Wizards (1977) — A Review.

7th November, 2025: Wizards.

The Introduction.

I have to admit, I’ve been thumb twiddling.

In between writing quizzes, jobhunting, worrying about my health, shopping, thinking about Christmas presents, watching deliveries being delivered, wondering where I put my most recent set of stamps … 

Which reminds me, I need to get stamps … 

At any rate … ?

I have a loose, quiet, evening: and plenty of things I could be watching.

Including the Ralph Bakshi animated fantasy, Wizards.

Considering I caught his version of The Lord of The Rings, many years ago, watching Wizards seemed like a good idea.

So … ?

I’ll be watching it … then telling you about it by Tuesday evening.

I have a busy calendar … !

~≈🧙🏽≈~

7th November, 2025.

Part One.

The Summary.

Wizards opens with the usual idents: ones that tell us the film is a 20th Century Fox production, and directed by animator, Ralph Bakshi.

Then moves on: to show us an illustrated manuscript that tells us that millions of years have passed since the Earth of our time.

Millions of years of war between the powers of technology and magic: and that, many years after a destructive nuclear winter, Queen Delia of Montagar gave birth to twin wizards, kind hearted Avatar (Bob Holt) and evil Blackwolf (Steve Gravers).

Once Queen Delia dies?   Once Delia dies, Blackwolf tries to take over the kingdom: only to be defeated by his brother, Avatar.

Three millenia, later?

Three millennia later, Avatar is teaching magic to Princess Elinore (Jessie Welles): whilst Blackwolf is organising assassins to kill Elinore’s father, the president.

It’s only when one of them, a robot named Necron 99, succeeds, that Avatar and his friends learn that Blackwolf has a secret weapon: one he can use to take over the world … 

~≈🧙🏽≈~

8th November, 2025.

Part Two.

Why Watch Wizards?

So … what did I make of Wizards, of a forty-eight years old cartoon?

And, more to the point … ?

Why on God’s green Earth did I want to watch a movie, that old, in the first place?

Let’s try and answer that second question, first, shall we … ?

Did you know there was an animated version of The Lord of the Rings?

No?

There was an animated version of The Lord of the Rings: released in 1978, a year after Wizards debuted, and made by Wizards director, Ralph Bakshi.

From what I recall?

Bakshi’s version of Lord of the Rings was something I caught in the mid-eighties: when it aired on TV.

Channel 4, I think.

Regardless of the channel, it caught my attention.

Granted: Bakshi’s version of the story only gets half way through, getting as far as the Battle of Helm’s Deep.

But it’s a good looking piece: not quite Disney standard, but good-looking, good looking enough for me to want to explore more of Bakshi’s work.

Little realising I’not get a chance to do so … until a copy of Wizards came my way, recently … 

~≈🧙🏽≈~

9th November, 2025.

Part Three.

What Did I See?

So … what did I think of Wizards?

What did I notice, and see?

Again: let’s start with the second questions, shall we?

What did I see … ?

The characters: the characters are — arguably — quite twee: notionally, aimed at children.

Until you realise Blackwolf, the evil wizard, is supposed to be decomposing, that his evil armies are covered in Nazi iconography … 

That yes, Avatar is smoking a very large cigar, when we first meet him: something heroes really wouldn’t do, these days.

And that Princess Elinore … looks a touch raunchier than you’d expect!

Or raunchier than I was expecting, let’s put it that way.

So the character design was unexpected but very good: cartoon like, obviously, but not necessarily aimed at children.

The quality the character design has?

Was shared with the backgrounds used: of the various cities, settings, and stills.

As far as I can tell, those include Gothic-tinged work from Ian Miller, and comic book fairies from Mike Ploog: work that looked gorgeous, utterly gorgeous, of a quality I’d kill to have pinned on my walls.

Especially the images of Scortch, of Blackwolf’s kingdom … 

I don’t think there’s a better representation of a contaminated landscape.

The rotoscoped images of Blackwolf’s armies?

Are equally as unnerving.

~≈🧙🏽≈~

Part Four.

A sidestep.

Just as a side step?

You’ll noticed I mentioned rotoscoping, there.

I have to admit, I know very little about rotoscoping: beyond the fact that it involves tracing over live-action film footage, one frame at a time.

And that these tracings can be composited over whatever backgrounds you want to use.

And when I say ‘very little’, I mean ‘very little’: beyond the fact it’s been used in a variety of different things.

It’s always struck me as — given the little I know of it — that the process could be both expensive, and time consuming.

Indeed, there’s several re-used battle scenes in Wizards.

But what came as a surprise?

Was that — apparently — Bakshi paid for a lot of the rotoscoping work, himself: as he felt it would be the easiest way to get the battle scenes done.

The results I saw on screen?

Were very watchable.

And something whose style I recognised: as the technique was something Bakshi re-used for his version of The Lord of the Rings.

~≈🧙🏽≈~

Part Five.

What did I think?

So, finally?

What did I think of Wizards?

What did I make of a film that’s quite different to the things I usually watch?

Yes: it’s different.

I’ve seen it described as ‘science fantasy’: and science fantasy that’s more fantasy than science.

Far more fantastical than, say, the original Star Wars, or Julian May’s Saga of Exiles.

They’re almost hard SF in comparison.

But, none the less: Wizards, with its elves, fairies and flowers, is fantasy. 

It’s also something we could take a simplistic message from: “Tech Bad, Magic Good”.

That, I think, is possibly why Bakshi found the idea of filming Lord of the Rings, appealing: there’s arguments that — in presenting the Hobbits as rurally as he did, in presenting Saruman as he did — Tolkien was trying to make the same point.

But … ?

I also think there’s more to the film than that.

Yes: I found Susan Tyrell’s narration somewhat off-putting.

Yes: we can say there’s a simplistic message mixed in with the hippy fairy good guys.

And yes, the climax of the film not what we were expecting.   Certainly not what I was expecting.

But … ?

The characters of Wizards are entertaining, the story bewitching, and the look of the thing, utterly beguiling.

Yes: it’s not perfect.

But Wizards holds up well, given its age.

I think Wizards is one of those films you should see, at least once.

I think it will repay the time.

~≈🧙🏽≈~

Part Six.

Last words.

That … ?

Is where I’m going to leave things for now.

I’ll leave you with my thanks for reading this: or for watching the video version of this review, if that’s what you’ve done.

However, before I go?

I will ask you to subscribe to my YouTube channel: and follow Nik Nak’s Old Peculiar.

If quizzes are you thing, I’ve published Daily Teaser quiz for years: and I’m planning more reviews.

Feel free to tip, keep your eyes peeled and I’ll see you next time.

Wizards.

★★☆☆