Alice In Wonderland
polycounter lvl 18
Anyone catch this yet? Is it worth hitting the theaters for? I'm really torn on this one. They styling is great, but it really looks like it could be awesome, or utter shit. Kinda looking for some opinions before I put $40 down so the family can see it.
Replies
I think that the 3d aspect of it left more to be desired..at least compared to something like avatar.
I really liked the movie itself. I liked the story a lot, but it was pretty safe and predictable.
I enjoyed the movie but I won't pay to see it twice. The ending dance was so hokey too, and no character depth. Burton was really trying to sell Johnny Depp's character to the point that I wasn't sure if the movie should be called Mad Hatter in Wonderland.
The story and dialog was stripped of everything that made it endearing and unique and turned into a tragic and gloomy trudge through a video game plot (
The part towards the end with the
I know it's got Tim Burton's name up there, and that's kind of his schtick. But if I wanted to see Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, or Nightmare Before Christmas, I'd rent them. They're great. But if I'm seeing a Disney version of Alice in Wonderland, I don't want it to be "Underland", I want it to be Wonderland. I want some light-hearted surreal absurdist escapism, not a homicidal Mad Hatter and a bunch of psychotic and/or depressed animals. That ain't fun.
edit: Well the book had plenty of depressed animals, but that was different. And they weren't begging for their lives or pleading for the safety of their families.
I think McGee's Alice was much more mature and interesting;
This seems like fluff and burton fanfare with an alice in wonderland theme.
(Though I am excited to see Crispin Glover in a large role, he looks like a badass in thise film)
That's never happened before! Certainly not in his last few movies!!
I don't know why everybody is talking about the bad story, there was no story! Just shots showing off 3d effects.
nice visuals though.
Pretty much what I felt.
Saw it on Friday, came 45 minutes earlier with online tickets and there was already a line. The cinema was FULL. The audience seemed to like the movie though.
The visuals were great, some scenes were funny, but overall it wasn't anything special. Johnny Depp did an alright job being mad, but then when was he NOT mad in Burton's movies, or at least somehow strange.
I thought the Alice actress did a pretty good job, though.
This being the primary reason I have no interest whatsoever in seeing this movie despite typically being a fan of both acts. That and the visual style of the mad hatter just reeks of shit to me.
For what had the potential to be a bloody fantastic piece of cinema, I'm certainly hearing a LOT of criticism on this one.
I'd probably suggest, that if you going to watch this movie, catch the 2d version of it.
The movie itself was better than I had heard, and I didn't go in expecting "Alice in Wonderland", but instead a movie about an older Alice taking another trip through Wonderland, and how the Red Queen's rule would have panned out in Alice's absence. This proved to be true. Its basically Alice a decade after her first visit with the Red Queen in control of the horrible creatures mentioned in Lewis Carol's poem Jabberwocky...
Annoying parts of the movie included Johnny Depp frequently dropping the above question, and the futterwacken/dance scene...the movie could have done without that...
I would wish 3D would just stop. cease to exist. only seen it used once proprly, in avatar.
And I was pretty psyched about this movie as well.
7/10
Just sayin' : )
And HonkyPunch- Yeah, Crispin Glover was awesome.
Did anyone else almost enjoy the opening where she was in the real world better than her in Wonderland, or was that just me and my uncanny love of period pieces?
My rating: Definitely worth seeing, but don't go in expecting to be blown away.
yes.
http://conceptartworld.com/?p=3136
Because with that eyepiece get-up it would have covered too much of Depp's face I would imagine.
Wonderland is supposed to be a light, happy place for the most part, not corrupt and dark. He went the wrong way in my opinion.
Was fine with Underland, and it being a darker place - he can interpret it as whatever he wants. It just came off as poorly written and... strange. Not good strange, but "did they really just put that in the movie" strange.
I felt she were putting on a performance for those around her. Like she didn't care for the pomp and priss of royalty. It would have looked much more hokey had they not had the scene with the dog running in and the White Queen waiting for the rest of the nobles to go away before running.
You are in the wrong Wonderland... I would never call Wonderland 'light, happy'. o.o;
It is a good movie and I enjoyed it but...
It was... odd. Not in an Alice sort of odd though.
It felt more like a different movie using Alice characters.
Everyone did a pretty good job acting, though it felt like they really didn't have much time to get into character.
Cracked out March Hare was awesome.
Red Queen I felt was no threat other than the power to declare "OFF WITH THEIR HEAD" every other breath. She was so boring of a character. A vaguely spoiled child.
Hatter with a claymore... I think I was done at that point.
Overall it just all felt... hollow.
It is one of those current crop of zombie movies I think, like Avatar.
Those movies that have all the makings of a great movie. They just lack the soul to bring them to life.
Everything was one rails, no adventure. There was not much threat of her not doing anything as she was supposed to. Oh and the 'prophecy' stuff... Pre-determination in Wonderland? That should be blasphemy.
And "Underland"? WTF?
It's like they knew they weren't up to Wonderland status and decided to push themselves farther away.
American McGee's Alice is still my choice of sequel. Dark, disturbing and the characters match up.
Poe wrote on both.