Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland"

Tony M

Maybe Tim went over the edge again huh?

danger boy

Well. I know when going to see a Tim Burton movie what it's going to be like ahead of time. he's to "Tim Burton" formula now. most all his movies now have the same look, feel and story line. You can expect the same 4 or 5 actors/actresses to be in his movies.

Johnny Depp will play an off the wall yet likeable character. Helen Bonam Carter will be a cranky off the wall character. etc... to formula for my taste I guess.

C'mon Mr Burton do something new and original we haven't see before..

shack

One of my daughters went to see it and was not that impressed. She said the 3-D was sort of cool but just didn't care for the movie.

dkg999

Went to see the 3D version with my daughter this weekend. It passed my "was I entertained" test. The 3D wasn't as good as Avatar. It's hard to go to far askew with a time-worn storyline, however I thought they did pretty well. The red queen did steal some of Dep's thunder. The part of the white queen could of been cast much more effectively.

Ron-P

danger boy wrote: »

saw this over the weekend in 3D IMAX.. and while it was cool seeing the 3D.. it wasn't done as well as the 3D in Avatar. At least to me it didn't see that good.

That's because it was filmed in 2D and then converted to 3D. It's not a film that was originally filmed in 3D so it will not look nearly as good as, say Avatar.

BottomFeeder

Just got back from "Alice" and my wife and I thought it was great.

Excellent

Sherardp

I'll be in Guam next week and will definitely try to see this. The previews look great.

Uilleann

It can't possibly be any WORSE than Avatar was! (trying to hold back the severe wretching)

I'm sure the 3-D is as 'believable' as any out there...at the end of the day, it's still a movie ans still constrained to the limitations of optical physics and current technology. Now if someday, we every get to an actual setting like the holo-deck or whatever it was called on the Star Trek series...THAT would be something!

AsSiMiLaTeD

I don't get all the neggative reviews about this movie. We went and saw it yesterday and it delivered on every expectation we had.

Was it a really in depth story with lots of plot twists? No, it's a Tim Burton movie. Did it stay very close to the original story line? No, it's a Tim Buron movie. Did it have a cheesy ending? Yes, it's a Tim Buron movie. Was it in absolute piece of artwork genius? Yes, it's a Tum Buron movie. Did it look awesome? Yes, it's a Tum Burton movie.

My only (somewhat) complaint was the score, I didn't find it very original. I doubt many moviegoers would notice this or care, but it's basically a mash-up of his other work and nothing new and original. The main theme was basically a rip off of the theme from Black Beauty. I knew i recognized it during the movie, and i've got all his scores, so when I got home I found it. At least he's ripping off himself and not someone else.

Overall, I walked away ver pleased and will likely go see it again, though I'm admittedly a fan of Tim.

bobman1235

I saw this recently. As expected from Tim Burton, it was beautiful to look at, but still SEVERELY lacking. I found it extremely slow and boring. I appreciate the art but there has to be something beyond pretty pictures. I think most Burton movies do a good job of balancing the crazy visuals with a compelling story; this is not one.

zombie boy 2000

As a HUGE Tim Burton fan, I kind of have to agree with Bob on the path he has chosen later in his career. It actually kind of started with Sleepy Hollow (which I loved) and most noticably, Planet of the Apes. It seems he and the studios may be cashing in on using his style to reinterpret source material that would appear to lend itself to his aesthetic. And unfortunately, many times it falls flat.

I would rather him go in a more personally creative direction - ala films such as Big Fish and Ed Wood. The man can do a fantastic story accompanied by some amazing visuals. He's proven it before. I just think he's in a creative rut right now.

Demiurge

It wasn't exactly an unknown story so I'm not sure what people were expecting. Visually and aurally it was great.

bobman1235

Demiurge wrote: »

It wasn't exactly an unknown story so I'm not sure what people were expecting. Visually and aurally it was great.

It kind of was an unknown story, given that it was a sequel to the original book... the characters were the same but the "plot" as it was was not the same.

Demiurge

Again, what were you expecting?

bobman1235

That's not really a fair question. I was expecting a movie that was interesting and kept me entertained for 108 minutes. There are a million ways to tell a story, which is why directors are so important. The same story in the hands of two different people can be boring or thrilling, depending on how it's told. So content-wise I was expecting what I got, but in the hands of Tim Burton I expected it not only to be pretty but also to be paced better and made more captivating.