Alice In Wonderland

snwrist · 03-07-2010, 08:53 AM

Went and saw this in 2-D. Fairly disappointing, though it had its moments. It was visually fantastic and some scenes were inspired. Johnny Depp was good, for the most part. A little of his character went along way, though...

...but the story was sorta empty, light and kiddie-ish. This was definitely a mishmash of Burton and Disney, with more of the latter. I would definitely have liked to see Burton go darker with this. I'd say it's worth seeing, but probably only once. 2 1/2 stars.

NePatsFan · 03-07-2010, 10:04 AM

Style over substance.

I admit that the story of Alice in Wonderland is a hard one to tell in a way that evokes some sort of sympathy or concern for Alice. It's nothing more than a girl who experiences one nutcase after another, and not much else happens. But this was still made terribly poorly. In a film where each scene is built to surprise and astonish, it was remarkably repetitive. Even Johnny Depp couldn't save this disaster which, by the way, looks like someone threw up a bag of skittles.

A giant pool of talent and each looked and acted more awkward than the next. No reason to go into the depths of this thing. Just know it was a disappointment. Tim Burton should just stick to producing animation or something.

Lembit · 03-07-2010, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanq

Fist off, I have no idea why Lina Wooverton wrote an awful script like that with a plain idiotic third act battle.

How can you say that it was Linda Woolverton´s fault? Like Terry Rossio puts it: "It's near impossible to tell whether the problem on a film is at the script level without being a part of the entire process. Even if you get a draft of the screenplay, you can't tell how much material is in there because the studio wanted it, the director asked for it, over the writer's own objections."

Adam Isaac · 03-07-2010, 11:56 AM

Probably would've been better on acid.

I was clock-watching during this, but I had no plans afterwards. Not a classic, but overall fairly watchable...the movie, I mean; not the clock.

winter dreams · 03-07-2010, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathanq

That was my problem with the film. It was just disappointing. I'm not sure who to blame. Fist off, I have no idea why Lina Wooverton wrote an awful script like that

probably because that's the script Tim Burton and/or the studio wanted?

Juno Styles · 03-07-2010, 12:20 PM

was curious about seeing this film, after seeing these comments i'll wait.

beerbeastredux · 03-07-2010, 12:52 PM

Just awful.

Sure, it looked good. But they kept cutting away from Alice to focus on Depp and the Queen. Why? It's called ALICE in Wonderland.

Oh, and they gave the Mad hatter a sword. A sword. What? WHAAAAT?

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?!?

NePatsFan · 03-07-2010, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beerbeastredux

Just awful.

Sure, it looked good. But they kept cutting away from Alice to focus on Depp and the Queen. Why? It's called ALICE in Wonderland.

Oh, and they gave the Mad hatter a sword. A sword. What? WHAAAAT?

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?!?

lol, I also kept thinking how out of place he was being a general of sorts in a sword battle....wtf

beerbeastredux · 03-07-2010, 11:18 PM

Yes, and in that respect, i commend the studio for knowing what kind of VAPID, sloppy picture it will take to make money :}

Ravenlocks · 03-08-2010, 01:45 AM

The look turned me off this film as soon as the posters started going up around town. It simply didn't look like Alice in Wonderland to me. IMHO, Tim Burton doesn't have the right style for Alice.

Of course, I also have the image of Alice I got from John Tenniel's illustrations in the book I had when I was little, and for me that will always be what Alice should look like.

It sounds like I'm not missing much by not seeing the film.

03-07-2010, 08:53 AM	#1
snwrist Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 621	Alice In Wonderland Went and saw this in 2-D. Fairly disappointing, though it had its moments. It was visually fantastic and some scenes were inspired. Johnny Depp was good, for the most part. A little of his character went along way, though... ...but the story was sorta empty, light and kiddie-ish. This was definitely a mishmash of Burton and Disney, with more of the latter. I would definitely have liked to see Burton go darker with this. I'd say it's worth seeing, but probably only once. 2 1/2 stars.

03-07-2010, 10:04 AM	#2
NePatsFan Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: North Hollywood, CA Posts: 1,410	Re: Alice In Wonderland Style over substance. I admit that the story of Alice in Wonderland is a hard one to tell in a way that evokes some sort of sympathy or concern for Alice. It's nothing more than a girl who experiences one nutcase after another, and not much else happens. But this was still made terribly poorly. In a film where each scene is built to surprise and astonish, it was remarkably repetitive. Even Johnny Depp couldn't save this disaster which, by the way, looks like someone threw up a bag of skittles. A giant pool of talent and each looked and acted more awkward than the next. No reason to go into the depths of this thing. Just know it was a disappointment. Tim Burton should just stick to producing animation or something. __________________ Joan: What does the "T" stand for? Jack: Trustworthy. Last edited by NePatsFan : 03-07-2010 at 12:56 PM.

03-07-2010, 11:56 AM	#4
Adam Isaac Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Where the sidewalk ends Posts: 3,269	Re: Alice In Wonderland Probably would've been better on acid. I was clock-watching during this, but I had no plans afterwards. Not a classic, but overall fairly watchable...the movie, I mean; not the clock. __________________

03-07-2010, 12:20 PM	#6
Juno Styles Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 2,966	Re: Alice In Wonderland was curious about seeing this film, after seeing these comments i'll wait. __________________ One must be fearless and tenacious when pursuing their dreams. If you don’t, regret will be your reward.

03-07-2010, 12:52 PM	#7
beerbeastredux Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 834	Re: Alice In Wonderland Just awful. Sure, it looked good. But they kept cutting away from Alice to focus on Depp and the Queen. Why? It's called ALICE in Wonderland. Oh, and they gave the Mad hatter a sword. A sword. What? WHAAAAT? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?!?

03-07-2010, 11:18 PM	#9
beerbeastredux Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 834	Re: Alice In Wonderland Yes, and in that respect, i commend the studio for knowing what kind of VAPID, sloppy picture it will take to make money :}

03-08-2010, 01:45 AM	#10
Ravenlocks Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Not where I was before. Posts: 2,130	Re: Alice In Wonderland The look turned me off this film as soon as the posters started going up around town. It simply didn't look like Alice in Wonderland to me. IMHO, Tim Burton doesn't have the right style for Alice. Of course, I also have the image of Alice I got from John Tenniel's illustrations in the book I had when I was little, and for me that will always be what Alice should look like. It sounds like I'm not missing much by not seeing the film. __________________ 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration, plenty of deodorant.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode