REVIEW: ‘Alice in Wonderland’ Visually Stunning, Confusing Story
by Carl KozlowskiA human being enters a lushly rendered alternative world, meeting an assortment of strange beings before having to save them from a vicious attack. No,this isn’t a review of “Avatar.” Rather, it’s a review of “Alice in Wonderland,” the new 3D take on Lewis Carroll’s classic book, which director Tim Burton and his favorite leading man Johnny Depp have brought to life in visually stunning – yet narratively befuddling – fashion.
I’m admittedly not acquainted with Carroll’s book, and only vaguely remember the 1951 fully-animated version that the Disney studios also created. But the key in reviewing a movie is in determining how it stands on its own as entertainment, and on this front, “Alice” mostly succeeds. It’s fun to look at and most of the performances are inspired, with relative newcomer Mia Wasikowska able to hold her own in an endless series of absurd and sometimes frightening situations.
On the downside, I found some of the gibberish talk by the Mad Hatter and the sometimes endless stream of odd-character introductions to be annoying at times. And while this is fine entertainment for teens and adults, parents of young children should realize that this movie is nearly a full two hours long, has some seriously violent moments in Alice’s fight with the dragonesque Jabberwock and even features a quick shot of a bad creature’s eye getting graphically gouged out. Also consider the fact that Alice drinks from any bottle and takes any pill in sight without questioning it – a fact that has inspired generations of drug-favoring hipsters to consider “Alice” a favorite story, but which might be concerning in the modern age, which is far more sinister than Carroll’s Victorian era.
The comparisons between “Avatar” and “Alice” are ripe for exploration not only because of their similar themes, but because this weekend “Alice” is poised to finally knock “Avatar” out of the weekly box office stratosphere due to the fact it’s the first major 3D film to come along since James Cameron’s epic invention entered theaters more than 10 weeks ago and became the highest-grossing film of all time. The major difference between the films is in their tone and casting – “Alice” maintains a fun if somewhat confusing tone of apolitical wonder, while “Avatar” jams a series of anti-military, pro-environment messages under its awe-inspiring visuals.
“Alice” also centers on a couple of star performances to work its magic, as opposed to “Avatar’s” cast of mostly unknown leads. Most people still wouldn’t know “Avatar” star Sam Worthington’s name enough to rush out for his next film, but the first thing people seem to ask about “Alice” is, “What’s Johnny Depp like?” As the Mad Hatter, he looks like Elijah Wood if Wood had become an honorary member of KISS – wearing a mountain of white makeup under a red-orange fright wig. He also takes the “mad” part a bit too literally at first, speaking in gibberish and sporting a frankly creepy grin throughout his first scenes before settling into a more nuanced and even kind tone after a flashback reveals what drove him into insanity.
Meanwhile, Helena Bonham Carter steals the show as the bulbous-headed Red Queen – an evil, shrieking harpy who loves to humorously use animals (a pig serves as her footstool) and shriek “Off with their head!” She makes a one-note freak into a vibrant, humorously frightening monarch that should draw even more public acclaim than Depp. And Crispin Glover as her evil assistant, the Knave of Hearts, surprisingly proves that he’s able to be more than a freak or a geek and becomes an effective badass villain, second only to the monstrous Jabberwock.
Ultimately, this “Alice” is destined to make a pile of money, but once viewers emerge from the dark theater and into the real world, the fantasy won’t maintain a long-lasting pull on their hearts and minds.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
71 Comments
He does look exactly like Elijah Wood!!! That's the first thing I noticed when I saw the poster for it months ago. I wonder if Elijah is upset with this at all?
While Carroll's books do work for children, they work for children of a different age when the coddling of kids was virtually unknown and, pardon the pun, kids' stories could be Grimm. But the Alice books also works as biting political and social satire that is thoroughly adult. Are there a lot of characters, bizarre situations, and nonsense? Yes. It's a story of the absurd. A dream land, literally. Is impossible to film? Perhaps. Many have tried. But it so beguiling, people will continue to film Alice for years to come.
And how Obamaesque is the following:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.” (Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, 1871)
The book doesn't make sense either … nor is it supposed to. That's the point.
If the movie made sense and wasn't "brought to life in visually stunning – yet narratively befuddling – fashion." it wouldn't be Alice in Wonderland.
"On the downside, I found some of the gibberish talk by the Mad Hatter and the sometimes endless stream of odd-character introductions to be annoying at times."
So in other words, just like the books.
As an fan of the Alice books I'm likely to go see this, but at the same time once again an Alice movie mishmashes Wonderland the Lookglass into one conglomerate hodgepodge. Which is disappointing in and of itself.
I'm glad to know others were thinking the same thing! Depp totally looks like Elijah Wood in the posters.
Careful now, if you continue consuming Hollywood's Eye-Candy you'll end up with hideous mountain-sized pus-filled zits covering your entire face.
I find a little Tim Burton goes a long way, but I'm willing to give this movie a shot. He's clearly stated that he's not just doing another version of Alice in Wonderland; it's sort of a sequel to the original stories. I'm a little concerned with his remark that he wasn't satisfied with the original books because the characters didn't have backgrounds or motivations. Does it really matter why the Mad Hatter was mad? I hope Burton doesn't turn him from the Mad Hatter into the Maudlin Hatter – a poor victim (as many Burton characters are) of evil middle-class "normal" people. But we'll see. I'll go for the effects if nothing else. Oh – and the lack of preaching, too.
[...] Reviews: Carl Kozlowski at Big Hollywood Debbie Schlussel Sonny Bunch at the Weekly Standard John Boot at Pajamas Media Kurt Loder [...]
Right, it is an allegory of life, lots of things don't make sense, like why are the progressives melting down and attacking the government and attempting to kill innocents?
Never read "Alice, Carl??" Get thee to a bookstore/library and grab an annotated version, which will give you an idea of how deep (and un-childlike) the story is. Carroll parodied Victorian life brilliantly, and John Tenniel's original illustrations are often caricatures of political figures of the era. I fully expect the movie to be a big gloppy mess, but I want to see how those original versions of the characters were mutated into Burton's vision. I always thought the Disney version sucked all the cool stuff out of the story. There's a 30's Hollywood version that features some big stars of the era in disturbingly freakish makeup. (W.C. Fields as Humpty Dumpty)
And for those who want a true movie for grownups, see the French film "A Prophet" (Un Prophete), a harrowing movie about a young muslim convict's time in prison where he evolves from a callow pawn of stronger inmates to a master criminal.
Off topic some: Did anyone watch last week's episode of 48 Hours where Depp was petitioning Arkansas to free the young men who murdered some little boys there? I only saw the trailers for the show which ishowed part of the interview with Depp. First, I could not believe what he was wearing. The man is what 46-47? Why would he think anyone would remotely take him seriously when he was dressed like a 15 year-old-skater dude? On the other hand, why does Hollywood think that people take actors seriously when it comes to topics such as this? I don't even think this man finished high school, but, "He is 1000 % sure that the murderers are innocent." What credibility does he have? Was the airing of this episode to coincide with the showing of his movie a chance happening? Strange how things like that happen.
That's all well and good Carl, but what about the music? Reviewing a Tim Burton movie without even mentioning the underlying musical score is like writing a restaurant review without mentioning the ambiance of your surroundings. You're neglecting half of the total experience. A good portion of the fans of Tim Burton's movies are only fans because they look forward to yet another inspired score from Danny Elfman. I'll be seeing the movie tonight and yes I'll be the guy you hear cheering when Elfman's name rolls across the screen in the opening credits. Long live the Mystic Knights!!!!
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm a getting a little tired of "visually stunning confusing stories".
Is that all HoWood can do?
Quick! When was the last time Johnny Depp played a normal human being?
Depp is one of those boy-males that populate the land of La-La. The Afflecks, Damons, Penns, DiCaprios, etc…child-men with the mindset of a below average 17 year old teenager in detention.
Compare them with male stars of the Golden Years in Hollywood who were the same age: Clark Gable, John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart…ALL MEN!
Wha' hahpenned?
Why are you against the using of DNA evidence to correctly identify if the accused are indeed guilty? The fact is the murder convictions they are protesting has a right to be protested, I don't trust any DA, let alone DA's that want to ignore DNA testing that could definitely conclude the question of whether they have the right people. Stop being so anti-hollywood and open your eyes, like the saying goes, "Even a broken clock is right twice a day."
Public Enemies, you must not look at movies too much?
Well this movie is supposed to be visually confusing, seeing that the source was logically and literally confusing.
Gilbert Grape?
Hear, hear! I've been an Elfman fan since Oingo Boingo was the cool band no one knew until "Weird Science" came out. Burton, Elfman and Depp are an extremely creative and entertaining mix in my opinion. I'll be attending this Sunday afternoon because I'm cheap and go only to matinees.
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day."
But only when used correctly, when used in the wrong context, like some evidence can,then it is not "right".
You count a scoiopatic killer as normal??
Gilbert Grape – 17 years ago
OUaTiM – 8 year old bomb
How can evidence be used in the wrong context? See this is when the hypocrisy comes out. Now tell me why should no one believe all the Palin ethics stuff and why we should wait until the processes plays out and use all evidence to find out whether she is indeed corrupt or not, but in this situation it is wrong to use all the evidence to determine wether or not the wrong people were indeed locked up.
DA's should never be interested in only perserving a conviction, the should really be interested in seeing the right party punished by society, and if a DA will knowingly walk away and fight against any evidence that can provide a clearer detail of events, he isn't worth a damn.
I look at movies quite a bit…just not the ones you look at apparently. I'm not knocking Depp…I like a lot of his movies. He was fantastic as Ed Wood. But lately, it seems like the freakier the character, the better. I'm getting tired of seeing him in clown make-up all the time.
I agree he is an intriguing actor. Didn't care for his Dillinger that much, though. A little too effeminate for me. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just not Dillinger.
All I will say is if you want to knock someone, atleast know about them so you can knock them good. Public Enemies was a big movie and Depp was great at the role.
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. *sheesh*
As you can see, I forgot about Public Enemies which is apparently the answer SomeDame was looking for. So blast away at her now as Dillinger was arguably sociopathic or at least a very not-nice guy.
I'm not a huge Depp fan, but the movie recieved a huge marketing blitz and everyone had to have known about it unless the lived under a rock or is just not into big film releases. Either way, Depp's last movie without all the makeup was Public Enemies and it was released last year. I'm finished.
Well, after all that huffing and puffing…!
I DID see the movie and Johnny had a little bit too much eye-liner on. And the huge marketing blitz didn't help the bottom line at all. Oh well, that's show bizz!
I, too, am spent.
I suppose that's better than "Visually stunning, dumb story," ala Avatar.
So basically this is The Chronicles of Narnia with Lewis Carroll characters.
I'm Burtoned out. I can't take anymore of his teengoth swirly designs, honestly. I look at each new edition of his work now and groan. The Depp and Burton combo is starting to annoy me.
Get thee to a bookstore, indeed, and I second the nomination for the annotated version.
I have referenced that Humpty Dumpty quote several times when pointing out the absurdity of the rhetoric used by hardcore, Newspeaking "progressives".
For some reason it seems to enrage them.
This film seems deprived to me somehow. Perhaps it's having Alice older or maybe it's some of the grotesquely deformed characters. (Honestly Burton creeps me out. Maybe that has something to do with it also.) Anyway, I may still see it if I've got -absolutely- nothing else to do.
There are some significant issues in that case he was commenting on.
There is more than a little evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, a flawed investigation, flawed forensic science, and bias because against the accused because of their lifestyle. (They liked rock music. The horror!)
Depp may be playing the happy Hollywood ditz getting involved, but he may well have picked a legitimate case to contribute his name too.
"Candy doesn't have to have a point. That's why it's candy"
~ Charlie
indeed…
"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men"
~ Willy Wonka
the Mad Hobbit?
so that's what happened to Michael Moore!
"I’m admittedly not acquainted with Carroll’s book…"
All I can say is: Wow! No wonder I'm against spending money on education in America. Obviously it's a complete waste of time. I'm old enough to remember when people were embarrassed to admit they hadn't read the classics, even more modern books like Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. But then again, in those old, far gone days, people were actually expected to have read them while in school, or any book at all. I guess things are different now, aren't they?
Well this should make their angry heads explode (from Alice in Wonderland:
The Hatter was the first to break the silence. 'What day of the month is it?' he said, turning to Alice: he had taken his watch out of his pocket, and was looking at it uneasily, shaking it every now and then, and holding it to his ear.
Alice considered a little, and then said 'The fourth.'
'Two days wrong!' sighed the Hatter. 'I told you butter wouldn't suit the works!' he added looking angrily at the March Hare.
'It was the BEST butter,' the March Hare meekly replied.
'Yes, but some crumbs must have got in as well,' the Hatter grumbled: 'you shouldn't have put it in with the bread-knife.'
The March Hare took the watch and looked at it gloomily: then he dipped it into his cup of tea, and looked at it again: but he could think of nothing better to say than his first remark, 'It was the BEST butter, you know.'
A weird alternative world? Sounds like this country right now. The mad hatters in Washington sure think up is down when it comes to economics.
"Visually stunning…confusing story"? Just like every other Tim Burton film? I expect nothing less…and nothing
more.
Obviously not a Perez Hilton fan, but someone directed me to his site today. He has a clip of the original Alice movie up today. It is 103 yrs old. Worth wading thru his trash to view. Amazing that movies were only a few yrs old at the time.
The original story requires an IQ to understand. Clearly the people involved in this were not qualified in that department. Like most National Socialists, they prefer form over function; style over substance. These hellywooders make good smoke (and smoke it, too) along with good mirrors, but when it comes to being able to take a story by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, a brilliant mathematician, then hellywood shows its ignorance. They should have stuck with Steamboat Willie.
How many of these merons have actually read Charles Lutwidge Dodgson's works? How many are capable of solving his many and varied puzzles? I would say zero but that's being kind.
Hellywood thinks inside their box and they love it there.
Chocolat.
Public Enemies, Finding Neverland, Nick of Time, What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Secret Window, Blow, Chocolat, 21 Jump Street. Those are just off the top of my head. I'm not a huge Johnny Depp fan, so there are probably a lot more. He goes between normal characters and oddball ones pretty regularly.
They still teach the classics in school, they just don't often teach those particular two. They tend to teach books that make sense and have relevant themes to society today. My grandmother gave me both of the Alice books as a child, and I've hated them my entire life, though I did have to memorize the Jabborwocky poem in the 9th grade.
"Visually Stunning, Confusing Story"
That is Alice in Wonderland! – the book along with the cartoons, tv shows that were made over the years. The author must have been on the first acid trip.
I will watch it but will wait for it to come on tv. It looks interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice%27s_Adventures...
When I was a child, I found Alice in Wonderland frightening: remember the Duchess' butler, with a fish head, and the little baby who cried and cried, with pepper swirling around, and who ran into the forest having turned into a pig? Very memorable and I am not sorry I missed it.
Then, Disney made his movie. Very cute. Not one weird moment. Dull.
"I’m admittedly not acquainted with Carroll’s book, and only vaguely remember the 1951 fully-animated version that the Disney studios also created."
You should have stopped right there, because your confusion over the confusion means, simply, that you don't get it – and can't get it – because you aren't in the loop with the whole Alice vibe. Not only that, but the old Disney cartoon – and I use that term prejudicially – did it's best to ruin the story the book told, which was wondrous in it's confusion.
Sounds to me like Burton gets it and did it right. Plus, there's a Danny Elfman score! I'll be seeing this in 3D next week, that's for sure.
Uh . . . John Dillinger last year? And he did so rather compellingly. Depp the person may not be a lot to love but Depp the actor is fantastic when he's on top of his game.
Sorry I haven't made a career in Deppology. Depp is great in some roles…not so great in others. It's called being an actor. Public Enemies didn't do so well at the BO…did I blame Mr. Depp? Ed Wood didn't do so well, either, but that is my fave JD movie. It's all rather relative.
And when did you start the fan club, Mr. TheMan?
Sounds too much like the process of writing their health care bill, eh?
No, it was heinie-candy, and it's why he has a hideous face filling that pus-filled zit.
All in favor say "aye". Aye.
I remember seeing the 1951 Disney production, and although it had its flaws, it was true to the original in several ways. It was scary as a hell and confusing as all hell. That's why we love it. As much as I think Burton is a political idiot, the same unrestrained imagination that produces political idiocy has apparently created something very like the original atmosphere of the two Alice books– inspired confusion, wonder, and terror. That's why I love the books, and why I expect to like (at least) the Burotn movie.
Burton makes the same movie over and over again. The same 'gothic' look and 'whimsical' characters. It has always sucked, and it is very boring–unless you have taken many blue or red pills.
Thank you for your amazing insight Guy On The Internet.
Sounds an awful lot like “That depends on what the meaning of 'is' is.”–Bill Clinton
Depending on your enjoyment of 3D, you might want to see this in 2D. I personally find 3D distracting and exhausting to watch. I chose to see this in a 2D presentation, and I'm happy I did.
The imagery is so rich and detailed that I think much of it would have been lost on me if I had watched it in 3D. I probably would have been fed up with the picture after 30 minutes.
Not a big "Alice" fan, but appreciate Burtons' oddball visual sensibilities, and this movie looks like a corker. I do wish Helena Bonham Carter would take an occasional role, though, away from her hubby. She's can be a great serious actress, and it would be nice to see her in a non-freaky role again.
BronxZionist is dead on right. Depp may be a Che-loving loser, but he is right on the West Memphis 3. There are two brilliant documentaries on the case from HBO, one called "Paradise Lost" and the other i'm blanking on momentaril, but in them one of the victims' fathers rants bizarrely and basically admits having killed them, he describes the moment of death with zealous detail. THe amount of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct involved is apalling beyond belief and one of the worst abuses of our system i can think of.
thank you, Sarah. If it's essential to know Lewis Carroll's drugged-out gibberish to be considered well-versed, consider me happily stupid.
That's what he gets for stuffing the candy into the wrong end.
I saw the movie yesterday and it is difficult to disagree with most of what has been said.
The movie is visually impressive, though the 3D is a tad distracting.
The story is somewhat confused, with the madness of the Hatter being quite mad.
Of course, this is a Tim Burton film with Johnny Depp. Just as turtles should know the nature of scorpions before giving them rides across streams, so should movie-goers know the nature of those two before buying a ticket. Indeed I think the entire movie exists solely so Tim Burton a particular line could be delivered as a form of auto-biographical self-affirmation. As I knew his nature before I bought the ticket I do not begrudge it, but it does remain the movie probably could have achieved just a bit more.
Sites we Like……
[...] Every once in a while we choose blogs that we read. Listed below are the latest sites that we choose [...]……
Websites worth visiting…
[...]here are some links to sites that we link to because we think they are worth visiting[...]……
… [Trackback]…
[...] Read More here: bighollywood.breitbart.com/ckozlowski/2010/03/05/review-alice-in-wonderland/ [...]…
You must be logged in to post a comment.