Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland

[rocklobster]

It's coming. The Tim Burton movie we've all been waiting for. I'd love to see his take on Alice in Wonderland. He's weird enough to do it right.

[bigsleepj]

Hopefully it would live up to Carrol's tale. Hopefully it will be the last for a VERY LONG TIME too.

[Scarecrow]

Is this more of a sequel to Alice or what? It's called Alice in Wonderland but seems to be based more off the sequel "Through the Looking Glass".

[Ante Bellum]

Well, the Disney animation had stuff from TTLG as well. They might have combined the books as well.

[Roy Mustang]

Is this more of a sequel to Alice or what? It's called Alice in Wonderland but seems to be based more off the sequel "Through the Looking Glass".

The story is based on and an extension of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (1865) and Through the Looking Glass, and What Alice Found There (1872), the two Alice books by English author Lewis Carroll (real name: Charles Lutwidge Dodgson) [1832-1898].

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang
[/color][/font]

[RainbowSounds]

Must. See. Now.

I think that the movie is the books combined. Like the animated one. I remember when I was 6 years old and watching that movie. It scared the heck out of me XD

[ADXC]

Looks good.

My sister is actually does not want to see it because she grew up with the other animated version, of which I also loved, and she just doesn't think it should be re-done.

But it will be fun to see Tim Burton's take on it. I hope he doesn't let me down.

[Cognitive Gear]

Actually, as far as I know, this movie is basically a fanfiction "after the books" story.

From wikipedia:

In the film, Alice is now 19 years old and accidentally returns to wonderland, a place she previously visited ten years ago. She is told that she is the only one that can slay the Jabberwock, a dragon controlled by the Red Queen. Burton said the original Wonderland story was always about a girl wandering around to one character to another and he never felt a connection emotionally, so he wanted to make it feel more like a story than a series of events. He doesn't see this as a sequel to previous films or a re-imagining.

From yahoo movies:

Burton's movie version isn't simply a retelling of the original 1865 novel. It's a new story that has Alice returning to Wonderland as a teenager several years after the events of Carroll's books "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking-Glass."

[ChristianKitsune]

It actually looks to be really interesting! I can't wait to see it!

[Azier the Swordsman]

My sister is actually does not want to see it because she grew up with the other animated version, of which I also loved, and she just doesn't think it should be re-done.

But it's freaking Tim Burton. A Tim Burton remake isn't your average remake. XD

[ADXC]

I know, but it is mainly just for nostalgia purposes.

[goldenspines]

I know, but it is mainly just for nostalgia purposes.

While I liked the older animated Alice in Wonderland as well, if your sis has read the book(s), she may enjoy Burton's remake.

I'm looking forward to this coming out. I'm a bit worried the storyline will be a bit too generic (even if the graphics are amazing, we still need a good story), but I'm staying hopeful. ^_^

[ShiroiHikari]

Interesting that it's a new story, but I see an awful lot of people being disappointed as heck when they go see it expecting an adaptation and not a "sequel".

I still don't really want to see it though. I think I'm pretty much done with Tim Burton.

[agasfas]

For me, Tim Burton's adaptations are a hit or miss. The previews do not seem to bad, so I might give it a watch. Visually speaking, the movie looks pretty cool. So if I get the chance, I'll try to see it in 3-D.

[bigsleepj]

* grumble grumble *

The more I see of this movie the more I doubt it will be good. I don't think bringing a demented Joan of Narnia angle to the material is the right thing to do. Oh well...

[Cloud500]

I'm still unsure of what to think about this movie, but I'm going to see it tonight and see how it is. A lot of the reviews criticized it for not being nonsensical enough. Yes, the original stories were somewhat nonsensical and confusing, but normally don't you want a movie to make sense? But then again I'm not a film critic, so what do I know?

[yukoxholic]

I've disliked most Tim Burton movie adaptions of classics (he killed Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for me x_x ) but I do like Alice In Wonderland and am looking forward to this film! Plus, the cast is wonderful.

Mia Wasikowska looks like the perfect Alice and Johnny Depp looks like an awesome Mad Hatter that coupled with Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen will at least ensure that it won't be too painful to sit through if the storyline falls to pieces. I have a lot of hope in Disney that this movie won't be as awful as a lot of critics have already said it to be. So, here's hoping! ^_^

[wildpurplechild]

Coming out to theatres today! My friend's going to see it on opening night. I'll probably see it eventually, it looks pretty interesting, and it's gotten a lot of hype. I'm not usually a Burton fan, so I won't probably be too disapointed if I think it's a flop. I always laugh at the part on the commercials where the March Hare yells "You're late for tea!!"

[ChristianKitsune]

Going to go see it tonight! Hope its worth it!

[Tarnish]

Tim Burton owes American McGee a lot of money right now.

[AlyssHeart]

Well, I saw it and I loved it! Then again..I pretty much love anything Alice in Wonderland or Tim Burton..so yeah. since it was not supposed to be a direct line from the books, I was more lenient. I really enjoyed it and was happy with the way things were done.

[Cloud500]

I just got back from the theater. I have to say that I enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would. The visuals were great with the exception that some of the cgi characters looked really awkward standing next to the real people, but I guess I can't expect them to look completely real. For the most part, I felt that it had the same overall feel of the books/world.

[ChristianKitsune]

I REALLY REALLY Loved this movie.... it was really cute! I love the Cheshire Cat! And Johnny Depp did really really good job, and I loved all the characters XD.

It was really awesome...but there was one part that made me go "Hmm"

When the Tweedle twins are being carried away, they are flown through a thorny area, and then flown over a barren mountainous region with a green lake...

It really reminded me of an area in the video game World of Warcraft in the game there is a place called "Outlands" and in this place called Hellfire Peninsula in the northwest corner, is an area that looked almost EXACTLY like that XD.

just interesting I guess... wonder if WoW inspired that part? Hmm..

*wants to draw the Cheshire cat now*

[MightiMidget]

I saw this yesterday and was floored. We went for 3-D, and it was outstanding. They used the 3-D pretty much to just give it dimension, instead of everything being flat and things jumping out at you. That made the physical aspect of it just stunning. (Though I still dislike 3D for the most part.)

Everyone did a good job, though Johnny Depp does plummet into Jack Sparrow 3/4 of the time...but oh well.

It was done really well, and as my sister said, "It was the movie Tim Burton was born to make."

[ADXC]

Well, I have to say, this movie was definitely worth the money I shelled out. It's definitely worth it to see it in 3D.

@ MightiMidget- About the Jack Sparrow accent, you're absolutely right. XD I kept hearing the ol' captain in there; however, that will always be one of the best accents I ever hear in anything.

For the record people, this movie was more of a "Through the Looking Glass" approach with the original's aspects smuggled inside. I definitely saw it as a unique way to combine books into one movie.

[Scarecrow]

Saw this tonight. I really liked it! Of course I kinda knew I would. The style was great. However, I hated the 3D for this... now the last movie I saw in theatres was Avatar back in December. But wow, could I really tell a difference between the two as far as 3D technology. In Avatar, I thought it worked great. Could it have done without it? Yes, but it was excellent 3D.

Here... blah. I wanted to take my glasses off. First... it was WAY to dark. In Avatar, it was MUCH brighter. You could hardly tell you had dark glasses on. Here, they didn't compensate for the dark glasses and it was annoying. I know his movies generally have some dark tone to the movie but it doesn't usually feel like your looking through shades or watching the movie out a tinted window. Second... in Avatar, just about EVERYTHING was in focus. The background and the foreground. So if you wanted to look into the back behind what was going on in the foreground, it still looked great and you could see all kinds of detail and it made it feel much more realistic. With Alice, it was like filmed normal and then put in 3D. The stuff in the foreground were in focus but the background was out of focus. Like when they're in the carriage, everything in the background behind the window, was blurred and you couldn't focus on anything behind the characters. In avatar, the windows were fantastic cause it made you feel like you were looking out an actual window and could focus on the background. This movie felt like you were looking at a Pop-Up book more than the 3D experience Avatar gave you.

I saw a few 3D films before Avatar and thought it was pretty decent 3D. I didn't realize how much better Avatar's 3D and what a difference it made actually being filmed with 3D cameras as opposed to just shooting the film and making it 3D until I watched this. And the dark tint was much more noticeable after the vibrant brightness in Avatar where they must have purposely brightened the movie A LOT to make up for the dark tint of the glasses.

Anyway, the movie itself was great. Cant wait to buy it. But I wish I watched it in 2D cause it was really annoying to sit through. The dark tint and the pop-book feel was really distracting. Avatar spoiled me there...

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Tim Burton owes American McGee a lot of money right now.

Bahaha. XD Not many people have played that game. I've always seen it in store shelves. Always got freaked out by the cover.

[ScalpelFactory]

Saw the midnight showing early Friday morning, it didn't exactly captivate me, but it didn't bore me either. I enjoyed it as a whole, but likely not one I'll watch again or own.

I'm just not a big Tim Burton fan. I liked Edward Scissorhands, and that's about it. A bunch of friends talked me into going and seeing this one [as well as slaving on everyone's costumes XD].

{HERE} was my closet-cosplay of the Caterpillar - just regular blue clothes, wire antennae, and crazy blue makeup.

[ShiroiHikari]

I just got back from seeing it. It's not a great film, but I went in expecting a total piece of junk, which it most definitely was not.

This was my first time seeing a film in 3D, and it took some getting used to at first. The 3D was nicely done, I thought. They didn't shove it in your face (oh ho ho) so it never got irritating or too distracting-- which is good because there actually was a story being told. Was it particularly original? Not really, but it was certainly more original than rehashing the books again.

I only had a few minor gripes-- the musical score wasn't really doing it for me, and sometimes the celebrities were distracting. Like, "Oh look it's Anne Hathaway!" and so on.

Overall, I had a pretty good time.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I see 3D as a gimmick. It's enjoyable at times but I don't think much of it.
I saw the movie in 2D instead.
I thought it was very good but the story was tried-and-true and rather predictable. There was some good humour, action and adventure. Thankfully the amazing visuals, the brilliant characters and the imagination of the piece helped to make it an entertaining movie. I enjoyed it far more than Avatar. It was a good bit of fun. The Mad Hatter and Cheshire Cat were awesome as were the White Queen and Red Queen. Alice was very good too.
7.5/10