Alice in Wonderland: a Rabbithole Review

  • Thread starter niky
  • 10 comments
  • 2,483 views

niky

Karma Chameleon
Staff Emeritus
23,800
Philippines
Philippines
"She's not the same Alice"

That one line signifies all that is right and wrong with this new take on the Lewis Carroll classic. While we've had a number of remakes and continuations of old stories and series as of late, "Alice" is one that I've been anticipating for quite a while. The whimsy of Lewis Carroll with the quirky genius of Tim Burton? A match made in heaven.

And yet, sadly, "Alice" is a bit short of whimsy... and after the introduction of the characters and all involved... a bit short of quirk.

It all starts with the premise. The movie follows the story of an Alice who's come of age. At nineteen, still mourning the loss of her father, and faced with an impromptu marriage proposal that everyone expects her to accept, Alice is being forced to confront her looming adulthood head-on.

Intervention comes in the form of a familiar white rabbit scuttling through the bushes. You know the rest...

As the movie goes on, however, the whimsy and oddity that both Carroll and Burton are known for give way to a more serious theme. Even here, in Underland (young Alice could never get the name right), Alice is forced to confront responsibility and destiny.

Underland is a mash-up of Carroll's Wonderland and Looking-Glass worlds. The characters are more serious, though, and at times... too heavy. The Dormouse goes from being a frumpy little sleepyhead to being "it-girl"... the Mad Hatter becomes a tragic hero... and the Red Queen's neurosis and imagined execution orders become frighteningly real.

While some of the madcap logical twists of the books go missing, that's not to sa that Alice's narrative and plot are weak. It does have its problems. With the Compendium of days (revealed in Alice's first minutes in Underland), the movie reveals its ending at its very beginning. Which makes the ending as inexorable and unsurprising as a Lord of the Rings battle scene.

Still, it's fantastic to look at. Underland is lushly realized and character design is exceptional. Depp and company do a great job of becoming the characters. I especially love Tweedledum and Tweedledee. The one complaint I have is that you don't spend enough time with any one character or in any location to become intimate with them.

In the end, the biggest issue with Alice is that it feels more Gaiman/Tolkien than Burton/Carroll. It doesn't actually need the Alice backstory to work, which makes it feel like the trappings are merely tacked on instead of embedded in the movie.

Which is a real shame, because it's a reasonably good movie. But it's definitely neither a raven nor a writing desk. Carroll fans take a pass, you're not missing anything.
 
I saw the film last weekend with friends and I can basically sum up my review with a single sentence:

"It was long, boring, and ultimately fell extremely flat in spite of the lush worlds and rather-good performances."


Burton had a difficult problem going into this piece. Simply re-doing Alice in Wonderland wouldn't have done justice to the story, especially when you're doing it for the House of Mouse, so he was left with doing an adaptation. I had no idea that there were sequels in the series, and his incorporation of those pieces was bold... Especially when the average person was likely entirely unaware of it. The story in itself wasn't entirely terrible, it just wasn't interesting. Ever. But, I'm entirely uncertain as to how it could have been presented differently.

It just didn't feel like a proper Burton film. That's the best way I can put it.
 
I think I concur with most analyses here. It's rather easy to sum up:

-lame story
-lame dialogue
-lack of context
-strange feminist overtones that aren't really explained or relevant to boot
 
Basically the only "sequel" was "Through the Looking Glass". The Red Queen is a mash-up of the Red Queen from the Looking Glass world and the Queen of Hearts from Wonderland. Tweedledum and Tweedledee, though popularly known from the cartoon, are also from the Looking Glass world.

Since the books are short, they're often sold bound together in paperback or hardbound form. I'm thinking of digging them up for re-reading... I have several copies lying around. They're best enjoyed with the original engraving illustrations, not the modern illustrations some publishers try to append onto the book.

Yeah... like I said... the movie just doesn't have the full Burton vibe from it... I'd expected him to do it better, since some of his earlier work had the same character of whimsy and wonder that the books do.

I would have actually liked it if they incorporated the structure of the "Looking Glass" book into the plot. The book is written like a chess game... and having the plot explained as such would have made it much better.
 
Basically the only "sequel" was "Through the Looking Glass". The Red Queen is a mash-up of the Red Queen from the Looking Glass world and the Queen of Hearts from Wonderland. Tweedledum and Tweedledee, though popularly known from the cartoon, are also from the Looking Glass world.

Yeah... like I said... the movie just doesn't have the full Burton vibe from it... I'd expected him to do it better, since some of his earlier work had the same character of whimsy and wonder that the books do.

The character designs weren't by him, and—truth be told—he works at his best on a smaller budget with less 'Hollywood' actors. He needs to stop defaulting to Johnny Depp, who has way too much screen time, as well.
 
Didn't know Tim Burton was also a visual artist? He may not have done the final designs himself, but the concepts are his:

http://www.aeromental.net/2010/02/06/tim-burtons-drawings-for-alice-in-wonderland/

burton_10a.jpg

20335_289164506654_102270346654_3621388_6335056_n.jpg

20335_289164541654_102270346654_3621389_4058913_n.jpg

20335_289164586654_102270346654_3621390_1140542_n.jpg

(I knew he was an avid cartoonist, but I didn't actually know these pre-production sketches were available to the public before you brought this up... so thanks!)

That's why his movies and work all have such a distinct look. He's not just a director, he's a visual designer.

I agree on the "too much Depp-th" thing. Though oddly, Johnny's performance was quite good.

I'm torn about this movie. I really, really enjoyed it, despite its shortcomings, and yet, being familiar with the source material, I was much, much more disappointed with how it all turned out than my wife. I suppose if you've never read the books, you won't know what went missing.
 
Didn't know Tim Burton was also a visual artist? He may not have done the final designs himself, but the concepts are his:

http://www.aeromental.net/2010/02/06/tim-burtons-drawings-for-alice-in-wonderland/

burton_10a.jpg

20335_289164506654_102270346654_3621388_6335056_n.jpg

20335_289164541654_102270346654_3621389_4058913_n.jpg

20335_289164586654_102270346654_3621390_1140542_n.jpg

(I knew he was an avid cartoonist, but I didn't actually know these pre-production sketches were available to the public before you brought this up... so thanks!)

That's why his movies and work all have such a distinct look. He's not just a director, he's a visual designer.

I agree on the "too much Depp-th" thing. Though oddly, Johnny's performance was quite good.

I'm torn about this movie. I really, really enjoyed it, despite its shortcomings, and yet, being familiar with the source material, I was much, much more disappointed with how it all turned out than my wife. I suppose if you've never read the books, you won't know what went missing.

Ha! Those aren't the concept sketches, sadly.

Alice_in_Wonderland_Knave_by_michaelkutsche.jpg


Look familiar? Here's the artist.
 
I think the title is misleading, as it never followed the original story.

The conflictions to the Carrol story should not have adopted the exact same title.

"Alice's return"... "Wonderland".... or simply "Alice"... something that is related but obviously not the original story.

I had never read the book and enjoyed the movie to a reasonable extent anyway.
 
Stand corrected. Reading through, apparently Burton gave him lots of freedom to develop the final designs.

Yes, I've been tracking this film for quite some time. Waaay back when "it" was a Marilyn Manson film, and then a Robert Rodriguez film, and then a Guillermo del Toro film . . . etc.

Its' final permutation as a Tim Burton film didn't surprise me, though — but the fact so many directors had turned it down gave me an inkling as to the quality of the screenplay.
 
True... would have hoped that Burton would have brought more Burton to it.
 
Back