AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,9/10
6,4 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaShortly after a tornado rips through her Kansas home, Dorothy returns to Oz to save her friends from a villainous jester.Shortly after a tornado rips through her Kansas home, Dorothy returns to Oz to save her friends from a villainous jester.Shortly after a tornado rips through her Kansas home, Dorothy returns to Oz to save her friends from a villainous jester.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 5 indicações no total
Lea Michele
- Dorothy
- (narração)
Kelsey Grammer
- Tin Man
- (narração)
Dan Aykroyd
- Scarecrow
- (narração)
Jim Belushi
- Lion
- (narração)
- (as James Belushi)
Tacey Adams
- Aunt Em
- (narração)
Michael Krawic
- Uncle Henry
- (narração)
Martin Short
- The Appraiser
- (narração)
- …
Bernadette Peters
- Glinda
- (narração)
Randi Soyland
- You
- (narração)
- (as Randi Vamos Soyland)
- …
Oliver Platt
- Wiser
- (narração)
Hugh Dancy
- Marshal Mallow
- (narração)
Brian Blessed
- Judge Jawbreaker
- (narração)
Douglas Hodge
- Fruit Striped Lawyer
- (narração)
Debi Derryberry
- Stenographer
- (narração)
Randy Crenshaw
- China Guard
- (narração)
- …
Randal Keith
- First Minister
- (narração)
- …
Megan Hilty
- China Princess
- (narração)
- …
Richard Steven Horvitz
- Munchin Suitor
- (narração)
- (as Richard Horvitz)
Avaliações em destaque
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
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.
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.
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
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesTwo sequels and a television series were originally planned. When this movie made only eighteen million dollars at the box-office against a seventy million dollar budget, the sequel plans were cancelled.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosUnusual Credit Style: In the closing credits, there are numerous entries for co-producers & other "producer" positions that list both husband & wife for each credit entry, such as "Jack & Jill Jones". Some credits are simply listed as a family unit. One such co-producer is listed as "The Ross Family". It is rare that credits are given in groupings of families. Most credits are a single person's name.
- ConexõesFeatured in AniMat's Reviews: Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return (2014)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 70.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 8.462.347
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 3.747.780
- 11 de mai. de 2014
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 21.755.418
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente