MovieChat Forums > Dreamchild (1985) Discussion > Strange inconclusive film

Strange inconclusive film


I would be interested to hear other reactions to this film, since I was totally taken aback by the ending. Just when I thought we were finally getting somewhere -- that I was finally going to learn the "secret" that Alice Hargreaves had been carrying around with her for seventy years -- the credits began to roll.

The film suggests, rather strongly, that Alice had been abused in some way by Dodgson, but this is never resolved in any way. There were so many other loose ends -- none of which were ever tied up -- that I found the film quite frustrating. Yes, it was well acted, and the images are beautiful and haunting, but what on earth was the director trying to tell us? What were we supposed to take away from this film? I agree that Dodgson "loved" Alice, but if he did, then it was in an inappropriate way. She wasn't pubescent -- she was only ten years old, and the actress who portrayed young Alice was clearly still a little girl, not a teenager.

I have to say I found it all mysterious, inconclusive, and quite disturbing.

reply

Actually you have the entire plot backwards..this film is about the presumption that becuase Dodgeson cared so greatly for Alice there must be something wrong with him because he was a bachelor and not supposed to care for children or little girls. It has to do with Victorian society and their ridiculous notions that a bachelor couldn't love children the way a father would and that he must be ill. Mrs. Hargreaves nightmares were from the implications and assumptions made by her mother most notibly and only her sister seemed to really understand Dodgeson just cared for Alice as a doting uncle or second father figure.
Try watching it again with that idea in your head and the plot actualy has a resolution at the end.
Dodgeson was suspected of unnatural love for children for decades until it was fianlly revealled that he was a just man who loved children something Victorian society couldn't understand..it wasn't masculine..or whatever.. pshaw!
Had he gotten married and had children of his own no one would have even thought such thoughts but because he was a confirmed bachelor...silly silly silly...

reply

It has to do with Victorian society and their ridiculous notions that a bachelor couldn't love children the way a father would and that he must be ill.
Victorian Society? What about modern society? His behavious would seem even more troubling these days (based on this movie).

If I have to tell you again, we're gonna take it outside and I'm gonna show you what it's like!

reply

Very well perceived, I agree completely. An absolutely wonderful movie.

____________
Life is full of misery, loneliness, and suffering - and it's all over much too soon.

reply

I think that Dodgson loved Alice, but knew it was hopeless and only subtly showed this emotion towards her. He did not molest her; he had several chances, but never did. He was portrayed as a shy and nervous man (good job for Holm) not a child abuser or monster. His love appeared strong enough, though. He stuttered around her and spoke to her in riddles hinting that he did not want her to marry someone else, or that she should be careful in choosing a husband when old enough. The most obvious portrayal of his love, I believe, is when he was staring at her on the water, and she splashed him- -a man loving a girl, she notices, and reacts in an embarrased and childish manner. She apologized, of course; her mother told her to, and she was sorry- -he was a harmless man and she knew he loved her. I believe that he earmarked her for himself. At one point, the old Alice stated that she could always recognize the emotion of love in other people, cut to her recollection of Dodgson telling her to be careful when choosing a husband. As a child she pretended not to understand, she may have had a childish understanding; he was her friend and I don't believe the thought of an old man, as Dodgson was portrayed in comparison to Alice, in love with her would have been pleasant.

Much of the affection shown to her by Dodgson, I believe, Alice repressed or overlooked as a child, and as an adult, she found new meaning in it by the end of the movie. She revisited many of the characters he created for her as an old woman and did feel shame in growing older. She said that she could never be the child that she was, which was true and I would feel the same if I were her. It was ridiculous for them to ask that of her. Perhaps, she never felt that she was Alice in the stories, and she only treated them as stories given as a gift- -if that. She told him when she was a child that they were only stories, this was after he kept asking her if she would always remember them. He put great care into them, yet she did not fully recognize this. This is linked to the touchy acknowledgement of his loving her. She is shown as never treating him as if he meant as much to her as she meant to him, how could she? He wanted more from her, what she could not give as a child- -he knew this, but at times nudged her with questions. In this scene, he kept asking her how she would keep the book that he gave her, wanting her to in some way give him comfort in knowing that she cherished his gift. She ran off to be with her sister and others.

Her mother got rid of his letters to her- -to me, this implies that there was something in them that hinted at his very real love for her. Mother Liddell must have not believed him to be a molester, for she allowed her children to hang around with him, especially Alice, many a day. It is as if Dodgson was a strange person to them, shy, maybe, but endearing and Mrs. Liddell seemed to have respect for him. I read that Alice's mother and Dodgson later had a falling out and Alice saw less of him in her later years b/c of it; what I read implied that the reason of the falling out is that he intended to be a suitor for Alice, but her mother wanted someone more suitable. Alice did marry someone else, had children, and grew old, as she was shown to have done in the movie, and as everyone does. She did go to his centarium, or whatever and met one of the boys (then men) who inspired Peter Pan.

At the end of the movie, her last recollection was of her apologizing to Dodgson after instigating laughter at him. At that time, I believe she was acting out her embarrasment of him, showing off as some kids do. He recited to them a piece of his story for her after she requested him to do so. She and the group (except her sister) began to laugh at him, a foolish old man, speaking nonsense. She knew that she held him in the palm of her hand and that he was doing what he was doing for her. This may have embarrased her and at the same time gave her a feeling of power. She did not recognize that he was truly hurt; she was a young girl playing. She apologized as she did after she splashed him on the water and gave him a kiss. His hand dropped down in a telling gesture. He did love her very much and did things just for her. But she was a child and did not know how to handle this. At the end, she remembers this last occurance, b/c she had finally realized or let herself realize the true emotion that he felt for her. She admired him for this and felt sorry about her treatment of him. She never fully acknowledged his gift until the end of the movie, b/c she finally let herself remember and accept everything at the end of her youth. She couldn't accept it as a child, and not as a young woman, b/c she was married to another man and had to follow a different path. At the end, you can only look back on the past and see things in a whole new light. He immortalized her as a child, the dreamchild that he was in love with; she finally was able to give back to him what she couldn't when she was young. The speech that she gave was for him, but also for the children; however he did write down the story at her request, so I believe it was hers.

reply

Caprineno, probably one of the best synopses of the film I've ever read. It is clear in this movie Dodgson (aka Lewis Carroll) felt an a deep love for young Alice.

The movie does cause us to think and question. The subject matter is very taboo and not fully understood, but since the time period in this movie is well over 100 years ago it is a little easier to accept that tolerances were different; ie we know historically that often young girls were married at 13-14 to men much older. Some people are going to see Dodgeson as child molester and his only interest is to molest young Alice. To them any suggestion that Dodgeson might have loved young Alice and always respected her childhood, is promoting the acceptance of sexual relationships with children.

It is a very dangerous line so it easy to understand people's extreme skepticism. If a man feels a romantic attraction towards a young girl, it takes a lot of self control to keep from reaching across the line between that separates the adult world from childhood; seducing the immature girl into engaging in mature activities.

reply

[deleted]

There is this movie's depiction of Lewis Carroll and then there is the real person who live; they are not the same. To comment on the movie's depiction of Carrol may, or may not, be a comment on the real person. My previous comments are strictly on the character in the movie. I have no detailed knowledge of the real Lewis Carrol's life. I had read they did have some kind of relationship as adults and he did want marry Alice, but there were family objections to the marriage. Sense I read it from only once source, I don't know if the information is accurate.

In the movie Lewis Carroll can easily be perceived as individual who has pedophilia as we define it today. Pedophilia, simply defined as the sexual and\or emotional attraction towards children who are not completely sexual mature. Pedophilia does not inherently mean child molestation. This movie doesn't suggest the relationship between Carroll and Alice involved anything we would consider child molestation.

In the movie Carroll is depicted has having a very powerful attraction for Alice that it causes him to stutter. Most people can identify with that specific feeling, even if they can't relate to being attracted to a 11 year old girl in that way. Who hasn't felt so attracted to someone that they find it difficult to talk for a few moments. Maybe meeting that rock\movie star, or simply a girl at party that appears to be a perfect 10 in the eyes of that individual. Perfect 10 simply being what each person finds to be over amazingly attractive, not how "attractive" is defined by media, Hollywood, society, etc, thus a perfect 10 different for everyone.

My conclusion after watching this movie is that the movie suggests that Carroll loved Alice and that he never harmed her in any way. Alice does not understand\accept this until the end of the movie. This too I think many people can related to; having a person strongly attracted to them, but they do not feel that same attraction back. Like Alice, it is possible to sense that you have power over that person, but not understand why.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Blaine, My focus is strictly on the movie, not how it compares with the known facts of his life. The movie does not hint at any other interests in other young girls other than Alice. I agree that the real Lewis Carroll did have other interests, but this movie is not about those girls, just his relationship with Alice. It is my view that the movie is suggesting he loved her; a fictional version of their relationship as told through the memories of Alice as an old woman, who remained uncertain about what motivated him to be so intensely interested her as a young girl. It is the old Alice that is confused as an adult, not the young alice who doesn't have the any expience in dealing with men such as Carroll. I think it is common for adults to reflect back trying to understand events that happen in their child hood. People can identify with the movie in that way.

It was not necessary go into the specific details of the emotional component of pedophilia. My comment on Pedophilia was a general\broad statement and can easily be picked apart for not fully defining what pedophilia is, and is not. I simply was clarifying that my use of Pedophilia was not intended to imply "Child Molestation", which is often how people choose to view\read it. The terms are not the same, so I clarified my usage for that post. What makes me role my eyes is that people (such as yourself), still focus in on the term no matter what the context or the underlining intent. Please go back and read my pervious comment understanding I'm not trying to fully define Pedophilia.

reply

[deleted]

I better understand. Since your first post in the thread was created as an reply to my message, I was reading it as if your comments were in response to my thoughts.

I have a copy of the movie that I recorded on VHS back in 1985. The quality of the video quality is now in sad shape.

reply

[deleted]

I would also like to see a DVD version, but tend to doubt that one will be released. The traffic on this board is an example of one reason why; few people saw the movie when it came out, maybe a few more have seen it on VHS. The demand is not there. One reason it could be released on DVD is because Jim Henson was involved in the production.

With the popular wave of conservative thought in the US, the movie could easly be targeted as a movie that is promoting something that it is not.

reply

[deleted]

Dreamchild is apparently now out on DVD. It was newly acquired by the local library (in New Zealand, so may be behind the times). I watched it after reading The Looking Glass House, a novel by Alice Liddell's great granddaughter, which added greatly to my understanding and appreciation of the film.

reply

For anyone who's interested, Encore (w/ Starz) is showing Dreamchild this month. I just finished watching it, and think I'll need some time to sort out my feelings on the whole matter. It's clear that Dodgson's practices of photographing/drawing nude young girls and befriending them would never happen today, so I'm torn between wondering if there was a pure sort of love between him and his charges, or if something else was going on, as this sort of thing wasn't discussed when I was a child, much less in those times. Lots to think about . . .

reply

[deleted]

Thanks for posting that it is on Encore this month. I have not seen it on any of movie channels or otherwise in over 20 years. Now that I have a DVD recorder, I can get a good copy of the movie.

It is my opinion that Dodgeson as portrayed in this movie loved Alice. The real life dodgeson might have something else all together. This is a movie with a perspective that suggests Dodgeson has a powerful attraction towards young Alice, so powerful that it triggered a stutter when he was around her. Was he attracted to her as a individual\unique person, or was he attracted to her because he was attacted to all girls of that age?

reply

I haven't seen anyone discuss the uselessness of the reporter and her aid Lucy to the film. Not knowing anything about Dodgon, the film does lead you believe there was more to their relationship. Now this my not be the case, but it is up to a film to comunicate the idea fully. I realize as well you never see Dodgson ever touching Alice, but as a viewer I wrote that off as they were not able to due to thought of controversy. Not really a very good movie at all.

Blah Blah Blah

reply

>>Not knowing anything about Dodgon, the film does lead you believe there was more to their relationship

Can you be more specific? What did the movie hint about their relationship?

reply

Sure. I wasn't specific enough. What I meant to say is that they hint through suggestive glances made by Dodgon towrd Alice that his thought are of a lustful nature. They concerned look on the face of her mother act those glances as well as her ripping up letters he wrote to her. That act of ripping the letters suggests there is something of a scandelous nature in them. The fact that she has repressed the memories of Dodgon. The fact in her first hallucination she see's him in a room with his back to her and is followed by him looking back. He's doing this in a more intense way than would suggest a fondness in seeing her.

These examples cinematicly/story wise allude to Dodgson wanting more from a relationship than friendship. This may not be the case. But as someone ignorent about Dodgson life, the film makers lead the movie goer down that path.

Blah Blah Blah

reply

I'll have watch the movie again and look at the more subtle aspects to the movie.

My overall take on the movie was that throughout her entire life the memory of Dodgeson stuck with her and she never understood why he had such a fondness for her as child. My perception is that Dodgeson never crossed any boundaries with her, but he had many odd moments and conversations with her as girl that she never understood. As a child she accepted him and his behavior without much thought, but as an adult reflecting back on her childhood she was unable to understand his motives. One possible way of looking at Dodgeson is that on an emotional level he was no older or more experienced than a 13 year old boy who find her extremely attractive, and those emotions very overpowering for him. I think most of us can related to those feelings in different circumstances. The person who knows the character motivations is Ian Holme. It would be interesting to hear Holmes thoughts on nature of the relationship between Dodgeson and Alice. He was playing the character in a certain way. Maybe the character was played as a man who is attracted to many young girls, or maybe he only felt that strong attraction for Alice, and no other girls.

reply

Good post. But that is the very purpose of my post. I wanted more answers. Not spelled out for me, but maybe something I could grab onto in Holms performance. I felt he was under used and instead of spending time with the reporter and Lucy, we could have had more time with Alice in her fantasy world dealing with old age and her relationship with Dodgeson. The film was flimsy and light. It didn't dig deeper and explore more. And I think the main reason is.. they didn't have the budget to create more of Dodgesons world and therefore beefed up their movie with fluff that went no where.

And further more, I thought old Alice was amazing in the film.

Blah Blah Blah

reply

I wasn't able to make any parallel connections between Dodgeson\Alice relationship and the Reporter\Lucy relationship. Makes me wonder if the original script lacked the Report\Lucy relationship and it was tacked on to give the movie a mainstream appeal(to help increase $$$).

I need to watch it again; sometimes film makers intentionally leave certain aspects of a movie for the viewer interpret as they see fit (ie Closer, Crash, The Woodsman, Lost in translation). This may or may not have been the case for Dream Child. Maybe they didn't want to try to answer the deeper question as to the motivations of Dodgeson. I like movies that can have multiple interruptions depending on how the individual chooses to look at it. In this movie Dodgeson can easily be perceived as a Pedophile (Note: Not all pedophiles molest children), but since the movie does not suggest he has any interest in other young girls, it leaves the door open for the interpretation that Dodgeson was only interested in young Alice (for whatever reasons). As historical info, the real Dodgeson took many nude photos of young girls. I am not aware of any that would be considered to sexual in nature. And several photo "Art" books include such photos as examples of early nudes. The photos I have seen are not offensive, unless a person considers non-sexual photos of nude children to be offensive.

With that said, it is a delicate balance when trying to create a movie that intentionally does not want to answer some questions, but successfully has all the right elements so the viewer is able understand the movie from various different perspectives and not think there are unnecessary gaps of information. I too would have preferred to see much more of Dodgeson and less of the Reporter\Lucy. Probably several interesting Dodgeson scenes were left behind on the cutting room floor.

reply

[deleted]

Caprineto gave a great interpretation of the film, esp Dodgson's and Alice's relationship. I do think the previous poster's comments about Victorians and their stance on sexuality is also important - the French philosopher Foucault wrote extensively about the Victorian pre-occupation with how sex and sexual attitudes were managed by the Victorians, especially regarding children. Basically, they saw "sex" everywhere; this makes sense regarding Alice's mother's wariness of Dogdson.
Re Caprineto's interpretation, there is a delicate line b/t unresolved adoration and molestation. Alice was clearly a "dreamchild" to Dodgson - ethereal, of another world - out of reach. She was something that he created; he must have realized after she humiliated him that there was a disjuncture between his idea of her and the reality of her. Yet you can also read the film title as pertaining to him; another poster mentioned that he acted rather like a 13 year old boy - perhaps he, too, is the dreamchild - head lost in the clouds, concerned with fanciful ideas, unable to function fully in "reality".

the film is haunting, and rather sad. it takes journeys across time and space for alice to come to terms with her past. it seems that alice decides that dogdson's embarassing love for her is redeemed by the legacy his work constitutes for so many generations of children (and adults). i wish the whole modern story of her maid and the reporter had been dropped and more time in flashbacks - ian holms and amelia shankley were wonderful together. i wonder how the girl actor understood alice's motivations.

reply

[deleted]

People are going to be attracted to whatever attracts them. Red hair? Tall? Short? Young?, etc. How they choose to behave based on their attraction can be harmful to others. There are men who are turned on by rape, but I suspect only a small percentage of those men actually commit rape. I also suspect there are a larger percent of adult men who are attracted to younger, underage, girls, but only a small percentage of those men actually act upon their attraction. I have faith that a vast majority of people are able to control their behavior. The paranoia is that if a individual feels an attraction, they also feel compelled to act on it.

reply

Having read a fair amount about Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (Lewis Carroll), I would say that the implications of this film are correct: Dodgson was in love with Alice Liddell; he didn't simply love her as a father or an uncle would. He was in love with her, yes, but the love he had for her, although romantic in nature, was also reverent, respectful, and benevolent.

It seems obvious to me that Ian Holm, great actor that he is, fully believes that Dodgson was in love with Alice Liddell, and that he is developing his role to that end. Simply observe the way his Dodgson gazes at Alice many times in the film: he is smitten, adoring, downright worshipful of the girl.

Charles Dodgson was a shy, complicated, brilliant Oxford mathematics don who really only felt comfortable around children, especially girls. There are some biographers who make a good point that Dodgson only liked female children. There is evidence of this in his writings, as he often wrote unflatteringly about boys.

Many of Dodgson's contemporaries found him shy and retiring with adults; but all attest to the fact that when around little girls, he became playful, spirited, and rather childlike himself. He was an undeniably gifted man, and, most importantly, one that best related emotionally to children. He had many friends who were female children, and, in my opinion, he fell in love with one of them, Alice Liddell. Since he related best to children, it follows that when he fell in love, he would fall in love with a child. It is not our right to judge him, since there is no evidence to support any of the later questions as to whether he abused girls in any way. A good biographer will not state his/her beliefs with any conviction on this point. Rather, upon reading about him, one gets a clearer idea of his character, and the strong feeling that he would never abuse anyone. This humane film also does not judge him, to its merit. Rather, it empathizes with him as a man and an artist.

Dodgson was a great writer who gave Alice Liddell the rare gift of his talent. That's what this film is about. Alice finally realizes, in her later years, the full nature of his love for her, and, implicitly, the pain he must have suffered at not being able to fully realize this love by marrying her. Dodgson knew that he would have to let Alice go; he knew that Mrs. Liddell did not see him as a proper match for her daughter, even if Alice had been willing to accept Dodgson when she grew to marrying age.

If you are still in any doubt that Dodgson was in love with Alice, consider the epilogue he wrote in "Through the Looking-Glass", which includes these lines about Alice herself:

Long has paled that sunny sky:
Echoes fade and memories die:
Autumn frosts have slain July.

Still she haunts me, phantomwise,
Alice moving under skies
Never seen by waking eyes.

reply

People said the same thing about J.M. Barrie... his 'unnatural' love for children.
People tend to be so biggoted towards what they've been raised to believe...
They refuse to see that sometimes, you can love someone... truly LOVE someone, without any sexual attraction whatsoever.
J.M. Barrie loved the children he wrote Peter Pan for, Lewis Carrol loved this little girl, Alice. Why people have to corrupt such a beautiful thing as innocent love with something as corrupted as child molestation... it really shows how sick society is.

He's a Goblin Babe!!! (And I'm not talking about the kid...)

reply

I only watched this because Ian Holm was in it and he was in LOTR and I am obssessed with LOTR, but thats not the point. most of the time when I watch a movie with a LOTR actor in it I like the movie (or can at least understand it) but this was by far a totally confusing movie, sorta good but too confusing for me to understand ANY of it. I just don't quiet get it. can anyone explain it?

in this movie (just IMO) it made Ian's character seem like a total pervert.

reply

Victorians simply had a more romantic view of children and childhood than we do today. Back then there wasn't tv, radio, dvds, etc., to poison childrens' characters as early as possible, all they had for entertainment were books, prose and poetry, parlor music, theater, etc. They created their own fantasy worlds which I'm sure were far more interesting than our own.

reply

Not only did James Matthew Barrie love the boys he adopted them all when their parents died. He didn't have to do that. They were his family by the time their mother died. His wife left him because he was impotent (there was no Viagra back then to fix that problem), he had no one else to love. Nico, the youngest, always stated there was absolutely no paedophilia there. "If there was we boys would have known it, but there was not" he was quoted as saying in The Lost Boys.

reply

The comments by lh_lh82 and dknow3 are absolutely the best ones in this thread. They sum up this lovely film perfectly. I'm so glad someone put it so well.

reply

You missed the entire point of the film. The ending is indeed conclusive. Reverend Charles Dodgson's love for Alice Liddell was pure and free of the taint of anything inappropriate. Alice's "loss of innocence" is simply the result of growing up and accepting a set of conventional attitudes that cause her to question unconditional love.

Reverend Dodgson' gift to Alice - Lewis Carroll's gift to the world - was to preserve a measure of childhood innocence and keep it with us throughout our lives. In adult life, Alice Liddell had lost that gift. It is her near death experience that causes her to re-examine her life, reassess her attitudes, and redirect her life. It is quite literally an epiphany that allows her to accept unconditional love.

Your view of the story is an example of falling into the same trap as Alice Liddell did before she grew wise.


"Ignore the man behind the curtain!"

reply

i found the ending strangely abrupt too-----and i know we all here are trying to understand the famous author's "love" for children, and his social ineptitude, but excuse me-----who falls "in love" with a child?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Just a quick report of a real-person episode in the life of a friend of mine. Her grandmother was years and years younger than her grandfather. It was said that friends asked the grandfather, when he was a young man, why he hadn't yet married. He said, "I'm going to wait for _____ to grow up". She was three or four at the time. He did wait for her to grow up and he married her, and they went on to have a large family together. There was never any whiff of anything inappropriate between them during that long wait. He obviously really loved her, and wanted to wait for her. It worked for them. So, it really can happen.

Yodi

reply

The film suggests the opposite. That Alice was NOT abused by Dodgson and only now, in old age, can understand and face that he loved her. She recognizes what he felt and how she without realizing it hurt him.

If he had abused her, she would have had some knowledge of Dodgson's inner life.

Alice learns compassion.

reply