Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

[Misawa]

We saw it last week and have two very different reviews up:


Anne Wollenberg:
★★★1/2

Do we need another Alice in Wonderland film, you may ask. Lewis Carroll’s books have been adapted umpteen times before. But given the silly, surreal subject matter, Alice was a Tim Burton film waiting to happen. It’s only a shame he didn’t get there first. Because the good news is Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is neither an act of cultural vandalism (unlike Charlie and the Chocolate Factory), nor is it all vivid imagination and super set design with no actual brains or substance (ditto).


For anyone unfamiliar with Carroll’s books, Alice falls down a rabbit hole and has some surreal adventures. And … that’s it. Forget conflict and emotional drama, it’s all talking animals, nonsense and tea parties. So it’s a good move, then, that there’s a bit of back-story to bookend Burton’s Alice: a childhood history of strange dreams, an undesirable suitor. When Alice falls down the rabbit hole, she’s at a posh garden party being pressured into agreeing to marry a bumbling toff (picture a ginger Boris Johnson and you’re halfway there).


Just as Burton’s name is the one that springs to most minds if you mention The Nightmare Before Christmas or Coraline, regardless of the fact Henry Selick directed both, it’s unlikely anyone’s going to dwell on the fact Alice in Wonderland was written by Linda Woolverton, who co-wrote The Lion King. This is Burton through and through: a gothic fairytale with gloriously macabre sets and weird, wonderful characters, such as Rickman’s hookah-smoking caterpillar, Fry’s scene-stealing Cheshire Cat and Bonham Carter’s megalomaniac Red Queen. And of course, Depp’s Mad Hatter. You can see flashes of so many previous Burton-and-Depp collaborations in the wild, mad, tortured Hatter: Edward Scissorhands, Sweeney Todd. It’s very much his take on the idea of Alice – a reimagining, not an adaptation.


There’s a lot missing, too: no Mock Turtle, no Gryphon, no Lobster Quadrille, the White Rabbit never utters the phrase “I’m late!” and the White Queen doesn’t bang on about “Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday – but never jam today,” as she’s too busy simpering and being sickeningly good and nice (but not that nice, actually, you’ll discover). What you will find is a lot more emphasis on Jabberwocky, the nonsense poem which – and you may well have forgotten this – was originally found in Through the Looking-Glass.


For the most part, the film hangs together well. The extra touches that have been added to give it narrative structure – whisperings about whether this Alice is the right one, the emotional depths added to her friendship with the Mad Hatter – work well, although the one wrong move was turning Alice into a hero on a quest, wrong-footing the movie with talk of special swords and destiny. Burton’s Alice could have been deeper and darker, but it’s a tough balancing act to bring the sheer silliness and nonsense of the source material without losing too much authenticity. It’s not a masterpiece, but this is a solid slice of Burton.


Neil Davey:
★

_______________________________________
The Cheshire Cat. That's what scores the single star for this overblown, dull, badly animated, all too familiar bit of Burton ************. After ruining Charlie & The Chocolate Factory (Wonka has a beard and isn't a sub-Michael Jackson creepy paedophile, you big haired ****) and Sweeney Todd (lose the choral parts, lose the subtext - although that's probably just me being a little bit gay and knowing too much about show tunes), the endlessly smug Burton has turned his attention to this version of Alice in Wonderland. Only it's not an "adaptation". It's a "reimagining". Because Burton, who hasn't made a decent film since Ed Wood in 1994, is clearly so much better than Lewis Carroll whose endearing nonsensical tale has been a firm favourite for 145 years.

Yes, Tim, clearly you've got the more imaginative nature. We so love it when you use the same bleeding imagery and "quirky" fantasy creatures that you've been using your entire career. It's not boring at all, really it's not. And yes, of course you can explain how Carroll was wrong, and that it's Underland not Wonderland. And yes, what a brilliant idea to have it not be a dream but to suggest it's real and therefore completely undermine YOUR framing device AND the whole ******* point of the story. You complete arse. Tell you what, while you're busy destroying a children's classic, why not gloss it all up with the worst CGI for several years and thoroughly unconvincing 3D? That'll really make this a classic polished turd for our time, particularly if you draft in Johnny Depp to play the Mad Hatter and let him say "Fez!" a lot and talk in a variety of accents to prove that — yes! — he's Mad. And if you could finish the job by casting an Alice who's so wooden you could turn her into a very nice credenza, that would be ideal.



The irony? I'm not even a huge fan of the book. But that, and all the other Carroll stories that Burton, in his "wisdom", shoehorns in, look even more like classics in comparison to this astonishing, irredeemably awful film. Tim Burton? Hang the camera up over there, put the director's chair back in the cupboard and **** right off.

[FlyingJesus]

I've obviously not seen it yet but don't imagine I will unless there's a large group of friends going on a night I happen to be free. The 2nd review there basically confirms all of my worst fears for the film, and the 1st appears merely a sycophantic faux-artiste's attempt to keep the odd and undeserved love of Tim Burton alive. How they can claim it's not "an act of cultural vandalism" when even from the trailers (and casting) it's clear that the emphasis is going to be on the Mad Hatter - who ought to be a minor character - simply to keep Depp in a job where he doesn't have to act any differently to any other Burton film he appears in, shows that I'm not really being over the top in my sentiments towards the former of the reviewers.

Truly, the only thing I can almost look forward to from this feature is a small hope that he's done well with The Jabberwocky, which has been orphaned in too many previous adaptations.

[Black_Apalachi]

I think I like this Neil Davey! They are my exact impressions of this film and Tim Burton - and I have hardly even seen any of his films including this one for that matter Quite shocked to hear what was said about the White Rabbit in the first review however. 'I'm late' is all I really remember of the story!

[Misawa]

Burton's made a lot of great films. But he truly hasn't since Ed Wood.

[FlyingJesus]

As you said in the starting post "we" saw this last week, would you care to offer a short review of your own? You don't need to give anything away of course, it would just be interesting to have a first hand review from someone who isn't being paid to have the opinion here

[Misawa]

I used that term collectively, sorry - they're my colleagues. I haven't seen it yet, nor are we paid to critique film and TV - yet - just get invited to screenings as the film press and get sent a billion DVDs/Blu-rays to review. That's payment good enough for me as something on teh side when I have a paying career anyway. I've been given around £1000 of DVDs and Blu-rays since I began working for that website in September.

To be perfectly honest, I do not want to see it! Sweeny Todd was the last straw.

[FlyingJesus]

Fair play, and yeah I remember that one all too well, I went along because of the girl I was seeing at the time (things we do for them eh) and would have struggled to be more bored. Shame that Odeon and other cinemas gave in and are allowing this to screen now, I'd have loved to have seen it flop on a default

[Misawa]

Given that friends had said it was very gory, I spent a fiver and got it. Turned out to be the worst fiver I had ever spent. Barely any gore in the first place, but the songs were sung so mind-numbingly awfully, I could barely stomach it. Burton seriously needs to stop using his missus, Depp and these ridiculous costumes. Oh, and not to mention make an ORIGINAL ******* film. He hasn't made an original film in years and years.

[dirrty]

aw, i was so hoping that it'd be really good. but the latter review has squashed my hopes

still gonna see it though, but with lower expectations. i'll probably still enjoy it n all.

[LuketheDuke]

lets not remember we dont have to take this one critics view into total consideration.

especially since Burton divides opinion so readily.