The Wizard of Oz (1925)

. . . of all time, it's not hard to understand how this repetitious, soulless, racist waste of film bankrupted its studio and its writer\director\star, Larry Semon. (Some film critics contend that Semon once was mentioned in the same breath with Charles Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Harold Lloyd, but these pundits are most likely bluffing and playing "Gotcha!" in an attempt to over-inflate their own stature.) Eggs eggs eggs bees bees bees mud mud mud boxes boxes boxes lions lions lions: that pretty much sums up the "plot" of Semon's lame 1925 silent version of THE WIZARD OF OZ. Since when does a hen lay eight eggs at a time? Since when do Black farm hands shirk work to chomp pilfered watermelons? Since when do people routinely survive 50- and 75-foot-falls none the worse for wear? GONE WITH THE WIND's excess essentially killed off its source material (Margaret Mitchell's novel). Unlike, say, JANE EYRE or GREAT EXPECTATIONS, there's not a new film version to enjoy of GWTW each generation. Larry Semon tried to pull the same GWTW trick on OZ. Fortunately, he failed to do so.

In my travels of music & odd movies it really amazes me at what I find. I found this 1925 "OZ" at a Goodwill store 1 mile down the road. It's a VHS 1980s copy. It plays pretty well,except a bit wobbly at the start.I already knew this wouldn't be "Dorothy & Toto" but I thought at least it would be in the same stratosphere. Now,I'm not saying it's a bad movie but it's certainly not at the level of "silent era creativity" I expect from that time.The best things here are the sets for one,very inventive,some of the visual effects (like the director/star jumping hundreds of feet to the ground and surviving!) Yeah..right! ...and as mentioned,it is interesting to see Oliver Hardy before "Laurel & Hardy".The biggest downsides here are : The obvious racist and insulting stereo-types of the day,that being our resident "token" black whose been renamed for the amusement of the 1920s audience and just "has" to be filmed eating watermelon! (Insert roll-eyes here).On top of that,the overweight Uncle Henry who is "literally" the butt of heavy humor. (I was wondering, "How many more things will he sit on and hurt his posterior with?" ) Very annoying in this copy is the incessant organ music. True it's what they used then in the movie-house but for today's time it's an irritant. I turned down the volume and did what Charlie Chaplin did and used classical music. This music actually fit the scenes I was watching and in a great coincidence...... the moment the film ended,so did the classical tape! If you're not familiar with the books,you will pretty confused but even if you were it would be the same story. ...but in this case it's not.5 stars for some interesting sets,stunts and even visuals plus Mr. Hardy. 5 off for the rest. I watched Judy Garland's right after and got more than my $1.99's worth. (END)

Larry Semon, who plays a farmhand and the scarecrow, also directed this version. He has managed to give himself at least 4 times as much screen time as Dorothy, who I believe is supposed to be the main character here. Most of his screen time is filler, which slows down the story greatly without adding anything worthwhile. Other than that, it isn't too bad a movie.This version has a lot of politics in Oz which is not in the 1939 version, but since I have not read the original book I don't know whether it was added here or omitted in 1939. The good and bad witches make no appearance here either, nor does Toto. I find it hard to believe that this movie and the 1939 version actually came from the same book, but I guess it's possible.

The 1925 silent "Wizard of Oz' Is, in many ways, a vanity project for Larry Semon, his brand of mugging to the camera comedy is a bit hard to take now, that said this is still pretty interesting and good for a silent.Rather different from the book and later MGM Movie, this version, the print I saw is the restored 100 minute print with added narration by Jaqueline Lovell, bookends the story with a grandfather reading Baum's book to his granddaughter. The early parts of Dorothy, played by the lovely Dorothy Dwan, are funny and strange. There is an odd air of sensuality throughout the film, odd since its intended for Children, I presume? SEmon does a very touching and funny bit with a lollipop, he wants to give it to Dorothy, but can't summon up his courage, Finally it end up eaten by a duck! Oliver Hardy plays another farmhand and he's very good, you can see why he became a star, his facial expressions and manners are just much better on screen than the other players, who are either too stiff or too hammy. The twister is here along with surprisingly good lightning effects. The land of OZ is basically a big soundstage, but it moves pretty well for a silent.Some things are bad though, the character of Snowball is listed as being played by G. Howe Black, a seemingly racist play on words. If its any consolation the actor is good and the character ends up the Lion and something of a hero, he rescues the scarecrow, Semon, in a bi-plane, near the end of the pic. For a silent this isn't bad, thought its terribly dated as one might expect. Worth a look for Oz devotees.