Alice in Wonderland Review

Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Better late than never, right? I’m talking both about this review and a modern big-budget live-ish action adaptation of Lewis Carroll’s Wonderland saga. And with the DVD fresh on store shelves, I figured it was as relevant a time as ever; in addition, this is pretty much my realm, so I should really really do this! Ladies and gentlemen: Tim Burton and Disney present: Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Disclaimer: this is not a re-make, this is a sequel. Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now 19 and has returned to Wonderland because everything has gone to hell for everyone. For Alice, it’s the threat of being strongly encouraged to wed a young wealthy noble gentleman with a sensitive stomach and a rod up his own rabbit hole; for Wonderland, it’s the ascension of the Red Queen/Queen of Hearts (Helena Bonham Carter), who has turned the once magical realm into the aftermath of the Pemberton Festival. Upon reentering the rabbit hole, Alice rediscovers all the usual characters, especially the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). As it turns out, there is a resistance of sorts, led by the White Queen (Anne Hathaway), which Alice must champion in order to fulfill her destiny. Is that good enough an explanation? Good, because what ensues is a cinematic cluster-cuss of breathtaking visuals, note taking plot devices, time taking explanations, shifting accents, a who’s who of real British character actors, a who’s who of fake British character actors, airborne food, not enough salt, too much pepper, confusing looks, inevitable disappointment, and Professor Snape as the Caterpillar.

First of all: it looks great, but it looks very CG. Now this is fine, especially for a Wonderland, but the campy/twisted vibe that some people might associate with it is completely sucked out. It also gives a scale to Wonderland that is almost too big for its britches. The whole point of the books was for Alice to go from one isolated incident to the next, which was Carroll’s style; Alice is not a hobbit and Wonderland is not Middle Earth. Even if this is a sequel (and why did they choose to do that, so they could cushion the blow without offending the author´s ghost?), it’s messing with the base format for reasons that are clearly neither artistic nor amazing.

Second of all: Wasikowska’s Alice is a bit stale, which is a bit of a problem when basically everyone else is CG. Even Burton’s usual ace-up-the-sleeve Depp turns in a surprisingly inconsistent performance; he certainly should be allowed to shoot for the moon, but he needed to use the same cannon for each scene. Fortunately, Burton’s other usual ace-up-the-sleeve (and main squeeze) Bonham Carter is fantastic and fantastical as the Red Queen, and Hathaway gives a surprisingly enjoyably breezy performance as the White Queen. I could go through the previously motioned who’s who lists for the voices of the various CG Wonderland characters that we all know and love, but that would take far too long and none of them were really that memorable (except maybe for the effectively calculated performance of Matt Lucas as both Tweedledee and Tweedledum). Interestingly enough, the most memorable character happens to be the March Hare (Paul Whitehouse, who apparently is not on any who’s who list!), who’s manic behavior is of the kind of prime Burton substance that is mostly absent from the film (yes it’s a CG character and no I’m not contradicting myself; it’s really that funny, so shut up).

When Burton debuted in the mid 80s, he brought a twisted charm to a “bicycle thief” situation with Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985), which was followed by the gothic comic bonanza of Beetle Juice (1988). And then there was Batman (1989). This hat trick was impressive, but then to follow it with Edward Scissorhands (1990), Batman Returns (1992), and Ed Wood (1994)? That’s just too much too soon! And it seems to have turned out that way because the 2000s have seen his craft slip. From the faceless Planet of the Apes (2001) to the heartless Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005), most of the life has vanished from the director’s work, and that’s because Burton’s art has been truly tainted by the advent of CG. His specialty has always been analog claustrophobia, yet the vast majority of his output over the last decade has been on a more epic scale. The main exception to this was 2007’s gothic musical Sweeney Todd: The Daemon Barber of Fleet Street (2007), but that’s why it was his best film since Sleepy Hollow (1999); both good films with a more intimate focus. If Alice in Wonderland could have been treated more like these films (and I don’t mean include the hyperbolic violence), then we would have had a much richer and zanier experience. And this is all very unfortunate, because when you think about it, is there actually anyone more qualified to channel Carroll’s vision than he (and please don’t suggest David Lynch, because he goes down the rabbit hole in all of his work, and a self-serving rabbit hole at that)? That answer was and still is no. Burton is certainly the man for the job, but I think we needed a Burton from another decade.

In the end, there is so much to say and ask oneself about this film: Is it what I/we/anyone was hoping for? No. Is it a masterpiece? Not at all. Is this Disney’s fault? Actually… no. And the reason for this is simply that Disney already has the best Alice incarnation of any film format/medium. For the finest take on Carroll’s classic, look no further than the 1951 animated feature of the same name. But the very fact that Disney already possesses the best actually serves to improve the experience of Burton’s film, and there is still a lot of fun to be had, because the characters endure and nothing in Wonderland can truly die. Warts and all, this is still Alice in Wonderland and there is still some Burton/Disney magic that shines through, and that still should count for something.

3.5/5 (For the story, Burton gets a B-)

McS