The clues were there all along.
Large or Small, Alice fails to impress in Tim Burton's Wonderland sequel.
When I first heard that Johnny Depp was playing the Mad Hatter in Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland,” I was slightly interested.
But then little things started to bother me.
First was the March release date. A March release date for a big name movie usually means it tested badly and the studio didn’t think it could compete with the summer box-offices brutes.
Nevertheless, Watchmen rocked, even though the general movie-going audience didn’t get it, and it was a March release, so I was still giving it a chance.
Then I saw the animation. Particular, the Red Queen’s bulbous head. There was just no reason for it. It completely turned me off of the film.
Then I saw it, and I found that it was worse than I thought.
In case you don’t know, Alice (Mia Wasikowska) was a little girl when she went through the looking glass and fell into the first rabbit hole discovering the magical world of Wonderland. At age 19, she has forgotten her adventures and convinced herself it was only a dream. However, running away from a would be suitor, she loses herself into the magical realm, now turned dark and scary under the evil Red Queen’s (Helena Bonham Carter) rule.
Some vaguely exciting adventures occur. No, that’s a like. After some boring adventures, Alice must face her fears, fulfill the prophecy and deal with some rather creepy romantic overtones between her and the Hatter.
The writing was terrible; an insult to Mr. Carroll.
Depp was under used and did a Scottish accent to show when the Mad Hatter was being madder than usual.
Alice was cute, but uninspiring.
The animation struggled between silly and overdone.
The 3D was abysmal. I don’t know if there is a real difference between “Disney 3D” and the “Real 3D” other movies use, but the 3D work in “Alice” was pitiful. Gag attempts to “jump out” of the screen were stymied and terribly contrived. Two years ago, in “Beowulf” a spear almost took out my eye. You could see the notches on the brightly lit blade and felt like you had to duck. In “Alice,” we have returned to the dark ages. Everything was dark, smudgy and flat.
Dark. Smudgy. Flat.
I can’t think of any other three words that describe the movies effect on the audience. Enter into un-Wonderfulland at your own risk.
I didn’t care for the film either… Hated it actually…
I did NOT see it in 3-D and I’m glad I didn’t fork out the extra bucks for those stupid glasses…
With that said… I thought the character and setting designs – with the exception of the Hatter – were brilliant. I loved the Queen’s huge head and loathed both look and characterzation of Depp’s Mad Hatter. (Some characterizations were WAAAAAAY off base.)
But the screenplay – excuse me: “screenplay” – was inept to the extreme and it was as if Burton nor the writer bothered to read the book(s).
The Red Queen was Alice’s friend (well, frenemy) in the second book and is in no way connected to the Queen of Hearts. The White Queen is supposed to be old and unorganized. The White Rabbit is timid, not ascertive. The Dormouse is comatose, not a wee-warrior.
If Burton was to stray so far, why not use the characters that didn’t appear in the 1951 Disney flick. The Duchess, the Cook, the White Knight, the Wasp in the Wig, the Sheep, Humpty Dumpty, the Lion, the Unicorn, the Mock Turtle, the Gryphon, the Mouse, the Lory, the Crabs, the Man in the White Paper Suit, ect.
And I won’t even start with the ending! The faux-feminism was so misplaced and came out of nowhere, what minute credibility there was in the bulk of the story -sorry: “story” – was completely thrown out the window.
Just ‘orrible, it was; ‘orrible! It was like a really bad dream, but not near as entertaining.