Warner Brothers wants to make a sequel to the 1939 Victor Fleming adaptation of Frank L. Baum’s The Wizard of Oz](The Wizard of Oz (1939) - IMDb). On the surface that seems all well and good, but the original news source, an article from the UK’s Daily Express, shares a few surprising details that make this a contender for an award I just made up: Most Unexpected Film News I’ve Read in a While.
It’s no surprise that the WB would want to send Dakota Fanning over the rainbow, but it is kind of shocking to learn they’ve no intention of a remake. The fifteen year old Fanning would play a grand daughter of Dorothy who, for an unknown reason, ends up in the land of the Tin Man. But before that gives you visions of Robin Williams heading back to Neverland in Hook, take a gander at this quote from one of the film’s producers: “You’ve still got Dorothy trapped in an odd place, but she’s much closer to the Ripley character from Alien [Sigourney Weaver] than a helpless singing girl.”
^ You mean the actress, Judy Garland? That's not the same as a sequel.
There is Wicked, which is not a sequel but a really compelling retelling of Oz, focused on the woman who eventually becomes "The Wicked Witch of the West." The book is excellent, the musical is fun and childish and very different from the book.
I'm not sure I understand the premise of this sequel, but why not go for it?