As a huge Tim Burton fan, I have been waiting for around half a year to see Alice in Wonderland at midnight, and even arrived at the theater two hours early just to get good seats. Why? Because of Tim Burton. He's come a long way since Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, but frankly, after being completely blown away by Sweeney Todd, I was expecting a little bit more from my favorite director, particularly when combined with his usual team including legendary film composer Danny Elfman and highly-talented Johnny Depp.
On the whole, the movie seemed a bit forced. It almost seemed as though production decisions were based on Tim Burton's past films, with very little relevance to the actual film. For instance, the trees had Tim Burton's trademark spiral branches, but it didn't add to the movie in any way, it was just decoration. While some 3D effects were surprisingly convincing, it seemed on the whole to be a novelty, as for most of the movie, I entirely forgot I was seeing it in 3D.
If there's one thing I love about Tim Burton's films more than anything, it's his vision. Unfortunately, his vision was highly disappointing in Alice in Wonderland. The characters especially disappointed me, particularly The Mad Hatter. after seeing posters, watching film clips, and previewing trailers, I was excited to see Johnny Depp back in his usual role, but I found his character confusing, inconsistent, and poorly executed. He delivered his lines so in such an average Johnny Depp way, I forgot it was supposed to be anything special, and often disregarded his character entirely. He slipped in and out of a lisp, sometimes took on a British accent and a deeper voice, and lost his voice when he yelled... sometimes.
Not a single character in the movie had an identifying personality characteristic. The white queen had her arms in the air much of the time, but not enough to form a character, the Knave of Hearts was only tall enough to look slightly disproportionate, Alice hardly even had a character, and the white hare slipped from indignant and demanding to docile and eager to please for no discernible reason.
But this movie wasn't a total loss. Tim Burton didn't fail to put in some of his classic macabre violence and cringes, as a monster gets his eye pulled out on-screen, a miniature Alice must cross a black, murky, river by stepping on the faces of floating, long-dead enemies of the queen (even stepping into the mouth of one), and the head of a monster is graphically severed and rolls down a flight of stairs, remaining in the background for several minutes.
A patch of humor here and there redeemed the movie on a whole, particularly the Mad Hatter's "Futawaker" near the end of the movie. Now and again, the 3D effects were used to great effect, making me wince and flinch from time to time.
On the whole, this movie failed to follow Tim Burton's masterful Sweeney Todd, or to live up to it's promising trailers and posters, but was it a waste of time and money? I'd say not. Like Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate factory, this is a far from perfect adaptation, but was still enjoyable, and i believe will become part of movie culture in the next couple of months. Not to be forgotten, but not to be awed, Alice in Wonderland is nothing more than an anteater in sheep's clothing: beautiful and intriguing on the outside, but ridiculous on the inside.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Alice in Wonderland... whatever happened to Tim Burton?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hey I know you from Grace Randolph's Facebook page. You said you had a blog where you wrote your reviews, so I decided to check it out.
ReplyDelete(Sorry for my poor writing skills english it's not my first language)
About Alice in Wonderland, I have heard lots of different opinions and read yours... I for one I'm not a person who prefers visuals over good plot BUT I still be going to see it because Tim Burton always delivers a good show even if it's not a great movie!
P.D: I loved Sweeney Todd too.