Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}''). What makes him a robot isn't that he's made of metal but that he's fundamentally a machine, and there's no such implication with the Tin Man.
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't wouldn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}''). What makes him a robot isn't that he's made of metal but that he's fundamentally a machine, and there's no such implication with the Tin Man.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}''). In short, just because the Tin Man is made of metal doesn't make him robotic.
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical.robot. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}''). In short, just because the Tin Man is What makes him a robot isn't that he's made of metal doesn't make him robotic.but that he's fundamentally a machine, and there's no such implication with the Tin Man.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}''). In short, just because the Tin Man is made of metal doesn't make him robotic.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the The fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects brought to life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects somehow brought to life, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects somehow brought to life, life by magic, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
''The Wizard of Oz'' is ''not'' a very logical story so as you expect, there will be a lot of head scratchers.
Changed line(s) 2,3 (click to see context) from:
''The Wizard of Oz'' is ''not'' a very logical story so as you expect, there will be a lot of head scratchers.
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 104 (click to see context) from:
*** Or maybe the storm damaged her house and forced her to move. Either way, she won't be missed. Hope Dorothy's next neighbor is a nicer person and a dog lover.
to:
*** Or maybe the storm that falling pole damaged her house and forced her to move. Either way, she won't be missed. Hope Dorothy's next neighbor is a nicer person and a dog lover.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Or maybe the storm damaged her house and forced her to move. Either way, she won't be missed. Hope Dorothy's next neighbor is a nicer person and a dog lover.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** On a related note, why does Dorothy (and the movie itself, for that matter) act as if it's critical she be rescued from the room before the sand runs out? If all the hourglass was doing was counting down the time till the Witch returned, why would it matter whether or not she was in the room with it? Indeed, the Witch still appears with it after they've fled down the stairs and are caught by the Winkies, but ''not'' at the exact moment the sand runs out; so even if there were a spell to tell her when that happened, it clearly didn't have an "instant summons" clause, nor did she come immediately on her own. Dorothy is frightened and panicking, and may think the Witch's words about how long she had to live were literal (as she has no idea what kind of magic the Witch has access to), but the constant camera jumps between the chopping axe and the sand running down, plus the increasingly frantic music, certainly seems to imply there is such a life-ending spell on the sand. And sure enough, right as they chop the hole big enough and pull her out, the sand runs out. So...was there such a spell (and that might even be why the hourglass exploded when the Witch threw it), or did the moviemakers want the audience to think there was?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Axes are good for ''chopping'', and there's also a flat butt end on his felling axe that can function as a hammer. Plus, rivets are pounded into place and not threaded, so a wrench wouldn't be of any use for re-tightening them. The original question stands.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more int the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects somehow brought to life, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot; it would fall more int in the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects somehow brought to life, like Pinocchio or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. There's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot (would you consider Pinocchio a robot)? Now, the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. There's In any case, there's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot (would you consider robot; it would fall more int the category of fantasy creatures that are inanimate objects somehow brought to life, like Pinocchio a robot)? Now, or indeed some Oz characters like Jack Pumpkinhead. For that matter, it should be noted that the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. There's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was created by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot (would you consider Pinocchio a robot)? Now, the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
to:
** He isn't a robot. The book explains that he was once an ordinary human being whose skin was replaced by metal. Now, I'm not saying the book's explanation must be taken as canon when it comes to the film. But the fact is that the movie never provides any explanation as to the Tin Man's origin beyond the one line "The tinsmith forgot to give me a heart," which could be interpreted multiple ways. There's no particular reason to see him as a robot; there's no implication that his insides are mechanical. Even if you were to speculate that (contrary to the book's explanation) he's some of kind of artificial creature that was created crafted by someone, that doesn't automatically make him a robot (would you consider Pinocchio a robot)? Now, the character of Tik-Tok in some of the later Oz books (who also appears in the movie ''Film/ReturnToOz'') is in fact a robot, and is often cited as one of the first robots in literature (more than a decade before the word "robot" was coined in the play ''Theatre/{{RUR}}'').
