The Las Vegas Sphere has sparked fierce controversy with an AI-“enhanced” version of The Wizard of Oz where Dorothy’s freckles are algorithmically sharpened and Uncle Henry is digitally inserted into shots he never filmed, igniting debate about the role technology should play in cinema’s sacred texts.
As Sphere and Warner Bros. announced in April, the new version of The Wizard of Oz is set to open August 28th with help from Google and an estimated cost of $80 million. The controversy revved up after July 27th, when CBS News Sunday Morning aired a segment on the altered version of the film. Interviews and behind-the-scenes footage revealed how the original 4:3 aspect ratio would be expanded to fit the Sphere’s massive semicircular screen: with new, digital additions never envisioned by director Victor Fleming.
Between an oddly-shaped venue, the context-collapsing echo chambers of social media, and anxiety around technological change, the conversation got heated quickly. “Who tf do these vandals think they are?” one poster wrote. Meanwhile, producers for the film have argued that they are laying out a new blueprint for the “ethical” use of AI in film restoration. But how ethical is it, really? How much of what Sphere is doing is actually new? And are there broader implications for the film industry, or does what happens in Vegas actually stay in Vegas?
Related Video
One thing’s clear: The world we lived in — the one without AI — is gone, and it would take more than ruby red slippers to get it back. So what lessons can we learn from Sphere’s journey down the Yellow Brick Road?
What Changes Did Sphere Make to The Wizard of Oz?
The most obvious alterations happened in the aspect ratio. As I’ve written before, Sphere is a bizarre venue, with a curved 160,000-square-foot screen and seating on a steep grade. Its design means that all 16,000 seats feel surprisingly close to any bands that might be playing, but also by design, nobody has the same view. Those sitting on one side of the audience can hardly see the screen on the other. The floor level has to crank back their necks to see the top two-thirds of the LED display, while the 400s get almost nothing but digital visuals: If they do choose to look down, they’ll have an unobstructed view of the musicians’ bald spots but hardly any chance to see their faces.
For musical acts, Sphere tends to rely on broad landscapes or moving geometric patterns, so everyone has something to look at, even if it’s not the same something. That won’t work for The Wizard of Oz. It’s fair to counter that with, ‘Then don’t show Wizard of Oz,’ but Sphere is one of the most expensive structures ever built in — and this is important — Las Vegas, so it doesn’t come as a shock that good taste wasn’t the highest priority.
The team tasked with the adaptation studied Fleming’s shot list and claims to have meticulously plotted out the world outside the 4:3 box. In the original, for example, Uncle Henry might walk into frame halfway through a scene. Now, Sphere audiences can see him leaning against the front door, listening to the rest of the conversation before deciding to cross the room. The landscape around the house, the wider poppy fields, all will be visualized for the first time.
But that’s not all. This version of The Wizard of Oz has also been digitally restored, smoothing out the graininess to take advantage of one of the world’s most impressive LED screens. Early examples look… not great, with the plastic sheen we have learned to associate with AI. But previews of the Sphere visuals for U2 and Phish also underwhelmed fans, and once it came showtime, those audiences were mostly pretty pleased. Your phone screen can’t really compare to Sphere, which is why Sphere visuals have a record of looking better in-person.
Most obnoxiously, the running time has been cut to 75-minutes, the better to fit three screenings into one day. Producers defended this by saying that TV broadcasts of The Wizard of Oz used to be edited for time, but that doesn’t seem to have happened in very many instances, and not at all after the film was protected by the Library of Congress in 1991. This excuse is pretty much straight bullshit.
Finally, Sphere’s The Wizard of Oz will be immersive, or what they are calling 4D. The CBS News Sunday Morning segment got a look at massive twirling fans that could help some audience members feel like they’re inside a tornado. Some, though probably not all — it’s hard to imagine how wind speeds comfortable for the front of each section would even reach the people in the back. Bursts of fire have also been promised, as well as fog clouds, haptic seats, and more surprises.
What else might be interactive? Will some audiences get splashed with water when the Wicked Witch is melting? Will the Sphere drop something kind-of sort-of similar to poppy seeds? And doesn’t this whole bit sound like a theme park ride with extra steps? I’m glad you asked.
Is Sphere Doing Something New or Unprecedented with The Wizard of Oz?
Lol. The truth is, studios have been repackaging their movies as experiences for decades, starting within friendly theme parks in California and Florida. King Kong 360 3D, Honey, I Shrunk the Audience, Journey to the Center of the Earth 4D, the A Bug’s Life adaptation It’s Tough to Be a Bug!, all repurposed film footage and characters to provide a unique experience. It’s a little less common to show the whole film (or at least, the whole film minus 27 minutes), but playing around with the director’s vision to make some cash is hardly new.
Of course, most companies play around with new movies instead of classics, and The Wizard of Oz is sacred within film circles. But still, it’s fair to wonder if there would even be a controversy if Sphere had called the event something else — say, The Wizard of Oz 360 — instead of hyping up the involvement of AI. Which brings us to the next point…
Is Sphere Manipulating AI Critics to Hype Up a Product That Isn’t That Remarkable?
I can’t prove this but yes, 100% yes. The AI hype cycle has been going on for years now, and it almost always follows a predictable pattern: Tech companies release an immature product, and before experts are even sure what it does, proponents of AI and AI critics swarm social media. ‘This is the future’ and ‘this shit sucks’ both help the AI companies, in the same way that covering Trump’s policy wins and his corruption both help Trump. “There’s no such thing as bad press” is an old adage that has only gotten more true with time.
So yes, calling this The Wizard of Oz 360 might have avoided the controversy. But why would they want to do that?
Is This Version of The Wizard of Oz Going to Set a Precedent for the Wider Film Industry?
Only if it succeeds, and then only narrowly. There just aren’t that many films with enough name recognition to merit an $80 million redesign. Star Wars or Jurassic Park, perhaps; The Lion King or Frozen, maybe; but those filmmakers are all still living, and Disney has plenty of venues of their own. Still, it might not be a surprise to see something like The Sound of Music coming to Sphere in the next couple of years.
But we’re still just talking about Sphere. The Sphere cut of The Wizard of Oz can only be seen in Las Vegas and is only impacting Sphere patrons. The original version of the film still exists — this isn’t a Han shot first situation.
If Sphere and Warner Bros. do make a fortune on screenings, we’ll probably see more venues lean into high-end live experiences that offer something unique. But Spheres aren’t proliferating — even London didn’t work out — and Sphere-style edits probably aren’t going to take over the industry any more than King Kong 360 3D did.
The Sphere’s $80 million AI makeover of The Wizard of Oz doesn’t represent the death of cinema or its revolutionary future — it’s just Vegas being Vegas.
@consequence The Wizard of Oz as it looks in the Las Vegas Sphere. #thewizardofoz #sphere #lasvegassphere #lasvegas
♬ original sound – consequence – consequence
