissatisfied with the movie and hope that with future endeavors they just write a story for actors and let Muppets play in it, rather than write a story for Muppets that Muppets can play their own jokes. And for someone's sake please stop using already told stories.

This was not very good Muppet Translation, maybe because it was produced by Disney/ABC -- but it was just plain lacking of that Original Muppet Magic.

Most notable is an "unknown" who does the voice for Fozzie Bear/Cowardly Lion; it sounded way too much like Mrs. Piggy. The movie itself was much too fast paced, like they were rushing it for some reason. They had two hours, what was the rush? Of course, I'm of the camp who does not like it when singers become actors. Ashanti was bearable when she was just singing. I do not understand why Frank Oz, Brian Henson, etc didn't do their signature voices...working on Revenge Of The Sith?...contractual obligations? I don't know....but it was too annoying.

This would have been MUCH better if this was produced by the original Henson gang. This was a "cute" attempt...but not true to the original Muppet Magic/Spirit.

I'm a fan of the Muppets from way back - the Muppet Show was campy and entertaining, and the Muppet Movie is a classic. The Muppet "movies" have ranged from the delightful (Muppet Treasure Island) to the bizarre (Muppets From Space). But "The Muppet's Wizard of Oz" is easily the worst of the bunch:

• While "The Muppet Movie" had more cameos than my Aunt Tilly's jewelry box, this movie features David Alan Grier, Queen Latifah (in what must have been a contractual necessary role), Jeffrey Tambor, and Quentin Tarentino. It's sad, really.

• The humor is, for the most part, forced from the characters, as formulaic as anything I've ever seen. There is just the slightest resemblance to the early work of Jim Henson and Frank Oz. One must wonder why Frank Oz was not a part of the ensemble; the script, perhaps?

• The decision to use Pepe the King Prawn as Toto aside (the most redeeming production decision made), the pillars of the Muppet domain - Kermit, Piggy, Fozzie, and Gonzo - are relegated to secondary roles that could easily have been any other characters.

• The Muppet performers, even the veteran Dave Goelz, seemed to be giving poor imitations of their own creations.

• A movie works best when it isn't aware of itself, but this one plays like a tacky road show of a vintage Broadway play. In fact, the whole movie seems to echo Norma Desmond's desperation to be a star again.

If "The Muppet's Wizard of Oz" is any indication, the Muppets are done.

This isn't just bad. It's shockingly bad. Bad to the point that you really feel sorry for the Muppets being in it. It would have gotten just one star but it got another because Queen Latifah is in it.

There are two fatal flaws in it. First, and worst, is Ashanti. I'm sure she's a nice person, kind to the elderly and to small animals. But she cannot act for beans. She has one facial expression and reads her lines as if she were holding the script and reading them cold for the first time.

This would be bearable because I love the Muppets. But the script is a disaster. It references THE PASSION OF THE Christ, APOCALYPSE NOW, KILL BILL and (as best I could figure) the HBO series MISFITS OF SCIENCE. So there we have three R-rated movies and an adults only series that featured ample sex and violence as sources of material.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this meant as programming for children? Ozzie Osborne's children, maybe, but beyond them there's not a big potential audience for it.

Maybe if Frank Oz had directed this he would have shaped it into something great. With the exception of DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS I've enjoyed all of his live action movies. And I firmly believe that the right director can get a good, even excellent, performance out of just about anyone by working with them and forcing them to dig deep into themselves to find that spark.

The Muppets will live to fight another day. And Ashanti, unfortunately, is continuing her acting career. She's in the third RESIDENT EVIL movie playing a nurse. However, she only gets ninth billing so she won't be able to do a lot of damage. And I can hope to see her ripped apart by zombie dogs: that will make me feel better about the $1.99 I spent to rent this movie.

Go check out the original MUPPET MOVIE or, my favorite, THE MUPPETS TAKE MANHATTAN. They have appeal for all ages.

What a disappointment! Though I will say that there are some redeeming qualities. Ashanti does give a very spirited performance in the title role as Dorothy, with a lovely singing voice, but it is one of the weaker interpretations of the character, the weakest being Diana Ross in the Wiz. If you want a wonderful characterisation of Dorothy, try Judy Garland or Fairuza Balk. I liked some of the contributions from Gonzo, Kermit and Miss Piggy especially,(I did like the Muppet's spoof on Ride of the Valkyries) but all of them have given better performances. There is also some nice scenery and costumes. Unfortunately the film is undermined by some very mediocre songs, and the script just wasn't funny, apart from the witch's line "I'll get you my pretty, and your little prawn too". Other than that, the jokes were contrived and overdone, and the film didn't have any of the magic of the original story. I agree with other commentators that it was an attempt to make the Muppets more contemporary, and because of the overall mediocrity of the film, it just didn't work. I absolutely love the Muppets, and I love most of their movies, especially Christmas Carol and Treasure Island, not to mention the surprisingly good Great Muppet Caper. But basically, Muppets Wizard Of Oz doesn't make the grade, some of it was very painful to watch, especially Quentin Tarantino's completely useless cameo, so I will give it a 3/10 for the Muppets. Bethany Cox.

My daughter just loved this movie. She has seen it more times than I can count. It's definitely not as good as the Muppet movies I grew up with (I still love The Great Muppet Caper), but most kids will love it.

The problem with this movie is that it lost the sweetness that always existed in the Muppet movies. Dorothy is no longer the sweet little farm girl from Kansas. She is now a feisty waitress in Aunt Em's diner who lives in a trailer park in Kansas and dreams of being a Pop Star. She wants to be somebody special and fortunately learns that she always special and never needed stardom.

You'll see the munchkins replaced by Hensons legendary rats, including Rizzo. Toto is now Pepe the Prawn. Miss. Piggy is hilarious as the three different witches. I loved their version of the wicked witch. She and her gang are still wicked but much less frightening as a leather-wearing motorcycle gang.

Parents will no doubt suffer as they watch all of this campy silliness, but at least the kids will be happy.

P.S. Good luck trying to figure out why in the world Quentin Tarantino was in the movie. That was a complete waste of five minutes.

I'm sorry--I just couldn't get through it. Whatever happened to the innocent fun the Muppets brought to these stories?

* Toto as a shrimp? I don't think so. Worse, a greedy, conniving, shrimp? I'm continuing not to think so.

* Rearranging Dorothy's motivations from the original to the "teen music star" fantasy was appalling. Hasn't that threadbare character motivation been done to death already?

* Ashanti's acting skills make Keanu Reaves comparable to Laurence Olivier.

* Changing the encounter with the Munchkins and the Wicked Witch of the East? Not quite blasphemy, I'll grant you, but very muddled.

* The on-camera death scene with Miss Piggy under the house was...well, just not on.

* Kermit as the scarecrow is okay, but not enough to save this.

* The sexual overtones of the nipple business in the TIN shack when the shrimp {shudder} is exploring Gonzo was completely unnecessary. This is Disney, AND the Muppets. They don't DO that sort of thing. How did that get past Standards and Practices? I'm going to have nightmares tonight because of that scene.

* My wife watched it longer than I did, and she was put off by the defibrillator scene in the poppy club. I didn't make it that far into the movie.

* They didn't even have Mabel King singing "No Bad News." (Yes, I know she passed in 1999, but it's the principle of the thing.)

* From what I can see, this was the director's first directing job. I'm voting that it be his last, as well. He's no Sidney Lumet (and you know what Sid did to "The Wiz") but hey, this guy's biggest contribution to the movie business thus far was the role of the boom box punk in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

This is a fun Muppet take on the classic story. In this movie The Muppets take on The Wizard of Oz in a great parody that is both charming and smart. Ashanti plays Dorothy Gale a farm girl who dreams of becoming a singer. One day she is swept away to the magical land of Oz. Toto is here replaced by prawn played by Pepe the King Prawn. Rizzo the Rat plays the Mayor of Munchkinland and all the Munchkins are played by his rat family. Kermit the Frog plays the Scarecrow and he is great as Always (You can't help but like Kermit the Frog). The Great Gonzo is the Tin Man and Fozzie Bear is Cowardly Lion/Bear.

This movie is closer to the book than the 1939 movie including elements like the wizard telling Dorothy to get the wicked witch of the west's magical eye rather than her broom and and there being four witches instead of three. Miss Piggy plays all the witches and she is one of the best parts of the movie.

This is high-quality family entertainment.But what else can you expect from Disney.The film is full of clever jokes and lovable characters. This is a film that both young and old will like and can be rewatched many times. This movie comes highly recommended ! and look out for a surprise cameo.

I rented this film because my 7 year old daughter loves Muppets and The Wizard of Oz very much. I wish I had read other users comments first. I didn't feel that it was entertaining at all and I didn't find parts of it appropriate for my daughter. I have to say the whole biker mama bit a little much. And the comment from Gonzo about "you can see my rear end! I must be working out!" to be really over line. I don't have any issues with an African-American playing Dorothy, but I am positive that they could have found someone with a little more skill. I do believe that Dorothy should have been someone a little younger than Ashanti as well. As I remember they thought Judy Garland might have been too old at 16! If this is the path Disney is steering the Muppets then they should sell the franchise to a company who will produce quality films. Now that I think of it, the only movies I can think of that Disney has made in the last few years that are any good have Pixar doing the real work. I am sure there are those that will disagree with me, but these are "my" comments.

I was fortunate enough to attend one of the premiere screenings of this film at the TriBeCa Film Festival in April. Granted, The Muppets' Wizard of Oz isn't Citizen Kane, but it is a fun outing, a movie that will entertain both kids and adults, and in that way it holds true to the vision of Jim Henson. I do agree that Ashanti is neither a great singer nor a great actor, but she's a popular recording artist that is kid friendly (how many of those can you think of), and she really isn't why you're going to watch a Muppet movie, now is she? The plot actually holds amazingly close, considering, to the original L. Frank Baum story, complete with SILVER shoes and 4 different witches, including Glinda, the witch of the SOUTH not north as was changed for the old classic film version. I am not going to give more away as this film has not been aired yet but I must tell Muppet fans that while Oz does not hold up to any of the original theatrical films during Henson's life, it is much better than most recent Muppet outings, has many very funny moments, and is DEFINITELY worth watching, if only for Pepe, who is hilarious! Enjoy!

This movie is an attempt by the clueless executives at Disney and the music recording studios to conscript Jim Henson's creations into a vehicle to promote their latest banal singer. It's obvious from the first scene as she breaks into her insipid solo number this is going to have a lot more about showcasing her so-called talents than anything fun with Muppets. My son informed me that she calls herself "Ashanti"--the latest mediocre offering from the record industry factories. Somebody had the asinine idea that she could act. Did they not notice that she has less acting ability than the average 3rd grader? If they did, I'm sure the phrase "It's for kids, so it won't matter" was used. Quentin Tarantino had an incomprehensible scene with Kermit the Frog that wasn't funny and may be frightening for some children. Some scenes from the L. Frank Baum novel cut from the Judy Garland movie were attempted. For example, each of the characters sees the wizard as something different (but with bad CGI). This might have been interesting if handled by a competent director but they were ruined here by idiotic poor implementation. The worst idea in this whole production is even having "Ashanti" in the same ZIP code as the movie, much less a starring role. In conclusion, if you love the Muppets, the works of L. Frank Baum, the Judy Garland Wizard of Oz or even Michael Jackson's The Wiz, AVOID THIS MOVIE. If you have any respect for Jim Henson and don't want to lose respect for Brian Henson, AVOID THIS MOVIE. If you like Quentin Tarantino, go get one of his other movies and AVOID THIS MOVIE. If you are looking for light family entertainment and have any sense of good taste, AVOID THIS MOVIE.

I was anticipating the release of the Muppet version of Wizard of Oz. I had heard that this version would be more closely identified with the Frank L. Baum book rather than the more familiar Judy Garland version so I was prepared for a 'different' story, but I was not prepared for what I saw and heard.

The Good: The Muppets were all there, the voices a little different but for all intents and purposes the personalities are still the same, I still miss Jim Henson's personal touch and flavour though. The quick-witted phrase turnings were enjoyable and the sight gags made me chuckle but for the better experience please see the DVD version with the 'edited for television' scenes added back.

The Bad & The Ugly: References to the worst parts of society, the 'Girls Gone Wild' elements, scantily clad Ashanti in clothes that were too small and unflattering. What was with the various 'Wizard' apparitions, particularly a dominatrix - how does that fit into a family film? The Muppets have always been a little edgy, part of their appeal is the ability to entertain the kiddies on one level while giving the parents enough to keep their attention too and not cause embarrassment. I enjoyed the movie overall, there are plenty of the familiar good parts of the Muppets we all know and love but parents, be prepared to do some 'splaining about some of the comments, actions and visuals presented to young children, this is not the Sesame Street version of Kermit and friends.

The Muppets are an acquired taste, but if you've liked any of their previous work this is one of their better ones. Some of the humor requires that you are familiar with the characters, other jokes require knowledge of the movie, and even better, the book. However even for a Muppet-newbie who's never heard of the Wizard of Oz this is an enjoyable film.

The team aimed higher than most of the previous outings by picking a well known, and loved, story. In my opinion they didn't miss the mark. I am not a real fan of Ashanti so the musical segments are a bit long for my taste, but the film overall contained relatively few clunkers. Like everyone else who has commented, the film is really stolen by Toto; by himself, he makes the film worth watching.

Jim, Jim, wherefore art thou, Jim! I have to say this was the first time I was genuinely disappointed by any Muppet movie. This was nothing more than a tribute to the next little pop star, Ashanti, and it made it feel like a selling out of all things Muppet. This work was pretty weak, the adaptation itself was horrendous, and the acting was ... (I hate to say it) sad.

I hope with all My little Muppet Heart, that Brian does something innovative and GOOD to give us something back from this horrendous disappointment.

Yes, it really WAS that bad. *sighs* It rates a 3.4/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Alright people, before you try knock Ashanti, let me just give y'all a little food for thought. "The Wizard of Oz (MGM, 1939)", this version is by far the most beloved version of all versions L. Frank Baum's classic story. One thing that y'all need to remember is that when Judy Garland starred in it, it was meant to become a big-budgeted classic. MGM was one of the top studios back in the "Golden Age of Hollywood" and almost anything that came out of that studio was meant to be a picture of class and prestige, from their "B" movies (i.e. "The Thin Man", 1934, William Powell and Myrna Loy) to their classic "A" pictures (i.e."San Francisco, 1936, Clark Gable, Spencer Tracy, and Jeanette McDonald), these films have stood the test time. If only there were more studios like MGM.

Now, the Muppets version of the "Wizard of Oz" was light-hearted family fun. Granted, I have seen Ashanti act better ("Coach Carter"), but her acting was meant to be over-exaggerated, because after all she was working with the Muppets. Granted, this film is far from a classic, but it's meant to be a lot of fun. Now people tell me, when you have ever seen any award winning acting in a Muppets film, (i.e. 1969's "Hey Cinderella), just watch that film and you'll see that the acting is the same in that film as it was in the "Wizard of Oz". So before you even try to say anything bad about the film and compare Ashanti with Judy Garland, please try to put things in perspective and remember that we are living in two different time periods and things were a lot different then than they are now.

I was lucky enough to see this at the Tribeca Film Festival recently. I grew up watching the Muppet Show and I wanted to show my kids how great and lovable the characters are.

Honestly, this isn't as good as 'Muppets Take Manhattan' or 'The Great Muppet Caper', but it was highly enjoyable fun for me and my kids. There were a lot of laughs, and my children were never restless, which isn't something that happens very often at the movies.

As for the cast, I wasn't very impressed with Ashanti as a performer, but I don't think anyone sees a Muppet movie to enjoy the human performances.

That said, I thought Jeffrey Tambor and Queen Latifah were actually wonderful.

They just don't make movies like these anymore. If you are a parent, this should be the sort of film you take your kids to see. It's fun and entertaining for both kids and moms and dads.

This is a direct-to-video children's movie and a satire of the Wizard of Oz. That pretty much tells you what to expect right there.

Howevere, unlike most OZ satires, this actually takes allot of ideas from the book, NOT from the Judy Garland version. Silver shoes, the Witch having one eye, green spectacles, the Tinman having a back story, multiple forms of the wizard, controlling the monkeys through a hat, etc. It also has some similarities to The Wiz, particularly the fact that the Flying monkeys are a biker gang.

Most of the characters are just the usual puppets with costumes added. Gonzo, however, seems to have been rebuilt from scratch, but it's still him. Just as The Screwball (for lack of a better name) is still Daffy duck.

CAST

Ashanti- Dorothy

Kirmit- The Scarecrow (for some reason)

Fozzy- The Lion

Gonzo- The tin man

Prawn from Muppets Tonight- Toto

Miss Piggy- All four witches

Rats- Munchkins

Various Muppets- Flying monkeys

Muppet band- Themselves in night club

Statler & Waldorf(critics in balcony)- basically themselves with horns

Skeeter, Dr.Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker- Emerald City Guards. A human- The Wizard

Alas, not as funny or a silly as "The Muppet Show", but interesting if only for the fact that it's a satire of the book, not the Judy Garland version.

It might have been (over) familiarity with the subject matter, but I'm another who felt this could have been a lot better. Ashanti didn't really seem to "connect" with the Muppets in a way other performers have accomplished in the past; on their show and in their movies, you thought Steve Martin or Ruth Buzzi were actually talking to other actors. Here, Ashanti seemed to be talking to decorated lumps of felt and feathers. The Quentin Tarantino bit seemed like it was dropped in as an afterthought, only because he really likes the Muppets and wanted to tell his friends he made an appearance in a Muppet production. Overall, it just seemed to lack the character and spark I've come to expect from the Muppets.

I don't think anyone expected this Muppet remake of the classic Judy Garland movie to be better than the original, or even as good as the original. But I don't think anyone expected it to be this far below it, either.

I like the Muppets, and I'm not a kid. I saw "The Great Muppet Caper" not too long ago, and I actually enjoyed it, and I watched the old Muppet TV show regularly. So I figured that a remake of the "Wizard of Oz", Muppet-style, would be enjoyable. Brother, was I wrong.

There are a host of problems with this film. To begin with, there's Ashanti. Her, to put it gently, "inexperience" as an actress shows in every frame. The best you can say for her is that she's bland. She has virtually no chemistry with the other performers--even Jeffrey Tambor in his relatively small on screen time clicks with them far better than she does--she doesn't dance very well (or, thankfully, very often) and while she sings OK, the songs are about as colorless as her performance, although one of them somehow wound up with an Emmy nomination. The script is weak, many of the jokes are lame, the CGI effects are mediocre--as another poster has mentioned, they should gone with Muppets instead of the cheesy CGI characters--and what in God's name is Quentin Tarantino doing in it? David Alan Grier is amusing and makes the most of what little time he has, and Queen Latifah seems a bit more at ease than she usually is, but overall this is the weakest of all the Muppet movies I've seen.