User reviews

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

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.

When I first saw this in the movie theater, it was amazing! This version of Wizard of Oz has some of the same characters from The Wizard of Oz like, Dorothy, Tin Man, Scarecrow, and the Lion. The jester is a interesting villain instead of the wicked witch from the west from the classic. The characters you love are joined by a few new friends! Oz kids was another version of Wizard of Oz, but this version is even better! The songs are great, they'll make you want to sing and have fun! When the world is my favorite song in the movie. Lea Michelle does a great job as Dorothy and her singing voice, too. This version of The Wizard of Oz is better than the classic, and Oz Kids!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

-Legends Of Oz: Dorothy's Return is the animated film based on the book Dorothy of OZ, which sees Dorothy return to Oz to help save it from The Jester. Along the way, she meets new friends and reunited with old friends.

-I'll be honest, the only reason I watched it was because I love Oz, but I actually was not disappointed.

-The story itself is a lot like the original. The ending doesn't matter as much as the journey. That said, many elements of the story, and overall film, feel really young. I know it's an animated film, but still.

-The pace is pretty good.

-The voice cast was good, but I loved Kelsey Grammar as Tin Man! -The characters are not that deep and have feel made towards younger audiences. The villain, Jester, was pretty funny. I hates Scarecrow though. He was the worst.

-The music was nice. There were some musical songs to it, which I really liked. However, there were only like 3 and they were not unified in style.

-I loved Oz. It was pretty and nostalgic! -It's PG.

-So Legends Of Oz: Dorothy's Return has some fun, entertaining elements mixed with some younger elements that are definitely for kids. I will say it's not a bad Nexflix/Redbox watch though. 7/10.

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.

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.

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.