I adore fairy tales. Fantastical stories that take you to other worlds and have no rhyme or reason, they simply are and exist, without any complex explanation. Of course, now there are blockbuster-ified fairy tales. If that's what you want, then director Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is for you.
This is not your ordinary Alice in Wonderland, it's actually a vague sequel to the original story, but rather than being an adaptation of the legitimate sequel penned by Lewis Carroll (Through the Looking Glass), it is an odd jumble of a story that seems as if it was dreamed up in a board room. Alice has been to Wonderland before, but cannot remember it. When she is 19 and faced with the horrible decision as to whether or not to marry her horrible suitor, Alice falls down the rabbit hole once more, rediscovers Wonderland, and learns that she is the only one who can usurp the Red Queen by slaying her all powerful dragon in a Lord of the Rings-esque climax.
It isn't fair to say Alice in Wonderland is a bad film, just cliche where it could have been so much more. One would think the marriage of bizarre director Tim Burton with the Lewis Carroll classic would be a perfect pairing, but the film was bogged down into the realm of cliche action/adventure. The film kind of plays out like a Lord of the Rings light. We must get this ancient sword, take it to the White Queen, and then Alice must challenge the Red Queen's dragon and slay it to save Wonderland. Am I the only one who finds something wrong with this? Alice in Wonderland is a fantasy, and not an action/adventure epic, but more of a fantasy that is more about the characters and not the epic backdrop. Speaking of fantasy, time was never taken to drink in the fantastical, to truly experience Wonderland, we would just hop on over to the next piece of the Hollywood puzzle. Still, there is a good amount to enjoy in the film.
Unlike most Tim Burton films, this isn't a macabre film that is simply macabre for no other reason than to be macabre. It is actually a kid-friendly film, and for Burton, is not weird at all, it is just true to the spirit of Lewis Carroll's story. The film is strikingly the most commercial friendly Burton film since the original Batman in 1989, and even though I was disappointed that the film was more of a big blockbuster than a straight up fantasy (like the books), the action/adventure elements were played well. While it was all a touch cliche, the dueling the dragon and the big epic battle at the end, was at least entertaining, even if it didn't feel like Alice in Wonderland. Not to mention, the characters are exceedingly charming. Johnny Depp is fascinating as the Mad Hatter, as well, Mia Wasikowska, who plays Alice, shines and is definitely a star in the making.
I think my greatest disappointment came with this film in seeing that the cast was all pitch perfect and the design of Wonderland was fantastic, not to mention a great many moments within the film showed promise of being one of those unforgettable movie moments, but none of that ever came to fruition and was just bogged down by the mechanics of the studio system. Really, the film is entertaining enough to watch, but repeat viewings really aren't desired, and by this film's favoring of cliche Hollywood blockbuster story over originality and straight up fantasy, it keeps the film from being something more memorable down the road.
I give Alice in Wonderland a D!
My review:
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, let me say that I do love Alice in Wonderland and I've read both Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. I am very fond of the original disney adaptation of it and always, up until now, enjoyed watching adaptations of the book. Wonderland is fun to watch in movies, something that can be experimented with and create endless possibilities with. Im a huge Burton fan and Johnny Depp is alright (his older work is more versatile and cutting edge than the roles he takes these days...). However, it must be said, this film is terrible.
First of all, the "new story" is neither adventurous enough to draw you in nor sentimental enough to make you care. The entire movie is completely confused with what it wants to be and what kind of relationship it wants to have with its audience. For instance, there are many scenes involving very gross and terrifying images. Including (but not limited to):*minor spoilers btw* seeing a small mouse stick a pin into a creature's eye and pull it out, seeing Alice walk across decapitated heads and actually fall into the mouth of one of them, and the head of the jabberwocky being sliced off and rolling for a good half a minute down a staircase. A dark, scary Alice is not a bad idea however there are also scenes involving a bubbly over the top white queen acting towards Alice (and treating the audience) like a 5 year old, a completely unnecessary dance sequence that only a 7 year old would find funny, and several childish jokes sprinkled throughout the film. Is it a kid's movie or not? I honestly don't think Tim Burton even knows the answer to that question honestly.
The story... where do I begin? First of all the entire first 10 minutes of the film is not revealing enough of Alice's character to be considered exposition. It's just sorta there... This blame, unfortunately, has to be shared with poor Mia Wasikowska, who is wooden, dull, and uninterested in anything that is happening around her throughout the film. Once we get down the rabbit hole things don't get much better. We are treated to a scene that lasts for far too long involving Alice drinking and shrinking and eating and growing atleast 3 or 4 times. The whole time we hear characters that don't sound all that familiar wondering if she's the real Alice. The lighting of the scenes throughout the beginning of the film is very dim and the colors seem to be a little dark as well. Basically forcing Wonderland to lose all sense of Wonder... oh wait... it's called Underland??? Well there you have it. We spend the first 40 minutes of the movie trying to figure out if she is the "real Alice" or not. I'll give you a hint: she is. Pointless plot really, I mean the audience knows she's Alice the entire time so what did this accomplish? Johnny Depp's performance can best be described as possibly the worst of his career thus far. He goes in and out of a Scottish/ Irish/ Swedish accent thingy... I never got the impression that the Mad Hatter in the book was Scotiredish did you??? Helena Bonham Carter isn't much better... which is very disappointing. I thought she would be perfect but she doesn't take any time with her character. She rushes almost all of her lines and doesn't enunciate to the point that there are some lines that you just can't hear. I don't mind a lisp, but I should still be able to make out what you are saying. Anne Hathaway, Alan Rickman, and Crispin Glover do the best they can with the awful script they've been given. The entire story of the sword being stolen to become the champion of the white queen so that the jabberwocky could be slain was dumb and not what Alice in Wonderland is about.
Which brings me to my final point. Alice in Wonderland is supposed to be a flimsy, episodic tale of a girl's loss of innocence and journey into maturity. Not an "epic" about a sword and a Jabberwocky. I don't understand how anyone could love this movie if they have read the books.