Tim Burton is a visual wizard, and there is no denying that. He has taken the works of Stephen Sondheim, Bob Kane, Roald Dahl, Washington Irving, and now Lewis Carroll and has turned them all into wonderful visual gems. However, sometimes Tim Burton’s creepy, quirky, and sometimes just bizarre directing style doesn’t quite mix with the original works. It worked wonderfully with “Sweeney Todd”, “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”, and “Sleepy Hollow”. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for “Alice in Wonderland”, Tim Burton’s latest visual gem. Even though I would be the first to admit that “Alice in Wonderland” is gorgeous to look at (especially in IMAX) and the cast of actors is mostly excellent, the source material’s mood and attitude rarely shines through the clouds of Tim Burton’s weird yet very entertaining directing style.
Alice is now 19 years old. Her father has passed away and she’s about to be proposed to by a snooty aristocrat in front of many esteemed members of Victorian society. Just as her intended fiancé proposes to her, she sees a white rabbit with a waistcoat and pocket watch, and in typical Alice fashion she (predictably) follows it. And where does that lead her? Unless you’ve been living in a cave for 200 years, you know she tumbles down the rabbit hole. And unless you are a complete idiot, you know that Alice ends up in Wonderland (the real name of the place is actually Underland). In Wonderland, Alice meets many weird and bizarre characters such as the Cheshire Cat, Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the hookah-smoking Caterpillar, and of course the Mad Hatter. Alice is then told it is her destiny to fight the evil Red Queen and slay the Jabberwocky, and there her strange adventure begins.
As a warning for all you Lewis Carroll purists out there, stay away from this film. If you go into it expecting a faithful rendering of Lewis Carroll’s mad world, you are going to walk out of the theater pissed off. This is more of a Tim Burton film than a reimagining of Lewis Carroll’s universe and unless you are a big Tim Burton fan like me, you will have no idea what I mean. Half of the time the madness of Lewis Carroll and quirkiness of Tim Burton balance out wonderfully. The other half of the time, one element heavily outweighs the other and it’s always the wrong one. When a scene requires more of Lewis Carroll’s zany incomprehension, Tim Burton’s deranged style always overshadows the more important factor. When Tim Burton is needed to spice things up, we are left with Lewis Carroll’s bland taste in our mouths. But the times that the balance is perfect, the effects are truly remarkable. I felt a sense of true wonder and intrigue during those scenes. The script (written by Disney vet Linda Woolverton) captures a great deal of Carroll’s original vision during the first half of the film. But the second half could not match the brilliance and wonder of the first. The film ends safe with a typical CGI battle scene that isn’t particularly good, and how the battle is ended isn’t very rewarding.
One of the film’s greatest strength lies with its actors, and there are plenty of fine performances here. Newcomer Mia Wasikowska is a revelation as Alice. She perfectly captures Alice’s sense of adventure and presents herself as a strong female character and a more than worthy choice of taking on the lead role. Unlike so many other films with quirky characters, Wasikowska never lets herself become a backdrop for the cast of colorful characters. Whenever it seems she will become a backdrop, she provides a reason why she is just as interesting as the CGI characters. Helena Bonham Carter is an absolute joy to watch. I think I laughed out loud every time she screamed at the top of her lungs “OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!” She brings a cold, yet strangely appealing zest to her performance as the Red Queen and I almost forgot that it was Tim Burton’s girlfriend who was playing this role. I really felt like this role belonged to her, and she took it and owned it. Anne Hathaway is also very good as the White Queen, a cute yet deranged Glenda-like witch. The voice-acting is probably even better than the live-action performances. Michael Sheen is great as the legendary White Rabbit. Timothy Spall does a marvelous job as a heroic bloodhound. Matt Lucas is hysterical as both Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Alan Rickman is fantastic as the (heavily underused) Caterpillar. But the finest performance in the film comes from Stephen Fry who voices the Cheshire Cat. His wicked sensuality and incredible voice combine to make a compelling and thoroughly entertaining performance. I loved listening to the Cheshire Cat as much as I did looking at him, and that’s saying a lot.
And for those of you saying to yourselves “hey, Dr. Razak hasn’t mentioned Johnny Depp yet”, don’t worry he’s next. Unfortunately, I cannot say that I thoroughly enjoyed Johnny Depp’s highly publicized performance as the Mad Hatter. As many of you know, Johnny Depp is my favorite actor working in Hollywood today and he always brings a unique flavor and zest to each of his roles. For the Mad Hatter, he does bring a unique flavor and zest to the character but he’s not a compelling character. It’s the strangest thing. His performance contains everything I love in a bizarre Johnny Depp performance but for this kind of material, the way he plays the character is almost completely inappropriate. Now I’m not saying I hated Johnny Depp’s performance (he nailed the tea party scene), but it’s not as enjoyable to watch as his performances in other Tim Burton films. Another performance I didn’t particularly care for was Crispin Glover’s performance as the Knave of Hearts. He felt completely out of place and was nowhere near as interesting as the Red Queen and the Mad Hatter.
But the main attraction of “Alice in Wonderland” is the computer generated imagery, and let me tell you that the special effects in this film are absolutely stunning. I loved looking at “Alice in Wonderland” more than liked looking at Pandora. The landscape is so colorful and creative that I felt like I had completely left Earth and had been cast into Wonderland. Many of the sets are also incredible. The Red Queen’s castle is a sight to behold, and the White Queen’s castle looks like something out of a J.R.R. Tolkien novel. All of the CGI characters are animated beautifully. The Cheshire Cat looks fantastic, Tweedledee and Tweedledum are creepily charming, and the Caterpillar is wonderfully animated.
But the visual appeal of this film isn’t flawless. I didn’t like the way the Red Queen’s card soldiers looked. I thought they looked very clunky and not very cool to look at. A character exclusion that I found very disappointing was that of the talking doorknob. As a child, that was one of my favorite characters from the 1951 animated “Alice in Wonderland” and I was very disappointed that the talking doorknob wasn’t included in this film. A wonderful CGI trick performed in the film is Helena Bonham Carter’s large head. The way they enlarge her head to match her ego is hilarious and her first appearance is one of the best scenes in the film.
For those interested in seeing it in IMAX, it is definitely worth the hefty ticket price. The scope is so wide and expansive. You actually feel like you are tumbling down the rabbit hole, and I ducked when the March Hare threw a tea cup at the screen. It’s a great experience if you are willing to give up a well-spent $16.
Overall, “Alice in Wonderland” isn’t the great follow-up to “Sweeney Todd” I was hoping for and it’s certainly not one of Tim Burton’s best, but it’s still an entertaining film that took my breath away during certain moments. B
No comments:
Post a Comment