While this was a very amateur production with a few good performances, as a life-long fan of the Oz literature I could have overlooked that if the story had been any good. My biggest issue is that it's presented as an Oz adventure when it's not, and whatever story it's trying to tell is muddled by two incongruous plots. Elizabeth is an orphan who pretends to be Dorothy in order to cope with vague and undefined problems, while the Scarecrow and a guy in grey makeup travel across the United States to seek her help with vague and undefined problems back in the rock quarry that's supposed to pass for Oz. I've wondered if I might have liked this movie more if I'd seen it as a child.
This is touted as a sequel, yet nothing about it matches the canon or indicates that anyone had actually read the books despite the frequent praise for them from the writer and the characters. There are already at least two other "sequels" anyway that DO incorporate elements of "Land of Oz" and "Ozma of Oz," the books which follow "Wizard:" Filmation's "Journey Back to Oz" from 1972, and Disney's "Return to Oz" from 1985. This was more like an "add a word" forum game that someone cobbled together into a script, and given that a few dozen people received special thinks for the writing, I wouldn't be surprised if that's what happened. It would certainly explain why the overall premise was so disjointed.
Ultimately if you like stories that have a simple plot with minimal conflict that's easily resolved and a pat happy ending all around, you'll find that here, but if you want something more complex, keep looking.