Friday, March 12, 2010

Review: Alice in Wonderland (Theatrical)

I'll start this review off discussing my stance on this 3-D craze that has attacked movie theaters (and America's wallets) as of late. I want to remind everybody of the 50s, during a time that I feel like everybody has forgotten, when all movies seemed to be in 3-D. Not that I was alive back then, but doesn't anybody remember those pictures of conservative 1950s audiences wearing 3-D glasses at the movies and being shocked at the giant bugs popping off the screen? Remember how the movie version of "Kiss Me Kate" was awkwardly in 3-D? And remember how that fad ended? And remember that it became a joke or theme park novelty (thanks Muppet Vision!)? So then why is it a big deal all of a sudden again? Sure I appreciate the novelty of 3-D, but I'm just waiting for this to all blow over in a couple of years. I don't particularly like it or think that it even adds anything to a movie and it hurts my eyes when things move around the screen quickly. The true test for me is when I see "Avatar" on DVD. Whereas I thought the 3-D aided that movie in placing the audience in a completely different world, I feel like now it's just being thrown on any movie, and that bothers me.

I could have liked "Alice in Wonderland" in 2-D, I'm sure. Perhaps I would have liked it even more than I did, as I felt like it was a generally blah movie altogether. I definitely feel like it didn't add anything to the story or the movie going experience except for having all the kids in the theater comment on how they could touch everything. Which also brings me to the awful movie going experience we had seeing this. I couldn't believe the young children who came, never mind the idiot family who showed up (a group of like 7, in a sold out showing) five minutes before the movie started, WITH A BALLOON AND AN INFANT. WHYYYYY. That angered me so much. So the balloon waved in the corner and the baby cried a lot and then I punched them all in the face.

OK, so back to the movie itself. I couldn't believe it was a Tim Burton movie, because it lacked a lot of...something. Creativity? It just seemed like a watered down Burton, or a commercialized Burton. Which I guess it was. A Disney-fied Tim Burton. Maybe he's lost the knack he was known for - that quirky off beat dark movies that actually had some heart and imagination. This movie seemed like it was just created in the vein of his other movies, to make someone some money because they knew Tim Burton and Wonderland would be a good match. Sure the movie looked like a Burton film, with the twisted greenery and the pale complexions and the general lack of eyebrows (except Anne Hathaway's White Queen) but maybe it just didn't live up to the expectations I had for what the movie could've been.

I thought the plot was way too contrived, with Alice going back to Wonderland and everybody there kept telling her she has been brought back to save them but she keeps denying this saying "they've got the wrong Alice" for no reason except to make the plot longer until Alice realizes she is that Alice. Le duh. I even found Johnny Depp to be oddly disappointing. I wanted him to be more...well, a tad more "mad" as the Mad Hatter and especially as compared to his cartoon counterpart he was kind of boring. And let's talk about the awkward hip hop dance he does which seems totally incongruous to the rest of the movie, but it's as if Depp said "I want to do a crazy dance at the end" and everybody was like, "You're Johnny Depp. Do what you want." I am not sure what the kid sitting next to me said when the dance started, but I choose to believe he did say "Hella Awkward." Which it was.

Maybe it was all the CGI of the movie that let me down a little. I didn't think it would bother me, and it kind of threw me back to the brilliant sequences of "Mary Poppins" or "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" with the live action characters cohabitating with animated characters on screen. But whereas those movies made those scenes feel magical, "Alice" left me with the sense of the CGI being a copout. It might as well has been an entirely animated movie. Oh wait, didn't that already happen once in 1951? And even though that "Alice in Wonderland" may not be one of my all time favorite Disney movies (it's still one of the best, but just not one of the top 10 favorites), this "Alice in Wonderland" pales in comparison.

I just think this was a case of a movie not living up to the expectations I had going into it because of the movie's premise, concept, director and cast. "Alice" should have been everything I thought it would've been, but it wasn't. I was entertained, sure, but I was also bored, unimpressed, and wished it wasn't in 3-D.

Please stop the 3-D trend. K-thanks.

Patrick Approval Rating: 6/10


No comments:

Post a Comment