Mitchell, I think this was several SAG strikes ago. Today Bolger probably would have received residuals. Unfortunately, he's no longer around to collect them (he died in 1987, age 83.)
Ray Bolger never seemed to lack work, so perhaps The Wizard of Oz boosted his career in lieu of residuals. There is such a mystique about that movie that (especially not having researched it) I am not sure of its influence after its initial release and the later ones on television. Of course the books were popular all along, so that is an added factor. --Jim
Jim, I did a bit of research: The Wizard of Oz cost $2.8 million (no doubt a bigger sum in 2025 money) to make and took in $29.7 million at the box office, so, yeah, it was a hit. In fact, it comes in at the number 3 of the Top Ten Box Office Movies of 1939. In addition, Judy Garland, went from being an up-and-coming starlet to one of MGM's biggest stars upon the film's release.
As for Ray Bolger, he had been a star in vaudeville who had only a few years earlier had transitioned to motion pictures. Oz was his biggest hit, but thereafter, as you said, never lacked for work.
That said, by 1956 both Garland and Bolger had a whole string of movie roles to their credit, The Wizard of Oz just one of many. Then it was shown on television to huge ratings, kept getting shown on television to huge ratings and within a couple of years Dorothy and the Scarecrow were considered their signature roles, overshadowing everything else they did in their careers, which neither one seems to have minded much. As for the movie's mystique, well, I for one find it immensely entertaining and have never tired of watching it.
Hello again, I always thought Miss Gulch to be the most sympathetic character in literature/the movies, so I agree with you about The Wizard of Oz.
But this still leaves the question about the film's reputation in the gap between initial hit and later cult following. Many hits get relatively "forgotten" after a few years, so spontaneous references to the movie (but not the books) during that period are necessary to find. I am sure you read more about the movies than I, so let me know if you think of any. (I once read an autobiography of Billie Burke, and she talked about many of her roles, but never mentioned Oz.) --Jim
Jim, I double-checked and the box office figure I cited seems to cover a ten-year period of time or longer, as the movie didn't recoup its costs--it was among the most expensively-made films of its time--until 1949. Nevertheless, it was still the number 3 highest-grossing motion picture of 1939. As far as it being a movie that stayed with people after they saw it, television makes all the difference here. Until TV came along, you saw a movie when it played in a theater, and that was that. The whole notion of some movies being regarded as "classic" didn't come into place until there was a medium where you could watch a film many years removed from the year it was made.
I used to watch Judy Garland's 1963-64 TV variety show on some digital channel, and The Wizard of Oz was referenced ALL THE TIME, which should give you a good idea how speedily it came to be regarded a classic after its initial network showing.
Finally, if you read Billie Burke's autobiography, then you know she was married to Florenz Ziegfeld. I imagine she had a lot to say about that.
Oh, lest we forget, the 1939 Academy Award Winner for Best Original Song: "Over the Rainbow". Judy Garland sang it many, many times on the radio and in live performances from '39 on, and of course, whenever she did, I'm sure that brought back memories of the movie.
That's a great quote! Ray Bolger always had a witty way of looking at things, and his response is no exception. Immortality sounds like a pretty good trade!
I just shared a new post; let me know what you think. Have a lovely weekend ahead.
I have seen different documentaries about the making of The Wizard of Oz. Some good, some not so good. I feel bad they didn’t get residuals. The lack of residuals would really not happen in today’s world (I think).
In order to keep the hucksters, humbugs, scoundrels, psychos, morons, and last but not least, artificial intelligentsia at bay, I have decided to turn on comment moderation. On the plus side, I've gotten rid of the word verification.
What a great response. (Although there should have been residuals.)
ReplyDeleteMitchell, I think this was several SAG strikes ago. Today Bolger probably would have received residuals. Unfortunately, he's no longer around to collect them (he died in 1987, age 83.)
DeleteSmart answer and quite true.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, Bolger may have just wanted to shut up some reporter.
DeleteImmortality doesn't pay the rent.
ReplyDeleteBolger may have been rationalizing, Debra.
DeleteHaha wouldn't we all. :-D
ReplyDeleteFirst post of 2025 Kirk, so happy new year :-D
LITERAL immortality, yes, Ananka
DeleteBummer.
ReplyDeleteMike, blame the man behind the curtain.
DeleteRay Bolger never seemed to lack work, so perhaps The Wizard of Oz boosted his career in lieu of residuals. There is such a mystique about that movie that (especially not having researched it) I am not sure of its influence after its initial release and the later ones on television. Of course the books were popular all along, so that is an added factor.
ReplyDelete--Jim
Jim, I did a bit of research: The Wizard of Oz cost $2.8 million (no doubt a bigger sum in 2025 money) to make and took in $29.7 million at the box office, so, yeah, it was a hit. In fact, it comes in at the number 3 of the Top Ten Box Office Movies of 1939. In addition, Judy Garland, went from being an up-and-coming starlet to one of MGM's biggest stars upon the film's release.
DeleteAs for Ray Bolger, he had been a star in vaudeville who had only a few years earlier had transitioned to motion pictures. Oz was his biggest hit, but thereafter, as you said, never lacked for work.
That said, by 1956 both Garland and Bolger had a whole string of movie roles to their credit, The Wizard of Oz just one of many. Then it was shown on television to huge ratings, kept getting shown on television to huge ratings and within a couple of years Dorothy and the Scarecrow were considered their signature roles, overshadowing everything else they did in their careers, which neither one seems to have minded much. As for the movie's mystique, well, I for one find it immensely entertaining and have never tired of watching it.
Hello again, I always thought Miss Gulch to be the most sympathetic character in literature/the movies, so I agree with you about The Wizard of Oz.
DeleteBut this still leaves the question about the film's reputation in the gap between initial hit and later cult following. Many hits get relatively "forgotten" after a few years, so spontaneous references to the movie (but not the books) during that period are necessary to find. I am sure you read more about the movies than I, so let me know if you think of any. (I once read an autobiography of Billie Burke, and she talked about many of her roles, but never mentioned Oz.)
--Jim
Jim, I double-checked and the box office figure I cited seems to cover a ten-year period of time or longer, as the movie didn't recoup its costs--it was among the most expensively-made films of its time--until 1949. Nevertheless, it was still the number 3 highest-grossing motion picture of 1939. As far as it being a movie that stayed with people after they saw it, television makes all the difference here. Until TV came along, you saw a movie when it played in a theater, and that was that. The whole notion of some movies being regarded as "classic" didn't come into place until there was a medium where you could watch a film many years removed from the year it was made.
DeleteI used to watch Judy Garland's 1963-64 TV variety show on some digital channel, and The Wizard of Oz was referenced ALL THE TIME, which should give you a good idea how speedily it came to be regarded a classic after its initial network showing.
Finally, if you read Billie Burke's autobiography, then you know she was married to Florenz Ziegfeld. I imagine she had a lot to say about that.
Oh, lest we forget, the 1939 Academy Award Winner for Best Original Song: "Over the Rainbow". Judy Garland sang it many, many times on the radio and in live performances from '39 on, and of course, whenever she did, I'm sure that brought back memories of the movie.
DeleteThat's a great quote! Ray Bolger always had a witty way of looking at things, and his response is no exception. Immortality sounds like a pretty good trade!
ReplyDeleteI just shared a new post; let me know what you think. Have a lovely weekend ahead.
Thank you, Melody. I'll check your post out.
DeleteI have seen different documentaries about the making of The Wizard of Oz. Some good, some not so good. I feel bad they didn’t get residuals. The lack of residuals would really not happen in today’s world (I think).
ReplyDeleteThat anonymous comment was from me…not sure why it didn’t use my name (the comment about all the documentaries and residuals)
ReplyDeleteNice to know it was you, JM!
DeleteImmortality indeed!
ReplyDeleteIndeed is right, Lux!
ReplyDelete