The creative Tim Burton we used to know and love is back.
Note: Spoilers!
I’ll admit, after the travesty that was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, I was very cautiously optimistic about Tim Burton’s version of Alice in Wonderland. I’m happy to report that the skillful Burton we used to know is back in full force. It isn’t really a sequel so much as a “what if?” extension of the story. In this case, the film takes place 13 years after Alice’s first visit to Wonderland (unnecessarily called “Underland” in the film, which made me think of The Venture Bros every time it was said). In the time since she last was in Wonderland (sorry, I refuse to call it Underland), things have gone drastically down hill. The Red Queen has tightened her grip over the populace, while her Jabberwocky has laid waste to much of the land. With the countryside in ruins, it’s up to Alice to obtain the Vorpal sword and defeat the Jabberwocky.
Despite a slow start and an at-times hammy script, the acting in this movie fits the source material well. Mia Wasikowska is perfectly cast as Alice, bringing believable charm and attitude to the role. It doesn’t seem like she is portraying Alice, it seems like she is Alice. Regardless of the odd big head/small body presentation, Helena Bonham Carter’s role of the Red Queen is excellent as well, responsible for generating many of the laughs. Based on the previews, I was worried that the insane proportions of her character would ruin any amount of personality she brought to the role, but the opposite occurred; her tantrum-filled acting and facial expressions perfectly matched the large head/small body presentation.
Johnny Depp’s take on the Mad Hatter works quite well, although I was confused as to why he kept going back and forth between no accent and a heavy Scottish accent…but hey, it’s Wonderland, it doesn’t have to make sense. Crispin Glover does a good job as the Red Queen’s bodyguard and right hand man, although his character feels like he was just filling a spot rather than being necessary. Still, Glover did the best he could with the role. Anne Hathaway plays the White Queen, who for some reason insists on holding her arms partially up. This was initially a joke, as you can see her drop her arms as soon as her entourage leaves her alone, but this is never repeated elsewhere in the film; she leaves her arms up the whole time. It’s really weird, but is just one of many little details that keep things surreal. The rest of the major characters in the film are CGI, although there is considerable voice talent behind them. Matt Lucas, Stephen Fry, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman…the list of voice actors goes on and on. Oh, and despite his very un-Cheshire Cat-like appearance, the Cheshire Cat in this movie is great.
The filmmakers definitely went the correct route with the CGI. Everything looks like it was drawn using a combination of pastels and acrylic paints, which hides just how much of this film is computer generated. Rather than just being another CGI filled adventure, Alice in Wonderland’s visual style keeps it unique in the world of film. There is a huge amount of detail in Wonderland’s environments. Because of the visual style, they obviously don’t match the realism of Avatar, but Wonderland is every bit as detailed as Pandora.
This isn’t Burton’s best film, but it is his best film in recent years. Interesting and amusing characters, excellent re-imagining of iconic Alice in Wonderland images, a great soundtrack, and good acting appear throughout the film. Highly recommended.
On a personal note, make sure you see this film in theaters…the trailer for Tron Legacy that shows before the movie is amazing.
Hiya.
Fan and lurker of your blog since your Mass Effect 2 review which I liked.
Feel I have to share my 0.02 dollars.
Just so you know what to expect, I’m from the camp that liked Depp’s Willy Wonka role. So no hard feelings ‘kay?
Can’t agree that this is Burton’s best work. I rate it as one of his worst and most disgustingly commercial. OK the latter is certainly forgivable because this movie was bankrolled and produced by Disney. It was already damned to banality so that it could sell to the lowest denominator and the most stringent of Bible Belt rubber-stampers. Which I don’t understand. Kids aren’t stupid. I’ve seen YouTube arguments between children who weren’t even alive for Transformers: The Movie, praising it above and beyond the Michael Bay abortion. I like these kids and wish them the best.
I agree with the term ‘Underland’ being odd and mildly irritating. Like a fruit fly determined to crash land in your eye. Where we differ is that for me, there was simply no attempt at all to explain WHY the name changed. Remember American McGee’s Alice? Now there was a fantastic speculative sequel with an older Alice suffering from psychological trauma after nearly being burned alive. It made sense that her Wonderland was twisted just like the spiritual ground zero that was her soul. Had we gotten something along those lines, ‘Underland’ might have been OK.
Oh lord, the script was very hammy indeed. Mia might have more to her but with her lines being so cheesy and a little bit too much of the “coming of age/not-yet-a-woman-no-more-a-girl” trope on heavy rotation, there was no hope for her to shine. She came across as incredibly droll. However, she looked fantastic in armour. I’ll give her that.
I thought there was too much Mad Hatter. Too much Johnny Depp. Like they were desperate to have another Jack Sparrow or Willy Wonka. The movie is Alice in Wonderland, but the posters and trailers have Mad Hatter all over it. The movie has Alice as thin slices of bread and the meaty beef patty is all Hatter. What’s this about the Mad Hatter being some misunderstood eccentric and people’s revolutionary? Che Guevara with mercury poisoning? There’s a reason to his madness? That felt wrong. Very wrong. Not to mention that very weird, almost incestuous scene just before the final battle that wants to suggest something more between Mad Hatter and Alice. Yech…
Red Queen felt like a vanity project for Burton to put his girlfriend in it. But he’s known for this. His previous muse Lisa Marie ended up having a role in just about every movie he made while they were an item.
Crispin Glover deserves credit for giving personality to a role that never existed in the original book. I loved the CGI that gave him those weirdly long proportions. Creepy.
Anne Hathaway was an awful casting choice. Superficially, her facial features just do not lend themselves to being alabaster white with silver hair. She is a beautiful brunette who could play any Mediterranean role out there. But she’ll never be believable as a White Queen. I could see she was meant to be more of a comic relief character – referring to her gag reflex gimmick and over-the-top princess arms – but it was very weak overall. I think someone with a face more strongly associated with comedy and compatible with the colour scheme, say Anna Faris from the Scary Movie franchise, would have been a better choice.
Matt Lucas from Little Britain as the Tweedles was an excellent casting choice. Brief but brilliant. Cheshire Cat was great. He really grew on me after his little bit wanting the Mad Hatter’s hat.
By the way, was there one Dormouse or two? There was one that swashbuckled and got the Bandersnatch’s eye and one at the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party. Were they the same?
I wasn’t expecting a necessarily dark movie, just a better one. Burton has done films that successfully catered to entertaining both adults and children: Beetle Juice and Edward Scissorhands.
But hey, you know, in the end it’s just an opinion.
V.
Thanks for the awesome comment, Vastad! I’m going to respond to a few of your main points:
1. It didn’t seem to take itself too seriously. Even though the storyline was “serious”, the film was presented as being self aware…I think the ridiculousness of the White Queen’s arms and how nothing seemed to have the same depth of field is proof enough of that (at least for me.) In viewing the movie in this almost self-mocking sort of tone, it really cleared away alot of the imperfections…I just took them as jabs against itself, rather than bad choices…which leads into my next point
2. I think with the goofy way the White Queen was presented, Anne Hathaway made sense. Wrong person for the role, sure, but considering they presented her in only a semi-serious way (and given the tone of the rest of the film), I think casting the role with someone ill-suited to play it just added to the quirkeness.
3. As far as the Mad Hatter playing such a large role, for me this goes back to a part of my review; since this is a “what if?” kind of movie, it gave them all sorts of liberties (kind of like resetting the timeline in the recent Star Trek film). Making the Mad Hatter central to the plot was just the direction they decided to take the “what if?” I had no problem with the Hatter taking a more central role, but it did kind of bother me that they didn’t explain why this happend. It just sorta…did.
4. Please note I didn’t say it was Burton’s best film, but just his best in recent years. See the second to last paragraph, the little ending blurb right before I talked about the Tron Legacy trailer (squeal!)
5. The Tweedles were GREAT.
Thanks again for the great comment, and thanks for being a loyal reader. People like you are why we’re here
PS: Near as I could tell, there was only one Dormouse. I believe the swashbuckler and the tea partier were the same mouse…they didn’t make that clear though, so I’m just going based off of clothing.