Alice In Wonderland

The first thing to know is that this is not the original Alice in Wonderland story. Director Tim Burton has said that he was never able to feel an emotional connection with previous versions because it's a girl just going from one strange character to the next, not really a story. So this isn't exactly a sequel or re-imagining, but a sort of extension. And this will likely disappoint, frustrate, or confuse some people.

Once Alice gets into Underland (yes, Underland), I found the film really enjoyable. It's not as whimsical or playful as I might have hoped, but that can be expected when the story is put into a framework and not allowed to just go randomly. You can probably argue that giving this story a grounding goes against the point because part of the charm of the original story is that randomness. But, again, this is something different and new. And it's not a bad thing to give the story an emotional grounding. It helps to give it a more full experience.

I really like that they actually did something new and different with the story. It makes it fresh and gives more a feeling of involvement because you're not quite sure where it's going rather than going through the motions because you already know what's up ahead. One of the most common complaints is that Hollywood doesn't do anything new or original and needs to stop re-making movies or re-adapting books, but this is a clearly a very new take, so that's good, right? Yes.

My only real problem with what they did is give it a sort of Wizard of Oz type of story framework (which is ironic since Lewis Carroll's original Alice stories can likely be pinpointed as an influence in L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz – young girl gets whisked to a strange, magical land and meets various strange characters). While it works for Oz, here it just feels cheap. Does there really have to be character's in Alice's real life that mirror those found in Underland? No. Especially when you want to believe that Underland actually is real, this just suggests it's her imagination. A bit of a let down.

As to be expected from a Tim Burton film, it's visually stunning. Very unique set and character design. But it doesn't distract from what's going on. Unlike other visually powerful, CG-heavy, 3D movies, the setting and all of that does not take center stage and is not the only real reason for the film. In 3D, the movie looks good, there's a few unfortunate instances where they obviously chuck things at the screen for the effect, but the movie just looks full (in a good way, not a distracting way).

Major kudos to Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter for their performances as the Mad Hatter and the Red Queen, respectively. The film is unquestionably theirs. They bring real character to the roles, beyond just being 'mad' or shouting 'off with their heads!' There's emotion in these characters as well. And they play them superbly well and it's a delight to watch them work. It's also somewhat humorous to contemplate the level of weird to have two actors known for taking, and portraying, very eccentric roles and characters in Johnny Depp and Crispin Glover sharing the screen in a Tim Burton film.

The film is very good and a visual treat. It's a joy to watch. Great? No. But so much fun and interesting.

3 stars out of 5