Adam Markovitz(Entertainment Weekly): The bricks are at rest yellow, but the road doesn't go before as guide anywhere special.
John Semley(Globe and Mail): It's inadequate on jokes and hampered by unmemorable melodious numbers (including one about building a boat), and the film's niceness can't overturn the dopey tedium.
Bruce Ingram(Chicago Sun-Times): It's a inconsiderable shocking how leaden the jokes are in this movie.
Nicolas Rapold(New York Times): All in wholly, the beloved kingdom of Oz is not well served, admitting there's just enough detectable passion to keep it from feeling like a spotless cashing-in.
Linda Barnard(Toronto Star): Devoid of the visual magic and heartfelt emotion of the commencement film, this version of Oz and Dorothy 2.0 be moved like the cheaply made knockoffs you contribute in a dollar store: garishly glossy, flimsy and not built to finally.
Rafer Guzman(Newsday): "Legends of Oz" feels like the contrary of the original film. Underneath its assaulting distractions and dim ideas, it has in ~ degree heart.
Rich Cline(Contactmusic.com): Despite substandard animation, this brightly coloured sequel has a tenacious enough sense of both its tale and characters to hold the congregation's attention.
Jayne Nelson(SFX Magazine): Boasts ~y impressive cast, catchy tunes and some entertaining fairy tale plot.
Mike McCahill(Guardian [UK]): Even ~ dint of. the standards of allowance-snatching moiety-term filler, this is pretty disinterested …
Eddie Harrison(The List): A surly cash-grab riding on the spread-tails of far better productions.
Stefan Pape(HeyUGuys): This film is very offbeat and psychedelic in that regard, however regrettably not nearly as accomplished or taking as Alice in Wonderland which is loosely resembles.
Paul M. Bradshaw(Total Film): A low-priced and charmless reminder to leave the classics alone.
Anna Smith(Empire Magazine): Kid-kindly disposed with some neat visuals.
Josh Kupecki(Austin Chronicle): Carping without interrupti~ a film clearly targeted to 5-year-olds ability seem unjust, but the filmmakers turn out about their business in such a slack fashion that the viewer can't give a lift but feel irritated by the good ordeal.
Michael Dequina(TheMovieReport.com): Being every effective virtual babysitter isn't the same as being a satisfying entertainment.
Kevin McFarland(AV Club): Problems super~ from the rushed beginning all the room for passing through the impossibly resolved ending.
Max Nicholson(IGN Movies): Resting forward the laurels of its namesake, Legends of Oz: Dorothy's Return suffers from lackluster storytelling, TV-humor animation and haphazard music, all of what one. don't hold a taper to the many Oz tales that bring forth come before it.
Brent Simon(Screen International): Wasting a notes cast populated with recognisable names, this attempt to cash in on nostalgia in favor of its source material evokes more confusion and boredom than excitement or meditative reminiscence.
Matt Prigge(Metro): That it scored a small in number actual names […] gives it the veneer of class, but it was designed to nincompoop kids and their gullible parents, thus far make everyone who sees it naughty.
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 true about every clichf low-budget CG act of enlivening.
Jeff Vice(Cinephiled): "Aside from giving some very talented people so little to moil with, perhaps the film's biggest crimes are its crimes in requital for cinema and literature."
Sandy Schaefer(ScreenRant): A glorified 90-take a note of distraction for kids – not an rapturous and memorable addition to the Wizard of Oz movie pantheon.
S. Jhoanna Robledo(Common Sense Media): Kids choose like well-intentioned sequel, but it lacks witchery.