Emerald City - New show on NBC (some boxed spoilers)

It’s way past my bedtime, so apologies for any errors or incoherence, but I was shocked to note that there was no previous thread (please correct me if I’m wrong).

What a fantastic show! How the hell is this on a regular network instead of HBO or at least AMC?

It’s got nearly the production value of Game of Thrones, and not an entirely dissimilar tone, but the writing and directing are a full level above anything on that show. There’s a poetry to it that just amazes me, and which, judging from the few review scores I’ve seen, a lot of people are missing.

There are some seriously powerful actors, both known and making their debut here, and at least a few scenes which are cinematically breathtaking (Zack Snyder would be jealous, I bet).

The writing is excellent - the dialogue works well, and the characters and plotlines are introduced in an interesting fashion that makes me want more.

But none of that touches upon the greatness in this show. It’s hard to explain, but there’s a delightful poetry that I’ve rarely seen in movies and television. Much of it (but not all) plays upon the modernization of Dorothy’s tale.

The scarecrow is met as a man crucified, with crows upon him, waiting to feast on his flesh. He has lost his memory, and someone might harshly call him “brainless”. When we expect to meet the Munchkins, we instead meet children of a tribe of free peoples. When Dorothy confesses she killed the Witch of the East, we are given a moment of suspense - are they going to sing and celebrate her, or punish her? - and by the end of the episode that suspense is not entirely satisfied, even after the moment has passed and the question answered.

The show tantalizes and teases, and satisfies enough only to keep us from complaining as it sets up the next delicious taste.

I fear that the show cannot continue with such excellence, what with regression towards the mean, and all. I fear that if the show succeeds at all, the pressures to maintain an ongoing, corporate friendly, syndicatable confection may ruin its particular genius.

But most of all, I worry that it may not get enough viewers who are paying enough attention during dinner (and all the rest that distract us while the boob tube clamors on) to be hooked by its creative poetry as I was to warrant what must be an expensive show to procuce, and it could be cancelled before its time.

Is anyone else with me on this?

Seen the first episode, and will keep watching. I’ve always loved Tarsem Singh’s visual aesthetic in films, even if the writing is not always great. So would watch it for that alone, although I’m already liking the modernization.

I haven’t had a chance to watch it yet, but I was particularly thrown by an ad that referred to it as “Game of Thrones meets Oz.” If you’re of a particular age and viewer demographic, that means something VERY different than the ad execs intended.

It’s considerably darker in tone than the most famous movie rendition of the story. Of course, the original novels were in many ways darker in tone than that movie.

I’m not quite as enthused as the OP but I’ll be trying to keep up with the show (my schedule makes following a broadcast series difficult).

Wife and I caught the premiere and loved it. Interesting characters and a great modern twist on the classic tale. We will be watching, and…

we can’t wait to see what kind of modern take the Tin Man has

A long and less imaginative version of Return to Oz. It’s opposite the best show on TV now, so I won’t be watching.

I review new shows for NBC from time to time, and I saw a handful (7 I think) of different trailers that they were testing for this show. I thought it looked mighty interesting from the trailers, but it seemed a bit too convoluted and it (spoilers for people who don’t want to know of a future plot point)

shoehorns a love story between Dorothy and the Scarecrow

…which took me right out of the show. I’ll definitely keep an eye on this thread though and hear what everyone else has to say about it.

I came looking for a thread over the weekend, and when I didn’t see one I assumed most who watched it were, like me, very disappointed. I kept saying to myself: should have known… network TV. I may give it a few more tries, but I don’t think it lived up to anything we see on HOB, SHOW, or AMC.

I liked it. Lots of interesting characters, lots of interesting conflict.
But holy crap that was a lot of commercials! I think they made a 1 hour show 2 hours long from all the ads!
Only way I’ll watch that again is on DVR.

I liked the show. Lot’s of action and graphics. But why are they trying to associate this with the Wizard of OZ.

There’s a tornado. And a wizard. And a witch died. Oh, and a toto called Toto. The ties seem weak. IMHO, of course.

Or as a jumpstart on the ratings?

Greatness?:dubious: The show was craptastic. Sharknado had better writing and acting. Emerald City was a confused muddled mess, with occasional flashes of interesting scenery or costuming.

It raised L Frank from the dead, buggered his corpse and then shat on what remained. :mad:

I haven’t watched this, but from the ads it appears to be a more adult, darker re-telling and re-imagining of The Wizard of Oz, by way of the 1939 movie.

So I gotta ask – how does this differ from the 2007 SciFi (now Syfy) series Tin Man?

Not a retelling or reimaging at all. Just a few names and shout-outs.

Yes, it’s more than a little like Tin Man (miniseries) - Wikipedia

But that at least had Zooey Deschanel.

I thought that the commercials made it look terrible. Combine that with this, and I didn’t watch.

I’ll probably keep watching, because I like Tarsem Singh’s visuals, The Fall is one of my favorite movies ever. But I agree that it is disappointing. I wish it was either better, or just more bonkers crazy. I giggled at the stupidity of dogs being called Toto, and the witch being tricked into shooting herself, and that the flying monkeys are robot drones. If there had been more over the top craziness I would have liked it more, I’m hopeful that maybe it’ll get a bit more of that as the season goes along.

It doesn’t help that both Dorothy and the Scarecrow are generic actors and so far the least interesting parts of the show. You could replace both of them with actors from some random procedural on TV right now and I probably wouldn’t notice.

I loved it. I’ve watched the first two episodes six times now and each time I catch more tidbits and intrigue. It’s not getting great reviews, so I’m hoping they won’t pull it before they run all 10 episodes. I also was hoping someone could tell me:

1: Does the Wizard have a little thing for Anna? He watched her for a while before approaching her, seemed quite taken when she told him how much she enjoyed numbers and figures and science, and then hesitated before asking her to go to the funeral with him.

  1. When West showed up for the funeral, stoned and with black marks all over her face, North demands “What did he do to you?” meaning, I assume, the Wizard. What DID he do to her? And as North is leaving, he asks about West’s health, and North answers that West is “alive, no thanks to you.” What did the Wizard do to her? She’s coked up all the time already. I understand that the witches are pissed because the Wiz opened the funeral to public view, but that wouldn’t account for whatever her deal was at the funeral.

I read that as the long-term, not the immediate: “What has giving up magic and living as a madam in his city done to you? What have you let yourself become? You junkie whore!” not “what *just *happened?”

I must have watched a different show than the OP. :wink:

I couldn’t even make it through the whole episode. It had a very ‘network tv’ feel to it, and like someone else said, Dorothy and the Tin Man were so bland and forgettable.

It didn’t help that much of the action is “in medio res” with no explanation whatsoever. I get that shows are done this way to prolong certain tension. But, I often am simply left behind.

The really irritating thing (for me) was that the Scarecrow was Jesus. Found on a cross, punctured in his side, has a beard, has dark hair, etc. They also don’t give the guy a lot of lines … and those that they do give him are all supposed to be cryptic and so forth.

I enjoyed the “woman and the child” elements … but, once again, I have to say that I didn’t understand any part of it because we weren’t given any back story because we aren’t supposed to know if the woman was “good” or “bad”, “sane” or “bat-shit”. Her magic wasn’t all that powerful… but, clearly, she was using magic. Goodness knows that a healthy adult can’t be expected to imprison a sickly child without magic.

I hope that the show goes somewhere … quickly.

I find this particular comparison ridiculous - real-life scarecrows are usually hung up like that. Are they all Jesus expies?

IME, Allegorical Jesus is typically blonde. Having dark hair is a point against the allegory. I’m not arguing the allegory isn’t there, just that you’ve chosen some poor points to prove it.