Alice In Wonderland

[Alexandro]

 Anybody who's ever seen a movie before is already able to picture in their mind what "Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland" is going to be...

No we didn't. How could we? Was there any way to anticipate this goddamn mess of a movie? I'm simply stunned at how bad it was. How boring. My god!! They kill the spirit of Carroll by actually turning up a story that makes sense instead of the original madness. No humor, Alice turned into a "girlpower" commercial, characters showing up and going away without doing anything memorable. Just sucked big time.

[MacGuffin]

I quite enjoyed this, aside from the WTF breakdance scene.

[polkablues]

I agree with everything Alexandro said.  Burton's whole take on the material was an abrogation of everything that was ever good about Alice in Wonderland.  He robbed it of its uniqueness and replaced it with an increasingly tired and predictable goth aesthetic.  There was no wonder to it, and while the main character was obsessed with the idea that it was all a dream, the story had none of the dream logic that set apart the books and the original Disney adaptation.  It was simply a point A to point B story with obnoxious characterizations and a goddamn battle scene at the climax.  And the CGI was horrible.  Nothing looked finished, nothing moved right... there were shots that wouldn't have looked out of place in a Syfy original movie.

It was still better than "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," though.

[pete]

tim burton is the dave matthews of film.  his specialty, whether or not he's conscious of this, is that he leaves a healthy dosage of artifice in every execution so the viewers feel sophisticated in picking out these elements of filmmaking that are usually invisible.  but his stories have always been so generic and he has never delivered on the promise of wildness in his art direction because in terms of storytelling, pacing, camerawork, and editing - he's quite generic and lacks the manic energy that other flashy filmmakers have; filmmakers such as The Coens or Tarantino or Jean-Pierre Jeunet - guys who also make their marks by promising to be wild and artificial, but these guys, say what you will about their works, write much more maniacal scripts to compliment the texture/tone of their films.

in short - burton's films only look idiosyncratic but never are truly idiosyncratic - except Ed Wood.

[john]

And, just like Matthews music, Alice in Wonderland is wildly successful and I still haven't met a single person who love it without apology. Or even love it apologetically, for that matter.

I like to remain, in the words of the AV Club "cautiously optimistic" about practically any film - but I can't even bring myself to see this.

What's even worse is that it clogged up the screen at the Castro Theater for a full fucking month that could have been devoted to interesting, exciting programming that, you know, I couldn't see at every fucking AMC.

[pete]

castro is a sad case of a theater brought to its knees by a shitty film crowd.  San Fran has like a dozen indie theaters, but they have not found a way to build a relevant, exciting crowd, nevermind exciting programming.  everything is a scene in this city, and moviegoing becomes especially shallow when it has to compete with great comedy, good bands, AND great weather.  I'm sick of revival theaters playing second run indies or The Big Lebowski.  Seriously.  The curators seem to have no connection no balls and most of all, no cash.

other than that, I saw alice amidst geeks ('cause it's wondercon) and families.  you know, an easy crowd.  but very few people laughed at the jokes and it seemed like most of them just didn't care.

who thought it was a good idea to devote much screentime to dragon slaying or popping and locking (doubled by the venerable dave elsewhere)?

AND, screenwriters should not write stories that involve "prophecy" or "destiny" anymore - those are just cheap ways of combining arbitrary events.  "you're gonna fight a dragon - it says so here in this here scroll".  Fuck that movie for making me curse on the Lord's Ressurection Sunday.

[tpfkabi]

his early films were pretty bizarre storywise and visually, especially his use of editing between real life and models/stop motion animation.

after he started using computers for his effects something was lost for me......or maybe it was around the time Bonham Carter became his muse........she creeps me out.

[Alexandro]

yes. his 80's to mid 90's period is flawless to me.

he really shaped what could be done in a comic book movie with batman and then topped it with batman returns, which even after the dark knight remains the darkest any filmmaker has taken that character and story. the catwoman character was inspired. incidentally he has always been very good at getting actors to shine in weird roles. scissorhands and beetlejuice were one of a kind films, with a distinctive sense of humor and heart. the nightmare before christmas is pure burton, original, impossible to conceive without him. then ed wood came, which pretty much everyone recognizes as his best film. because it is.

personally, I enjoyed Mars Attacks a lot, and feel he made a great job with Sleepy Hollow. His first real misstep to me was Planet of the Apes. After that it's been a weird ride. Corpse Bride and Charlie were ok, but something's been missing. What's depressing in Alice is how lifeless is, and of course, the idea of changing it to the extent of becoming a lord in the rings wanna be. He is clearly showing signs of fatigue.

[pete]

you didn't notice how lifeless his two batmans were?
beetlejuice seemed funny.  maybe he's much better at comedy than a thriller or an adventure.

[Alexandro]

no, I don't see them as lifeless at all. batman returns specially is pretty ballsy. it was a risky proposition in 92 and it would still be risky today. i think in those days he was still trying to fight the power, so to speak. he was doing things his way when his way was still not an accepted brand. nightmare before christmas was left to die in cinemas, but years later it became a cult hit. it could be said the same about burton himself. now everything is too easy.

[tpfkabi]

you didn't notice how lifeless his two batmans were?
beetlejuice seemed funny.  maybe he's much better at comedy than a thriller or an adventure.

I got that 8 disc Batman DVD set for Christmas. Burton Batman through Schumacher Batman's.

So far I have gone through all of the first one, commentaries, everything.

That first film left a big impression on me as a kid - I can still remember which theater inside the overall theater I saw the movie in and how weird that opening credit sequence was.

I still really enjoy it now.

In what way do they seem lifeless to you?

I have never cared as much for Returns and even at the time I felt the Schumacher's were insuperior, escpecially Batman and Robin, and that was before I looked at films in any artistic way.

[Stefen]

Burton used to be good. Pee Wee and Beetlejuice are both awesome.

He's just creatively bankrupt. His idea well has dried out. He hasn't had an original idea since the mid-90's. Everything is someone elses idea.

He's a businessman now.

[Gold Trumpet]

I think CGI is hindering the effect of his production talent because it's meshing with too many other films, but other than that, I just think he needs better scripts. He's always been clueless about how to develop a story if the script needs work. Technically, his filmmaking-style is a lot more developed today than it was in the late 80s or early 90s, but he's entrusted himself to a lot of inadequate scripts. I also think many of us saw his films when we were younger and gave our hearts over to the films before our heads. His early efforts aren't that good.

[pete]

I believe I've said this elsewhere on the board, but Batman was the first film that disappointed me.  And I was like 9 or 10 when I saw it on TV.  I remember how it promised all these cool things, but delivered none - a car that suited up just to run away from pedestrians and a plane that was shot down by a pistol.  I remember thinking the whole thing was tedious - the struggle at the end was so theatrical and phony and I didn't really care if the Joker died or not.  And then I thought maybe it was just because I was young so I'd try to re-watch it every couple of years, and over time I became even more bored.  The film also just didn't have very good substance - it looked like it might be dark and exciting, but even as a kid I just thought those things - the woman with the distorted face, the father that got electrocuted to death, the crazy knives dude - were half-assed.

[Alexandro]

yes. i also think a good script would help, but the fuck ups in alice in wonderland are beyond the screenplay. it's not a particularly exciting directorial job either. it's kind of boring actually, everyone seems bored. when i saw charlie it was obvious burton and depp at least were having a lot of fun with it, enjoying the benefit of their superstardom. this time it wasn't like that.

I didn't remember beetlejuice or scissorhands to be that good actually, but rewatching them recently reminded me of the charm and originality of vision he displayed early on. and this were his stories too.

I do have a strong memory of the first batman, because it was a huge movie, did tons of money, and it was an actual event as far as I can remember. I went to a full theatre with people sitting on the floor that exploded in applause when the batship posed itself in front of the moon.

Anyway, the guy needs to DO SOMETHING, and that something is NOT the addams family.