alice in wonderland Tagged Articles at Cinematical

If you are a regular reader around these parts, then you are probably well acquainted with our Scenes We Love and Scenes We Hate. So, I recently went to see Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderlandand was struck with a moment on-screen that wasn't necessarily a scene that I hated (in the traditional sense of the word), and it definitely wasn't a scene I loved -- but it stood out, because it did almost manage to ruin the entire movie.

Now for the curious out there (and this might count as a spoiler, so be warned), the moment in question was when the Mad Hatter (played by Johnny Depp but looking like Gene Wilder) celebrates the victory over the Red Queen and engages in a dance vignette that would make the kids in High School Musical run in terror. It was in a word: horrifying. After discussing the movie with friends, I just couldn't get that scene out of my head, and trust me; I don't mean that in a good way.

But this isn't the first time this has happened to me, and sometimes when I'm watching a movie, there is a scene that is so out of place, or just so badly executed that it has you desperately wishing that everyone involved had spent just a few more minutes in the editing suite.

After the jump; 3 other scenes that I think managed to stop the movie dead in its tracks...

There are two things that I feel I must share up front, in the spirit of full disclosure. The first is this: I consider myself a fan of Tim Burton. Every time I hear that the frazzle-haired aging Goth crackpot is releasing a new film, I feel an undeniable frisson of excitement, sure that this one will be on par with Big Fish, or Mars Attacks!, or (oh pleasepleaseplease) Ed Wood. And so I eagerly anticipate every new Burton film -- up until that point when I'm trapped in a theater with Planet of the Apes or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, weeping sadly into my popcorn. Every time.

Secondly, while I'm as technologically savvy as I need be (considering that the majority of my work and leisure time are tied to the Internet, that all my life's pertinent contact info is stored in my phone, and if my laptop failed right now I would turn into a useless, neurotic pile of fail) I'm also a late adopter when it comes to tech trends. I still have a normal-sized TV, for instance. My cell phone is just a phone. That sort of thing.

All of which I share so that you'll understand my reaction to Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland remodel. Putting aside any considerations of what's good or bad about the movie as art, I couldn't get past one huge stumbling block -- once the opening credits had finished, I spent every moment of Alice wishing desperately that it wasn't in 3-D.

The original Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll is a delicious Victorian oddity, a children's book whose bizarre dream world, unforgettable word play, and young heroine have captured the imaginations of artists as diverse as James Joyce, Dali, Jefferson Airplane, Jan Švankmajer, and, of course, Tim Burton.

It was only a matter of time until Burton tackled this classic, a dive into the subconscious littered with nonsensical rhymes and literally crazy characters. As the wonderful Annalee Newitz points out, "As [Carroll's] protagonist Alice moves from dreamy encounter to dreamy encounter, watching nursery rhymes coming to life and fighting bloodthirsty monarchs made of cards, we witness something that for the Victorians was just as stunning as a giant dynamo. Psychiatry was in its infancy in the 19th century, and this brave new science suggested there was a method in madness. The muddle of our dreams might illuminate the truth about human consciousness; the murmurings of madwomen could shed light on how so-called sane people think."

Sounds like perfect fodder for Burton and his misunderstood oddities and lovable outsiders, right?

Oh, so wrong.

As in the video game American McGee's Alice from 2000, a much-older Alice returns to Wonderland. In McGee's version, Alice is returning to a terrible place in shambles which she must fight through in order to get to the bottom of why it's falling apart in the first place. I'm not going into more detail here on the plot in McGee's Alice because there is a nice little twist that makes it a much more compelling story than Linda Woolverton's poorly paced script. Woolverton's script feels like an afterthought to Burton's desire to make a 3D Wonderland loaded with CG creatures. In actuality, the 3D effects were added later, making it a less authentic 3D experience than, say, Avatar. The AMC/Odeon squabbles might have been for naught, since Alice would be best enjoyed on the big screen, if only because there's so much going on, it's almost impossible for the human eye to keep up. And as wondrous as the talking animals are, as fabulous as the costumes are, as huge as the Red Queen's head is, it's nothing but a house of cards.

Officially or unofficially, Tim Burton is Hollywood's most prominent purveyor of fantasy fun, be it filtered through his own ideas, as in Big Fish or Edward Scissorhands, or functioning as an adaptation of a beloved text, such as with Sleepy Hollow or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. His latest effort is a big-screen 3-D update of Alice in Wonderland, which stars two of his longtime collaborators, Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter, and turns Lewis Carroll's magical source material into a rousing, surreal adventure.

Cinematical recently participated in a Los Angeles press day for the film, where cast and crew members offered their thoughts about Carroll's iconic text, discussed the challenges of getting into larger-than-life characters, and reflected on the fantasy worlds created by Burton, whether he dreams them up or just brings them to life. [Editor's Note: Although "Cinematical" is used to distinguish questions from answers in the text below, our journalist was just one of many reporters asking questions of the filmmakers.]

Johnny Depp is known for many things -- his dreamy good looks and his penchant for taking on unconventional roles being among the most obvious -- but one new facet of the actor's repertoire has only come to light recently; his ability to make lines of gibberish sound downright Shakespearean.

The actor's latest work hasn't earned my admiration in the same way his early performances did, mostly because it feels as though he's become a caricature of himself. If nothing else, Depp's newest film, Alice in Wonderland, is sure to be yet another title to showcase his ability to amuse us by talking without saying anything at all.

The thespian is set once again to demonstrate his unique talent for creating a new vernacular out of nonsense syllables when he tackles the role of the Mad Hatter in Burton's flick. Our sister site Moviefone has a fantastic mash-up video featuring some of the actor's finest moments of linguistic lunacy. Dig in after the jump.

With the spectacle of cinema, it's easy to forget a story's roots. That's especially the case when it's the story of a girl who slides down a hole, shrinks and grows due to magical food, has magical adventures with strange creatures, and sees the royalty of playing cards brought to life. But, as fans of the source material know, Alice in Wonderland isn't a complete fabrication. Just like Peter Pan, there's a real story behind the mystique.

To give you some background before diving into Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland tomorrow, Life has a great gallery that digs into the real-life Alice, and how the story became what it is today. As they write: "On July 4, 1862, Carroll took the girls on a rowboat trip to a picnic in a nearby town, telling them a story about a girl named Alice and a magical rabbit hole. Alice Liddell, then 10, begged him to write the story down for her." He wrote a story, and bit by bit it morphed into Alice in Wonderland. After getting published, new editions featured new characters, some of whom seem like an essential part of the story, whether we're talking about the Mad Hatter's tea party, or that grinning Cheshire Cat.

Check out some images of the real-life Alice below, courtesy of Time.



The gallery also talks about the subsequent productions of the novel, and the behind-the-scenes turmoil, from the many links between Lewis Carroll's work and Alice Liddell, questions of pedophilia, and what ultimately happened to the girl who slid down that hole.

Shutter Island held strong, hanging onto the top spot in its second week with last weeks two new releases Cop Out and The Crazies hanging pretty close to one another in second and third. Here's the top five:

1. Shutter Island: $22.7 million
2. Cop Out: $18.2 million
3. The Crazies: $16 Million
4. Avatar: $13.6 million
5. Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief: $9.5 million

Alice in Wonderland
What's It All About: 3D adaptation of the Lewis Carroll fantasy.
Why It Might Do Well: Director Tim Burton may not have a perfect track record (Planet of the Apes, anyone?) but he's the go-to guy for weird. With Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter and Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen, this trip down the rabbit hole should be one to remember.
Why It Might Not Do Well: Might this be too creepy for the kids?
Number of Theaters: 3,400
Prediction: $64 million

Brooklyn's Finest
What's It All About: A crime drama focusing on three Brooklyn police officers over the course of a single week.
Why It Might Do Well: Looks like a compelling story and having the likes of Richard Gere and Don Cheadle in the cast can't hurt.
Why It Might Not Do Well: Some of the potential audience for this may be drawn away by Shutter Island, and Brooklyn's Finest so far has a mere 31% at Rottentomatoes.com.
Number of Theaters: 1,800
Prediction: $8 million

Just in time for the arrival of Tim Burton's new, somewhat sequel-ized mo-capped 3D version of Alice in Wonderland comes video of the first ever film adaptation of Lewis Carroll's book from 1903, courtesy of the British Film Institute Archive. Though the book (originally called Alice's Adventures in Wonderland) was published in 1865, it wasn't until eight years after the birth of cinema that the initial adaptation -- directed by Cecil Hepworth and Percy Snow -- came about. Other Alice adaptations followed shortly after in 1910 (first version made in the United States) and 1915 (both, including the 1903 version, were silent), and the first Alice adaptation with sound came in 1931. From that point on, there's been over 20 different adaptations of Carroll's original book on the big and small screen, concluding with the version that's about to hit theaters on Friday.

From the YouTube description: "The first-ever film version of Lewis Carroll's tale has recently been restored by the BFI National Archive from severely damaged materials. Made just 37 years after Lewis Carroll wrote his novel and eight years after the birth of cinema, the adaptation was directed by Cecil Hepworth and Percy Stow, and was based on Sir John Tenniel's original illustrations. In an act that was to echo more than 100 years later, Hepworth cast his wife as the Red Queen, and he himself appears as the Frog Footman. Even the Cheshire cat is played by a family pet. With a running time of just 12 minutes (8 of which survive), Alice in Wonderland was the longest film produced in England at that time. Film archivists have been able to restore the film's original colours for the first time in over 100 years."

Watch the first ever Alice in Wonderland movie after the jump.

A few weeks ago, Peter took a look at the latest developments on the Weekend at Bernie's remake, and based on the amount of comments the post received, a lot of you seem to care one way or another about the 1989 original. Or, you at least have something to say about the concept of remakes. Either way, I'm sure you'd love to see what a Bernie's redo would look like if Tim Burton directed it with Johnny Depp in the titular role of the dead man. For better or worse, the guys at LandlineTV have made something to satisfy that curiosity.

I say for better or worse, because I honestly don't find their video to be all that humorous nor a worthy imitation of Burton's style. I hate to be so critical, as they seem to have put a lot of effort into this. I do love the concept, at least, but as I make a point to show with my Pitch of the Day posts, there are plenty of good ideas out there. But it's the execution that requires true effort and talent. For me, this clip goes along with other recent so-so attempts to understand specific auteur's aesthetics, such as the imagined Wes Anderson Spider-Man trailer and most of that hypothetical filmmaker-directed Super Bowl video.