The Wizard of Oz has a genuinely hazardous production history, but its most repeated stories do not all have the same evidentiary footing. The supposed on-set suicide is a misreading of a background shape; asbestos use is documented in Yale University Library’s film notes; the groping story is a memoir allegation disputed by a film historian; and Judy Garland’s account of drugs concerns her broader show-business experience, not a verified prescription on this film’s set.
What the evidence says about each claim
| Claim | What the source establishes | Evidence type and limit |
|---|---|---|
| A Munchkin actor hanged himself in the forest scene | TIME calls the story false and says the background shape is more likely an exotic bird. The Oz Museum also describes birds used in the forest setting. | Reporting and museum commentary identify a likely explanation; neither conclusively identifies the bird’s species. |
| Asbestos was used as snow and on the broomstick | Yale University Library’s film notes state that asbestos was used for the poppy-field snow and the burning broomstick. | Institutional production notes document specific physical materials used on the film. |
| Munchkin performers groped Judy Garland | Sid Luft’s posthumously published memoir alleged that performers put their hands under Garland’s dress. Film historian Aljean Harmetz told TIME she found no witness account of an assault. | A retrospective memoir allegation is contested; the accounts do not settle what happened. |
| Garland was given drugs during this film’s production | TIME reports Garland claimed studio executives gave her uppers and sleeping pills to keep pace with show-business demands. | This is an attributed claim about her broader career experience, not documentation of a specific drug or prescription on this production. |
Was there a suicide on the set?
No credible evidence in these accounts establishes that a Munchkin actor died by suicide during filming. The rumor comes from a moving shape in the background of the forest scene, visible behind the walking characters. TIME says the shape is more likely one of the exotic birds the filmmakers borrowed from the Los Angeles Zoo; the Oz Museum likewise points to birds used in the constructed outdoor setting. The exact species is not conclusively identified by those sources. TIME’s account of the rumor and the Oz Museum’s discussion support treating it as a mistaken interpretation of a background figure, not a documented death.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Wizard of Oz (Repackage/BD) | $11.78 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
![The Wizard Of Oz - 75th Anniversary Edition [Blu-ray] [1939]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51z3JAodV2L._SL160_.jpg)
|
The Wizard Of Oz - 75th Anniversary Edition [Blu-ray] [1939] | $24.96 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
The Wizard Of Oz - Blu-ray | $23.08 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
![The Wizard Of Oz [4K Ultra HD] [1939] [Blu-ray] [2019] [Region Free]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51NwzqiDatL._SL160_.jpg)
|
The Wizard Of Oz [4K Ultra HD] [1939] [Blu-ray] [2019] [Region Free] | $38.62 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
The Wizard of Oz | $35.00 | Buy on Amazon |
Was the snow really asbestos?
Yes. Yale University Library’s film notes say asbestos was used both for the snow covering the cast in the poppy field and for the burning broomstick. This is not just an inference from a visual effect: the notes identify the materials used in those specific scenes and state that asbestos was known to be unsafe at the time. Yale’s production notes also describe other improvised effects materials, including muslin for the tornado, chocolate syrup for the Tin Man’s oil, talcum powder for steam and Jell-O powder for colored horses.
Did Munchkin performers grope Judy Garland?
The claim is an allegation, not an established fact. Sid Luft, Garland’s former husband, alleged in his posthumously published memoir that Munchkin performers put their hands under Garland’s dress. The Guardian reported the memoir account in 2017, and TIME discussed it alongside a contrary account from Aljean Harmetz, author of a production history of the film.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
- Runtime: 101 minutes
Harmetz told TIME: “Nobody on the movie ever saw her or heard of a munchkin assaulting her.” That is significant disagreement, but it does not prove the allegation false or establish exactly what occurred. The fairest conclusion is that Luft made the allegation and Harmetz reported finding no witness account to support an assault. The Guardian also records attributed recollections about drinking and behavior; those accounts are not proof of collective conduct by all the performers. The Guardian’s report and TIME’s discussion preserve the distinction between allegation and corroboration.
Was Judy Garland given drugs while filming the movie?
TIME reports that Garland claimed studio executives gave her “uppers” and sleeping pills to help her keep up with the pace of show business. The report does not establish a particular drug regimen, prescription, or date on the Wizard of Oz set. It is therefore accurate to attribute the claim to Garland and describe it as a broader account of the demands placed on her career; it would go beyond the available evidence to say that production records prove she received a specified drug while making this film. TIME’s report is the source for the attributed claim.
What production dangers are documented?
The rumors sit alongside real hazards, but documented injuries should not be inflated into a generalized “curse” or treated as proof of every dramatic retelling. TIME reports that Buddy Ebsen was hospitalized after exposure to makeup made with pure aluminum dust. When Jack Haley replaced him as the Tin Man, the material was mixed into a paste. TIME also reports that Margaret Hamilton suffered burns and that her copper makeup was quickly removed from the wounds. Yale’s notes include injuries to Hamilton and stunt double Betty Danko, as well as Winged Monkey performers hurt when piano wires snapped. The Library of Congress describes the hot Technicolor soundstage and heavy costumes. TIME, Yale and the Library of Congress exhibition document different aspects of those working conditions.
Why the set could be difficult to work on
Yale’s notes say the shoot lasted six months and temperatures frequently exceeded 100°F. Bert Lahr’s lion costume weighed 90 pounds, including 50 pounds of real lion fur. The Library of Congress says MGM made almost 1,000 costumes for 600 actors. These figures help explain the physical demands of the production, but they do not by themselves establish how often injuries occurred or how its hazards compared with other Hollywood productions. Yale’s film notes and the Library of Congress exhibition provide these production details.
Rank #3
Why the stories should not be treated as equally proven
The asbestos account comes from institutional film notes describing concrete production methods. The hanging-figure story is a false interpretation of a background image, with birds offered as the likely explanation. The groping account rests on a memoir allegation that a film historian said she could not corroborate through witness accounts. Garland’s drug claim is a reported statement about show-business demands, not a set-specific medication record. Keeping those categories separate makes it possible to recognize genuine production hazards without turning uncertain or misread accounts into established fact.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Rank #4
- Polish Release, cover may contain Polish text/markings. The disk has English audio.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
