HOME | DD

JillianNC In reply to ??? [2012-01-24 18:10:37 +0000 UTC]

Just curious, what do you think of the recent Marvel Comics adaptation of the first two books? (Great work, by the way! You obviously know your Oz!)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to JillianNC [2012-01-24 18:27:09 +0000 UTC]

Thanks! I haven't actually purchased those comics (yet), but I've flipped through them several times, both in in Barnes & Noble and the comic book store, so I believe I've seen enough to form an opinion. At first I was a little surprised that Eric Shanower was doing the scripting, but not the art itself, as he's obviously a big Oz fan and has a style very close to the John R. Neill illustrations. However, after thinking about it, I think a completely traditional approach might have been a mistake. I quite like Skottie Young's lively, cartoony artwork; I think it gives the old material a fresh, modern feel while still remaining faithful to the text.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EmperorNortonII In reply to ??? [2012-01-24 17:42:11 +0000 UTC]

Nice work! I remember the Captain Carrot comic miniseries The Oz-Wonderland War. When Dorothy shows up, one of the outsider characters remarks that she looks nothing like Judy Garland, and another says that the book is never the same as the movie.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to EmperorNortonII [2012-01-24 18:16:21 +0000 UTC]

Heh. I actually read about that particular miniseries in a blog post recently when I was googling images to reference for this. Sounds like they got the same essential point across in a much less blunt manner.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

GamemasterFel In reply to ??? [2012-01-24 11:31:54 +0000 UTC]

If its any consolation, want to know what my brother said to me after reading every single Oz book we had? Not only did he rank it alongside some of his favourite novels, like On The Road, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, We, 1984, Siddhartha, and the entire bibliography of Hunter S. "Raoul Duke" Thompson, he said this.

"You can find the meaning of life in Oz."

That's some of the highest praise I've ever heard him give a book.

I, for one, have never read the other Oz books, sadly. I plan to, they're on my reading list. I've just been caught up in a little Discworld myself.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to GamemasterFel [2012-01-24 19:01:39 +0000 UTC]

I need to read more Discworld books. I have read a handful, though. I told my sister how much I liked Mort, so when she spotted an autographed copy, she bought it for me for my birthday.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

GamemasterFel In reply to rocketdave [2012-01-24 19:37:54 +0000 UTC]

Funny thing about Discworld. It has multiple series in it, but they aren't exactly told one after another. The series' chronology is infamous because of it. My advice? Start with one of the "series within a series," whether it's the Death storyline, the witches storyline, the Rincewind storyline or the Watch storyline. Work your way up and everything else should be a breeze.

Mind you, costly hobby, what with over thirty books in the series. I currently own twenty two out of thirty nine (forty, if you include "The Science of Discworld"). In Canada, a Discworld book can cost about $11. So, lemme see, I've spent $242 in the last three or four years collecting them. Ooh boy.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to GamemasterFel [2012-01-24 19:47:12 +0000 UTC]

Yikes! That's why I tend to buy most of my books used. Anyway, good advice, thanks.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

GuyBcaps In reply to ??? [2012-01-24 07:58:13 +0000 UTC]

Patchwork Girl of Oz was the first Oz Novel I ever read. And to my shame, I kept trying to square its events in my head with the Judy Garland film.

Eventually I read the entire (Baum) book series and never looked back. If any thing, the Judy Garland film is one of the worst book to movie adaptions of all time (Return to Oz, not being much better). The fact that it is so ingrained into popular culture is a little annoying. But being the first 'Technicolor' film probably has more to do with its fame then anything.

Great comic! I actually like the 'cut and paste' style here. You tweak it enough from panel to panel to work. And the individual character drawings (and that background) are all crisp and well drawn. Good show.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to GuyBcaps [2012-01-24 08:28:56 +0000 UTC]

I've actually seen a couple fairly compelling arguments as to why the Judy Garland movie tells a better story than the book, such as by making the Wicked Witch of the West a recurring villain instead of just sticking her in one chapter. Also, when the book should logically be almost over, with the revelation of the Wizard as a humbug, instead it keeps going with another journey. Not crazy about them making Oz a dream, though. And the message is to never leave home? What?

In any event, there's nothing inherently wrong with alternate takes on the source material. It's just that that movie has so completely eclipsed the original book. It's a little like the "Glee" cover of "Don't Stop Believin'" getting more downloads than the original version by Journey. I enjoy Robert Downey Jr.'s and Benedict Cumberbatch's portrayals of Sherlock Holmes, but they might bother me if they made people totally forget about the original stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

It may partly be the nostalgia factor, but I still like "Return to Oz." It's not really a straight-up adaptation, since they borrowed elements from two different books to make their own story. I do think perhaps they made a mistake trying to reach out to fans of the MGM movie by including the ruby slippers because I don't think it really helped the movie at all or stopped negative comparisons.

Thanks very much for the comment.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ozaline In reply to rocketdave [2012-01-25 07:04:17 +0000 UTC]

I disagree with those reasons, I think the extra journey works just fine... I mean it's like many a fantasy, the Hobbit doesn't end when the Dragon Dies there's the battle of the 5 armies, likewise for Lord of the Rings after they kill Sauron they still have to free the Shire. The movie has to end at that point since they built up the Wizard and the Witch so much, but in the book that's not the case.

I find the book a much more compelling story since Dorothy is an active protagonist in the book, in the movie she just walks down the road while everyone else does all the work for her.

Anyway I really like this comic but I wish it had Ozma in it, since she's the reason I love Oz so much.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

rocketdave In reply to Ozaline [2012-01-25 07:50:03 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, you know, I was thinking about LOTR when I wrote that and wondering whether that invalidated that particular argument. I certainly don't think the whole "Scouring of the Shire" section weakens the narrative. In fact, some would argue that it's an important part of the book and are pissed that Peter Jackson cut it out, though I can understand his reasons for doing so. Some people thought "Return of the King" had too many endings as it was. My main memory of going to see that movie the first time is some jackass impatiently tapping his foot in the row ahead of me.

I guess my problem, if you want to call it that, is I can see things from both points of view. Or maybe it's just that I'm easily swayed by convincing arguments. I do think the movie and the book are each good in their own way. You are right about Dorothy being more proactive in the book, though.

My initial thought was to make Ozma the central figure of this comic, but focusing on Dorothy made more sense, since the point was to emphasize the gulf between the books and the movie. Also, it didn't seem right to just give Ozma a "walk-on" role. However, I do intend to try drawing her in the future. Thanks for your comment.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0