As a fan of Tim Burton, I went to see "Alice in Wonderland" the night it opened. For a late school-night showing (especially on a night before an 8:30 class) and $12 (apparently 3D is expensive, this was quite an increase from the regular $5 ticket price), this movie wasn't really worth the price or the next day's exhaustion. Granted, I would still recommend seeing it, but don't expect Tim Burton's best, and don't pay the extra for the 3D.
I had high hopes for this film. It had been advertised for quite a long time, so I had been looking forward to it for quite some time. But Tim Burton failed to deliver a movie up to his own standards. He did create an entertaining sequel to "Alice in Wonderland," and the combination of live-action and animation was pretty impressive. But like Dargis says in her article, Alice seems somewhat of a side-note. Burton spent more time focusing on characters like the Mad Hatter, played by Johnny Depp, who seems somewhat of a strange combination between his previous roles as Jack Sparrow and Willy Wonka. And there were some obvious casting failures. Anne Hathaway should stick to movies like "Princess Diaries" and "The Devil Wears Prada." Her character was flat and unconvincing.
Anyhow, it was interesting to hear Dargis's opinion of the movie in her article. She describes several aspects of the movie in witty, descriptive vocabulary that was both interesting and entertaining to read, and her insights about the movie made me recognize aspects of the film that I hadn't paid much attention to before.
Yeah, I was upset that I ended up lured in my that film as well. I felt like everyone in it was relying on their old stand by audience-pleasers. Yes, Johnny Depp, we know you can make weird faces and speak in crazy accents. He hardly brought anything other than that to the table. And much in the same way, neither did Tim Burton or his wife. Thumbs down.
ReplyDelete