June 17th, 2014 14:11

Legends of Oz: Dorothy’s Return

Movie Info


Adam Markovitz(Entertainment Weekly): The bricks are yet yellow, but the road doesn't be at the head of anywhere special.
John Semley(Globe and Mail): It's uncivil on jokes and hampered by unmemorable dulcet numbers (including one about building a boat), and the thin skin's niceness can't choke the dopey tedium.
Bruce Ingram(Chicago Sun-Times): It's a paltry shocking how leaden the jokes are in this movie.
Nicolas Rapold(New York Times): All in quite, the beloved kingdom of Oz is not well served, nevertheless there's just enough detectable passion to keep it from feeling like a pure cashing-in.
Linda Barnard(Toronto Star): Devoid of the optical magic and heartfelt emotion of the original film, this version of Oz and Dorothy 2.0 perceive like the cheaply made knockoffs you notice in a dollar store: garishly brilliant, flimsy and not built to endure.
Rafer Guzman(Newsday): "Legends of Oz" feels like the irreconcilable of the original film. Underneath its aggressive distractions and dim ideas, it has no heart.
Rich Cline(Contactmusic.com): Despite substandard act of enlivening, this brightly coloured sequel has a firm enough sense of both its fable and characters to hold the congregation's attention.
Jayne Nelson(SFX Magazine): Boasts every impressive cast, catchy tunes and ~y entertaining fairy tale plot.
Mike McCahill(Guardian [UK]): Even ~ dint of. the standards of allowance-snatching half-term filler, this is pretty all the same …
Eddie Harrison(The List): A touchy cash-grab riding on the covering-tails of far better productions.
Stefan Pape(HeyUGuys): This thin skin is very offbeat and psychedelic in that regard, though regrettably not nearly as accomplished or taking as Alice in Wonderland which is loosely resembles.
Paul M. Bradshaw(Total Film): A cheap and charmless reminder to leave the classics alone.
Anna Smith(Empire Magazine): Kid-on ~ terms with some neat visuals.
Josh Kupecki(Austin Chronicle): Carping without ceasing a film clearly targeted to 5-year-olds force seem unjust, but the filmmakers rollicking time about their business in such a lazy fashion that the viewer can't assistant but feel irritated by the whole ordeal.
Michael Dequina(TheMovieReport.com): Being each effective virtual babysitter isn't the like as being a satisfying entertainment.
Kevin McFarland(AV Club): Problems multiply from the rushed beginning all the fashion through the impossibly resolved ending.
Max Nicholson(IGN Movies): Resting without ceasing the laurels of its namesake, Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return suffers from lackluster storytelling, TV-nature animation and haphazard music, all of that don't hold a candle to the many Oz tales that hold come before it.
Brent Simon(Screen International): Wasting a sound cast populated with recognisable names, this try to cash in on nostalgia according to its source material evokes more muddle and boredom than excitement or meditative reminiscence.
Matt Prigge(Metro): That it scored a scarcely any actual names […] gives it the overlay of class, but it was designed to simpleton kids and their gullible parents, even now make everyone who sees it cohesive.
Linda Cook(Quad City Times (Davenport, IA)): Oz has its moments, in like manner to this day.
Charles Solomon(Animation Scoop): Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return reunites Dorothy Gale, the Cowardly Lion, the Scarecrow, the Tin Man-and reasonable about every clichf low-budget CG act of enlivening.
Jeff Vice(Cinephiled): "Aside from giving some very talented people so little to toil with, perhaps the film's biggest crimes are its crimes to counter-poise cinema and literature."
Sandy Schaefer(ScreenRant): A glorified 90-sixtieth part of a degree distraction for kids – not an enrapturing and memorable addition to the Wizard of Oz movie pantheon.
S. Jhoanna Robledo(Common Sense Media): Kids resoluteness like well-intentioned sequel, but it lacks fascination.

Current time is: 25 Jan 2015 03:48