Movie: Alice in Wonderland

I have a confession. I never read the book “Alice in Wonderland,” nor, to my knowledge, ever seen the Disney eponymous movie. It is such a touchstone in our culture, that I know quite a bit about it. But there is probably a lot that I don’t know.
Watching Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland,” it literally took me a bit before I realized that this wasn’t really “Alice,” but a sort of sequel. I suppose it gives a fresh angle to the original, and probably pisses off literalist “Alice” fans, and maybe delights some similar number of fans who were in it for the fantasy in the first place.
In any case, I’m more interested in whether the movie stands on its own as a good movie than whether it is a valid homage to the original.
I have not seen the movie in 3D. Our most local theater, Brenden, was sold out for the showing that we went to in 3D, so we had to come back for the boring old bi-dimensional version.
Even so, it is a beautiful movie. There are a few cringe-inducing CG elements: the Bandersnatch in particular and Crispin Glover. Only a computer could produce something so over-the-top hideous as Crispin Glover.
The story is a nice tale of reality versus fantasy, destiny versus free will, and whether it is better to be loved or to be feared.
Helena Bonham Carter as the mega-meloned “Red Queen” is fierce in representing the primary force moving the movie along. She is a wonderful, evil, petty beast. Her courtiers wear disforming disguises so as, presumably, not to upstage her.
Johnny Depp is the Mad Hatter, gap-toothed, with creepy Gollum eyes and flame-red cotton candy hair. He is meant to be the good side of the equation. Madness is to be celebrated. Or at least non-conformity.
Alice, played by Mia Wasikowska is subtle and beautiful. When she smiles she lights up the screen, but she doesn’t have much occasion to smile in this movie.
This being a Tim Burton movie, it is de riguer to call it “dark.” But it doesn’t really seem very dark. The worst thing that happens in this movie is the intended beheading of the Mad Hatter, and I don’t think anyone really is meant to think that he is going to be killed. Right?
Some of the CG is just terrific. The rabbit, the dormouse, Anne Hathaway’s lips (little joke there).
The movie left me a little unfulfilled. The buildup of the primary conflict between Alice and the Jabberwocky seemed too predictable. Of course Alice is going to win. And because the Jabberwocky is mostly off-stage, it’s hard to get too worked up in hating him, in wanting him to fail. Don’t get me wrong, the Jabberwocky looks great. I hope that Smaug looks this good in the “Hobbit” movie. But he is so obviously doomed, there wasn’t any dread in the confrontation. It was simply the next scene that needed to happen.
“Alice in Wonderland” is a well-made film. It is fine even for quite young kids. It is entertaining and worth your time. It is not an all-time classic, but it is a film that I enjoyed. More than, say, “Avatar.”