Schallert, Edward. "Fairy Tale of Oz Called Milestone in Fantasy" Los Angeles Times 16 August, 1939, A18. ProQuest Historical Newspapers Los Angeles Times (1881 - 1986). ProQuest.

 

This is a review of the premier of The Wizard of Oz. It starts and ends with praise and has Schallert has no doubt it will have worldwide appeal. He claims even with all the “to do” of a premiere, the film exceeded his every expectation. He praises it as original and not what he has come to know as the formulaic Hollywood. He likes the use of the color because it adds meaning to the story. He thinks MGM’s choice of actors was superb. He likes the story and the films ability to have him “rooting for Dorothy”. He admires the technical feat and comments that it finally challenges Disney. He then continues to compliment everyone he thinks deserves praise in making such a great movie.

This is a review of the movie right when it came out and Schallert seemed to love it. I think its important to note that the majority of the review doesn’t spend time focusing on the technical genius of the film, which is something that could potentially be outdated. Additionally, it is important to note that much of the use of the “technology” was to the advantage of the story of the film. For example, the film was one of the first shot in color and used the Technicolor Process. This process tended to over exaggerate the colors on screen and made things seem almost unreal. This worked perfectly for the film because while Kansas was shot in black and white with a sepia tone, it was Oz that was shot in color. This “unrealistic color” lent itself to the idea that Oz was a fantasy land. Also the limited ability in special effects allowed for the melting of the witch to be lighter hearted and less gruesome. In essence, the story benefited from the limited technology of the time, rather than being hindered by it. Additionally, something briefly touched on in this article was that this story is one of the only fairy tales completely American in origin, which may not lend to its international popularity, but certainly can help give Americans a sense of pride when the watch it (which inevitably makes them like the film more)

Arthur Milliers View 'Oz' With Varied Reactions
THE TIMES ART CRITIC AND FAMILY
Los Angeles Times (1886-Current File); Aug 28, 1939; ProQuest Historical Newspapers Los Angeles Times (1881 - 1986)
pg. A14

 

This is a Los Angeles Times article written right when the movie was released in theaters. It is unique in movie reviews that it is a review by an entire family: David, Mojave, Joyce, Arthur Jr., Mom, and Dad. They each seemed to like a different aspect of the film. David enjoyed the Lion character the most. Mojave liked the Munchkins and felt like she was experiencing the story with Dorothy. Joyce thought it was good fairytale and liked the settings as well as Judy Garland. Arthur enjoyed watching a movie about his favorite film. Mom liked that there were no guns and little violence. Dad was impressed by all the makeup used.

This article is important because it emphasizes the wide appeal of the movie. It is one of those few movies that whole families can watch, and enjoy together. Although everyone was entertained by a different aspect or a different character, they all liked some aspect of the film. It displays its ability to combine so many different things to provide entertainment for everyone. Although reactions may be different today, the story remains the same. A father may no longer be impressed by the costumes since time has brought much more elaborate costumes to films, but perhaps he is still blown away by Judy Garland’s voice or maybe he has an appreciation of the technological achievement when put in its’ time period. In another article I have from 2002, we see that 7.9 million people watched the film, which is concrete evidence that the film is not becoming outdated anytime soon.

Crowther, Bosley. "Bonnie and Clyde." The New York Times 14 Apr. 1967. 5 Apr.
     2008 <http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/
     review?res=EE05E7DF173CE361BC4C52DFB266838C679EDE>.

    Bosley Crowther’s original New York Times review condemns Bonnie and Clyde, most famously declaring, “This blending of farce with brutal killings is as pointless as it is lacking in taste.”  His review criticizes both the lead actors and director for combining slapstick comedy with gory violence, which he finds neither entertaining nor purposeful. This review clearly demonstrates how appalled Crowther was with the level of violence and “ridiculous” portrayal of crime. Not only does he find the combination of comedy and violence horrific, but says the film is not at all representative of the real story of the Barrow Gang. Lastly, Crowther attacks the portrayal of a “sleazy, moronic pair” as fun-loving, carefree, and sympathetic characters.
    This review lends unique insight into the immediate and controversial reception of the film. Crowther clearly represents those critics who belive this movie was too graphic and insensitive in its glamorization of crime. It is significant to note that despite such scathing reviews, the film was a huge success, which demonstrates Bonnie and Clyde’s ability to speak to and attract audiences.