• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

OneWingedBird

Beloved of Ra
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
15,431
Official trailer here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiPR6kA4_iU

I would say i was hoping this might be better than the lacklustre 'hallmark' version (yes, those people who did Merlin), and for a sequal, perhaps even with a dash of the American McGee take on the story, but as it is, i'm not particularly impressed with the trailer.

Probably doesn't help that Johnny Depp/Mad Hatter's hair and make-up give him an undue resemblance to a character from a certain Grant Morrison story. :?
 
I wonder if this 'Disney-fication' of the story will be any closer to the original than the last one?
 
I might have said Tim Burton was ideal to film Lewis Carroll, but I thought that about him and Roald Dahl and look how awful Charlie and the Chocolate Factory turned out. I'll wait and see.
 
I'd have preferred Terry Gilliam to direct, or Tarsem Singh. Tim Burton just tries too hard to be weird these days.
 
What bugs me is that once again we see the mixing of books. The people making the adaptations don't seem to understand that Wonderland and Looking Glass are two separate stories with strong, if idiosyncratic, structures under their wildly flapping flags of imagery. You go putting chess into Wonderland and playing cards behind the Looking Glass, and you mess up the structure, which naturally makes everything else collapse. You cease to have nonsense constructed for the delectation of intellectual little girls and wind up with a mess.

The percentage of readers who don't see this structure and enjoy the books anyway is large, but casual readers are always benefiting by the hard work of authors who make everything look easy and spontaneous by dint of meticulous craft. The reader who sees the underlying structure of any story gets a little bonus by their own labor. The craftsmen adapting the books into a movie should not be doing so if if they don't understand the scaffolding on which it's built; they have to be the kind of reader who looks for and consciously appreciates that sort of thing, or they can't do their own job correctly.

It looks as though they're erecting another scaffolding underneath, with the Mad Hatter taking a prominent role presumably in some sort of plot recognizable to modern audiences as appropriate to a movie - and that's BS. The protagonist of the story is Alice; everyone else is in a supporting role and needs to be cast and seen only in relation to her. There's only two ways to cast it: fresh-faced little girl (Alice is 7, remember) surrounded by Big Character Names (not stars, character actors) in cameo parts, each coming forward to wow us with their individual turns and their chemistry with her; or fresh-faced little girl and a bunch of performers from other media - circus, stage, voice actors, ballet, opera even (I'd love to see a couple of divas bringing on the full stage presence for the Queen of Hearts and the Duchess), ditto.

Sigh. I'll probably go see it just to gripe.
 
From what I've read in this months Total Film this version is meant to be a quasi-sequel to Wonderland and Looking Glass, which is why the Alice in this film is older. Apparently she re-enters Wonderland while running away from a potential suitor who is about to pop the question.
 
river_styx said:
Tim Burton just tries too hard to be weird these days.
Agree completely. His is a very cute kind of grotesque, which I find almost unbearable at times. Alice is one of my favourite things, and doesn't really need any more cack-handed assaults ;)
 
It's odd - although I must admit I was quite excited to see the pre-effects photos of some of the characters in September's "Empire", watching the trailer left me cold - it all seemed a bit tame really and not terribly interesting.
 
If there's one piece of, 'children's' literature, that needs a long rest, it's 'Alice'.

IMHO the best adaptation ever done, was Jonathan Miller's BBC version, back in the 1960's. Back then, there were even a few Victorians still around, who might have read it as children. It was dreamy and surreal, in a, 16mm, monochrome, psychedelically opiated, sort of way and played heavily on the undercurrents of English eccentricity, psycho-sexual repression and love of erudite wordplay and language. Very mid-Sixties, just as the original was similarly, from the mid-Sixties, of the previous century. Like a sort of cultural Indian summer of the Victorian British Empire. Music by Ravi Shankar.

http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tv/id/1065750/index.html

Any US influenced version, so far, has taken a baseball bat to these things. It's not about the latest CGI SFX, either.

Burton has done some decent stuff, but Alice just needs to be left alone, to recover from over exposure.
 
The Times critic likes it:

Review: Alice in Wonderland
Kate Muir

Never have toves been so slithy or a film so brillig. Tim Burton’s spectacular reimagining of Alice in Wonderland, which had its royal premiere in London last night, takes Lewis Carroll’s famous Jabberwocky poem and makes it a 3-D epic for the next generation.

Traditionalists may quibble with Burton’s Gothic ride through the Alice books, but his hallucinogenic humour is true to the originals. Plus you don’t get a cast any better than this. The standouts are Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen with a bulbous head and a venomous tongue, using a live pig as a footstool, and Alice herself, played by the Australian actress Mia Wasikowska with frowning confidence and not a drop of soppiness.

The characters may be familiar but the plot deviates insanely from the original. Down the rabbit hole, Alice still finds the “Drink Me” potion, varies from 6in to 20ft tall, attends the Mad Hatter’s tea party and confronts the Red Queen, but Burton brings Alice’s dream closer to his more favoured nightmares.

Each scene offers a British luvvie in phantasmagorical disguise. Alan Rickman voices the caterpillar, and perhaps inevitably the Cheshire Cat speaks with the smug voice of Stephen Fry. Tweedledum and Tweedledee are a digitally manipulated Matt Lucas, and Paul Whitehouse is the disturbed March Hare, prone to throwing crockery. The squeaky dormouse, who pokes out the Bandersnatch’s eyeball with a needle, is our very own Barbara Windsor.

Unfortunately, Johnny Depp has too much of Willy Wonka lingering about him as he plays the Mad Hatter, who is promoted to a modern buddy role with Alice. Anne Hathaway’s character as the White Queen was, said Burton, based on Nigella Lawson. This running joke becomes clear in the lipsmacking potion scene.

The creepy fantasy landscapes and kooky costumes have gestated brilliantly on Burton’s famous drawing board, but 3-D effects superimposed after filming seem unnecessary. The miraculous beasts and lurid tropical flowers could have come from Avatar.

Carroll probably never saw Alice as an action-adventure movie with huge battle scenes between red and white armies. Yet John Tenniel’s original illustrations percolate through the film, and the Jabberwock is a near facsimile — although its eyes light up. The Frumious Bandersnatch is more worrying. No longer worth shunning, the beast has been turned by Disney’s Imagineers into a cute, growly, brown-spotted monster. Ditto the Cheshire Cat, who resembles a grubby Garfield.

Commercial considerations have also made Alice 19 years old, for the all-important teen market. Burton lets her break the Victorian mould and become an empowering, feminist figure as she puts on some Joan of Arc armour, grabs the vorpal sword and roars “off with your head” at the Jabberwock. In all, a fantastic film that gets curiouser and curiouser.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/ ... 041246.ece
 
I generally like Johnny Depp, but I also am beginning to find his OTT performances a bit grating.
 
Someone needs to build a very big wall between him and Burton. I normally love directors using the same actors over again, but this one went past ridiculous some time back.
 
Johnny is lovely to look at but he's becoming a bit of a one-trick pony as far as his acting is concerned. He just plays the one OTT role over and over again.
 
Since the phrase "since Alice" is a standard comparative in the kidlitosphere, it's not surprising that School Library Journal reviews the movie.

Purists will be perplexed and the average moviegoer ultimately disinterested by director Tim Burton’s pedestrian spin of Lewis Carroll’s 1865 classic, Alice in Wonderland. Those hoping to see the heroine swim in the pool of tears, the pig-baby, or the Mock Turtle will leave disappointed. Instead of losing her way in Wonderland, this Alice takes the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings route, fighting evil as an empowered warrior.

This umpteenth adaptation begins with six-year-old Alice waking up from a strange dream—she remembers something about a blue caterpillar and a dodo. The film then flash forwards 13 years later. Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now a lovely, porcelain-skinned young woman with blond ringlets about to become engaged to a fey aristocrat. Right as he’s on his knee proposing to her, Alice’s attention diverts to a rabbit rummaging in a hedge. She runs after it, and plunges into the hole in which the hare vanishes.

From a hookah-puffing Caterpillar, Alice is given an ancient scroll, “the Compendium,” that prophesizes that someone by the name of Alice must kill the dragon-like jabberwocky, the protector of the tyrannical Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter). Before she accomplishes this, she must first find a sword with magical powers. Her newfound confidant, the Cheshire Cat, tells her that the sword knows what it wants, she just needs to hold onto it.
The script by Linda Woolverton chucks out the episodic nature of the original novel and imposes a hero’s rite of passage, turning the bizarre into the rational. There’s nothing wrong with Alice as a take-charge action figure—if only she actually did anything. She’s more a bystander than participant, even in battle. And it’s not as if the original Alice was insipid or a shrinking violet. She may not always have known what to say or do, but she was still only a child.

The film was 3-D-ified only in post-production, which may explain why this Wonderland is muted compared to the film adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s Coraline. Down in the rabbit hole, the computer-generated production design is pretty much what you’d expect from Burton: a dark, misty forest with spinney trees; and a far-out, garish Mad Hatter, orange hair sprouting out from his hat, clashing with his pale green eyes. Speaking in a strange brogue, Johnny Depp adds a lisping, foppish eccentric to his resume of crazed Brits. Unfortunately, the humor of his frantic and often indecipherable antics with the March Hare and the Dormouse falls flat—the viewer will definitely feel cut-off from their tea party.

The script mashes up Carroll’s Wonderland with his follow-up Alice Through the Looking Glass, bringing in Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the jabberwocky, and the White Queen, played by the ghostly Anne Hathaway, who sends up her Princess Diary heroine, ever so dainty with the florid hand gestures to match. (If you’ve seen her spoof Mary Poppins on Saturday Night Live, you’ll get the idea.) Acting and not special effects seizes the day; Hathaway and Bonham Carter (with an inspired and freakishly outsized head and gusto) save the film from monotony.

Advancing Alice’s age automatically takes away her sense of wonderment or befuddlement. The dialogue of Carroll’s Alice would sound strange coming out of the mouth of a 19-year old. However, no matter fantastic her surroundings, Alice remains an unfazed observer, calmly repeating to herself that all she’s seeing is a dream. So if nothing matters to her, why should the audience care?

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com

It saddens me to see words like "prophesized" (you mean prophesied; no, really, you do, trust me) in a library publication. And the beast itself is the jabberwock. "Jabberwocky" is the title of the poem, not the monster. The two bits I bolded would have talked me out of seeing this movie even if her being turned 19 hadn't.
 
PeniG said:
Since the phrase "since Alice" is a standard comparative in the kidlitosphere, it's not surprising that School Library Journal reviews the movie.

Purists will be perplexed and the average moviegoer ultimately disinterested by director Tim Burton’s pedestrian spin of Lewis Carroll’s 1865 classic, Alice in Wonderland. Those hoping to see the heroine swim in the pool of tears, the pig-baby, or the Mock Turtle will leave disappointed. Instead of losing her way in Wonderland, this Alice takes the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings route, fighting evil as an empowered warrior.

This umpteenth adaptation begins with six-year-old Alice waking up from a strange dream—she remembers something about a blue caterpillar and a dodo. The film then flash forwards 13 years later. Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now a lovely, porcelain-skinned young woman with blond ringlets about to become engaged to a fey aristocrat. Right as he’s on his knee proposing to her, Alice’s attention diverts to a rabbit rummaging in a hedge. She runs after it, and plunges into the hole in which the hare vanishes.

From a hookah-puffing Caterpillar, Alice is given an ancient scroll, “the Compendium,” that prophesizes that someone by the name of Alice must kill the dragon-like jabberwocky, the protector of the tyrannical Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter). Before she accomplishes this, she must first find a sword with magical powers. Her newfound confidant, the Cheshire Cat, tells her that the sword knows what it wants, she just needs to hold onto it.
The script by Linda Woolverton chucks out the episodic nature of the original novel and imposes a hero’s rite of passage, turning the bizarre into the rational. There’s nothing wrong with Alice as a take-charge action figure—if only she actually did anything. She’s more a bystander than participant, even in battle. And it’s not as if the original Alice was insipid or a shrinking violet. She may not always have known what to say or do, but she was still only a child.

The film was 3-D-ified only in post-production, which may explain why this Wonderland is muted compared to the film adaptation of Neil Gaiman’s Coraline. Down in the rabbit hole, the computer-generated production design is pretty much what you’d expect from Burton: a dark, misty forest with spinney trees; and a far-out, garish Mad Hatter, orange hair sprouting out from his hat, clashing with his pale green eyes. Speaking in a strange brogue, Johnny Depp adds a lisping, foppish eccentric to his resume of crazed Brits. Unfortunately, the humor of his frantic and often indecipherable antics with the March Hare and the Dormouse falls flat—the viewer will definitely feel cut-off from their tea party.

The script mashes up Carroll’s Wonderland with his follow-up Alice Through the Looking Glass, bringing in Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the jabberwocky, and the White Queen, played by the ghostly Anne Hathaway, who sends up her Princess Diary heroine, ever so dainty with the florid hand gestures to match. (If you’ve seen her spoof Mary Poppins on Saturday Night Live, you’ll get the idea.) Acting and not special effects seizes the day; Hathaway and Bonham Carter (with an inspired and freakishly outsized head and gusto) save the film from monotony.

Advancing Alice’s age automatically takes away her sense of wonderment or befuddlement. The dialogue of Carroll’s Alice would sound strange coming out of the mouth of a 19-year old. However, no matter fantastic her surroundings, Alice remains an unfazed observer, calmly repeating to herself that all she’s seeing is a dream. So if nothing matters to her, why should the audience care?

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com

It saddens me to see words like "prophesized" (you mean prophesied; no, really, you do, trust me) in a library publication. And the beast itself is the jabberwock. "Jabberwocky" is the title of the poem, not the monster. The two bits I bolded would have talked me out of seeing this movie even if her being turned 19 hadn't.

I work in education and publishing, and must say this saddens me greatly as well.
Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass were my favorite stories as a little girl, and mean a lot to me even now. I am not attracted to this film's aesthetic. Tim Burton seems to be a little too full of himself these days.
 
Saw it at the weekend.

It was alright, the opening half hit all the bases of what you would expect from a traditional Alice story but the second half when they work in their own storyline kind of lost my interest.

HBC was just channelling Queen Elizabeth from Blackadder, Depp was just annoyingly OTT and his constant switching of accents was just confusing.

The shoehorning in of a stupid dance at the end, a la Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder, just really was pointless and the generic action climax was just so out of keeping with the whole thing.

On a side note the 3D was just awful. I suspect it had to do with where I was sat, booked late and was 4 rows back at the side, but I just found some bits looked really blurry, and the whole thing was really dark - not just in themes, literally so dark that at times I struggled to see what was going on.

Saw Up and Avatar in 3D and they both were bright and colourful and really worked. This one I think I'd have enjoyed far more in 2D. I'm just not convinced that every film needs to be in 3D, sadly it seems likely to become a pre-requisite for any big fantasy or action movie.
 
PeniG said:
What bugs me is that once again we see the mixing of books. The people making the adaptations don't seem to understand that Wonderland and Looking Glass are two separate stories with strong, if idiosyncratic, structures under their wildly flapping flags of imagery. You go putting chess into Wonderland and playing cards behind the Looking Glass, and you mess up the structure, which naturally makes everything else collapse. You cease to have nonsense constructed for the delectation of intellectual little girls and wind up with a mess.
Well, you may not like this radio play then!

Saturday Drama
- Alice through the Looking Glass


By Lewis Carroll, dramatised by Stephen Wyatt It's mid-winter, the snow is falling against the window, and Alice is learning how to play chess but then, on a whim, she goes to the mirror and pretends her black kitten is the Red Queen and suddenly everything changes ...

With Jim Al-Khalili, Roger McGough, Jenni Murray, Jane Garvey, Eric Robson, Pippa Greenwood, Peter Donaldson, Kirsty Young, Andrew Marr, Evan Davies, Garry Richardson & Melvyn Bragg.

This dramatisation brings out the intellectual spine of Lewis Carroll's classic story - while losing none of the fun. When Alice crashes through the looking glass she enters a world set out like a giant chess board and discovers science, maths, poetry, riddles, and wordplay. It is instantly entertaining and tantalizingly offers the listener more than meets the ear.

In this fast-moving and surrealist world, Alice has to decode the bizarre rules of the mirror-world. If Alice can get to The Eighth Square she will be Queen. Lewis Carroll is ever present. He sets out the chess game for Alice, teasing the listener into having an overview of his story and exploring the ideas within it.

On her chess journey Alice will meet the Red & White Queen, Humpty Dumpty, Tweedledee and Tweedledum (who might be more familiar than the listener can possibly imagine) and the Red & White Knights. But there's a twist here - Alice will also discover that Radio 4 can be found on the other side of the glass.

Published for Christmas 1871 this story is the mirror image of Alice In Wonderland: the characters are chess pieces instead of cards. It is Winter rather than Summer and time runs backwards. Tim Burton's film was 'inspired' by Lewis Carroll's books but it wasn't Lewis Carroll's book. This is a chance for the Radio 4 listeners to discover the real thing and show them why this classic appeals to philosophers, linguists and chess fans, prefaced Modernism, has provoked a wealth of academic study, and in doing so remind them of the bits they loved in childhood (and the bits they've forgotten).

Mathematician Carroll, prefaced his book with a chess problem. It is claimed the game is a part of a sequence of numbers - that Alice's journey is code - that Carroll was flirting with numerology and esotericism. It is intriguing because Carroll loved number games and puzzles. He was frighteningly clever. He regularly invented things. You could say he was the Mark Zuckerberg of his time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... ing_Glass/

Available until
4:02PM Sat, 29 Dec 2012
(So don't forget about it during the festive over-consumption.)

It sounds fascinating to me, so I'm just about to listen to it!
:D
 
BTW, the Tim Burton 'Alice in Wonderland' is on TV again:

Boxing Day, 6.50 pm , BBC1
 
Alice Through The Looking Glass: Directed by James Bobin on this occason but it still has the Grant brothers from EastEnders as Tweedlum & Tweedledee. What we have here is a Steampunk Tme Travel Extravaganza. Alice, Mia WAsikowsa like a crazed Doctors Assistant, steals a Chronosphere and travels back through time to change the past and save the Hatter. Pursued by Time, Sacha Baron Cohen, portraying an evil Dr Who. Johnny Depp is of course the Hatter and we see him in various stages of his life. Madder in his youth.

Great fun. 8/10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2567026/
 
I thought Mia Wasikowsa was a porn star but that's Mia malkova :oops:

Miss Wasikowska is a decent enough actress, but doesn't do much for me, and I'm not into vampires either, but in Only Lovers Left Alive her English accent made her strangely alluring. Not as Alice, though. Again, strange.

Anyway, this sequel has underperformed at the box office, perhaps because not enough people liked the first one in spite of it being one of the most successful movies of all time (really!). Or maybe the bad Depp publicity put people off.
 
Back
Top