Big Picture Big Sound

Alice in Wonderland Review

By Joe Lozito

Some Kind of "Wonderland"

Alice_in_Wonderland.jpg

Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, "Alice in Wonderland". Yep, I'd see that. Who better to bring to life Lewis Carroll's classic fairytale - about a girl who famously falls through a rabbit hole into a skewed world of disappearing cats, smoking caterpillars and mad hatters - than the director of "Edward Scissorhands", "Sweeney Todd" and "The Nightmare Before Christmas". And who better to play the aforementioned haberdasher than the man who has partnered with Mr. Burton to create some of the more memorably zany characters of the last twenty years (the ill-conceived Willy Wonka collaboration excluded, of course). It turns out that this umpteenth version of "Alice" (the imdb.com list requires scrolling) does not equal the sum of its parts. In fact, the most wondrous thing about it is how lacking in wonder it all is.

For anyone who's seen the film's posters, it's clear Mr. Burton has brought his signature style to the film; it looks beautiful. In fact, it quickly joins the dubious ranks of great-looking dull movies (see 1992's "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow"). The script, by Linda Woolverton, is not an adaptation of Mr. Carroll's "Alice" novels ("Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass"), it's a hodge-podge of elements from both books (Tweedledee/dum, Red and White Queens, the Jabberwocky) thrown into a new plotline that finds a nineteen year-old Alice taking up arms to defend "Underland" (not Wonderland) from the reign of the evil Red Queen.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, in principle; I like a good "re-imagining" as much as the next guy. But Ms. Woolverton's script suffers from a classic blunder: it buys into its own quirkiness (see the later, non-animated, films of Wes Anderson and certain Coen Brothers missteps, to name a few examples). It's not enough that the look of the film is fantastic and that the characters are imaginative and charmingly goofy. There needs to be something grounding the film as well. Here, there's not.

Alice (newcomer Mia Wasikowska) is defined by the fact that she doesn't buy into her arranged marriage and refuses to wear corsets. Once in Underland, she declares everything to be a dream and therefore keeps much of the action at arm's length. Likewise, the characters in Underland are defined by their quirks: the Caterpillar is a stoner, the Dormouse has a Napoleon complex, and the Hatter is, well, kinda mad. Though not nearly mad enough. In a role that will likely join his Willy Wonka interpretation on the list of rare Johnny Depp gaffes, the Mad Hatter is all lisps and accents. He's compassionate and flirty, but will occasionally let loose with a flurry of unintelligible nonsense. There are glimmers of a character here, but it doesn't fill out. Burton mainstay Helena Bonham Carter fares better as the Red Queen, whose obsession with her oversized noggin has put her at loggerheads (pun intended) with her benevolent sister, the White Queen (Anne Hathaway, not given much to do either).

Though "Alice" is presented in 3D, it was filmed in standard 2D and later converted. The conversion process is stunningly good but, aside from a few jolts to the camera, there's not much to warrant the dimensional upgrade. Mr. Burton's beautiful production design may have been better enjoyed in the original 2D. The filmmakers should have spent that time adding depth to the story, not the imagery.

What did you think?

Movie title Alice in Wonderland
Release year 2010
MPAA Rating PG
Our rating
Summary The most wondrous thing about director Tim Burton's take on the Lewis Carroll classic is how lacking in wonder it all is.
View all articles by Joe Lozito
More in Movies
Big News
Newsletter Sign-up
 
Connect with Us