Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return (2013) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
63 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Not without its moments but very lazy and charmless on the whole
TheLittleSongbird13 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return judging from the terrible reviews was a film that I watched with low expectations, but as a fan of animation and think the voice cast to be very talented the film did deserve a fair chance. There are worse animated films out there and Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return isn't from personal view as terrible as has been said but it is not a particularly good film either and one of the weaker Oz incarnations(with only 1978's The Wiz being worse, the best of course being the timeless 1939 MGM classic), even when judged on its own merits rather than a direct comparison. There are a few glimpses of good detail in the animation, like the rainbow, Dainty China Country, Wiser's chest and the grainy colour for the tree. Toby Chu's score is pleasant and whimsical in the way that most of the songs are not; When the World is a catchy and beautiful song and by far the highlight of the soundtrack; credit should go to the writers for trying to give Jester a back-story(the closest we actually get to learning about the characters) and Toto is adorable and entertaining, the only character who is really likable. The voice cast are a mixed bag, with Martin Short the stand-out, he may be on autopilot at times and has lacklustre material but his maniacal and sometimes amusing voice-work is the most enthusiastic of the whole cast. Megan Hilty, Hugh Dancy, Jim Belushi and Kelsey Grammar are perfect as well for their characters too.

But others don't make the grade. Lea Michele's singing is amazing of course but her acting is rather unemotive and shrill and Dan Aykroyd and Patrick Stewart are wasted in under-written and dumbed-down roles(Aykroyd also came across as too abrasive and stern for a leader). Bernadette Peters would have been perfect for Glinda but compared to her delicate, benevolent character design she came across as too ambivalent and gravelly voiced(it also sounded like she was trying to put on a part-English part-French accent), while Oliver Platt may be unrecognisable but it did sound like he was channelling Dom DeLuise but wasn't really all that funny in doing so. It's not their fault though, because the dialogue is really inane with a lot of the humour, or what there is of it, very juvenile and forced and the characters are poorly realised, the most entertaining characters being Toto and China Princess and the blandest being Dorothy. Wiser the Owl to me was annoying and too cutesy with the worst of the humour coming from him; Scarecrow, TinMan and Cowardly Lion while having some enjoyable rapport are under-utilised(with an overdone leading-joke too) and little more than stooges and China Princess and Marshal Mallow's romance is somewhat cute but takes up too much of the film and wasn't all that necessary. Personally, also, the villain Jester is over-used and a missed opportunity, with despite Short's voice work, a cool entrance and his back-story the writers didn't seem sure whether to have him as a menacing villain or one played-for-laughs, often he seemed too silly to be a real threat to anyone and his plans seemed in the end under-developed and senseless.

The story didn't come across as very engaging, it meant well but was very charmless and brash and was lacking in any real brains, heart, charm or wonder. It's rather unimaginative and by-the-numbers stuff, as well as being very predictable, complete with an awkward mix of forced humour and a bleak surrealistic in alternative to magical atmosphere which makes one question whether the film had a clear idea at all which audience they were aiming at. There were a few nice details and bright colours but most of the animation was not very good, a lot of the characters are very robotic in movement and very hollow-eyed(ie. Dorothy) and the backgrounds are flat, garish and plastic computer-game looking most of the time. The Kansas scenes and final battle were especially embarrassing with Aunt Em and Uncle Henry suffering the worst of the stiff character designs. And of the songs only one really stood out(When the World), the others were forgettable and badly placed(some like Candy Candy coming right out of nowhere), the Jester's rock-opera-like villain song stylistically out of kilter with the rest of the songs and even the rest of the film too. Well actually Even Then was a nice song but made the mistake of grinding the film down to a complete stand-still. But how can you have Peters on board and not give her anything to sing, it's criminal considering that she has the most experience of any of the cast here in this regard? Overall, one of those animated films that is not completely terrible but from a very subjective personal opinion not good either, there are moments that are decent but much of it is lazy and charmless. 4/10 Bethany Cox
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Am I the only person on here who actually thought this film was actually a nice animated film
lisafordeay4 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
So my mom,my brother,and myself all went to see this film today in the cinemas as the other film we were suppose to see wasn't on until 15:35 and it was too late for us to see it. So we decided to watch Legend of OZ: Dorothy's Return. Now before I start this review I have to say that as a 23 year old woman I absolutely love Animated movies in fact its my favourite movie genre as I love all the effects and effort that is put into making animated movies like Frozen,Tangled,Shrek,The Lion King,whether its Hand-drawn or not I love watching animated movies.

So this one I had very low expectations on,I thought it looked stupid and generic and like a film you see going straight to DVD as it was like a Barbie film,but I was wrong,now its not the best film of all time,but its entertaining for the kids as well as the adults who are big kids at heart.

SO what is this about well let's dive in. Dorothy Graine( voiced by and sung by Lea Michele from Glee in her first animated debut) is whisked away to OZ once again thanks to a magical rainbow that transports her and her dog to OZ as an evil Jester wants to take over by making puppets out of real people. SO Scarecrow insists on Dorothy's help and she agrees. Here she meets a obese owl who helps her and later a marshmallow guard(voiced by Hugh Dancy who also sings in this movie as he sung in the 2004 film Ella Enchanted)who arrests Dorothy and the Owl as they ate candy(btw did anyone think that the candy scene was like Sugar Rush in Wreck It Ralph)and when the marshmallow guard finds out that Dorothy is known as the greatest person ever to defeat the wicked witch he agrees to let her and the owl go. So they go off to defeat the jester(voiced by Martin Short who was in Barbie's Princess & The Pauper and he as in the 2003 Disney film Treasure Planet)who is the wicked witches brother.

So can Dorothy get Glinda(Bernadete Peters from Anastasia as she voiced Sophie in that film) the white fairy back? and undo the spell that turned her into a puppet?

Overall I found this film sweet and nice. The animation is nice to look at,the backgrounds look great and the voice acting was good too(Dan Akyrod from Ghost busters as the Scarecrow,Kelsey Grammar who also worked with Bernadette Peters in Anastasia and he was Sideshow Bob in The Simpsons,and James Belushi from Curly Sue as the Scarecrow are also in this film). The music is great(Bryan Adams who is a singer who did the likes of Spirit of the Stallion and Racing Stripes) provides the music for this film. If you got kids than this is for you,or if you consider yourself an animated fan like me than check it out. For those who hate musicals and sugary sweet cartoons avoid.

6.5/10
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Moderately Entertaining Film the Kids Will Probably Love
pinkled513 May 2014
I'm a parent who has 3 animated movies in his top 10 favorite movies of all time (Frozen, Wreck-It Ralph & Incredibles) so I'm a good candidate to review this film objectively.

I took my 8 yr old son and 9 yr old daughter to see it. Final analysis?

Me & my son: It was o.k. My daughter: I liked it a lot!

I think most kids will enjoy this movie a lot. I was moderately entertained, which is more than I can say for a lot of the animated drivel that passes through our theater. I give it a 6 out of 10. It certainly doesn't deserve to bomb at the box office. I thought it was better than mindless sequels like Rio 2 or even Despicable Me 2, which I didn't enjoy much. But here's a full breakdown of my review:

VOICE ACTING 8/10: Martin Short was outstanding, and raises the score here. Kelsey Grammar was also very good. I love Dan Akroyd, but his portrayal of Scarecrow left a lot to be desired. Jim Belushi and Lea Michele were adequate in their roles, if not rather forgettable.

ANIMATION 6/10: The animation definitely has a sub-par appearance compared to large studio productions (such as Disney or Pixar) but it isn't anywhere near direct to DVD levels. I could tell the animators put their heart and soul into this film, they just didn't have the tools to make it look amazing. Dorothy's animation is a distraction, but many of the non-human characters were great. There was a lot of attention to detail but, unfortunately, the movie suffers from its low budget appearance. People do judge a movie by its cover and it suffers here.

PLOT/STORY 5/10: There's nothing new or interesting about this story. It progressed from point A to point B without any real surprises or a sense of what was propelling the characters forward.

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT 5/10: The villain was the best part of this film. Excellently portrayed by Martin Short, he was a lot of fun to watch. Dorothy and most of her companions were pretty flat and uninteresting. Marshall Mallow was interesting but his relationship to his love interest seemed forced and a little contrived.

MUSIC/SONGS 6/10: The songs were technically proficient and had a professional feel to their production. Unfortunately, they were also rather uninspiring and not very catchy. There's no way anyone would be able to hum or sing any of those songs after just one viewing, as one "reviewer" claimed, they were just too unremarkable.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What are you people on?
saramarch111 May 2014
This movie was AWFUL. None of my 4 children enjoyed this film (ages 5-13), and one fell asleep (we went at 11 am so he wasn't tired). The animation seemed cheap, like a direct to DVD type movie. Barbie movies are better animation than this movie was and that says a lot. The songs were random and about the oddest things. The characters made no sense and interacted in a bizarrely unemotional and unconnected way. Not one character was interesting, funny, deep, layered, anything. I didn't really recognize any of the voices of the "big name" actors who voiced the parts, save for Lea Michelle, who sounds like she is whining/crying all the time. And of course Martin Short as the strangest, least scary yet most highly disturbing villain ever. Whomever is giving this 10 stars is obviously paid to do so (there are people who are paid to give good reviews on movies before they come out to generate interest and get people to the theater) and/or possibly on uppers. I recommend not seeing this in the theater, save your money and if you must, rent it on Redbox for $1.29 or whatever. One of the worst kids movies I've seen in a long time- and I've seen 'em all.
59 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
On my worst movies of the year list
lynn_v12 May 2014
So bad - I can't believe some of the good reviews. The Jester character was horrible and unfortunately on the screen practically the entire movie. The flying monkeys were everywhere and disgusting. A few redeeming characters like Wiser the Owl and Marshall Mallow tried to add some depth to the movie but were strapped by the script. This wasn't even as good as Saturday cartoons as far as the quality of the animation. I agree with the person who said people must be getting paid to write good reviews. I kept waiting for some great Bryan Adams songs - but where were they? The initial premise that a whole town would pick up and move because some shyster told them they had to was also ridiculous.
25 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Something Rotten In Denmark
james184410 May 2014
I find it hard to trust the 1st dozen or so reviews on some films found at this sight. Of course I could be mistaken but, I saw this film and found it to be full of nonsense and trite cliché dialog. With the mega cast that participated in the making of this film I expected a much better and more interesting story to be explored in this sequel classic.

As I watched the various characters enter the beginning scenes I felt they were very cardboard like. The few comedic scenes seemed almost too childish even for children. As to the animation, it was not to my liking. It seemed that it was taken from generic Saturday morning cartoons. It was bland and even boring to a degree.

Lastly I noticed that production costs of this animated film were surprisingly much more than I expected it to be. Nearly a million bucks a minute. I felt that for that kind of mega bucks this should have been a higher quality of product. The next few weeks will show weather the movie goers buy and or embrace this less than stellar movie.

Not every children's Animated film can be a "Frozen" or a "Finding Nemo" but they should at least aim for that quality and level of product.
27 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
My 7 Year Old Daughter Loved It, So It's Good In My Book 7/10
ghandibonez11 May 2014
I have to say...When I told my daughter we are Going to the movies..I wanted to take her to see Rio 2, but she said She'd rather watch Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return. I thought i was gonna be In for an hour&a half of boredom and a terrible Computer-Animated Wizard of Oz Movie..but luckily, my daughter made a good choice. When we Entered the movie, we realized nobody else was there, (Not surprising) and that made the kiddo so excited bc She could talk when she wanted to and walk around..This Film kept her interested, and she had a big smile on her face The whole time. It kept a pretty decent pace, had lots Of good action sequences & The animation was Actually much better than I thought it would be, looked somewhat Realistic. Also had a few good laughs&she loved the Musical scenes. I'm a 31 yr old guy..so obviously this Isn't my kind of film..i love computer animated Kids movies but this one doesn't aim any over the head Jokes for adults and comes off as corny to an adult.. but since my Lil one had such a great time, it's a good one. I recommend this as a movie for a family w small children to Watch together or for ages 3+ to watch alone(the action & bad guys May be too intense for some younger kids to watch alone. Overall, much more enjoyable than expected. -Ghandi Bonez
17 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Uninspired, mostly humorless film based on a second-rate book
amendpa21 June 2014
As I suspected from its origins, this film is uninspired, unoriginal, and mostly humorless. Apparently it is doing poorly at the box office-- and rightly so. What is missing is the sense of humanity and wonder that infuses L Frank Baums's classic books (especially the first few) and the MGM classic film based on his first book. I think the problem with this film is that it is based on the rather mediocre "Dorothy of Oz" written by a Roger Baum, a great grandson of L Frank Baum. "Dorothy of Oz" has the same deficiencies as this film: lack of universality, originality, understanding of humanity or appeal to adults. Because of these deficiencies, even children will find this film as forgettable as Roger Baum's book. Instead of true originality we are given some new "cute" characters like Wiser the owl. It can't just "get by" on cuteness or nostalgia for the original Oz story. It just doesn't work. Successful children's books and films are driven by vision and heart: this film (and the book it's based on) have none.

I became aware of this film even before it was made, when people soliciting investors for the film contacted me. They were surprised to learn that someone actually knew about L. Frank Baum and his wonderful books (beyond the MGM film that almost everyone has seen). They appeared to believe that anything connected to the Wizard of Oz was golden, and were outraged by the idea that Roger Baum's book is uninspired and that a film based on it was doomed to fail.

Unfortunately, in the end the producers were not able to rise above the unoriginal "Dorothy of Oz." I feel sorry for whoever did invest in this boring debacle. I recommend that you skip this film, no matter the age of your children. Instead see a classic: rent Pinocchio, MGM's "Wizard of Oz," or Disney's "Mary Poppins" each of which has the heart that this film lacks.
21 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Unbiased opinion of Legends of Oz
Scottafls6 October 2014
Fortunately I have two little kids now or I would have never watched this movie. In addition, I never heard this movie was coming out or anything about it until we all saw it on Netflix.

My kids aged 9 and 2 1/2 years of age. They both love animated movies to death and have seen a lot of them. Animated movies are not my cup of tea, but because they are playing all the time in the house I see, hear, and remember the movies even though I am watching them indirectly.

I was searching for yet another animated movie and I stumbled upon this one. Being older, I am a fan of the original Wizard of Oz movie from the 1930's having seen it a million times growing up. It looked interesting so we all watched it. Now for the critique:

2. The Story (ebb & flow): It seemed like a logical sequel to the original live action movie that I love, although the sequel is animated. I thought it was easy to understand and wasn't illogical like some other reviewers stated. As an adult and an experienced movie watcher, I thought the story was well written and easy to understand. The fault lies in the source material. Most young people today do not know the story of the Wizard of Oz so they can't connect to it.

3. Characters. Once again, as in the fault of the story, the characters are not recognizable to the target audience: kids. Yes the adults will know about the Wizard of Oz, but the core audience will see it as an original movie. No kids watching the movie will know about the Lion's courage, the Tin Man's heart, or the Scarecrow's brain. Their background is unknown and the movie does not make an effort to rectify the situation. The only character in the movie that you end up learning a lot about is the Jester and only because he talks about himself and his past near the beginning of the film. To me thats a bad idea. Why? Because kids should know about the good characters, not the bad ones. The good characters are the ones you want your children to connect with and feel sympathy for, not the evil ones. I felt they focused too much on the Jester character and not enough on characters that mattered.

4. Animation. The animation quality wasn't bad. Was it the best I've ever seen? No, but it wasn't the worst either. I would say it was good animation that probably could have benefited with a little more financial resources allocated to it.

5. Musical parts (songs): This is where the movie shines. I felt the songs in the movie were of high quality and very catchy. If this were a successful Disney movie, the songs from this movie would be sung by every boy and girl like what happened in Frozen. Frozen had like two or three catchy songs, where Legends of Oz had four or five that would be popular. Of course this is my opinion and I'm not a fan of musicals.

6. Excitement & Entertainment. This is where the moneys made for a movie. Did you feel you got your moneys worth? The movies strengths were its musical numbers and the good story to support the songs. If they had instead used the songs in a more higher profile animated movie, it would have been a better idea.

Bottom Line: An enjoyable movie that needs to watched more than once to really appreciate the strengths of the movie: it's songs. I bought the DVD!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One of the worst movies I've seen at the theater
sheebeehuh12 May 2014
I wasn't expecting a lot but this movie is one of the worst movies I've ever seen at the theater. If you are a hard-core fan of the Oz/Dorothy stories you might like it but if you are expecting a movie that is even remotely coherent you will be disappointed.

It's fantasy and it's geared toward kids, I get that, but the story and dialog here are so lame that even young kids will struggle to find this movie entertaining. It tries to mimic "Robots" at times (which IS a good movie) and tries to sort of be a Disney-esque musical but it fails to be anything other than just a really bad movie.

This should have been a straight-to-DVD release if it was even released at all. It features big named talent (Patrick Stewart, Dan Akroyd, Kelsey Grammar, Jim Belushi,etc.) but with story this poorly-written nobody could have saved this movie.
24 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Legends of Oz is a must see family movie
kennethtownsend-9723015 October 2015
Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return is a kind of sequel to the original story, The Wizard of Oz. the story starts when Dorothy wakes up in her home in Kansas after the tornado hit. After only being there for a short time, Dorothy is swept back to Oz because of a distress call from her old friend Scarecrow. The message informed her that Oz is being taken over by the evil Jester, the younger brother of the Wicked Witch of the West. The Jester has stolen his sister's broomstick and is using it as a magic wand. He is devoted on destroying Oz and ruling over everyone by himself. It is up to Dorothy and her new friends, and of course Todo to stop the Jester and restore the life in Oz.

First off, I would like to note that this movie is a musical. So if you are in to musicals this is a must see movie but if you are not, this movie may not interest you. I like the fact that all the characters pick up where they left off in the first movie. The cowardly lion is no longer a coward and the tin-man now has a heart and real emotions.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Legend's of Oz is a delightful animated feature
bppipping9 May 2014
I'm happy I took my 5 1/2 year old grandson to see this animated feature. It maintained his interest and when it was over he told me how much he liked it. He didn't rate the depth of the characters or the quality of the CG like a lot of adult reviewers have done. The movie was made for them of course. I did not read their reviews before I went to the theater and then was somewhat incensed afterward when I did. When it comes to "cartoons" let's wait for the kids votes to come in before we decide to bury someone's work. As an adult I've found the movie to be quite memorable. There are several segments that are very entertaining, heart warming, and exciting. Overall, Legend's of Oz is a fun movie. Take the kiddies and simply enjoy the show.
17 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Someone drop a house on me!
hpotter139723 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This has got to be one of the worst animated films I've ever seen. The animation was absolutely horrible and quite ugly (even "Toy Story" from 19 years ago has better animation), the songs are horrendous (no "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" here), the storyline is a cheap knock-off of the original story (can't even the proper time era right - Kansas is now mid-2000s for some reason), and the characters are unlikeable. And one more thing: I have a feeling most of the people who write heavily positive reviews are rich idiots who lost $100K each because the film's producer Greg Centineo scammed you all into supporting this fiasco just so he could get rich (most of the movie's $70 million dollar budget is probably in his back pocket right now). Same for the movie's Facebook fans, positive audience feedback on Rotten Tomatoes and Cinemascore, and so on. Admit it: you were cheated the reason the movie failed is because it's terrible, so don't try to save your own skin.
16 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Avoid
sporeviews19 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Remember all those straight-to-dvd Disney sequels that nobody liked? You know what would be a really great idea!? Giving that exact same treatment to one of the most beloved family classics of ALL TIME! And boy, is it.

It has a plot that's just as boring. It has songs that are just as meaningless and forgettable. It has writing that's just as child-pandering and groan-inducing. It has performances that are....arguably passable. But you cast Bernadette Peters in a musical and didn't have her SING?

And in a freaky coincidence, the india-based animation company known as Prana frequently teams up with the studio known as DisneyToon that used to give us those movies! And currently makes all the Tinkerbell movies. Well, that also explains why it LOOKS significantly not up to par. Unspectacular, but not TERRIBLE, as some of the ideas and designs seemed upped for Oz, if safe. But the difference in quality from what we've come to expect from theatre animation, is not subtle. Which leads us to the BURNING question: How did this get released to THEATRES? In WIDE RELEASE? In BLOCKBUSTER MONTH?! (May 9th) Oh, and it didn't do well? Well, you don't say!

Oh, and did I mention that the lion, Tin Man and scarecrow are BARELY IN THIS MOVIE?

Now, acknowledgement: This movie was technically based off one of the original Oz books that I haven't read, so I don't know how exactly faithful it is. But I do know that the marshmallow guard that's an extremely prominent character WASN'T IN THE BOOK AT ALL. So that doesn't necessarily give me a bit of confidence. And even if the adaptation WAS faithful, it STILL wouldn't make this movie any less unbearable to sit through for me.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not even worth suffering through on Netflix
shottsy16 June 2017
My fiancé and I can be cartoon masochists. Sometimes we watch questionable animated movies out of morbid curiosity and enjoy making hun of hem, but this movie was so bad it wasn't even enjoyable to make fun of. It looked like it was animated in the 90s, the music was forgettable and the characters were horribly one dimensional and stupid. I wouldn't have even enjoyed this as a child. What were they thinking? They spent all their money on voice actors and none on the film or story writing. How this ever got theatrical release is beyond me! What an awful awful movie!
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Another failed attempt.
trylontheatre115 June 2014
Disney tried to recreate the magic of the 1939 classic motion picture with OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL; it didn't work and it doesn't work with this latest animated movie. The posters made it look interesting, but than there is the film itself. The story line was lousy and all the name star's voices did not help the picture. Can't the makers of movies, like this, see that it isn't good? Doesn't Hollywood have screening rooms any more? And what is with all these great reviews for this movie? Come on now. The way people write about this film you would think it was the second coming!!! Today's filmmakers need to forget about messing with one of the greatest motion pictures ever made and come up with new ideas.
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
LEGENDS OF OZ contains some familiar names but . . .
pixrox112 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
. . . they don't ring true (Dorothy Gale is too self-assured, Aunty Em and Uncle Henry are too young, Zeke & Hunk & Hickory are inexplicably M.I.A., Glinda is too helpless, the Lion formerly known as Cowardly is uniformly but ineffectually ferocious, Tin Man just dithers like a Clinking Clanking Clattering Collection of Colligenous junk, and Scarecrow is an Ivory Tower bumbler). LEGENDS OF OZ encompasses a few new faces but none are worth getting to know (Jester seems to be afraid of his own flying Henchmonkeys, Marshal Mallow only occasionally takes the initiative, the China Princess seems too small-minded and petite for him, Wiser-the-owl is a dumb gas bag, and the Bogus Appraiser from the framing story cannot lift Elvira Gulch's jockstrap). LEGENDS OF OZ incorporates one lame innovation (transport by rainbow), but seems to squander the wealth of its rich source material (human characters are nearly eliminated, most of the seven songs sound like rejects from Disney Princess Toons, the 1939 black-and-white real life\color Dreamscape device SHOULD have been done even more effectively here in animation, and the scare quotient has been "dumbed down" to toddler level). This flick will seem to last at least four or five dog years to most people--and to Toto, too.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Didn't like it.
I really dislike this movie. It was one of the rare times when I went to see a movie and had low expectations for it and I left the movie with an even lower opinion of it.

In the movie, Dorthy comes back to Oz to rescue her old friends from a new villain with the help of some new friends, but the new friends are not as good as the Scarecrow, the Tin man, and the Lion. they had no depth to them and their purpose was weak.

This may have not been a big deal if Dorthy, the main character, wasn't so one-dimensional.

The new villain, the Jester had potential, but falls short. I think it had a lot to do with the character design overall, which tried to be creative but had no feel to it. Very strange, it was like the artist were not communicating with the animators

I did not like the animation. I thought it was not smooth enough for a movie being released in theaters.

I guess the movie got the released because of all the names attached to the project. The movie was able to use the success of Glee's Lea Michelle who played Dorothy to get it out their. I recognized the voices of Dan Aykroyd and Martian Short, but the voice talent that made no sense was Patrick Stewart, who I feel had better things to do than this movie.

In a world with plenty of Wizard of Oz Sequel, Prequels, and spin-off this was by far the worse. You and your kids have better things to do.
11 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"Legends of Oz" is a very mixed bag...
racecar-413 May 2014
Going into "Legends of OZ", my expectations were already quite low due to a lot of negative reaction from critics and Oz fans. Having now seen the film, I was pleasantly surprised by some of it. I found the writing and concept of the film to be quite good. The film managed to be funny when it needed to be and was even able to pull off a few heartfelt moments. The cast of new characters who become Dorothy's traveling companions, as well as the new villain, all were able to hold my attention and deserve their place in the Oz canon. All the vocal talents in the film, particularly Martin Short & Megan Hilty, are pretty much spot-on with their interpretations of the characters in Oz, even the iconic ones we've come to know and love. The design of Oz and its inhabitants, while not particularly revolutionary, was sufficient and "magical" enough to not be distracting. Unfortunately, once those designs begin to move (as this IS a "motion picture") the film begins to run into problems. Some of the animation, especially in the Kansas scenes at the beginning and end of the film, are on par with the old Sims computer game renderings, which were impressive for their time, but CGI has moved FAR beyond that. But the biggest misstep of all is the original music written to make the film a "musical". The concept, production, and placement of these songs are so bad that they almost felt like an afterthought. I expected Bryan Adams to deliver something much better than the finished product and was quite disappointed. The only saving grace on the soundtrack is "Even Then"....which "even then" had terrible moments of mediocrity. Perhaps Bryan Adams just isn't capable of delivering that twinkly, magical, Disney-ish feeling music ala "Frozen" that (in my opinion) was needed for a film like this. As the title summary states, its a mixed bag, but still at least somewhat enjoyable for fans of the original and of L. Frank Baum's novels.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Not For Anyone Over 5
utgard1426 October 2014
This is supposed to be based on a book written by L. Frank Baum's grandson. Congrats to him for cashing in on granddad's legacy, I guess. The new characters are entirely forgettable so I won't bother discussing them. Why is Dorothy wearing cowgirl boots? Is that a thing? The opening credits go on way too long. The animation isn't the greatest. The backgrounds are flat and cheap. At times the movie looks like a video game made ten years ago. The voice work is passable but the actors can't make this work. Martin Short is having a field day but his enthusiasm is not contagious. The songs are very bland. Think 'Christian pop music' bland. The song about candy had me questioning why I was watching a movie clearly meant for toddlers. Man, it's pretty insufferable. I kept checking the time and thinking about my life choices. Look, if you're a parent of little ones, maybe they'll like it. If you're an adult who isn't very bright, maybe you'll like it. The rest of you, I would suggest you avoid this. It's not something most adults or teens will like. It's childish, corny, and boring.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Legends of Oz honors the original in look and feel
scottitaliaander9 May 2014
I saw Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return in an advance screening last weekend. I took two of my sons with me, neither under the age of 16. Older teenagers are natural-born skeptics when it comes to kids' movies so I was sure they'd pan it.

Much to my (pleasant) surprise, they enjoyed the film as much as I did. From the opening credits-- which re-imagined the tornado sequence in the 1939 Wizard of Oz that we have all seen dozens of times--to the final frame, we were captivated by the characters, the songs and the storyline. In addition, the pacing of the movie was great, though there were a few moments where it felt a little "draggy." But just a few: my guess is the target audience (ages 6 to 12) won't even notice.

This independent film has some surprisingly big stars as voices of the characters, most notably Lea Michele of Glee fame. I had never heard of her a few months ago, but then I checked her out and found out she has 3.4 million fans on Facebook! She seems to be big among the teen set. Anyway, she plays a winsome yet spunky Dorothy, a 2014 version of the character popularized by oh-whats-her-name in 1939.

The Scarecrow, Lion and Tin Man are voiced by Dan Ayckroyd, Jim Belushi and Kelsey Grammar respectively. They have kept the inner core of these lovable characters while updating them to suit modern tastes.

The freshest part of the film are the new characters introduced as Dorothy returns to Oz and tries to make her way to the Emerald City, where an evil Jester (terrificly played by Martin Short) is wreaking havoc. In an echo of the original film, Dorothy first encounters and then wins over these characters (Wiser the Owl; Marshall Mallow, the Dainty China Princess and Tugg, played by Patrick Stewart) as she makes her way down the yellow brick road.

Some of the songs are forgettable but there some that really connect. "Even Then," a love ballad written by Bryan Adams and Tift Merrit, is sure to cause a lump in your throat. And "When the World" will probably be the tune that stays with you as you leave the theater. I wouldn't be surprised if the soundtrack is more popular than the movie itself.

All in all this is a film that the whole family should find charming and fun. And at 88 minutes it is the perfect length to tell the new Oz story while keeping your attention. Ignore those critics complaining about the quality of the animation. Its a kids' movie, for crying out loud!
31 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Clean humor for children
tinysmalllittle11 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
My daughter (16) has to review a family-friendly movie occasionally for the local newspaper. An Oz-loving friend, my daughter, and I went to see this on May 10. My first issue concerns the kind of cars driven. Then, Auntie Em as a 40 year old in jeans. Then, we meet the Appraiser. Seriously? On a Kansas farm in the 1930's? The Scarecrow, now a genius despite the fact that the Wizard never gave him anything he didn't already have, has a machine that terrifyingly sucks Dorothy into a rainbow and deposits her in OZ. I thought...this is going to be the WORST movie ever. However, as it continued, it did improve.

Martin Short did a very good job. There was a bit too little of the Scarecrow, Lion, Tinman, and Glenda...because they are amazing actors. The music was quite good. Patrick Stewart was adorable as Tug/Tank. Unlike many awful "family films" like FreeBirds in recent past, it actually is clean humor, and OK for kids. There is a death sentence handed down and subsequently commuted.

The princess/marshmallow love story is a bit out of place, but sweet.

Overall, not BAD.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Poor
neil-4763 April 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Dorothy is summoned back to Oz to combat the Jester, a new threat.

This CGI feature is based on a novel by original author L Frank Baum's great-grandson and features a stellar voice cast. The first of these is not a recommendation and though the second should be, it isn't: several stalwarts over-perform, and no-one is given anything very special to do.

This is a thoroughly pedestrian piece, characterised by truly awful animation. This would have looked shoddy 15 years ago: by today's standards it is lamentable. Then one sees that it cost $70M and one wonders what it went on.

I suppose this would pass muster for undemanding kids, but it really isn't very good at all.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
¿What were the creators thinking about when creating this movie?
sarakleinp26 June 2019
Sorry for having to criticize this work negatively, but in my opinion it was a bad idea for them, bring this classic Frank Baum to the big screen, without knowing it. There is no doubt that this movie has a script a little loose and of poor quality, but the plot is fine.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Expected to NOT like it but was surprised at how entertaining it is.
TxMike16 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I watch pretty much everything my public library gets on DVD. I am a big fan of the original movie and was curious about this one, but being animated thought it would be boring. Still, I felt obligated to watch at least 15 minutes of it.

Well I was surprised at how engaging it is. The voice acting has some of the best in the business and young Lea Michelle (of Glee fame) does a great job voicing Dorothy Gale, including a few nice songs. I was also surprised at Martin Short, who plays the bad guy, the Jester. We all know he is a fine actor, but his marvelous singing was a pleasant surprise.

The story starts right when Dorothy is waking up after the tornado shook everything up at home. Recall that the original movie was all a dream, while Dorothy was knocked out. But this story is done not as a dream, but as Dorothy really being brought back to Oz, by a rainbow transporter, to save Oz from the Jester.

The story of course is inconsequential, it is just animated fun with a few songs thrown in. But good songs. When Dorothy gets back to Kansas, she also exposes the fraud being perpetrated to steal everyone's damaged property.

Other voice actors included Dan Aykroyd, James Belushi, Kelsey Grammar, Bernadette Peters, Oliver Platt, and Hugh Dancy.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed