ALICE IN WONDERLAND is an “unmitigated disaster”?
Most critics are currently under review embargo for Alice in Wonderland (05.03.10) but the general feeling is, when that ice breaks – Tim Burton is in for a mauling. At least that seems to be the take from British shores.
It’s one thing making a mockery of Gene Wilder and Planet of the Apes – which yes, got us all very angry indeed but on this side of the Atlantic, you mess with the writings of legendary Brit Lewis Carroll and boy you’re in trouble. I’m seeing it on Thursday in 3-D – and I will let you know.
Jeff Wells posted the following on his site late yesterday…
I’m told that certain British exhibitors and theatre managers who’ve seen Tim Burton‘s Alice In Wonderland feel it’s “a true stinker of a movie…an unmitigated disaster,” as one correspondent puts it. “It’s no shock that Disney want to release this on DVD as soon as possible. Not sure what can save this though the promotion so far might guarantee it a great opening before poisonous word of mouth kills it.”
Can’t say I’m overly surprised by the trailers and I’ve been warning people for months to prepare for a disaster.
“Saw a screening last week, Jeff. Will let you wait to judge it but the movie is a mess. No real plot to speak of and some terrible acting from the likes of Crispin Clover. Even some of the CGI is messy. Cinemas not wanting to show this due to early DVD terms from Disney might not [realize] how lucky they are long-term. There was also a screening last week for critics and that didn’t go well either.”
And he goes on, a Manhatten-based critic…
“Alice sucks. Visually amazing [with] many familiar characters but none of the story from the books. No wit, no tension — an action-fantasy, if you can believe that, minus comedy.”
17 Comments
I went to the multimedia screening last Friday and I was incredibly disappointed. I’m a huge fan of Tim Burton and I have to say this is the worst thing he has done, which is surprising as you would think the source material would be a perfect match for him. The addition of 3D seems to undermine the visual quality that you’d normally expect from Tim Burton’s film. Helena Bonham-Carter is great but by combining the two novels in such a ham-fisted fashion and doing everything in your power to ensure Johnny Depp has maximum screen time makes for a messy narrative that never really gets underway.
Note to TIM BURTON: It is time to try something else. You’ve been a director for over twenty years, and you’ve made only two films (BIG FISH and ED WOOD) that involved quasi-normal people in almost-realisitic situations.
I love imagination, but a guy shouldn’t be given millions of dollars just to pursue his whimsy when it doesn’t have a point. ALICE IN WONDERLAND has no point at all other than to allow Burton to indulge himself.
MOVE ON. GROW UP.
Obsessed With Film has been awesome lately. I’ve been digging all the special articles and all the normal movie news in general. I almost gave up on this site a few months ago. But you guys came back with vengeance.
What can I say, I’m a movie nerd that loves watching and talking about movies. I feel at home here.
The reason none of the story is in the movie is because its a different look to the book itself. a rewrite, a sequal i guess. this type of movie doesnt need to have any part of the orginal story except for same characters and personalities to the characters.
I really had high hopes for this movie; especially after Burton’s fantastic ‘reimaginations’ of PLANET OF THE APES and WILLY WONKA.
i sense sarcasm from the previous poster.
this Alice looks like a CG sickfest. normally, i’d support tim’s vision combining traditional and computer assisted special effects, but i think he went overboard here. and if anyone has to be blamed for the poor story, its not tim its probably that woman who adapted it. i’ll still see it but i can’t say i’m that surprised most people are panning it
I’ve heard nothing but good things until your post. It looks good to me.
I’ve seen it, there’s a few “fun” moments in, a few nice touches, but overall it’s bad. Crushingly, depressingly bad.
Look out for the ‘nuking the fridge’ moment 5 mins before the end – Johnny Depp (with the help of Danny Elfman’s score) creating one of the worst moments in cinematic history. *Everyone* will be talking about it; sad as it overshadows any positives of the movie.
Sigh. Remember when Burton was making stuff like Scissorhands, Ed Wood and even Big Fish? Then he got bored and lazy and started remaking films, collecting paychecks and seemingly stopped caring altogether. As much as I enjoyed it, Sleepy Hollow was probably the turning point. Damn, what a waste…
@ALK I was indeed being sarcastic.
But must admit I did enjoy SLEEPY HOLLOW because it actually had a plot, mystery, action and a glorious camp monster played by scene-chomper Christopher Walken.
Having said that, in the hands of another director the script for SLEEPY HOLLOW could’ve been a really terrifying movie. But Tim Burton’s penchant for camping everything up to ’11′ did rip out most of the tension and horror from that story.
Everone in my house is waiting for this movie to come out. The fab clothes are as creative as the movie itself!
Willy Wonka was nothing short of a COMPLETE DISASTER!!!! Completely ruined the film. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is a failure as well!!!
I think everyone is missing the point. The movie didn’t have to be based off the books at all, thats not what made it bad. What made it bad was the horrible writing that has plagued Hollywood recently. It seems as if they took a script brain storm or early draft and made a movie out of that.
Maybe if they had better writers, and spent more time on the script, the movie wouldn’t have been so bad.
But on a side note I would have to disagree for Sleepy Hollow being Burton’s turning point. He has made good movies after that, Sweeney Todd being an example. And no I’m not just a gothy fan girl who liked Sweeney Todd because it was cool, it was well written, acted, and sung (not matter how much they changed their voices).
To date ALICE IN WONDERLAND has taken over £400million worldwide so why bother with a decent script anymore. I don’t think the general public really care do they?
Well from my stand all of you make a great point it was good it has underlying meaning to everything the movie has mystery if you watch from the directors point of view or from a point of view taken from that time period what we say is crap today was really entertainment the whole time Alice encounters animals that talk and other “impossible things” of that time our minds have been tainted from actual point and direction in a movie other than just looking at the impossible things or the possible things that make imagination or make us feel a little like children again its a children’s book so the movie should be for children and whimsical things and impossible or improbible things my be what he was looking to find and create from it. Also since I saw the movie I have had a problem with it theres something “wrong” with the movie I cant figure it out but there is. Can anyone help with this problem or have the same problem.
As an Alice/Lewis Carroll purist, I wasn’t even bothered to go and watch this train wreck of a movie. The trailer killed me, the mistakes killed me.
Based off the original characters? Do you even know what you’re talking about?
Does the Red Queen say “Off with his head?”, No. Why? Because thats the QUEEN OF HEARTS.
As for childlike, it was a transition from childhood to adolescence, thats what the concept of “Wonderland” is. If she’s eighteen, she blatantly can’t return to that state of mind.
Basically, Burton has messed with something great…again.
@ Rhi – interesting comments there from a “Alice/Lewis Carroll purist” because — having not read ALICE IN WONDERLAND since I was a kid and not having read THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS at all — I wondered whether the book-ended structure in Tim Burton’s adaptation was true to the novels?
(**SPOILER – If you haven’t seen the movie – at the end Alice shuns the arranged marriage and begins running her father’s company herself? Did this happen in the books?**)
I personally, have no problems with a movie changing elements of its’ source material, however when the changes do not make any sense at all I ask questions of the filmmakers. In this instance, having gone on this wonderful, magical journey and met all these fantastic creatures/characters why does Alice then turn arch-capitalist and take over her father’s business?
I understand her story arc sees her find independence from an oppressive, patriarchal arranged marriage but surely by taking control from her father she herself is endorsing the capitalist society she hates; albeit on her own terms. Surely, Wonderland was where she belonged?
Any link between her fantastic journey and the ending was lost on me. Unless of course it was in the original novel(s)?