Alice In Wonderland

[Mindipedia]

Just went to watch the movie today, found it a great watch (personally). I remember being a wee little tike when the animated disney version came out and i practically grew up on this movie (along with Sword in the Stone). When I was 12 I found it was based off an even earlier version - so i watched that too.

Anyway after watching the movie, and being a AiW fan, I have to say: Imo it was a bit fast paced. Instead of characters going: <Slight pause> That's odd. They just went: <instant reply> That's odd, So it made it a bit fast paced if I may say so. Some of the acting seemed forced and not lively enough but the world was fantastic to feast my eyes upon.

Overall I give it a 7.5/10 and it's worth watching if you enjoy these type of movies.

P.S. I watched it in 3D

[Symphonic]

I went to a midnight 3d showing as well.

I have to say I really enjoyed it. So many people were saying how they thought Tim Burton was going to ruin it and I was like... Uh, it's Tim Burton, he'll do an amazing job. Lots, I think, who said that were expecting this to be a remake when in fact it is a sequel.

Favorite line: No, her name is Um, IDIOT!

[Rivehn]

Went to watch it in the movies and yes its a sequel and yes its very good.


To bad there wasn't more conversation about the movie here,it was a big success.

[The Core]

Hollywood chews up and spits out another great classic, mangled and sad. Alice should be about wierd stuff, it shouldn't make any sense, there isn't any particular story in the book she just goes around seeing and doing stuff that's just looney.
Why the flying fudge does it have to involve some damned war and try to be some sort of "LotR meets Narnia and rapes Alice over" crap?

And how can you even call it a sequel?! How can you make a sequel of something when you're not the original author or the first story nor have anything else in common with it then taking the main heroine and aging her then slapping her into an armor and make her into a friggin' high fantasy savior?!

Hollywood, and especially you Tim Burton, take your hands of my classics you damned dirty apes!

[Hessie]

I enjoyed it. It was a bit strange at times, but overall I thought it was a good watch.

I couldn't understand what was being said the whole time though.

the White Queen had like 8 orgasms over the course of the film which was a tad disturbing...

[Daginni]

This is Hollywood showing that it is out of ideas and proving that is has to recycle old movies to get by.

With that said... I can't believe it made that much money.... do people read reviews before they mindlessly give their money to see crap like this or is it just a sign that society is just a bunch of idiots...

[Medium9]

I haven't seen it yet, but usually I just love the combination of Burton and Depp, and the trailers looked rather appealing. You guys make me second guess if it's a good idea to spend some money there :-\

[Chrus]

Wall of text, if your not in the mood feel free to ignor it, but no "TLR" there is no one forcing you to do and such comment is just fail (ohh and now someone is gonan be funny and do it anyway)

Watched it yesterday.

The reason for actually wanting to watch this movie was

a) A Tim Burton Production
b) Johnny depp was playing "The Mad Hatter"

My impression of it was almost as I had exspected, I wasn't let much down by Burton.
The movie is great, but I don't think that it's a movie for every one, now I'm from denmark and for some reason the movie theaters had chosen to sync the movie to a danish version. I found this both idiotic and misleading.

Firstly you lose alot of the greatness in the movie by removing the original voices, as both Alan rickman, and johnny depp was in this movie. It's just sad to sync it to another language
2ndly this is far from a kids movie, because the title is "alice in wonderland" there are already kids who would like to see it, translating it to the country's language just makes it even more "likly" that parents take their childs to see it.

That was hardly the point, back to why it's not for everyone.
Many people don't like johnny depp, well except for his preformance in Pirates of the carribean. This is the first step to having it a movie where people who like johnny depp for his acting is those that will go and see it.

And then, tim burton is not as knowen when it comes to the real life. (away from computers) alot of people don't know what kind of material he makes, and having a movie named "alice in wonderland" there for most likly took off alot of people from going to see it.

This is the 2nd step to why this is a movie that mostly "fans" go to watch it.
Because of the title those who normally go alot to the movies don't go and watch this, they would most likly because of the title not chose this. Which means that the wieving number drops alot from normal movies.

So to sum it up:
This movie is going to be watched by people who like tim burton and johnny depp. And knows what kind of movies they have made together before (Sleepy hallows, edward scissorhands etc.)
Because of the title this is not gonna be watched by people who usally watch alot of movie, unless they have some background info about tim burton r johnny depp.
Parents might accidently take their kids to this movie, because of the name and how many countrys translate it to the countrys language.


Anway, to get in on my own opinion.
I do find this a very good movie, some points where I didn't quite feel that it was the "follow" of the normal history, but thats normal in movies and might just have been to make it fit better.
Yet I'll give it a 9.9/10.

Also, I watched it in 3D. while I am a fan of this new deal and how they are trying to have it as standard in new movies, I'm a little disapointed about the 3D effects stil.
The whole "dept" in movies is great, and I'm glad they haven't made it so realistic to that everything comes out in your head all the time, that would just kil the movie instead.
But the problem is that they still are in the beginning of the 3D century (it all really started with avatar) and their tecnology is still not where I would like it. When things move fast it gets blury and that hurts the movie.
Also the "focus" point is chosen by them, there is no options to chose your self in many scenes as everything that is not in their focus will get "blury" (not by much, but still) and this hurts the movie.

How ever I believe that it is just a matter of time before the standard has risen and this is no longer a problem.
Just like the special effect where horrible in the start it will be perfected and better by time, and I hope this will be sooner then I exspect.

To the thing with the 3D, I was watching the movie with my father and brother (family night, ya know) and well.
The first thing my father said was that he could do without the 3D and how it was bad and made alot of things that wasn't in focus or moved to fast blury.
If your in the same opinion I just wanna say, suck it up please. In a few years it wil be near perfect and there will be no problem.
Back when movies came out at first, the monsters eg. was bad as hell. this did not prevent you from going to the theater and watch them anyway, it was new, it was exciting and cool.
Now many years later the speciel effects are just wonderfull (2012!, or avatar) but this new thing when add'd 3D to most movies you don't like? ohh c'mon it's new, it's exciting and it's cool. The tecnology is still not perfected yet but it will soon enough, give it a chance, and just because some of the things out of focus get blury, don't throw away the experience to watch a movie in 3D.

[Medium9]

Hah, now you just destroyed my reluctance - if it's a movie Burton/Depp fans like, I'm in . However, the point about dubbing you made is not unimportant. Here in Germany they dub just everything for theaters, and there's no choice to go see it in English except for veeery few cinemas on some special days, of which I don't know any in my vicinity . And you're perfectly right: You CAN'T dub Rickman and Depp without majorly f*king up the whole movie.
So, since 3D isn't really necessary for me, I'll probably wait for the DVD, that usually comes with the original language as an option. Screw dubbing *sob*

[The Core]

This is Hollywood showing that it is out of ideas and proving that is has to recycle old movies to get by.

With that said... I can't believe it made that much money.... do people read reviews before they mindlessly give their money to see crap like this or is it just a sign that society is just a bunch of idiots...

No. People have no taste. The general public, the average Joe, swallows anything without any sense of criticism. I thought you'd know that by know.

Oh and Johnny Depp has one spectrum, one personality, he's so damned shallow and intensly boring.

[Chrus]

And how can you even call it a sequel?! How can you make a sequel of something when you're not the original author or the first story nor have anything else in common with it then taking the main heroine and aging her then slapping her into an armor and make her into a friggin' high fantasy savior?!

It is not a sequel, it's not Alice in wonderland 2..
It's a story about the same girl and the same world, but as the perspective of a alice at the age 20..
While this is indeed a movie based on the 2nd time alice enters underland, it is still not a 2nd Alice in wonderland, now down right sequel to the first one..

do people read reviews before they mindlessly give their money to see crap like this or is it just a sign that society is just a bunch of idiots...

if you wanna talk bad about a movie, tell why you think it's bad, don't just say it's crap and how people who likes it are a bunch of idiots.
Now I'm a Tim burton and Johnny Depp fan, and I was happy to pay money to watch this movie. in my opinion your are the idiot and the one who are stupid for not liking it.

[The Core]

Millions of flies can't be wrong: Eat shit!

[Chrus]

Millions of flies can't be wrong: Eat shit!

lol fail.. yes even something 100 million people think can be wrong. they might all have the info from the same place and just spread it out.

What millions of people think is not nessacery right or true.

[Yoshimoto]

It was very good and I plan to see it again I feel I missed alot of it.

The point of the movie is that it's a representation of a story that happens after through the looking glass.
If you've read the books it's a very good movie. Though I feel Depp did a good job but he could have made the Mad Hatter a bit more "bat shit" crazy.
I also really enjoyed the white queen's movement not sure why it was just very odd and fitting.
No mock turtle .
But very good, best movie I've seen in a long time.
oh and Donny Elfman FTW he really outdid himself on this one.

[Skandalize]

Overall the movie was great. However, it felt like they were focusing too much on the 3D which made the rest of the movie worse. I do not suggest that it made it bad, it was really fantastic and I loved the work by Danny Elfman! Outstanding as usual. Johnny Depp played his role very well as the Mad Hatter and I even looked up some information about his character since he made me really interested in the depths of the Hatter.

Tim Burton does it again, give me more! MOAAR!

[Miltiadhs]

look i am a huge Tim Burton fan.i liked the movie(i watched it on 3D) but for a Burton film...well i was expecting more.....it was ant a movie that every Burton movie has.but overall it was a nice and enjoyable movie

[Medium9]

I've seen it now, too, but not in a 3D cinema. And I have to agree: The particular "burtonness" was somehow missing, even though the movie had the typical dark tone. It was okay, but Alice's actress didn't really do that much of a great job (or it just is missing charisma), and for the first time, I even thought that Depp wasn't up to his standards.
All in all, it could have been worse, but I don't think I'm going to add this to my DVD collection. But I don't regret having seen/payed for it, since it was okayishly entertaining nonetheless. Just not something for a re-watch.