Terrible writing


I just watched the first 2 hours of this and am really disappointed with the writing, which is uneven and sometimes silly. Is it a children's show with cliched, flat dialogue ("Are you out of your tiny minds?") or an adult farce ("I thought they were pissin' on your grave")? It's certainly not an homage to the original Wizard of Oz. I didn't much care for the original 1939 production but it was miles better than this garbage. What a waste of some wonderful talent - the writers owed Callum Keith Rennie and Alan Cummings and the others much better material than this.

reply

I found the writing to be clumsy at times too. Though I did enjoy the mini series and will watch it again. Part one is really uneven but part two and three where better. You should try watching part two, it gets better and is much more even. Still got some terrible dialogue in some scenes but also some funny moments.

I like the story and the actors (not including ZD who should have been recast). I just wish they had let another better group of writers go over the story and fix up the clumsy dialogue and uneven pacing of part one.

reply

I'll give the next installment a try - I've got it on tape from last week. I so agree with you about Zooey D - pretty face, and I'm sure she can act, she just didn't prove it here.

reply

[deleted]

A lot of it isn't bad writing, just bad acting. That "tiny minds" line could have worked if D.G. had appeared sufficiently frightened (she's about to be flayed, after all), but instead she just looks stoned. I've seen Zooey Deschanel in other movies, and she can't act in any of them. The best writing in the world will fall flat if poorly acted.

And I don't recommend comparing it to the original. Very few remakes are widely considered acceptable by fans when compared to the original, but most can stand their ground if taken on their own merit.

Cross my heart, smack me dead, stick a lobster on my head.

reply

[deleted]

Don't whine at me. I didn't start it; the OP was the one who brought it up.

Anyway, even though it's not exactly a remake, a lot of people compare it to the original nonetheless, and somehow this one is almost always found wanting. So like I said, I don't recommend comparing the two, because Tin Man is pretty good on its own, and a comparison can color your opinion.

Cross my heart, smack me dead, stick a lobster on my head.

reply

I think what Genetic was trying to say is that there is this..oh, what do they call those things...oh yes, book...there's this book called The Wizard of Oz that the 1939 movie was based on...and that this is also based on. So basically, the 1939 movie isn't 'the original'...so this isn't a remake of that...it's based on the book.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

The writing isn't too bad. If you want to see really bad writing look at THIS baby!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCj8sPCWfUw

even then the dialogue here isn't the worst I've ever heard. This is a kids TV show so of course the dialogue wont be PERFECT to an adult ear. My favourite adaptation of the Oz books is "Return To Oz" and even that had its few moments of bad dialogue.

OT: Agree about the '39 film though, didn't care for it much at all.

Goth for LIFE!

reply

Actually, the ONE thing about this miniseries that killed it for me was the ending, and in fact it seems the writers have this problem with all of the projects they've made that I've seen thus far. It will start out VERY nicely, great buildup, nice tension, and then they just completely undercut it and give it an incredibly anticlimactic ending, taking a GREAT premise and utterly runing it. They did the same thing with Alice, which I loved, up until the last hour. Just, awful.

reply

Actually, the ONE thing about this miniseries that killed it for me was the ending, and in fact it seems the writers have this problem with all of the projects they've made that I've seen thus far. It will start out VERY nicely, great buildup, nice tension, and then they just completely undercut it and give it an incredibly anticlimactic ending, taking a GREAT premise and utterly runing it. They did the same thing with Alice, which I loved, up until the last hour. Just, awful.

reply

I really struggled to watch this schlock. It was like reading bad fan fiction, especially with that whole "Dorothy is the Chosen One" angle that they were taking.

Also, it's often excrutiatingly obvious that certain things were only in the script for budgetary reasons - first of which being, the Tin Man is not tin because they couldn't get the budget together for good enough VFX/Makeup. He dresses like a cowboy so they had an excuse to shoot scenes in touristy Old West ghost towns in Utah/Colorado, rather than build sets themselves (this also saved money on costume, because his whole getup was probably looted from a studio backlot), and the Emerald City now resembles a beaten up version of New York so they could recycle sets from other movies which had a similar mise-en-scene.

These terrible little production flaws consistently break the fourth wall and make it nigh unwatchable, and that's before we get to the writing or the acting. Clearly they blew the entire budget on hiring semi-famous actors - as many of the principles are quite well known (Ms. Deschanel was an up-and-comer at the time, but would not have come cheap). However, Sir Lawrence Olivier couldn't have saved this dud, as the dialogue was totally dire throughout.

I gave up at the end of the first episode. Apologies if it turns into Citizen Kane in the next chapter.



reply

I kept thinking that this would make a good drinking movie. You have to take a shot whenever you hear "Come on" or "Run"


Frankly, any writer who uses the phrase "Come on" should be shot

reply