अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA re-imagining of L. Frank Baum's classic "The Wizard of Oz."A re-imagining of L. Frank Baum's classic "The Wizard of Oz."A re-imagining of L. Frank Baum's classic "The Wizard of Oz."
- 1 प्राइमटाइम एमी जीते
- 14 जीत और कुल 23 नामांकन
एपिसोड ब्राउज़ करें
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I was rather surprised that I enjoyed this. The story was obviously dragged out a bit thin to reach 6 hours in length. The stretching causes the pace to seem a bit too slow. Possibly better editing could have alleviated that. The characters are well thought out and thankfully not exact copies of the originals. From what I gathered after seeing all three episodes is that this story takes place 500 years after the original Dorothy came to Oz. The story is much darker, which is refreshing.
The leads do admirable jobs in their roles. I found only the lion to be somewhat boring, probably due to his inability to vocalize very much. He just didn't emote very well, although he did have some decent screen time, I just didn't connect with him at all. Toto was another character that confused a bit. His motivation was questionable considering the devotion he professed to have. I also wish the Wizard was a more prominent fixture, but all in all, I was OK with that branch of the story.
To sum up. Good acting, and I think a good choice on the lead for Zooey. I found her quirkiness and general kind of cute gutsiness refreshing. The special effects are better than average and certainly better than the typical home-made sci-fi look you may be used to. The scenery was also very nice in the movie (albeit with a darker twist). If you enjoyed the original, and you aren't a die hard fan hoping for a rehash of the same old story, then check this one out. It may be worth your time ;)
The leads do admirable jobs in their roles. I found only the lion to be somewhat boring, probably due to his inability to vocalize very much. He just didn't emote very well, although he did have some decent screen time, I just didn't connect with him at all. Toto was another character that confused a bit. His motivation was questionable considering the devotion he professed to have. I also wish the Wizard was a more prominent fixture, but all in all, I was OK with that branch of the story.
To sum up. Good acting, and I think a good choice on the lead for Zooey. I found her quirkiness and general kind of cute gutsiness refreshing. The special effects are better than average and certainly better than the typical home-made sci-fi look you may be used to. The scenery was also very nice in the movie (albeit with a darker twist). If you enjoyed the original, and you aren't a die hard fan hoping for a rehash of the same old story, then check this one out. It may be worth your time ;)
Pretty entertaining, although the wooden style of the lead actress who plays DG is annoying. She doesn't seem to sync with the rest of the ensemble at all, and can't seem to manage any emotion other than wide-eyed amazement. Also, the plot line seems redundant and contrived at times - I was expecting something a little bit more original, while still incorporating stuff from the Wizard of Oz movie we're all familiar with. I was surprised to see a bit of Time Bandits and Star Wars at the beginning (the swinging cage and the Ewok-like situation). It's as if the writers couldn't make up their minds which fantasy stories to "sample." Overall, worth watching once, maybe twice.
An interesting take on one of the oldest classics. If you love the science fiction genre and the wizard of oz, you should love this imaginative display of the original ideas of The Wizard of OZ. It has the main characters of the Wizard of OZ still searching for the same things. I found it extremely entertaining, so much so that I actually decided to watch the second part. (And I can only remember to watch shows if they REALLY capture my attention. Few do.) So far i've not found it lacking. It looks exactly like the commercials portrayed it It is extremely well acted and the scenery is amazing.
All in all, i've found it to be a good show so far. It's twenty minutes into the second episode and i'm already planning on watching the third part. (Show's on commercial right now.)
All in all, i've found it to be a good show so far. It's twenty minutes into the second episode and i'm already planning on watching the third part. (Show's on commercial right now.)
Tin Man is an interesting update of the old Wizard of Oz story, with special effects and acting well above the Sci-Fi Channel's usual low standards. It is more akin to Battlestar Galactica (although not quite as good) than to their creature features. Zooey Deschanel, Kathleen Robertson, and Alan Cumming all turn in good performances, although Richard Dreyfuss fans should be warned that his role is smaller than advertised.
The plot overall is well written, although at times rather predictable, especially in the third episode. There are some issues with the dialogue though, with some genuinely flat lines scattered throughout the series.
In terms of younger fans of Baum, the plot might be a bit dark for the under ten set, but should be enjoyable for older kids, particularly teenagers with a taste for the bizarre.
The plot overall is well written, although at times rather predictable, especially in the third episode. There are some issues with the dialogue though, with some genuinely flat lines scattered throughout the series.
In terms of younger fans of Baum, the plot might be a bit dark for the under ten set, but should be enjoyable for older kids, particularly teenagers with a taste for the bizarre.
First the negatives. TV suffers from a style of script writing and directing that is optimized for the "series". Real movies are initially drafted for size, depth and complexity to complete a story. Real movies have to be cut and edited to fit the 90 to 180 minute length tolerable for a feature film. This is why many great movies end up having a "directors cut".
TV movies are based on the contract with the network and the longer the series, the more advertising can be sold. Tin Man only had about 180 minutes of story material but they needed to fill 360. Some of this additional length is "padding" and not cutting useless scenes.
The other major negative is that Zooey Deschanel's acting was very weak. I'm reminded that the initial films of John Wayne and Jack Nicholson was some of the absolute worst acting caught on film. Jack improved much more than John and perhaps Zooey will improve with age.
As for the positives. I give this a fairly high rating because of the admirable approach of giving all the principle characters a deep multi-dimensional role in the story. As much as I love the 1939 classic, it was a children's story, and a musical at that. The tin man, scarecrow and lion were symbolic vehicles of the lack of heart, intelligence and courage respectively in both films, but here they have a history. And that history is an important part of a deeper story. It is that deeper story that kept me coming back to watch parts 2 and 3.
Some of the better aforementioned "padding" are the scenes that presented more character development of all the principles.
TV movies are based on the contract with the network and the longer the series, the more advertising can be sold. Tin Man only had about 180 minutes of story material but they needed to fill 360. Some of this additional length is "padding" and not cutting useless scenes.
The other major negative is that Zooey Deschanel's acting was very weak. I'm reminded that the initial films of John Wayne and Jack Nicholson was some of the absolute worst acting caught on film. Jack improved much more than John and perhaps Zooey will improve with age.
As for the positives. I give this a fairly high rating because of the admirable approach of giving all the principle characters a deep multi-dimensional role in the story. As much as I love the 1939 classic, it was a children's story, and a musical at that. The tin man, scarecrow and lion were symbolic vehicles of the lack of heart, intelligence and courage respectively in both films, but here they have a history. And that history is an important part of a deeper story. It is that deeper story that kept me coming back to watch parts 2 and 3.
Some of the better aforementioned "padding" are the scenes that presented more character development of all the principles.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThis film broke the Sci-Fi Channel's records by being the highest-rated television event in the network's history.
- गूफ़Throughout most of Into the Storm (2007), Glitch repeats himself constantly. This "glitch" dissipates in Search for the Emerald (2007) and is gone by Tin Man (2007) as part of his character development.
- भाव
DG: I'm DG. This is...
Cain: I know, a head-case.
Glitch: I have a proper name... and when I remember it I will tell you.
DG: What's a head-case?
Cain: It's what the state does to re-educate criminals. Remove their brains, and keep them trapped inside their own heads. Ain't that right, convict?
Glitch: Whoa, I ain't no convict!
[hesitates]
Glitch: And just in case I am, it was a bogus charge, a frame job, I'm sure of it!
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThis may only apply to the extended credits on the DVD release: the character name Dorothy Gale is misspelled "Dorthy".
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनIn the DVD edition, released March 11, 2008, the opening title card and credits are only shown on the first episode. Similarily, the first and second episodes do not contain end credits. As a result, the opening titles on the first episode and the end credits on the third episode have been extended and expanded to cover the entire series.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Beyond the Yellow Brick Road: The Making of Tin Man (2007)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Зачароване королівство
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 30 मिनट
- रंग
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें