Sunday, March 14, 2010

Alice in Wonderland Review: Lands without Wonder.


The original “Alice in Wonderland” film, although panned by Walt Disney himself, was and is a staple in cinematic animation and in the memory banks of people fortunate enough to have experienced the high. The new “Alice in Wonderland” is a staple in… a piece of black paper that Tim Burton vomited all over.

What do you need to know? The new Alice is still wacky and weird in lovable ways, but it’s actually a sequel to the original film and the books “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” and “Through the Looking Glass.” If you’re expecting the original tale told all over again…well, watch the original all over again. Otherwise, we now have an extension of what happened, but what may perplex the audience is that Tim Burton considers his version neither a sequel nor a reimagining. In essence, that’s probably what ultimately brings the film down: Alice in Wonderland has no idea what it wants to be.

While the original stories were completely absurd and nonsensical [ON PURPOSE], Tim Burton decided it would be a fantastical idea to make this version linear and very finely plotted [ON PURPOSE]. Well, in essence, he f***ed up [ON ACCIDENT]. To be completely honest, had this film come out almost identical to what it is now and another version of Alice had never come out before, this might just be a pretty great film. The truth of the matter is that there was already a version of Alice out: the original books. These original books had a point and are respectable works of literature. This Alice just seems to be a cash-in on the success of the famous cartoon that came out in 1951 and it worked. This isn’t exactly surprising, as most people who watched the cartoon loved it and to know that none other than Tim “Johnny Depp’s Secret Male Lover” Burton is helming it only adds a bar of Xanax to the cocaine-infused acid trip it already was. It works, for the most part. The characters are all still quirky and the best part of the story, the landscapes and CGI work are all beautifully rendered and top-notch and the story is fun enough [although cliché too often]. Unfortunately, much of Alice’s “wonder” is gone, and interchanged for bravery and boldness as she stands up to the Mad Hatter and takes on the role of a dragon-slayer. She’s also a bit more cunning and clever, which might make sense because this is a… well, certainly not a sequel since Burton doesn’t think so, but a continuation.

The plot is unbalanced at first: Alice tumbles down the rabbit hole and treats everything like she did before with the same bewilderment and curiosity. However, it is made clear that these events are taking place much later in her life, after they already happened, so the question arises whether the first time it happened was just a weird dream or just as real as this time? That’s a bit confusing, but then she acts like she’s the hottest thing to ever walk Underland [aka Wonderland]. So what, exactly is she?

Luckily, every character you meet is immediately memorable and lovable, especially (as you’d assume) The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) and the Red Queen {Helena Bonham-Carter). Both of these characters are incredibly quirky and you await every scene containing them. The Mad Hatter is just as crazy as before, but with the Jack Sparrow-esque feel to him that makes him completely huggable yet devastatingly badass at the same time. Then of course there’s the Red Queen, who’s just deliciously evil, mixing some light-hearted self-loving troublemaking with some truly villainous traits [specifically her love of decapitation]. The minor characters are all great too, though, from the bloodhound who wants his family back to the cracked out Hare to Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. That’s what works, and Tim Burton isn’t exactly a stranger to quirky characters.

All in all, the film suffers because of its overdone yet classic “hero’s journey” style of story-telling. There’s nothing inherently wrong with it, but it becomes predictable, which completely undermines the otherwise otherworldly feel the film retains. Burton missed the mark on what could have been a much better and memorable take on the whole series, but at least he created great atmosphere and truly original art direction that alludes to his usual family-friendly morbid oddball direction. Cheers to what you see and hear, negative cheers to what you experience overall.

6.0/10

-Kyle Shelton

2 comments:

  1. Wow such a low score. I might say I'm scared to watch it now but it just looks soo cool that I still need to. Really want to see Tim's twist on the classic.... good OR bad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's not necessarily "bad," but it's kind of just.. not as good as it could've been, and not really Tim Burton's best work. It's still infinitely enjoyable for the most part, but it begins to feel too familiar too fast.

    ReplyDelete