Question: I watched Tin Man and loved it. The way they tied almost every aspect of it into the original Wizard of Oz made it really interesting. The budget must have been well above the average miniseries. How is it that a show like this didn't end up in theaters or at least on a major network?
Answer: The days when cable networks were no longer considered "major" are long gone. And when's the last time you saw a "major" network invest the time and energy to produce a thoroughly original miniseries? (Answering my own question: CBS is airing a Lonesome Dove prequel, Comanche Moon, in mid-January, but that's an exception.) Sci Fi has made an annual tradition of splashy December miniseries, and while I wasn't as wild about this as you, I applaud them for swinging the bat with such ambition. Why shouldn't something with the scope of Tin Man deserve to find its place on a network with as far-reaching aims as Sci Fi?

Another take on Tin Man comes from Jaime L. of Walnut Creek, CA: "I don't want to begrudge you your opinion, but I have to disagree with your take on Tin Man. I find that I am liking it and the characters more and more as I watch. It's always nice to see a darker take on things. I have always thought of the Judy Garland Oz as way too sweet and can barely stand to watch it more then once a year. Tin Man might be dark, but it's complex, which makes it all the more entertaining. Why you would compare this gem to the original is beyond me. I think it stands on its own. Remakes of the same thing are boring. This really shakes things up, and I'm happy to say I like it. I respect and value your opinion, and I hope you can agree to disagree with me on this one point."

Again, I'm glad you got more out of it than I did. For the record, in a review that I would call ambivalent but more than fair, I did not call Tin Man a "remake" but a "reimagining," and I'm OK with that sort of thing. Remaking the original movie would be impossible and pointless. I just found the experience of watching the new version to be laborious, and worse, I was never emotionally engaged, which is a pretty fatal flaw for a quest epic. But I will take serious issue with you on one point: "It's always nice to see a darker take on things." Since when? Being edgy is fine, but just because something is edgy and dark doesn't necessarily make it better. And when did it become fashionable to slam things for being sweet? Not that the 1939 Oz film didn't cause generations of kids to have nightmares for years about green-skinned witches, flying monkeys, Technicolor hourglasses and violent twisters. The MGM version is a brilliant fable, and I will stick to my opinion that Sci Fi's odd, overstuffed and joyless adaptation will fade in memory long before people stop watching Judy & Co. trip down the yellow brick road.