Alice in Wonderland (I) (2010) User Reviews

Maybe the formula needs invigorating...

[doibhlin · 6/10 · 3 March 2010]

I attended the Cast and Crew screening on Sunday, in Leicester Square, with high hopes for this film as it's without doubt the most exciting job I've had. This was my first feature experience, and working for Tim Burton was a hell of a way to start.

But, even as someone with a lot of time for his films, and a pre-existing bias, I couldn't really connect with this. The cast acquit themselves well, especially considering the noted difficulty in emoting to a tennis ball on a stick, but all their tics and quirks seem to be masking a void at the centre of what should be a free-floating, evocative trip. Sure, it's weird looking, but we've seen it before, and back then in films like Edward Scissorhands it had a sense of purpose. Now we're left exploring a CGI wonderland that seems to be without a great deal of wonder. The book revels in its bizarre environs, absurd dialogue and whimsical characters. This film grounds them, drains them of that mystery and leaves us with a colourful but forgettable retread. It seems intent on driving us to a narrative conclusion that few people will have had much stake in through its running time, simply because we're not giving much to care for.

With a source material so familiar, even to those whose knowledge is second hand references, there needs to be a degree of innovation (as in Svenkmejer's dark stop-motion version, or the co-opting of Terry Gilliam in to his "Tideland" narrative), or else a studious and inspired adaptation that completely returns to Lewis Carroll. What we end up with is a mid-point that fails to get to grips with what enchants people about the Alice story, and another chance to see a beautiful waif walk around twisted, quasi-Gothic landscapes to a score by Danny Elfman.

Not that this isn't an enjoyable experience in itself, and as seen in the vast Screen 1 at the Empire it is at times breathtakingly pretty. It's just inessential, and while it may be unfair to expect a classic from a favoured filmmaker every time out, when they tackle something with the pedigree and history of Alice In Wonderland you can't help but hope for something special. And that's the problem, that Tim Burton, while he is still making decent films, has been a long way off special for some time now.

6/10 (if they gave half stars it'd be 6.5), but that doesn't mean it's a bad film. It's possible that my grade is affected by high expectations and lost potential. If you have kids, I'm sure it'll be better than 90% of the dross that passes for family films now. At least there is some artistry involved, and while he might not be at his best I'll still always pay to see a Tim Burton film (although I got this one for free...)

some stunning visuals, clumsy writing

[ericpendley · 5/10 · 5 March 2010]

It is still worth the high price of the 3-D admission to see some of the amazing animation and design, but the writing is extremely boring and clumsy, and the performances cannot save it. Too many liberties were taken with the originals here, and in no way improve upon them, it only barely resembles either of Carroll's books in theme and some specific scenes. There are some "Disney moments" that literally set off a gag reflex as well.

The animation is quite stunning and wonderful though, as is the costuming and set design (in so much as there were sets and not just green screens, I'm sure SOME actual props were used). There are some clever elements that owe only to good visual design and direction I'm sure, as the only other clever bits in the dialogue were the parts directly lifted from the originals.

Nothing Wonderful

[Sniper005533 · 6/10 · 4 March 2010]

Adding a little bit of a background story and a few more characters to Alice's adventures didn't do as much as i thought it would for the story. Truthfully i wanted to love this movie, I'm a huge Tim Burton/ Johnny Depp fan. But this just didn't do it for me. I came out of the theater wondering if it were just the mediocre script or the director who had failed to meet my expectations. The best part of this movie is probably Johnny Depps portrayal of the mad hatter who truly is mad. However, Mia Wasikowska presents Alice in a dull manner that had me checking my watch every ten or fifteen minutes. Overall this film isn't awful, but at the same time its no masterpiece, for an interesting film to look at I suppose this would be an alright choice, however if you want a great story and compelling acting, you might want to check out something else, because this isn't the movie you're looking for.

'Twasn't brillig!

[majikstl · 24 March 2010]

If ever there were a working example of the word "whimsical," it would be the works of Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (a.k.a. Lewis Carroll), i.e.: "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass." The stories, stuffed with clever word play, non-sequiturs, train-of-thought chaos and general silliness, are not exactly funny, so much as just being playfully amusing. The reader – like Alice – takes a trip of wayward, unpredictable imagination. Tim Burton's film version (or re-imaging) of Carroll's tales likely will never be accused of being whimsical. Indeed, one would be hard pressed to find a trace of whimsy in any line of dialog or overwrought image. Burton's film, while certainly being visually stunning, is also dark, and at times just plain depressing.

Burton has said that he never felt emotionally connected to the "Wonderland" stories because they seemed like they were just about a young girl wondering around meeting unusual characters. Which is exactly what they were about. Their unpredictable nature and inexplicable logic is what made them what they were: engaging, if somewhat high-toned, nonsense. Burton and his screenwriter Linda Woolverton have tried to tame the material by boxing it into clichés and a tiresomely predictable plot. He expertly keeps the visuals more or less right – though he has made it all look gloomier and creepier – but the literary essence of the original material has been tossed aside to make room for little that might be considered funny and even less that might pass for fun.

The story begins with Alice, as a little girl, interrupting her father's business meeting to tell him she has had another in a series of recurring dreams, presumably about Wonderland, and she asks him if the dreams are a sign she is going mad. A few joking and reassuring words temporarily puts her mind at rest, but the film reveals itself; the dream world of the little girl is now to be treated as a nightmare world that may be caused by or will result in mental illness. The story jumps a head over a decade later where Alice's widowed mother hopes to marry her off in an arranged union with an upper class twit. Will Alice wed the twit? Duh! The end is obvious – as is the heavy-handed feminism jammed into the story.

Soon Alice (Mia Wasikowska) falls down another rabbit hole and lands in Wonderland – or is that Underland? But Wonderland is now a bleak and ramshackle place, with most everybody living in fear of the tyrannical Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter). Alice eventually discovers that she is the chosen one, expected to help the White Queen (Anne Hathaway) save Wonderland from the bombastic Red Queen by battling the ferocious Jabberwock. Instead of a bewildered outsider lost in a strange world, Alice is now a reluctant messiah. Few of the oddball characters from Carroll's books have been retained, apparently to make room for an expanded role for Burton's favorite muse, Johnny Depp as The Mad Hatter. Depp takes up far too much of the story time for a character who looks far more interesting then he really is. Worse, a hint of a possible romance between the Hatter and Alice rings false.

This ALICE IN WONDERLAND isn't for kids. Of course, the same could be said for the original books, what with their obscure literary allusions and now-dated popular references. Whether for commercial reasons or a sheer lack of imagination, the film is yet another childhood fantasy that has been re-written into an adult horror film. Like the disastrous THE WIZ and Steven Spielberg's overblown HOOK, a gentle and benignly scary fairy tale has been twisted around in order to supposedly explore adult themes. And as Disney did this once before, back in 1985, when they made RETURN TO OZ, a horrible and unwarranted sequel to THE WIZARD OF OZ: they've taken a colorful, playfully perplexing fantasy world and turned it into something unpleasant and uninviting. There's nothing particularly wrong with taking an old literary classic and looking at it through fresh eyes, if the look is truly fresh, but remains true to the original -- as, say, Burton did with SLEEPY HOLLOW.

Like the recent SHERLOCK HOLMES, this ALICE an exercise in dumbing down. Just as the former film takes Holmes and de-intellectualizes him, making him into a rough-and-tumble superhero, the later indulges in victim feminism, turning Alice from being a precocious, adventurous child into a sorrowful, reactive woman. Here Burton and screenwriter Woolverton become regressive feminists, changing a wide-eyed, curious little girl into a repressed, depressed and distressed woman who "takes control of her dream," dons armor and becomes a warrior and ends up being empowered.

And what does this empowerment lead to? She becomes a businesswoman. So much for intellectual whimsy.

Fantasy , imagination and adventures is this peculiar version based on Lewis Carrol tale

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 30 June 2011]

Tim Burton film version of Lewis Carroll's classic proves the special slickness of director to create weird worlds and strange characters . Alice (Mia Wasikowska)is 19-year-old and doesn't remember nothing about her former visit on Wonderland happened 10 years ago . Then she returns to the magical world from her childhood adventure, where she reunites with her old friends as Mad Hatter (Jhnny Depp), White Rabbit (voice of Michael Sheen), Chesshie Cat (Stephen Fry), Blue Caterpillar (voice of Alan Rickman) and learns of her true destiny: to end the Red Queen's (Helena Bonham Carter)reign of terror who helped by Knave of Hearts (Crispin Glover) is fighting her sister White Queen (Anne Hathaway)for the kingdom.

Moving rendering of Lewis Carroll classic with gimmick of blending live action and computer generator puppets and 3D animation . Riveting for its casting , but overall , roller-coaster spectacle. Most of the charm and wit remains from original story in this particular version . It results to be an amusing of somewhat aloof , storytelling of children classic with a magnificent three-dimensional visual effects team at its best bring to life the following : the Cheshire cat , Blue caterpillar, the Queen of hearts, March Hare , Tweedledum and many others. Breathtaking array of technical effects with impressive set pieces illuminate the Alice's full-blown adventures. The amazing plot is pure entertainment and with interesting screenplay based on characters created by Lewis Carroll , though here Alice acts as a heroine who combats dragons , monsters and of course the evil Queen of Hearts . Episodic characters as Mad Hatter and Queen of Hearts are given major boost by strong personalities from Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter . Spectacular final battle full of action , groundbreaking frames and fabulous fights . Overwhelming production design , though full of digital effects with impressive scenes and portentous images . Stirring musical score fitting perfectly to story by Danny Elfman and colorful cinematography by Dariusz Wolski . The motion picture lavishly financed by veteran producer Daryl F. Zanuck is originally directed by Tim Burton in his exceptional style. Rating : 6,5 acceptable rendition .

Other take on based on this vintage tale are the following : 1933 by Norman Z McLeod with Gary Cooper , Edward Everett Horton and Jack Oakie ; 1950 by Dallas Bower with Carol Marsh , Pamela Brown and Felix Aylmer ; 1951 by Walt Disney directed by Clyde Geronimi, Hamilton Luke with voices of Sterling Holloway , Ed Wynn and Richard Haydn ; 1972 by William Sterling with Fiona Fullerton, Peter Sellers , Dudley Moore and Michael Crawford and TV version with Tina Majorino and Woopy Goldberg .

Verdict: Lacking in muchness

[DailyScrawl · 7/10 · 7 March 2010]

Tim Burton's 2010 version of Alice in Wonderland was full of surprises for me. My first surprise was that it isn't a modern adaptation of Alice in Wonderland, it's a Hollywood sequel. This Alice is 19 years old and makes her second foray into Wonderland in this movie. My second surprise was that I was watching an action movie that has as much resemblance to C.S. Lewis' "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe" as it does to Lewis Carroll's original story. Rather than meandering around a nonsensical Wonderland in the spirit of curiosity and discovery, this Alice is given a very straightforward (and bizarre) "mission" right from the start.

In other words, there's an Alice in this story, and a Wonderland too. But this isn't The Alice in Wonderland. It's Hollywood's.

Overview

Try, try, try as I might, I couldn't appreciate much about Tim Burton's spin-off version beyond the visual extravaganza. The plot was too simplistic and straight-forward. Each character is clearly painted as either good or bad (well, white or red, in this case). Alice is lacking in depth of character. Johnny Depp's unpredictability has become so predictable it's not fun anymore. The nonsensical wit and charm of Carroll's original have been all but removed. But is it a bad movie? Is it not worth seeing in theaters? I'm not so sure about that. It has two redeeming qualities: It's visually spectacular, and what Burton was attempting to achieve with this movie is there, it's only been buried under the other aforementioned weaknesses.

Vision

Wonderland is amazing to gaze upon, and this is probably the most bizarre interpretation of it to date. That's no small achievement and may be enough justification for some to see the movie in theaters. It doesn't feel particularly real, however. It has nothing to do with the special effects—they're tremendous. Instead I chalk this up largely to the small cast of characters, which becomes particularly unbelievable around the climax of the movie, where a large crowd would be expected.

Speaking of vision, I can see what Burton was attempting to do with this movie. He wanted to build a babushka doll of illusions, each one being a new surprise. The purpose of the event in the beginning of the movie, a secret behind Alice's friend's marriage, the nature of this Wonderland (compared with the audience's traditional, childish conception of it), the truth behind the Red Queen's grotesque court… all not what they appear to be at the onset, and surprises to either Alice or the audience. In my humble opinion, however, this doesn't quite come across during the watching. I didn't come to see his "vision" until writing this review, and the only satisfaction it's given me is that I don't have to completely pan this film. Burton just didn't take it far enough to make it remarkable.

I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that someone will read this review, watch the movie, and enjoy it because they know what to expect and can see that Burton at least tried to add dimension to his work.

Origins

Lewis Carroll's original novel is best known for being "literary nonsense," and in my opinion the value of such nonsense is that it lightheartedly calls into question our preconceptions about "logic" and common sense. Regardless of what was done to the plot, I was optimistic that this unintelligible intelligence would be carried over into this new rendition. I was wrong, and am hence terribly bummed.

I recommend anyone with a curiosity toward Wonderland read the original novel. Also, the 1951 animated Disney version is dated (it's over half a century old, after all), but it's still worth giving a try.

How to enjoy this movie:

* Pretend you're going to watch a strange mish-mash of The Chronicles of Narnia and Alice in Wonderland. You won't have to pretend very hard once you're in the theater.

* Soak up all the 3D, computer generated goodness.

* Don't expect too much more than your run of the mill Hollywood fairy tale.

Weak points:

* The plot was too simplistic and straight-forward.

* Each character is painted as clearly either good or bad (white or red, in this case, I suppose).

* Alice is lacking in depth of character.

* The nonsensical wit and charm of Carroll's original have been all but removed, to be replaced with a handful of silly words. This one hurt the most for me.

Not what you would expect from a Johnny Deep picture

[stronciu_stefan · 7/10 · 3 March 2010]

When I decided to pay a premium price for a 3D blockbuster I expected a memorable picture. Besides the fact that Johnny Deep plays a great role as usual and H.B. Carter also has a nice performance the overall plot is dull and static. I believe that because they had to "improvise" and write a new story continuing the original one, the quality of the screenplay and plot decreased significantly. Although there are some funny moments and well written lines for the main characters, many of the others pass by unnoticed. Overall it was a nice, entertaining flick with average 3D effects, way below Avatar, and a simple,uncomplicated plot. Also it was rather short since I expected 120 minutes at least and not 100. Finally I would this movie performed below my expectations. A 7/10 would be a fair grade in my honest opinion.

Best, Stefan

Has anyone seen white rabbit with clock here?

[favmov · 10/10 · 19 March 2010]

After watching this movie I don't want to live in this world anymore. I love Tim Burton's movies and this one wasn't disappointment. The cast was great. Everyone played, they weren't just grimacing. Helena Bonham Carter was great as always. Mad hatter was something, his lines were witty and his dance was the funniest thing ever. Every character is special. I liked this Alice, she's strong, smart and modern. And every time I saw the cat I wanted to be there to hug it. I was worried that Disney would spoil this movie, but I was wrong this is absolutely Burton's movie. The landscapes will make you forget about everything you saw before. Atwood's costumes are beautiful, they fit the characters same is the make-up. If you like fairy tales don't miss Alice In Wonderland.

Pure, undemanding, trippy wonderment.

[Troy_Campbell · 6/10 · 4 March 2010]

On its release last year I couldn't find much to fault Avatar on. But after watching Alice – the first serious CGI-dominated 3D film since James Cameron's immersive motion picture – there's now a glaring issue with it: the bar was set waaay too high. Previously the computer generated effects in Alice would have knocked your socks off, however in a post-Avatar world it significantly underwhelms. Not an overly fair statement for a film which has consistently beautiful and detailed images – take the awe-inspiring climactic clash which is set on a chess board-esquire battlefield for example – but you can thank Cameron for that. Once you get past the fact that Burton's creation does not aim to achieve realistic environments or creatures and that the actors will never appear to be anywhere other than in front of a green screen, you are in good stead to enjoy the colourful animation for what it was intended for: pure, undemanding, trippy wonderment.

It's a damn shame then that this meticulously crafted, psychedelic visual-journey isn't matched with a screenplay that was given just as much effort. The inbuilt metaphors of the Alice tale are still there however writer Linda Woolverton adds very little in the way of character development or plot undercurrents, seemingly intent on relying on the visual effects wizards and actors to contribute the extra layers. Her biggest missed opportunity is further exploration into the Mad Hatter or even the White Queen – both of whom are half-baked caricatures – with the Hatter coming off as a mere chance for Depp to be quirky, rather than the cleverly-written character with an interesting back story that he should have been. To Woolverton's credit though, she did manage to concoct some deliriously amusing dialogue for the Hatter and the Red Queen; a small highlight of her script which partially redeems her lack-lustre attempts elsewhere.

Kudos to Depp, then, that he still generates another memorable, albeit this time one-dimensional, on screen persona. He provides his Hatter with plenty of lovable eccentricities and rough edges, all the more noteworthy considering the non-existent depth to which the material affords him. He'll certainly be a hit with the kids. The rest of the cast are unpredictable in their output: Aussie newcomer Wasikowska overdoes it as the titular protagonist, Hathaway's saccharine White Queen grates on the nerves and the opaque Glover is unbearably boring as Stayne; whilst Carter's malevolent Red Queen is a hoot, Lucas induces a laugh or two as Tweedledee and Tweedledum, Rickman oozes noble charisma as the Blue Caterpillar and Paul Whitehouse's March Hare steals every single scene he is in.

Depp's usual strong performance and Burton's knack for striking visuals narrowly prevail over a shallow script and an unconvincing leading lady.

3 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)

Treading water in Wonderland

[Red-Barracuda · 3/10 · 22 March 2010]

Sometimes I think that I should like Tim Burton movies more than I do. Don't get me wrong, the man has made some excellent films, such as the masterful Ed Wood. But all too often, despite an agreeable tendency towards visual flamboyance, I leave his films feeling somewhat underwhelmed. Alice in Wonderland is a case in point. It's a movie where CGI effects rule the day. But the trouble is that the true weirdness that is at the heart of this story is not captured at all with all the computer-generated imagery on-screen. Sure it's very efficient and well-designed but like CGI in general, it's far too polished to really strike a chord and convince. There is a distinct lack of wonder in this Wonderland. The otherworldly weirdness is dissipated too by the use of overly-familiar voices to give life to the various denizens of this world, we are left thinking 'Oh that's Stephen Fry, hey isn't that Alan Rickman, I'm sure that's Christopher Lee and isn't that the bloke from Little Britain, etc'. It consistently takes us out of the movie and grounds the characters in a way that is just counter-productive. We want weirdness from an Alice in Wonderland film, not slick CGI and famous voice-over actors.

There is also a dangerously cosy predictability at play here too. Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Danny Elfman – they say familiarity breeds contempt, well that's a bit strong but it IS seriously lacking in surprises and you cannot help think that all three individually talented men could do with taking a break from each other for the good of their careers. Depp's Mad Hatter is pretty uninspired by his standards, while Burton's visuals and Elfman's music are nice but ultimately completely forgettable. I found it very difficult to care for any of the characters in this film, and that is never a good thing. It also meant that the conclusion came across as deeply trite, as we have been given nothing to empathize with. We don't know or have any interest in these characters, so when Alice goes around her extended family one by one imparting her new knowledge onto them, it means nothing. It also doesn't help that the journey to Wonderland has made absolutely no difference at all to the title character's state of mind – at the beginning she does not want to get married to the upper-class chump and at the end she does not want to get married to the upper-class chump. So you are left wondering what exactly was the point?

I saw this in 3D and if there is one thing that this film has taught me it's that I am done with this 'new and improved' technology. I sensed it was a gimmick even before I watched Avatar; now I am certain. A bad film is a bad film, and no amount of extra visual depth is going to change that one iota. It's all surface-veneer, and really that's this movie's ultimate problem, there is nothing of interest within the CGI/3D. A great shame, as the source material is undeniably compelling.

I realize that I am almost done here but I have not even mentioned the worst thing about the film. What was it? It was when the Mad Hatter and then, subsequently, Alice do a truly cringe-worthy little dance near the end of the film. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I half-expected Britain's Got Talent winners Diversity to pop up in a cameo appearance at this stage and join in with some urban street dancing manoeuvres. That didn't happen. And that is, at least, one saving grace.

Wonderful, but only a visual masterpiece.

[OwenAllaway · 8/10 · 26 February 2010]

Disney presents Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

STARRING

Johnny Depp... as Willy Wonka, if Willy Wonka hadn't been Michael Jackson

Mia Wasikowska... as a winsome young lady Alice who discovers her inner fortitude

Crispin Glover... who doesn't dance, unfortunately

Helena Bonham-Carter... with a big head

Matt Lucas... as two Matt Lucases

Stephen Fry... who does actual voice acting and doesn't just read his lines

Paul Whitehouse... who against all my expectations, still does know how to be very funny

Alan Rickman... who nearly steals the movie, just by doing what he does best

Christopher Lee... who actually steals the movie with just two lines

AND

Babs Mitchell-Windsor... playing a character her actual, real size

I can see why the they've not really wanted to call the film a proper sequel. It is that, being the story of a nineteen year old Alice who returns to barely-remembered Wonderland, but it also lifts dialogue and scenes from the original books. The story is your standard journey, emotionally, but all set in a very Tim Burton Wonderland.

Which, of course, looks astounding. Wonderland is an amazing place, often colourful, but equally often ravaged and desolate. It's a treat for the eyes, with the imagination and design shining through the technology. (It's very, very good, but strange things happen if you look somewhere the 3D doesn't want you to look and there's the odd moment of strangely stiff animation, especially when human(-like) characters are completely CGI-ed up.)

Unexpectedly, it sometimes feels like one of the Narnia films (though makes those movies look like accountant-led spreadsheets that have been printed out on toilet paper and left out in the rain), but mainly it's exactly what you'd expect from Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland. It's a great big treat of a movie, to be sure. Given that it's Tim Burton working with Disney, it's often gruesome and scary, but not too much. It makes you laugh at times, it pins you to the back of your seat at others, it gets you leaning forward trying to drink in every detail of the place, but it's not ever actually surprising. You know what's up, you know where things are going and you're never shocked. (Maybe once, in a quiet, horrible scene that stands out, even amongst the rest.) Even if you've not seen a single still photo or second of footage, if you know Wonderland and you know Tim Burton, you can picture it yourself effortlessly.

So much of it is still in my head this morning, but it's all visual. There's no heartache or sense of triumph that lingers after a great story. Funny as it is, there's only one line I'm ever likely to quote (a single word). I just have these amazing images left in my brain. In that sense, then, it's appropriately dream-like.

I doubt I'll go back and watch it again at the cinema, but I'm most definitely getting the Blu- Ray when it comes out next week, or whenever Disney decided they should bring it out.

If it feels like I've damned it with faint praise, I don't intend to. It's all pretty wonderful for the two hours it takes to speed past you, but I just want to make it clear - nothing that goes into your ears or your heart ever quite matches what goes into your eyes.

One of the most enjoyable worlds to enter, that'll having you returning asap.

[doctor301 · 7/10 · 4 March 2010]

Alice In Wonderland (2010) Review By Dylan (http://www.dylanreviews.ning.com) Alice in wonderland, a timeless tale now in the hands of director Tim Burton (Willie Wonka, Edward Scissor hands) brings his usual suspects Johnny Depp (Pirates Of The Carrabian, Willie Wonka) and Helena Bonham Carter (Harry Potter, Corpse Bride) along with Anne Hathaway (Valentines Day, Get Smart) and new upcoming Aussie Actress Mia Wasikowska (Defiance, Rogue) to the table to bring his vision of the tale to the big screen, also in 3D. The story presumes mostly you know the basic tale of Alice In Wonderland and stars 13 years after her original adventure where she has lost all memory of ever having going to wonderland in the first place. This sequel is not to be confused with Lewis Carrol's actually sequel to his original Alice In The Wonderland tale, this follows its own path and story written by Linda Woolverton (The Lion King, Beauty & The Beast) Upon entering wonderland Alice will meet usual characters like the white rabbit (Michael Sheen), Tweedledee and Tweedledum (Matt Lucas) along with The Mad hatter, the hair (Paul Whitehouse), cheesier cat (Stephen Fry) , red and white queen and all the original characters. Alice is for-told a future set that she will save everyone from the red queen by slaying her evil beast in a battle and so begins Alice's adventures in wonderland. The story starts out well and sets a good mood unfortunately it seems a bit rushed at time, like its brushing past this plot point to more quickly to a part it thinks is better and more interesting part of the film than what your watching. More time is spent of the Mad Hatter and his development through out the film then Alice, which is annoying as she is the heroine and main character. This might not bother some people but if your gonna make more character for the Hater give the movie to him not Alice. The fight scene also wasn't very interesting, it was very quick and lame in general and when the whole movie is leading up to this moment you are setting there expecting something much more extravagant. Every actor in this movie give a all good performance and does well bring there characters to life. Johnny Depp does a fantastic job bring the mad hatter a new side of character that hasn't been seen before, Matt Lucas does well playing both Tweedledee and Tweedledum and Anne Hathaway also does fantastically as the White queen. Every other small part played is also done well and without fail, Crispin Glover as the Knave of hearts to Alan Rickman as the blue caterpillar. Mia Wasikowska as Alice is good in parts but you have problems with her acting towards the end as she seems to not grow much through out the film and although apparently losing her muchness, when she gets it back her personality doesn't seem much changed apart from the ability to saw yes to more things. The film looks fantastic, Tim Burton's vision of what Wonderland is presented perfectly with a mixture of dark and beautiful colors. The creatures and characters all look there parts and the score from Danny Elfman never fails to match the mood great. Its a pity that you never see and great shots of wonderland apart from the start which is only short. The 3D in this movie was produced after the final production so its not all that great, its OK and when its working well it is doing a great job. Unfortunately it also has some flaws in it and a bit much time was spent on creating effects that pop things out of the screen then on the rest of the movies 3D in general. In general i think id enjoy watching this movie without 3D a lot more as some things were annoying. The movie is all but perfect but is very fun, it has a very good cast to carry you through one of the most enjoyable worlds to enter that will leave you wanting to return as soon as possible. Alice in Wonderland is defiantly worth checking out, younger child will enjoy (just not to young as there are a couple frightening scenes) so shall older kids, adults and even older types. Returning to Wonderland through Tim Burton's looking glass was as ever enjoyable as his past adventures, id suggest getting out and seeing this one at the cinemas tomorrow. Acting: 8 Writing: 7 Direction: 8 Production: 8.5 Overall: 7.87 3D: 6

Tacky Bombast - Silly Script - Waste of Talent

[SeriousMovieCritic · 1/10 · 6 March 2010]

Here is a tale of two Lewises. One wrote a small but great children's book that still delights, surprises and enchants. The other wrote a large, artistic series of children's books that push Christian sermons at us in the guise of adventure fantasy. The first author, Lewis Carroll, wrote Alice in Wonderland. The second, CS Lewis, wrote the Narnia saga. Here is what happened – in my theory – when the light bulb went on above the head of Linda Woolverton, who wrote the original screenplay for the new Alice in Wonderland.

"What if we turn Wonderland into Narnia? What if an older Alice revisits her dream world, now called Underland, and discovers a giant battle in progress between good and evil? We could have a Red Queen's army fighting a White Queen's, a Mad Hatter as saintly mediator, and a lot of Armageddon spectacle sure to bring in the youngsters and spawn a video game."

Thus is Hell born. You cannot believe the dreadfulness of Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland – gifted director takes on gaga script – until you see it. Enchantment has gone that-away. Once down the rabbit hole Alice, played with brave but doomed grace by Australian actress Mia Wasikowska, discovers that her old chums all walk a darkening land bearing Tolkienish/Lewisite names. The dormouse is Mallymkun, the Cheshire cat Chessur, the caterpillar Absolem. Soon the throng is joined by dragons who seem to have come from Avatar. The tea party has 10 seconds to flatter us with incipient charm – its chaotic table and moth-eaten March Hare suggest a Samuel Beckett revamp (that would be a good spin) – before it too is sacrificed to sword, sorcery and showdown. Johnny Depp's Mad Hatter shows promise for a little longer – this actor does deranged innocence better than anyone (Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood) – but finally he too drowns in the Sea of Tacky Bombast.

Sylvie and Bruno Continued

[tedg · 18 March 2010]

I can usually find something to engage with and love in any film. It is a sort of challenge and promise to myself to do so -- as a choice in building a life. But this movie was a nadir in my adventure.

The Alice stories are special, special absolutely and special to me.

For many people, the stories are simply amusing nonsense for children, something to be fuzzily remembered in the same way as, say, Peter Pan or a Grimm's tale. But it is anything but. Carroll advanced our ability to speak to ourselves when he polished the story and sent it to us.

One can hardly expect someone like Burton, or anyone making a big budget Disney- distributed project to understand the material. But if you cannot understand the soul of what you are working with, you cannot leverage or extend it. You will need to count on your own talents instead. But Burton's strength is simple: the imposition of disordered fantasy on relatively ordered reality. He has exhausted this and was finished as an artist long ago.

By any measure other than color intensity, this is a failure as a movie. When Depp isn't given a complex structure to support, he can at least be amusing. Here, we have not even that.

What is normally considered nonsense sequences in the books are anything but. Dodgson was the foremost theory of logic in Europe at the time. Based in Oxford, he created the story for the child of the Dean, the creator of the then great Greek lexicon. Dodgson/Carroll was a master of the inadequacies of logic within the medium of everyday language.

All the "nonsense" sections are really a catalog of all the strange ways in which logic breaks when it encounters the way we linguistically form thoughts. Many of these parody assumptions Dean Liddell made in his understanding of Greek, mistakes that have saddled us with flawed scholarship on Aristotle and his logic. They are great, great fun: puzzles that even a 6 year old can laugh about.

This is where playful narrative originates. Only Shakespeare, Joyce and Lennon-NcCartney have had similar influence on our everyday thought. Karl Rove, for example, stands on the shoulders of Charles Dodgson's trickery.

None of this is conveyed. None, even though the Marx brothers made this safe territory for film humor.

Even the overall structure of the Alice stories is cool. Dodgson was not a pedophile, nor a drug addict, but he was something more dangerous to his soul. He was a charter member of Oxford's Psychical Society and a student of the inventor of mystical tarot, the self-named Court de Gebelin. The structure of the Alice stories, based on this, is our first structurally folded literature.

His ordination ruined by his guilt about this, he spent the remainder of his life writing a C S Lewis-like Christian allegory, Sylvie and Bruno to make amends. It was every bit as tepid and worthless as this. Every bit as wrong, as offensive to reality.

The movie also mixes in Jabberwocky. That was a poem written years earlier as a teen, to amuse his crotchety parson father, someone obsessed with the perversion of noble Saxon words by effete French. The poem is about the battle between true (Saxon) language and logical language.

(This comment is on the two-dimensional exhibition. I decided that the effects would be beowulf-like and cheaply distracting. I think I was right.)

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

In this case, I don't think the problem is with Tim Burton, but with Disney

[abrown975 · 6/10 · 17 July 2010]

I saw the trailers for this movie and I knew this movie had potential. Tim Burton was directing, for God's sake! So I went to go see it. It started out okay, although Mia Wasikowska as Alice was very dull. I understood that Alice was always an introverted, pensive character, but that doesn't mean she has to wear a straight face the whole movie. But I can let that one slide. The scenery was terrific, as all Tim Burton movies are. The Queen of Hearts was brilliantly played by Helena Bonham Carter, and I think her performance was the best. The characters Alice met on the way all had personality, but that's when Johnny Depp came along as the Mad Hatter. Johnny Depp gives personality to all of the characters he plays, but this one I think had too much personality. I say that because his makeup is just creepy (creepier than Willy Wonka's) and a little over the top. It honestly made me think of a three-year-old putting on every gloss and powder she could find (and lots of it) so she could be like her mommy. Aside from the makeup, it also sounded as if Mr. Depp kept switching accents from British to Scottish, like he couldn't make up his mind. So I think his character was a little over the top, but I didn't let that ruin the movie for me. After all, there was more to the story. Anne Hathaway came into the picture as the Queen's sister, who was okay in her performance, but came off as a little dazed at points. But for the most part, she did fine. So you're probably asking "So what made the movie so bad?" The futterwacking scene (I'm not sure if that's how you spell it). Yes, the scene where Johnny Depp's character, for some reason, just starts to dance in what seemed like break dancing and just wiggling his legs. And if that wasn't bad enough, the music sounded like a mixture of hip hop, Celtic, and renaissance. That whole scene turned my review from an 8/10 to a 6/10 because it just seemed so dorky and Disney-like (remember way back when we used to consider that a good thing?). It was unneeded and made the movie just seem babyish. I honestly am starting to hate the Disney corporation because in most of their movies they have to make someone or something break dance. We have already seen break dancing guinea pigs, pigs, wildebeests, and now Mr. Depp. But, believe it or not, I don't think Tim Burton would deliberately put that in any of his movies. So this movie would be a whole lot better if Mr. Burton steered clear of Disney so his film wouldn't be "kiddie-fied". The end finally came and I left with nothing but the dance scene in my mind, just wondering what idiot thought that would be a good idea to put that scene in the movie. Disney needs to stop making things dance disco or break dance and they need to stop making movies about strange animals. And Tim Burton needs to stay away from them because they dilute his talents, along with Mr. Depp's. Other than that, this movie was okay. Not bad or great, just okay. Mr. Burton, I hope you have learned your lesson to stay with Warner Brothers.

After this, I don't wanna know what would Burton do with the Adams Family.

[sandra-mazoni · 6/10 · 14 April 2010]

Huh. OK, where from should I start?! Maybe to explain what was good, because the list is shorter than what was bad. Visually, this was one of better movies I've seen lately: colorful, great imagination (hm, I mean the combination of an "old" Alice and several other Burton's movies), and astonishing effects (although I haven't seen it in 3D, the effort is quite visible). Helena Bonham Carter was giving her best, and that's so obvious in every second she spent on screen. Both rabbits were great, and so were cards and other supporting characters. And now, back to reality. Johnny Depp was AWFUL! And I'm one of his biggest fans. So is with Tim Burton - almost every other work was great, there were several lame movies, but he's definitely one of my favorite directors. At least, he was. How is it possible to make such a crappy movie from the story as extraordinary as Alice in Wonderland is?! Well, easy: if the dialogs are lame, plot line does not exist and you are so much in love with yourself you think of you as the mastermind of all fictional movies that could not possibly make some mistake and any frigging crap you role in shiny paper would make some money. Well, NOT! And, holy cabbage, what was that sh*t with that dance?!?! I don't wanna know what would he do with the Adams Family.

Nothing like what you expect, slow slow slow slow dull and slow slow slow

[Shawzil · 6/10 · 4 March 2010]

First Movie I walk out of in 2010!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As expected though I was giving him the benefit of the doubt, Criminally insane Tim Burton manages to yet make another stupid movie from a classic favorite of every kid.

A) This movie is not what you might have been led to think it will be from the trailers and mass media bombardment Hollywood manages to over hype.

B) It's slow dull and not in anyway like what you think Alice in Blunder land is all about.

C) Soo much lost potential to market this movie to a wider audience and to make a genuine classic remake with partial of the cast involved and not all.

D) The movie could have been more musical to keep you entertained some how but no no no. Not a single piece in the first 60 mins

E) First Movie I walk out of in 2010!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

F) Watch a pirated download if you must :( :( :(

G) the ONLY GOOD THING in this movie was the graphic animation and my mad hat goes off to those costume designers and special effects ppl.

Yes folks, this is as bad is they come in terms of bad remakes with H U G E potential..........

I walked out feeling ripped off from a childhood dream, so, cling while you can to the 51 classic as this is no movie for an Alice fan.

Then again, you may have a different opinion or view on it but don't say I didn't tell you so.

Frankly speaking, I have no interest in ever watching a Tim Burton movie EVER again.

Very entertaining but somewhat lacking

[Herbest8 · 6/10 · 16 April 2010]

The idea of Tim Burton directing a live action/animated crossbreed of the famed nonsense story "Alice in Wonderland" seems like a match made by the arch angels of cinema heaven and even though the final result is pretty good, you can't help but feel a sense of botched potential.

The story is slightly tweaked from Lewis Carroll's original. Thirteen years after her original visit, Alice is lured back to Wonderland (or Underland, apparently) in order to fulfill her destiny: slay the monstrous Jabberwocky.

First off, this film has many great virtues: the visual style is perfect (with Burton nicely contrasting the real and fantasy worlds), there's a shipload of great performances, and the movie moves at a good pace. Plus, it's fun to see the the magnificent Christopher Lee and Michael Gough in a movie again.

However, on the whole, there's something amiss. Although fun and entertaining, it's sad that Burton didn't just do a straight version of the original book. On top of that, Johnny Depp turns in a shockingly two-dimensional performance and the infamous "futterwacken dance" is a little out of place.

Overall, "Alice in Wonderland" is something special but feels a little empty.

Movie Review: 'Alice in Wonderland' is a beautiful world to behold

[d_art · 8/10 · 6 March 2010]

Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is a sequel and not a retelling of the original children's novels by Lewis Carroll. In this film, Alice is now 19-years old, and soon after the death of her father, is proposed to be married away. Feeling pressured, she runs off, following a white rabbit, which leads her to Wonderland, a place she only vaguely remembers from childhood. There, she meets past familiar faces as the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp), the Blue Caterpillar (Alan Rickman), the Cheshire Cat (Stephen Fry), and eventually the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter), who has been terrorizing the land with her harsh rule and beheading of heads. Alice finds out that her destiny is to end the Red Queen's rule by slaying the queen's dragon, Jabberwocky, as written in the prophesy. Along the way she meets up with all sorts of colorful characters.

If you remember, Steven Spielberg's Hook was the live action sequel to Peter Pan. Similarly, Tim Burton's film is very much like a close cousin, except it's about Alice. The progression of the story is also kind of similar, where the main character, Alice, like Peter, must rediscover herself and finally defeat her nemesis. Likewise, both films are both elaborately staged, they are both about growing up and making choices, and there's a big showdown. Chances are if one liked Hook, one will find many things to like about Alice.

Tim Burton's version of the Wonderland's environments are gorgeous, imaginatively created, lots of colorful details, and breathes life. The castles are sleek and intricately designed. The creatures are generally live versions (CG) of the Disney's previous animated version, and they're even more odder and fun to look at. I particularly loved the portrayal of the Chesire Cat in this film, and the way he snakes through midair like water feels very natural, although it wouldn't feel so natural in real life. Only complaint I may have in terms of visuals would probably be where we see CG versions of natural creatures like dogs--they're not particularly stylized so their CG-ness can be more noticeable.

Danny Elfman's score fits the environment just right, giving added intensity when needed. This film is essentially Tim Burton's playground and even if there wasn't any story, it still would be plenty of fun to just watch the loony characters in their environment. I will add that 3-D aspect of it helped a lot.

Johnny Depp plays the Mad Hatter with usual gusto, as he brings much energy and quirkiness to such an oddball character. I suppose there is a mix of Willy Wonka and Jack Sparrow in there somewhere. Given that other characters are mostly or completely CG, Johnny Depp's character can feel a bit of out of place, as he still feels human. Helena Bonham Carter as the big-headed (literally) Red Queen is fun, expressive, and extremely likable for such a short-tempered character. Mia Wasikowska is particularly noteworthy as Alice, which she plays with free-spirited pluckiness, charm, and beauty.

The story, admittedly, is a simple one, although it is to the story's credit that Alice is now an adult--it helps since many happenings in Wonderland can be quite unfriendly, bizarre, and grotesque. Thankfully, no more worries about some dream causing some lifelong trauma to some poor child. I also appreciated the fact that her Wonderland, like dreams, is an extension of her frustrations with the "real" world, where she felt she had many "expectations" from outside forces. At the same time, it's not like Where the Wild Things Are, where other characters are actually projections of real-life people from the main character's life. For example, to read Mad Hatter as an extension of her father feels a bit like a stretch, although the Red Queen could possibly represent her future mother-in-law since they both dislike animals. Certainly, one can merely enjoy it at face value and the creativity of this world and be fine with it.

Overall, I enjoyed this world of Alice. In one sense, that may be the important thing, if one were to stick to the flavor of the original novel. The story within the Wonderland, I felt, wasn't as poignant as "real life" moments, which were filmed with much love and detail. Given the fact that original story consisted of series of random events and character interactions, it was nice to see the characters work together a bit. The overall result isn't something beyond what one would expect from this style of work, but it's fun, and where it succeeds, it succeeds well, thanks to the consistency of Tim Burton's imaginative visuals. *** out of **** stars.

For more of my reviews, you can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/d_art

Visually Astonishing Movie

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 13 June 2010]

In her engagement party, the indecisive nineteen year-old Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) is proposed in a gazebo in front of the guests by the snobbish and arrogant nobleman Hamish (Leo Bill). Before giving the answer, Alice sees a strange rabbit and escapes, falling down through a hole in a magic world called Underland. After drinking and eating magic potions to reduce her height, Alice meets animals that can talk and the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). Alice helps the good White Queen (Anne Hathaway) to defeat her evil and tyrannic sister Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) and returns a more confident teenager.

"Alice in Wonderland" is a visually astonishing movie with a deceptive story. The lead character is confused and indecisive and her change in the end is at least weird. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Alice no País das Maravilhas" ("Alice in the Wonderland")

Alice against Lewis Carroll

[WithoutPorpoise · 2/10 · 2 April 2010]

I loved "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and remember it as an amazing and timeless adventure indeed. Alice wanders around in a world so enigmatic and unstable that you never know what will happen next, and what twist will put Alice in just new trouble, often unintentionally and tragically made worse by her own doing. Now this is all exactly what this movie does not have. After Alice arrives in the new 'underland', you will soon be in on the entire story: It is two sides, good against evil, and Alice is to slay a monster. Not a single second is unexpected. Nor are there any twists. (But even the first minutes are astonishingly wanting any concept: Scenes without any real characters rush by, there is no focus of attention in the opening.) But most of all, my understanding of then brand "Alice" is that she originally wanders around a dream land that confronts her with her own self, her anxieties, her shadowy anticipation that things will not be all nice and easy, all taking shape in landscapes, characters and events painted in dream-language. Of this essence, it should be no problem to create a movie that really leaves an impression - let alone, if Tim Burton is in the team. But there is nothing, nothing of this concept in this movie. Instead of joining a charismatic and mature character on the journey through her own dismal, natural instabilities that every one carries inside, the story here is already written, and Alice is only to follow marked footprints. For the only reason that... she is the one foretold to do it. There is merely the most silly 'hollywood-intellectualism', where 'good against evil' must be taken as, like, certainly some sort of metaphor representing all our everyday struggles, and it is so much about decision making and all... I'm devastated. Eventually, Tim Burton has added his potential for design to a movie completely without content. The only metaphor I see is Lewis Carroll appearing at the end in the figure of the Jabberwokie, and Alice, slaying him. Carroll is dead, long live 'Alice does Hollywood'.

A masterful reworking of a classic

[The-Sarkologist · 10/10 · 5 February 2012]

To me it is very hard not to give this movie a 10 (I don't like giving away too many 10s) because I find it very difficult to find anything I don't like about the movie. To me it is a masterpiece. The characters are very well defined, the actors play their roles very well, and the movie moves at a very good pace, leaving time to breath, but also keeping you enthralled. Tim Burton is a masterful film-maker, and his films do tend to be of the highest quality (ignoring Batman of course). In this film he revisits the story of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (as well as Jaberwocky and Through the Looking Glass) and though it may reflect events in these previous stories, it is not the book that Lewis Carrol originally wrote.

Alice is now 19 and she has been haunted by strange dreams since she was a young girl. She is a very imaginative girl, and her father always encouraged her imagination, however he is now gone, and she is expected, at the age of 19, to become a proper English lady, so is taken to a party to get married. We can see from the beginning that she is not the normal English aristocratic girl, but is fed lies (such as you really don't want to turn out like Aunt Imogen, and that this guy is the only guy that will make her life complete) but she can see that the choice she must make will affect the rest of her life.

While she is wondering around the party, she catches glimpses of the White Rabbit, and is also remembering scenes from her childhood (such as painting white roses red), but when the question is finally asked of her, she flees, and falls down a hole after the White Rabbit, and lands up in Underland. This is one of the changes that Burton has applied to this realm. While the original story was a nonsense tale written for children, Burton has turned it into a true fantasy tale. As soon as Alice steps out of the tree into Underland, we immediately see Tim Burton's touch to this story, with the strange and fantastic realms that are characteristic of his movies.

It turns out that Alice has been prepared for this moment as she is the one ordained to slay the Jabberwock and to free Underland from the Tyranny of the Queen of Hearts. It is the Jabberwock that gives the queen her power, and as soon as it is taken away from her, she is beaten and exiled. I always love a film that ends with the antagonist being exiled as it, to me, is a greater punishment than death. Death is the great unknown, whereas exile keeps the person alive, while forever reminding them of the crimes that they committed (though it is not always the case, as an exiled person can simply burn with rage and seek vengeance).

This film is a fantasy quest, in that the quest that Alice undertakes is reflective of her quest to come to understand who she is and her role in the world. While the events in Underland take place over a number of days, only five minutes pass in the real world, though it is in these five minutes that Alice comes to discover who she is. She begins denying her destiny, and then comes to understand that the only person who is in charge of her destiny is herself. However, in discovering this, and taking a stand, it becomes clear that it was destiny for her to reach this moment. It is then when she draws the vorpal sword, and believes that she can slay the Jabberwock, that she truly comes into her own.

We see this as the film winds up magnificently. The slaying of the Jabberwock, and the freeing of Underland is not the end of the film. Alice returns to the real world, and while some may become despondent in returning to the same old boring world, Alice is not, and takes what she learns. She is an adventurer at heart, not an English lady. It is her desire to travel the world, and to pick up where her father left off. While it may be somewhat unrealistic for her to go into business with an English gentleman at this point in history, we need to remember that she is a lady of high standing, so we cannot have her running off into the underground. Instead she retains the image of the heroine as the move closes with her boarding the ship, taking pride of place, and sailing off to China where no doubt she will face many new adventures.

Following The White Rabbit into the Hole?!

[jonnyfendi · 7/10 · 17 April 2010]

Finally, I went to see "Alice in Wonderland", the movie that I had been waiting for such a long time. The tale is about 19-year-old Alice following the white rabbit, to find her destiny back to Wonderland that is now ruled by Red Queen. The movie is directed by Tim Burton, the man who specializes in eye candy and delight visualization. Thiz movie is the seventh collaboration with Johnny Depp as his main performer, after "Edward Scissorhands" (1990), "Ed Wood" (1994), "Sleepy Hollow" (1999), "Charlie and The Chocolate Factory" (2005), "Corpse Bride" (2005) and "Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street" (2007). His other masterpiece features are "Beetle Juice" (1988), "Batman" (1989) and "Big Fish" (2003). Thiz movie is supported by various Cast members like Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman and Mia Wasikowska as Alice. The most powerful performance in thiz movie is "Big Head" Red Queen character, which is played amazingly wicked and funny at the same time by Helena Bonham Carter (it's about the same character on Lord Farquaad in first "Shrek" {2001}). Bonham Carter's performance exceeds Depp's appearance. Her existence saves the movie for overall. Beside that I do not feel any emotions on thiz film, everything is flat. Actually, thiz movie isn't supported by a good script. It could be the worst script that ever came to Tim Burton's desk in these past twenty years of his career. Nevertheless, the visualization is A-Class. The story is an alternate version of the original "Alice in Wonderland" (written by Lewis Caroll). Thiz version doesn't carry such a thrill and interesting plots. At the final scene (Spoiler Alert!), give Alice a sword and knight armor to slay a dragon? It's definitely not a good option. The change is too radical, soft and tender Alice that is built from the beginning suddenly takes an incisive turn over. The flip over is so hard that possibly has become its own boomerang itself.

Visit My Blog on JONNY'S MOVEE : http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com

Jabberwocky is a PARODY of heroic epics and you dolts took it SERIOUSLY.

[sibelian · 1/10 · 10 March 2010]

You dolts took a meandering, plot less masterpiece and turned it in all seriousness into a soul-less CGI dirge with the same plot that it's source was LAUGHING AT.

The Jabberwock is not a dragon. The Jabberwock is the IDEA of a dragon. It wears spats and a waistcoat you DOLTS.

The Queen of Hearts never ACTUALLY chops anyone's head off, the Gryphon SAYS SO. There is nothing oppressive or dangerous in Wonderland. Wonderland doesn't make enough SENSE for anything to be dangerous.

Where WAS the Gryphon? Where was the Mock Turtle? Where was Bill the Newt? Where was the trial of the Knave of Hearts? Come to that, where were the Mad Hatter, the March Hare and the Dormouse? The Dormouse is a sleepy fat thing that likes treacle, not Reepicheep.

Where was the Duchess? Where was the Duchess's cook? Why does everybody make such a big deal out of the Cheshire Cat and the Caterpillar? They're among the least significant characters in the book!

Who's this bandersnatch? What's the Jabberwock doing in it at ALL? The Jabberwock's a work of fiction even on the other side of the looking glass!

What's all this faux-sinister creeping about with wounds and murky skies and burning buildings and severed heads?

You DOLTS. Don't you remember the ending? The oppressive queen, the insulting know-it-all tea-party guests, the bewildering fluctuation in one's own sense of self-importance almost like growing and shrinking, the unhelpful people, the stupid people, the bad-tempered people, yes, and even the hero waving his little magic sword at the scary dragon in a waistcoat and spats, what does Alice say to them? "Who cares for you? You're nothing but a pack of cards!" Your story-telling has regressed to the shuffling of tropes that children were laughing at over a century ago.

Did you even READ the book?

Call me Mad, but I Hatter really good time.

[rooprect · 22 February 2017]

The setup of this movie sounds like the beginning of a good joke: "Tim Burton and Walt Disney walk into a bar..." You wouldn't think it possible, but it happened. Tim Burton, the master of dark, twisted fantasies where every story involves at least 1 corpse, teamed up with the studio known for bright pink bunnies and such.

The temptation is for Burton fans to expect a Burtonesque flick while Disney fans expect an accurate retelling of the 1951 Disney cartoon classic. Neither happened, not by a longshot.

What happened instead is something you just have to experience. Someone once told me that the root of beauty lies in contrast. A yellow flower in a field of yellow flowers isn't as beautiful as a yellow flower growing on a desolate battlefield of some war-torn desert. So with that in mind, this is a movie for people who can appreciate the contrast between Burton's sarcasm and Disney's innocence. I'll give you an example...

In the Disney cartoon, as well as Lewis Carroll's original story, the Red Queen runs around commanding "Off with his head!" at anyone who irritates her, but of course the Red King quietly follows behind whispering "You're pardoned" each time, thus saving the executioner a ton of gory axe blades. But in this version, in a brief but stark moment, we learn that the beheadings are quite real. And then bam, we quickly return to Disney territory where we are entertained by the banter of cute talking mice.

Literally, I rubbed my eyes, turned to the person sitting next to me and asked, "Wait... did we just see a bunch of decapitated heads??" Confusing at first, this volley between macabre & merry becomes the charm of this film. I should add that I counted at least 3 characters who got an eyeball disgorged. And yet, in Disneyesque fashion you never really feel a sense of menace; it's mostly in good fun.

I purposely didn't mention the plot until now because, to me, the story was secondary to the overall vibe of the film. But in case you're wondering, this is *not* a retelling of Disney's, Carroll's or anyone else's "Alice in Wonderland". This is sort of a sequel to the original where Alice, now 19 years old and about to get married, gets reconnected with her long forgotten adventure of youth. In that respect, it reminded me of how the movie "Hook" was sort of a sequel to "Peter Pan".

To me, that's the only department where this film lost a few points, because it felt like they were weaving too much of a story into a tale that was inherently a stream-of-consciousness that mimicked the randomness of a dream (Lewis Carroll himself invented the story on the spot while rowing Alice Pleasance Liddell and her sisters on a pond). This version follows more of a straighforward plot to defeat the bad guys, and in so doing, it got away from the dreamlike feeling of all other versions I've seen.

Johnny Depp... of course JD steals the show with his alternately endearing and terrifying Mad Hatter. He plays the role as someone suffering from severe PTSD which manifests itself in multiple personalities. There's his normal, gentle, lisping Hatter. And then there's his cruel, dark Scottish Highlander Hatter who sounds like Sean Connery just lost his place in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Honorable mention goes to Crispin Glover (Marty McFly's nerdy father in "Back to the Future") who plays a very chilling Jack of Hearts. And another honorable mention goes to Anne Hathaway who plays the angelic but somewhat ditzy White Queen.

Special effects are good for 2010 but a bit dated for today. The best effects are the subtle ones such as the way the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) was depicted as having an enormous, bulbous head. I also thought the "Drink Me, Eat Me" scene where Alice shrinks & grows was done very well.

In the end, although I had been expecting something of a trainwreck, I think the odd pairing of Burton & Disney was a success. So what's next? Maybe horror master John Carpenter ("Halloween") does a teencom with Lindsay Lohan & Jamie Lee Curtis called "Freaky Friday the 13th"?