Alice in Wonderland

2010 "You're invited to a very important date."
6.4| 1h48m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 05 March 2010 Released
Producted By: Walt Disney Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://disney.go.com/wonderland/
Synopsis

Alice, now 19 years old, returns to the whimsical world she first entered as a child and embarks on a journey to discover her true destiny.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Disney+

Director

Producted By

Walt Disney Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

puuoor Making a dreamy land is better than making a real land. Even foolish guys know that Alice was in wonderland not a rel city therefore they wouldn't repeat some funny behaviors of movie actors in reality.
John Brooks Firstly, I'm no Lewis Caroll fanboy nor a connoisseur in any quality of the original novel so this review contains nothing in relation to whether the film was true to the book and what not, it's a movie review purely about the movie: Alice in Wonderland (2010) directed by Tim Burton and starring Mia Wasikowska whom since they've been brought up both do a very efficient job in my opinion for their respective tasks: Alice is strong-willed, has lots of presence and character and that's precisely what her role is about: a free-thinker in a world of formatted prudes who's not afraid to let her imagination and peculiar personality thrive. I also think that young Australian actress fit the character physically as she was not only pleasant to look at but conveyed that strong will while not being boorish either, just that fine line: a feminine tomboy with the slightness and freshness of a young girl.And now about Burton: he does well to recycle the Alice story and keep it exciting and bring enough elements to it that it's something new to look at, rather than just being another Burton or just another Alice iteration. The film is structured and paced just right running in at the standard 1 hour 45min. Each scene is memorable and distinct visually, the dialog very good and punchy, often funny, and it never lets itself become self-indulgent. All the secondary characters and sprites are very well crafted - Johnny Deep as the Mad Hatter, those two plump boys, the Jabberwocky (voiced by Christopher Lee as an easter egg), both Queens are fantastic (and hilarious in their own way: Anne Hathaway and her deliberately annoying princess-like mannerisms holding out her hands like a fairy and coming close to throwing up a few times - and Bonham Carter's anger tantrums and ridiculous head), the Cheshire Cat... the tiny frog subjects of the queen and their deep voices...Stylistically the film is quite awesome: from the very cool design for the card soldiers, to generally the sometimes barren sometimes hyper-colorful and rich dreamy landscapes with that thick hard contrast filter throughout, to the way they depicted for instance the phonies with their caricatured overly large features...All in all, a job very well done. Obviously however one looks at it, it's still mostly crafted on an original story and inspired by a few earlier versions. 7.5/10.
Hermione Granger I was not expecting much out of this movie, and I did not get much. I was not bothered like others were that Alice was older, but I was annoyed that this was a sequel and not her original adventure. The characters were very unique and lovable, and though animated creatures didn't look real, animated movements, such as Alice's growing or falling, looked real. I also liked how some of the characters she met represented people in the real world. The plot was lame, with little explanations or reasons. The characters also talked too fast or in a strange voice. There were also plenty of things that disgusted me, such as a head getting chopped off and bouncing down stairs, or an eyeball being stabbed and then popping out. I do not understand why these excellent characters and animation had to come with such a lame plot and things being grotesque. I'm being generous with four stars.
rooprect The setup of this movie sounds like the beginning of a good joke: "Tim Burton and Walt Disney walk into a bar..." You wouldn't think it possible, but it happened. Tim Burton, the master of dark, twisted fantasies where every story involves at least 1 corpse, teamed up with the studio known for bright pink bunnies and such.The temptation is for Burton fans to expect a Burtonesque flick while Disney fans expect an accurate retelling of the 1951 Disney cartoon classic. Neither happened, not by a longshot.What happened instead is something you just have to experience. Someone once told me that the root of beauty lies in contrast. A yellow flower in a field of yellow flowers isn't as beautiful as a yellow flower growing on a desolate battlefield of some war-torn desert. So with that in mind, this is a movie for people who can appreciate the contrast between Burton's sarcasm and Disney's innocence. I'll give you an example...In the Disney cartoon, as well as Lewis Carroll's original story, the Red Queen runs around commanding "Off with his head!" at anyone who irritates her, but of course the Red King quietly follows behind whispering "You're pardoned" each time, thus saving the executioner a ton of gory axe blades. But in this version, in a brief but stark moment, we learn that the beheadings are quite real. And then bam, we quickly return to Disney territory where we are entertained by the banter of cute talking mice.Literally, I rubbed my eyes, turned to the person sitting next to me and asked, "Wait... did we just see a bunch of decapitated heads??" Confusing at first, this volley between macabre & merry becomes the charm of this film. I should add that I counted at least 3 characters who got an eyeball disgorged. And yet, in Disneyesque fashion you never really feel a sense of menace; it's mostly in good fun.I purposely didn't mention the plot until now because, to me, the story was secondary to the overall vibe of the film. But in case you're wondering, this is *not* a retelling of Disney's, Carroll's or anyone else's "Alice in Wonderland". This is sort of a sequel to the original where Alice, now 19 years old and about to get married, gets reconnected with her long forgotten adventure of youth. In that respect, it reminded me of how the movie "Hook" was sort of a sequel to "Peter Pan".To me, that's the only department where this film lost a few points, because it felt like they were weaving too much of a story into a tale that was inherently a stream-of-consciousness that mimicked the randomness of a dream (Lewis Carroll himself invented the story on the spot while rowing Alice Pleasance Liddell and her sisters on a pond). This version follows more of a straighforward plot to defeat the bad guys, and in so doing, it got away from the dreamlike feeling of all other versions I've seen.Johnny Depp... of course JD steals the show with his alternately endearing and terrifying Mad Hatter. He plays the role as someone suffering from severe PTSD which manifests itself in multiple personalities. There's his normal, gentle, lisping Hatter. And then there's his cruel, dark Scottish Highlander Hatter who sounds like Sean Connery just lost his place in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles.Honorable mention goes to Crispin Glover (Marty McFly's nerdy father in "Back to the Future") who plays a very chilling Jack of Hearts. And another honorable mention goes to Anne Hathaway who plays the angelic but somewhat ditzy White Queen.Special effects are good for 2010 but a bit dated for today. The best effects are the subtle ones such as the way the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) was depicted as having an enormous, bulbous head. I also thought the "Drink Me, Eat Me" scene where Alice shrinks & grows was done very well.In the end, although I had been expecting something of a trainwreck, I think the odd pairing of Burton & Disney was a success. So what's next? Maybe horror master John Carpenter ("Halloween") does a teencom with Lindsay Lohan & Jamie Lee Curtis called "Freaky Friday the 13th"?