Even though I like this version, I greatly prefer the Disney animated film and the 1985 CBS miniseries. There are several things that I think prevent this version from reaching its potential:
1. I didn't like how they shoe-horned in the moral about performing. Even though I'm against adding a moral to this story, period, I wouldn't mind it so much if it was done with tact. Unfortunately, it was done distractingly enough to stand out from the Carroll material, and yet somehow it was half-hearted enough not to pack a punch the way the '85 CBS miniseries did with its moral about growing up.
2. I hated how most of the animal characters were downgraded to humans with vaguely animal characteristics. This made the Caucus race segment almost unbearable, and the White Rabbit's house portion less interesting. It's a shame, too, because I absolutely loved the Gryphon and March Hare and thought the White Rabbit was decent. Taking away most of the literal animals takes away some of the magic of Wonderland for me.
3. This is somewhat related to #1. I felt the added dialogue mostly didn't mesh well with Carroll's prose. I have no problem with added/altered dialogue as I'm not a purist. Disney's version plays fast and loose with the material and is fantastic in its own right, while the 1972 British musical is basically word-for-word and yet is rather dull. So I don't have a problem with additions and alterations as long as they blend well with Carroll's whimsy. Lines like, "I speak both crying and sobbing fluently" and "death worse than fate" don't feel especially witty the way lines like "half a cup, if you don't mind," do in the Disney film. Perhaps this wouldn't be as much of an issue if so many parts of the script weren't taken verbatim from the book.
4. The direction was off. I didn't care for some of the casting choices (Whoopi Goldberg as the Cheshire Cat) or some of the interpretations (Miranda Richardson's whiny Queen). A lot of the timing in the lines didn't work for me, and I felt that sort of undermined the dialogue itself.
5. It bothered me that the film stuck closely with Alice in Wonderland, then suddenly threw in Through the Looking Glass segments in the third act. It felt unbalanced to me, especially since the Looking Glass segments interrupt the tension from the Queen's croquest ground. If they absolutely had to put in some of Looking Glass in there, they should've mixed it up more evenly ala Disney's version.
I know all this makes it sound like I hate the movie, but I don't. There's enough to like about it that I'd give it a solid 7/10. Some of the performances are spot-on (Martin Short as the Mad Hatter, Simon Russell Beale as the King of Hearts, Christopher Lloyd as the White Knight), and the production design and costumes are fantastic. I also liked how they took Carroll's poems and made them actual songs (something the 1985 miniseries only does with a few of them). I just think the issues above hinder it from being a truly great adaptation. I'm really excited to see what Tim Burton does with the story.
reply
share
KristenStewartForever
8 years ago
Shoot me. The Disney animated version was messed up. This beats it because it follows Carroll's books. The Disney version was kiddy and cheesy. This was all Carroll's books set to screen.
reply
share