Back in the 90s when I first made an effort to explore Steven Spielberg's filmography, I rented Always. My perception at the time was that it was an amalgamation of Top Gun and Ghost. Revisiting it now, nearly 20 years later, I'm left with the same feeling.

The story is predictable and obvious, devoid of any surprises. The cast is solid and they have good chemistry with one another, particularly Richard Dreyfuss and John Goodman, but there really isn't much for them to do with such one-dimensional characters. The aerial footage is impressive...at first. The problem is that even that becomes repetitive. After the first half hour, even those sequences all look the same.

Storywise, the chief problem is that Pete (Dreyfuss) takes his death in such stride that there's no real reason to even sympathize with him as he's compelled to play matchmaker for his ex. That ought to have been a central theme of the film, but instead he just sort of shrugs and accepts that this is his new task. It rings so false for him to laugh his way through so much of the film that the few instances where he winces are devoid of any meaning. He shows more apprehension at losing control of his plane than at watching Dorinda (Holly Hunter) being romanced by Ted (Brad Johnson).

Subplots aren't particularly well developed, either. Al (Goodman) is a fine sidekick while Pete is alive but the rest of the film he seems to service exclusively as the guy yelling at Dorinda to get over her grief in the one troubling scene of the film. He never even apologized or recants berating her, leaving us with the impression he's essentially a cold-hearted jerk who more or less disappears from the film's second half.

Even John Williams's score feels detached and bored. The concert arrangement on The Spielberg/Williams Collaboration is lush and lively, but the actual film score feels like a temp track that was never really replaced.

In short, there's just no reason to connect with, or care about, any of the characters or their situations here. It's a shame, because the premise offers the chance for some genuinely interesting relationship dynamics. Unfortunately, they're squandered in a film that ran away from the humanity of the story.

Always was re-ranked on my Flickchart to #1481/1530

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is somewhere between a strangely choreographed ballet and a fever dream. It was based at least in part on the 1902 stage play, which accounts for its style. The essence of L. Frank Baum's novel is recognizable, particularly the design of the Cowardly Lion, which strongly resembles the original artwork of the novel by W.W. Wenslow.

This short film is by no means a comprehensive adaptation, but there are enough things to appreciate in its brisk 13 minutes that I dig it.

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was re-ranked on my Flickchart to #841/1530

I have absolutely no idea what I just watched. All I know is that I really dig The Woozy. It was nice to see the Cowardly Lion, the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodsman near the end, though just why they're present is beyond me. The sacrifice of the Patchwork Girl's leg was a bit startling, though her ability to be repaired negated the shock factor a bit. Go Scarecrow, I guess, for hooking up with her in the end though, again, I have absolutely no idea what that was about.

I wish I could say more about this silent picture but really all I'm left with is "WTF was that?"

The Patchwork Girl of Oz entered my Flickchart at #829/1531

Right. So this one is weird with a beard. The premise is straightforward enough: King Krewl disapproves of his daughter's beau so he hires the witch Mombi to freeze her heart. Dorothy and her companions come to the princess's aid. Simple enough.

Except that along the way some really strange things happen, like The Tin Woodman taking his ax and chopping off the head of Old Mombi...who then reattaches herself. And I have absolutely no idea where the kangaroo came from or how it fits into any part of the story. I'm watching the screen and then BAM! Kangaroo!

Again, as with The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, I adore the Cowardly Lion costume. He doesn't have much of a role here, but it was amusing to watch him nag for the Scarecrow's attention.

Frank Moore's Scarecrow is a highlight, displaying comedic timing playing up his character's awkward inability to walk properly while still exuding an air of optimism. Pierre Couderc's Tin Woodman is curious if only because it appears he has a big black mustache, which of course reminded me of Cesar Romero's Joker.

The special effects are comparable to a stage play, but they show some imagination all the same. Particularly impressive is the Wizard of Oz's cart-pulling barrel thing. All in all, His Majesty, the Scarecrow of Oz is a strange, but likable, affair.

Probably not for audiences too young to handle ax beheadings, though.

His Majesty, the Scarecrow of Oz entered my Flickchart at #383/1532

Just when I thought it didn't get stranger than His Majesty, the Scarecrow of Oz comes The Magic Cloak. They were both originally slated to premiere on the same date (28 September 1914), but this one was delayed due to various reasons and wasn't actually released until some time in 1917. On that basis, I skipped it in production order and came back to it in its original release order.

Holy wow. This thing is like what I've always imagined an LSD trip might be. Another title may as well have been When People in Animal Costumes Attack!, because one subplot involves the donkey Nicodemus rallying forest animals (including "a lazy lion" that is clearly the same costume, if not character, as the Cowardly Lion) to fight a gang of robbers/kidnappers. Concurrent with that is a plot about Nicodemus's owners being given a magic, wish-granting cloak and also becoming the new royalty of the village of Noland.

Wikipedia informs me this was originally a five-reel film broken into two two-reel shorts and then later reconstructed, which certainly accounts for the non sequitur plot points. My personal favorite: As Queen Zixi absconds with the magic cloak, a title card announces, "And they had vampires even in those days!" o_O I never saw anything resembling a vampire. I have no idea what that was supposed to be about.

Whereas the ridiculousness of His Majesty, the Scarecrow of Oz appealed to me, I had a much harder time getting into The Magic Cloak of Oz. It's a disjointed mess, though it certainly delivers a lot of WTF moments.

The Magic Cloak of Oz entered my Flickchart at #851/1533

I kind of recall watching this when I first got the 3-disc Collector's Edition of the iconic 1939 Wizard of Oz DVD set, but apparently I didn't pay it very close attention at the time because I found it startling this time through.

This version of The Wizard of Oz can arguably be interpreted as an ancestor of The Princess Bride, Superman, Harry Potter and , among others. Like The Princess Bride, the story is framed by a present-day grandfather reading a book, to his granddaughter. Dorothy herself is given a Superman/Potter-like characterization this time. Rather than being an ordinary Kansas girl whisked off to Oz, it is revealed instead that she was born a princess in Oz and secreted off into hiding and dropped off in Kansas where she was raised by her "Aunt" Em and cruel "Uncle" Henry.

The archetypes and structure make for a genuinely intriguing interpretation. This time around, there are no "real" Scarecrow, Tin Man or Cowardly Lion. Instead, they're all personas adopted by Kansas farmhands taken to Oz along with Dorothy. Primarily, the film is a vehicle for director/star Larry Semon's comedic antics. Some of the gags work well and there are a handful of genuinely impressive stunts along the way (and some ambitious, but unconvincing, special effects).

Unfortunately, it's impossible to get past the blatant racism of this film. There's one black man - an uncredited Spencer Bell, whose character is given the debasing name Snowball. When we very first see him, he's gorging on watermelon instead of working. Though I get that he's the character who becomes the Cowardly Lion (and therefore reasonably displays a fearful personality), it plays instead that he's a lesser man than the others. Most egregious of all, when Semon's Scarecrow and Bell's Lion are trapped in a dungeon with actual lions, the former threatens the latter by actually saying in a title card:

"I hear these alley cats like *dark meat*. *I'm* not worried..."

Are. You. Kidding. Me.

My education background is in history and I can distinguish between my values and those of the past, blah, blah, blah, but this was a personal viewing not one for historical purposes so I feel at liberty to cringe and object. It's a shame the film resorts to such overt racism because under all the meandering gags there's actually a truly interesting narrative. Maybe others can stomach it, but I'm pretty well done with it.

There's also the matter of Dorothy herself, who starts off a reasonably strong, suffering Cinderella-type heroine but then quickly devolves into a fickle and entirely passive character. She's scarcely even a damsel in distress because she doesn't even seem to know she's in danger at all. And at film's end, rather than connect with the loyal farmhand/Scarecrow played by Semon, she lives happily ever after with Prince Kynd - though we've not seen any interaction between the two to even remotely suggest any romantic attraction. I guess being a prince was her only criteria?

The Wizard of Oz was re-ranked on my Flickchart to #1449/1533

For an 80 year old cartoon, this ain't half bad. The hand drawn animation shows at least as much whimsy and effort as anything from Walt Disney from the same era, though the narrative is lacking. The first few minutes are recognizable from the source material: Dorothy and Toto are transported to Oz by way of a pretty selective tornado. We meet the Scarecrow and Tin Man in turn, then visit the Emerald City - though here it seems more accidental than intentional.

The Wizard himself is especially wizard-y in appearance for the first time, right down to a starry pointed hat and long white beard. Unlike traditional Wizards of Oz, this one can actually perform magic - though his work falls somewhere between "superfluous" and "creepy." (Am I the only one who found it pervy that we see so many shots of Dorothy's undergarments and her legs opened? Why was she sitting on the steps in the beginning, thrusting her pelvis upward?)

The only conflict of this cartoon is that a chicken's egg grows so large before hatching that it threatens to destroy the Wizard's part of the Emerald City. Once hatched, though, all is well and things end there, so apparently no one cares whether Dorothy ever goes back home or not. Eh, it was the 30s. One less mouth to feed, right?

The Wizard of Oz entered my Flickchart at #1310/1534