Tin Man

Parts of this oz interpretation are hard to swallow but none the less the show has held my interest. The way they've incorporated elements of the story into the movie is sometimes clever and sometimes not so much. The acting can be irritating and forced-Glitch is very Jar Jar Binks at times... At first I wasn't a fan of the Tin Man but as the show goes on he is starting to grow on me. I love Zooey Deschanel however in this movie there are times when it feels like shes just reciting lines from the script or seems bored. If you have an open mind and can get past the bad parts over all its pretty good. Visually it excels for a movie mini.

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.

So far what I have have seen of Tin man is AMAZING, from the cinematography to the story line. It is an interesting perspective on a very classic story. While nothing can replace Judy Garland as the original Dorthy, Zooey's take on her is much more real and less "hollywood." She thinks much like any of us would in her given situation, and that alone makes her an endearing character. Yes the special effects are lovely, but that alone does not make this movie. What does is the way you are able to connect to the characters. You are part of the story, not just watching it on a silver screen. After having grown up on the old school version, this is something I could see my kids relating to. As much as I love The Wizard of Oz, it is very dated and you have a hard time NOW dealing with out candy coated the script is. The original wizard of OZ book was actually quite SCARY for it's time, so to see someone embrace that dark thread I feel breathes more life into the picture. Unlike Willy Wonka's remake, this one can actually stand BESIDE it's predecessor and hold its own. It is not trying to be like the classic which is nice. Orginality is much more intriguing.

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 ;)

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.