comment #1

Circumvrent says ...

I don't know, I just can't get excited for this. Actually, nothing Burton's done since BIG FISH has made want me to go out and see it.

comment #2

LexG says ...

Time for another "Lex had no childhood" moment, though since Alice in Wonderland is kind of girls' story, maybe not so shameful.

But honestly? I have like no fucking idea what Alice in Wonderland is, or what it's about. And it gets referenced ALL the time in movies and books and songs; So many movies and works of art follow this "down the rabbit hole" shtick that I guess emnates from this-- story? movie? book? kid's novel?

Never read it, never will, don't know, don't care. But everything from LOST to TIDELAND takes some cue from it... Like, who read this shit?

When I was a little kid I wanted to watch violent movies with ass-kicking and slashers and hot chicks and shit. I didn't read Alice in Wonderland. I can't believe any of you guys did either.

comment #3

bluefugue says ...

If you want to be unfamiliar with one of the seminal works of children's literature, knock yourself out. I wouldn't go around bragging about my cultural illiteracy if I were you, though.

comment #4

Rich S. says ...

The 3D trailer got a huge reaction before the showing of Christmas Carol I saw last weekend, particularly the shot of the Cheshire Cat. I personally was really impressed with Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

The novels aren't just seminal works of children's literature, but marvelous evocations of the English language itself. They are some of my favorite works to read aloud.

comment #5

Colin says ...

The 3-d trailer for this film was better than Avatar. I actually believed I could touch the cat!

comment #6

arturobandini2 says ...

I'd watch this Tom Petty music video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5H0wUo37RY ) a thousand more times before I'd go see one more Tim Burton movie. He's right up there with Peter Jackson as far as I'm concerned. Remember what Pauline Kael once said about Alan Parker? "He's got style to burn. And that's exactly what he should do with it -- burn it." Somebody stop Burton before he remakes Mary Poppins with Johnny Depp.

comment #7

Chase Kahn says ...

Milla Jovovich > Lewis Carroll for LexG

comment #8

Eloi Manning says ...

Fuck, could Burton be anymore comfortable at this point in his career. I bet he got paid billions for this. "Put some creepy trees in it, and get Depp to act weird." Ch-ching. Ed Wood was a masterpiece. They don't make films like that anymore.

comment #9

DeeZee says ...

Lex: Could be worse. Most of the people who've adapted it still haven't read The Little Prince.

Colin: Didn't see it in 3-d, but the fact that Cameron's trying to cash in on that audience with the new trailer shows what a hack he's become since True Lies. [Well, that trailer, and Dark Angel.]

Chase: Ironic you should bring her up, since she was initially considered a choice for the lead in the now-dead American McGee movie version of Alice.

Eloi: Not as comfortable as Stevie and Lucas with Indy 4.

comment #10

Steven Kar says ...

Just realised that the last time I kinda liked a Tim Burton movie was back in 1999 with Sleepy Hollow, when I watched it for the first time.

And the last time I loved a Burton movie was in 1994: Ed Wood.

comment #11

Bob Violence says ...

Didn't see it in 3-d, but the fact that Cameron's trying to cash in on that audience with the new trailer shows what a hack he's become since True Lies.

Cameron was working with digital 3D before "that audience" even existed, god knows what your retarded, probably syphilitic ranting is supposed to mean

comment #12

Floyd Thursby says ...

Agree with above comments about the wonderfulness of the 3D Cheshire Cat, better than anything in A Christmas Carrey, one of those odd movies that's neither good nor bad. It's just there, interesting solely for the technology. Surprised, however, at how good Carrey's voices were. He occasionally sounds like Alastair Sim, especially in the scene with Marley. The kiddies surrounding me seemed engrossed.

comment #13

TheGK says ...

As for what Alice in Wonderland was, it was a children's tale written by a Victorian Englishman who was probably hopped up on opium for most of the time he was writing it.
Sounds like fun to me.

Haven't seen the 3D trailer, but I bet the Chesire Cat would look awesome.
I like the look of the posters, but they do seem to be pretty standard Burton.#

comment #14

chicagodad says ...

It's the right material for Burton, certainly. Looks beautiful, and does capture the mood I'd always had in my head.

Rich, how was A Christmas Carol? I'm interested in your opinion.

comment #15

Rich S. says ...

chicagodad,

Christmas Carol is a fascinating, but ultimately maddening film. Aside from a brief chase sequence in which Scrooge is attempting to escape the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come - much of which you see in the trailer- the film is almost slavishly faithful to the novella. It is not by any means the "theme park ride" the trailer portrays.

Except for the scenes at the end that require it, Jim Carrey is admirably restrained. He does a really good job and it's fairly clear that he is at least partially channeling Alistair Sim. Zemeckis' familiarity with the Sim version is made patently obvious by several scenes, most clearly the scene where Scrooge's housekeeper is selling his bed curtains. For a moment, the soundtrack literally sounded lifted from the Sim version.

Many of the sequences - some seen in this version for the first time - are dynamite. The portrayal of the Ghost of Christmas Past as a candle is terrific. I also loved the sequence where Scrooge views Christmas Present through the "glass bottom boat" of the transparent floor of his sitting room.

The best sequences, though, are those that are meant to be scary. The doorknocker, Marley's ghost and the Christmas Yet to Come sequences approach out-and-out horror. It really makes me look forward to the zombie movie Zemeckis apparently has planned next.

And yet....and yet...it just misses. Contrary to some observations, Zemeckis has not beaten the "dead eye problem." It's least noticeable on cartoony characters like Scrooge, Bob Cratchit and the Ghosts, but blatant on characters like Tiny Tim and Fred.

Plus, the film seems oddly truncated. Zemeckis uses some admirable cinematic shorthand to get some of his points across, but some of his omissions are puzzling For example, he omits Scrooge's realization during Fezziwig's party that the party's goodwill exceeded the cost of the thing. There's no real reason to leave out some of the things he does as the film, even with the omissions, is actually seven minutes longer than the Sim version that includes them.

Combining the dead eye thing with these omissions severely blunts the emotional impact of the film. All the parts are there, but they don't come together as a whole.

I would highly recommend the film as a technical exercise, particularly to someone who could "fill in the blanks" as to the scenes/lines that are missing. If for no other reason, you get to see things in this version you'll never see anywhere else. I think it's a worthy addition to the canon, but with a few more tweaks, it could have been a damn near perfect version of the tale.

comment #16

Carl Kolchak says ...

Rich S., I agree almost completely with your take on Christmas Carol.

Contrary to the popular notion, Alice in Wonderland was not the product of drugs. In addition to being a classic children's story, it is also very much a satire of Victorian society.

comment #17

chicagodad says ...

Thanks for the review, Rich. I'll give it a shot after all.

I can't believe they didn't just go in and fix the dead eye thing with more traditional computer animation. It just seems a slavish devotion to MoCap at the expense of quality, which isn't a big surprise, I guess.

Been thinking about A Christmas Carol a lot recently, and I remembered this quote from Harlan Ellison:

"Did you ever notice, the only one in 'A Christmas Carol' with any character is Scrooge? Marley is a whiner who f****d over the world and then hadn't the spine to pay his dues quietly; Belle, Scrooge's ex-girlfriend, deserted him when he needed her most; Bob Cratchit is a gutless toady without enough get-up-and-go to assert himself; and the less said about that little treacle-mouth, Tiny Tim, the better."

Happy Holidays!

comment #18

Rich S. says ...

You're welcome. I didn't mention it, but I also highly recommend seeing it in at least digital 3D (I saw it in true IMAX). There are a couple of scenes you watch through a window, and you can see the glass right in front of your nose, with the action going on behind. The snow effect is also particularly impressive. Let me know what you think.

Ellison cuts to the heart of the matter, as usual.

Happy Holidays to you and yours, as well.

comment #19

MilkMan says ...

Tim Burton is so shallow he makes Wes Anderson look like Tarkovsky. If Burton ever had anything to say about anything it slipped his mind between his first two morning sprays of Aquanet.

comment #20

DeeZee says ...

Bob: I'm not referring to the digital 3-d aspect, but the whole Burton-esque fantasy thing.

comment #21

Colin says ...

Avatar is hardly anything like a "Burton-esque fantasy" unless Worthington dons scissor-hands, the cat people are self-loathing or it takes place in a neo-gothic background.

None of which takes place.

comment #22

DeeZee says ...

Colin: It's a Burton-esque fantasy in the same way that Planet of the Apes was a Burton-esque fantasy.

comment #23

Gordon27 says ...

Ah, so it's similar to the Burton movie that looks and feels nothing like a Burton movie? Brilliant!

comment #24

Gordon27 says ...

Oh, and:

"Eloi: Not as comfortable as Stevie and Lucas with Indy 4. "

I love it when DZ proves that he is the perfect personification of the Internet. Yes, the movie was terrible, but you're the only person in the world still talking about it.

comment #25

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: "Ah, so it's similar to the Burton movie that looks and feels nothing like a Burton movie?"

Yep. A poor man's Burton movie.