Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland"

It was on for about 3 hours and it wasn't all music. Cast and crew were interviewed, people got to interact, there were scenes from the movie shown and whatnot. If you watched it all you wouldn't be complaining.

although Burtons films are definitely severely cgi'ed and cartooned mostly digital, he does combine very good film with this digital style in movies such as sweeney todd, the acting in sweeney todd was terrific, and i thought it was an all around very good film

But a visual classic? That was the statement I disagreed with.

I was pretty disapointed with Sweeney Todd. I'm not a fan of Burton, but I went to the cinema just to see that film on the big screen because I was interested to see what Burton would do with it. Unfortunately, what he did with it was make it look like an expensive theatre production on screen. I thought the best part of the entire film was the 'paradise/perfect life' sequence.

^Yeah, the only bit of that movie I enjoyed at all was the "By the Sea" segment. Otherwise, I thought it was overly depressing and almost painful to watch (especially in comparison to the musical). But I won't go into that.

Eh, Burton's visuals are interesting, but they don't make a movie. And with this movie, I don't like what I've seen of it so far. I'm fine with films changing certain bits of the original work it's based on, but with all the things Burton's been tweaking it just doesn't seem like Wonderland anymore. What was so great about Carroll's world was it's utter nonsense and insanity, giving it a well-constructed dream-like quality. I know it is impossible to completely recreate that quality in film, but it can be (and has been) done to a certain extent. From the interviews I've found of Burton, it sounds like he's too lazy to try to bring this quality into his film and is instead trying to make the story make more "sense" because it's a lot easier. He claims "it won't work as a film" (*cough*bullsh!t*cough*) if he doesn't say the Hatter has mercury poisoning and the Red Queen has a brain tumor (not entirely sure if this is true, but it it is: seriously, WTF?). By doing this, his film looks more like Narnia or some other typical fantasy film instead of Wonderland, which is what it's supposed to be. I don't think this is going to be a proper tribute to Carroll's work.

Burton is right. Wonderland as written won't work as a movie and never has through all the adaptaions. The Disney animated one is the best, but it was such a box office disaster it was the only Disney animated feature broadcast on television in the 1960's instead of being re-released countless times like all the others. I'm not saying Burton's approach is right. Haven't seen the film. But a story that doesn't follow three act structure, where nothing dramatically happens, and is brillianltly written but very literate nonsensical humor doesn't easily adapt to the requirements of film.

^I'm aware of that, and that's not my problem with the film. I completely understand adding certain elements to the story in order to create a more centered plot. However, certain things Burton has changed (mixing characters together, implying relationships that were not originally there, creating new reasons for the insanity of the world) are not needed and - in my opinion - detract from the orignal story's brilliance way too much.

This movie's plot has been used before, and in that version it worked pretty well. The characters had changed a bit from Carroll's book, but this version was set long after we had first seen them and they had reasons to change (and you could see the shadows of what they used to be). It certainly wasn't as brilliant as the book, but it paid its respect to the original story and attempted to create something in tribute to it.

With Burton, it looks like he has made this mainly with selling it to the mainstream audience in mind instead of trying to create an artful and respectful adaptation.

Loved Sweeney Todd, but I was pretty disappointed with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I'm scared he'll use the same tones and gimmicks as with Charlie... but I'm willing to give this a chance.

__________________
Throwing my opinions where it's not asked for: http://popculturemaiden.com/
http://ultracashcourse.com/femideal

It is going to be a nice combination.. Burton, deep... cant wait to see it

I like this new clip, but the LA Times has given it a mixed review. Something about mixing Lord of the Rings into it.

I saw it today and quite like it

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

shouldnt it be alice in wonderland 2 since its not the orginal story

Maybe a different title but not Alice and Wonderland 2. That would reference a sequel, and that wasn't a sequel to anything.

"Alice in Wonderland"is 3D fantasy adventure directed by Tim Burton, the story about the 19-year old Alice who returns to the whimsical world.

I saw this in 2D. Might catch it in 3D I dont know yet but from what I seen, it probably doesn't really need to be seen in 3D to be enjoyed as much. Sure it would be an added attraction, but it would kind of be in the way with what stands out already when its not three dimensional.

this was an amazing movie saw it on wednesday with my best friend. i saw it in 2d i really dont think you need to see it in 3d but if you really want to go ahead