John Brooks
Firstly, I'm no Lewis Caroll fanboy nor a connoisseur in any quality of the original novel so this review contains nothing in relation to whether the film was true to the book and what not, it's a movie review purely about the movie: Alice in Wonderland (2010) directed by Tim Burton and starring Mia Wasikowska whom since they've been brought up both do a very efficient job in my opinion for their respective tasks: Alice is strong-willed, has lots of presence and character and that's precisely what her role is about: a free-thinker in a world of formatted prudes who's not afraid to let her imagination and peculiar personality thrive. I also think that young Australian actress fit the character physically as she was not only pleasant to look at but conveyed that strong will while not being boorish either, just that fine line: a feminine tomboy with the slightness and freshness of a young girl.And now about Burton: he does well to recycle the Alice story and keep it exciting and bring enough elements to it that it's something new to look at, rather than just being another Burton or just another Alice iteration.
The film is structured and paced just right running in at the standard 1 hour 45min. Each scene is memorable and distinct visually, the dialog very good and punchy, often funny, and it never lets itself become self-indulgent. All the secondary characters and sprites are very well crafted - Johnny Deep as the Mad Hatter, those two plump boys, the Jabberwocky (voiced by Christopher Lee as an easter egg), both Queens are fantastic (and hilarious in their own way: Anne Hathaway and her deliberately annoying princess-like mannerisms holding out her hands like a fairy and coming close to throwing up a few times - and Bonham Carter's anger tantrums and ridiculous head), the Cheshire Cat... the tiny frog subjects of the queen and their deep voices...Stylistically the film is quite awesome: from the very cool design for the card soldiers, to generally the sometimes barren sometimes hyper-colorful and rich dreamy landscapes with that thick hard contrast filter throughout, to the way they depicted for instance the phonies with their caricatured overly large features...All in all, a job very well done. Obviously however one looks at it, it's still mostly crafted on an original story and inspired by a few earlier versions.
7.5/10.
Polly Whitacre
Summary: An epic new twist on an old classic *** This review may contain spoilers ***"Alice in Wonderland" is about a young lady that falls down a hole and has a grand adventure. Although the theme of the film stays true to being character focused, Tim Burton's version differs from Walt Disney's version in the way that Alice, played by Mia Wasikowska, does not fall asleep and dream while reading a book. She has adventures, she mistakes for dreams, throughout her life to groom her for Frabjous Day. On Frabjous day, Alice is to battle the Jabberwocky and kill it to stop the Red Queen. The Hatter, played by Johnny Depp, Tweedledee and Tweedledum, played by Matt Lucas, White Queen, played by Anne Hathaway, and White Rabbit, played by Michael Sheen, all help Alice along the way. Alice in Wonderland is a character focus themed film as Alice is the focal point of the plot. She arrives just in time to save the day! The clothing they used for Alice sets her apart from the rest of the characters, as appropriate since she is not from there. The armor Alice wore was vastly different than all of the other guards, making her stand out from the rest in a heroic way. This use of costuming further accents the theme being focused on Alice. The camera angles used in the Jabberwocky battle scene, coupled with the choreography of Alice's battle movements, making it an epic fight and accents her as being the hero. The upward angles used as she walks down the stairs after killing the Jabberwocky make her look tall and champion like. She fights with smooth well thought out movements. The close up of her when she rolls out of the way of the Jabberwocky's foot after being knocked down added to the shot and excitement. The computer-generated characters were well-done. The make-up and costumes were incredible. The attention to detail, from the tearing, and loosening of Alice's clothing, all the way to the fine details of the fur on the rabbits, dogs, mice, and horses were excellent for the year this film was produced. The background music was great throughout, and they really did a great job with the sound effects. In the final battle scene between Alice and the Jabberwocky, Alice cuts off its head, killing it with the vorpal sword. As the head rolls down the stairs of the crumbled tower, you can hear a squish- squish. The subtle use of the squish sound effect really added to the scene. This character focused film is an epic new twist on an old classic!
ironhorse_iv
2010's 'Alice in Wonderland' is a film that, on paper, would seem perfect for director Tim Burton's dark creepy unique skills. After all, the original novel of the same name by author, Lewis Carroll is known for its dark humor, and insane tone, but the main reason why I dislike this movie, so much, is because, the screenwriter of this film, Linda Woolverton try to put logic in a story that needs no logic. 'Alice in Wonderland' isn't about an ancient prophecy about a grown woman, Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) ending the Red Queen's reign (Helena Bonham Carter) and restoring order to the world of Underland, with war and battle. No, it's about a child's journey into the world of the absurd and surreal, and learning that life is not rational. Most adaptations follows these guidelines, but somehow director Tim Burton's version, wanted to be different and verve off, drastically. Sadly, the changes, they made, weren't good at all. First off, when did Wonderland turn into Underland? I get, that the land is supposedly beneath a rabbit hole in the ground, but since the movie share more relates to the novel 'Through the Looking-Glass' than 'Alice: Adventures in Wonderland', shouldn't it, be call 'Mirrorland'? Or better yeah, 'Imagineland' since its coming from the dark side of Alice's mind. Anyways, no matter, how much logic, they try to put into naming this place. Carroll never call, his world, anything else, than Wonderland. It's always been Wonderland. So, why did they add this!? It's so pointless. Also, when did that world had a 'Chosen One' war plot as if it's 'Lord of the Ring' or 'Narnia'?! Isn't it weird that nobody else, step up and kill the queen, already, seeing how the land is full of magical cakes and liquor that change your size? Why hasn't that happen, yet!? Even the villain, doesn't match the source material, as the Red Queen is not the same person as the Queen of Hearts. If anything, it's should be a war against math, since Carroll hatred that. Second off, they insult both the fans of the 1951's Disney animated version and the Carroll's purists, by having deceitful marketing. By having a grown adult, Alice returning back to Wonderland, instead of a kid discovery the world for the first time. It made this film, technically a sequel. Yet, Disney still call the movie with its originally name, leading much confusement. Honestly, a story like this, could had work, if they went with a different title and wrote Alice as a adult who must reclaims her youthful spirit in order to save the world. Similar in the way, 1991's film 'Hook' did with its source material with 'Peter Pan'. Instead, the movie has Alice, still childish in her adult years fighting against the pressures of conforming to 19th century aristocratic society's expectations. This is fine and dandy, if the moral of story is trying to tell the audience to be mature adults and learn to take responsibility, but no that's isn't what, the screenwriter was going for. The film instead, has Alice still going against her Victorian lifestyle straight in the end; even after the fact that she obey Wonderland's rules, with her destiny on killing the dragon-like creature, the Jabberwocky (Voiced by Christopher Lee), leading to little to no character development. I know, Woolverton wanted to make Alice into a stronger will person, that empower women to choose her own path, but this story arch goes nowhere. Couldn't they wrote Alice, a little better!? Mia Waskowska's performance doesn't help as well. She seem very disconnected from everything that is happening on screen. She seem so bland and boring. The worst of this, had to be the scenes, where Alice is supposed to go through a variety of absurd physical changes that are to represent the discomfort of having a period and going through puberty. Hints the metaphors with the food and drinks. Yet, Mia's look so disinterested. We see very little traumatic, frustration, or even sadness, from her. Very bad acting. Made me wish, for a talent child actress instead. The only reason, why I can see why they change this, is because of Lewis Carroll's questionable relationship with little girls. A lot of historians think that he might had been a paedophile, but still had Alice be a kid in this film. After all, this is originally supposed to be, a kid's movie. Despite that, the supporting cast were a little more memorable in their performance, even if they were chewing up the scenery with how over the top, they were. Still, it's a bit tiresome and repetitive, to see actors Johnny Depp and actress, Helena Bonham Carter in yet, another Burton movie doing their shtick. Another problem with this film, is how ugly looking the visuals look. I hate how much time, they spent in Alice's Victorian era life. Everything there is so gloomy. It really sucks the fun out of the film. Wonderland in 3D is not any better. Although, the visuals of that world does have some beautiful moment, for the most part, the faded colors added to the melancholy tone of the world at war theme. It's not that good. Plus, it looks so blurry. I'm sorry, but the CGI also looks very fake-looking. They all have that artificial quality that looks even worse in the 2D version of the film. It's sad, because Burton was once-known for his stunning cool sets and unique realistic character design. Another disappointment in this film was lack of music. Where was the 'happy unbirthday' song? Where is any song from the source material!? Clearly, there wasn't much heart, put into that department as even Danny Elfman's overall score sounds pretty generic and plain as well. Despite these qualms, the film made a lot of money, proving once again that Burton knows how to please the majority of his audience. However, not me. I really hate this film and its 2016 sequel. Can't recommended.
