The most vivid dream you've ever experienced...

Rating: 8/10 (5 March 2010)

So, I just got back from seeing this film. Maybe film isn't the right term for it- maybe visual stunner is. Visually, it was quite an amazing ride. The animals who talked, the strange evaporating cat, Johnny Depp's crazy makeup, Helena Bonham Carter's big head, and the fantastic color and scenery...it made Wonderland quite wondrous. It was like a very vivid, crazy, and quite random dream. The characters were hilarious and truly fascinating, especially the March Hare! I think that little skinny hare with that Scottish accent of his stole the whole movie! Unfortunately, he had too few of lines! The best part of the movie was the animals. The Cheshire Cat, voiced so brilliantly by Stephen Fry, was the most unforgettable character to be sure. Alan Rickman also gave a quick, but meaty and satisfying performance as- none other than- a blue caterpillar!
There was plenty of humor, and I think most viewers will agree with me on this. Helena Bonham Carter was the female actor who stole the show from the others- being Mia Wasikowska and Anne Hathaway. Bonham Carter happens to be one of my favorite actresses because of her amazing uniqueness on screen. She has distinct looks, a great charisma, and a screen-presence hardly surpassed by any other female actor. Though her character may not have a great backstory, the character is understood. Bonham Carter provides for many laughs and good entertainment. Alice, played by Mia Wasikowska, was quite dry. There was no climax for her character (well, there really was no climax in the whole movie), and she did not change from beginning to end. All characters were static. Maybe the dryness wasn't Mia's fault...it's possible it was the fault of the script. Other than the fact she should have been more expressive and emotional, there's not too much I can say that is a fault on her part. Also, I understand working with CGI is very tough on actors, as they don't see the characters they are talking to while filming as we see them on screen. Talking into a blue-screen has its challenges for conveying full emotion and expression. However, I've still seen other actors do much better jobs with CGI. Then, there was Anne Hathaway--the White Queen--who gave one of the poorest performances of the movie. Such a hollow and lacking portrayal that it hurt me to watch her. She added no beauty, grace, sophistication, or allure to the White Queen. And her makeup! What happened there?? The makeup was so unflattering that it made an otherwise quite beautiful actress quite ugly! The white hair did not work with the dark lips and jet black eyebrows. She looked like some sort of goth girl. Another awful performance was by Crispin Glover, who played Stayne. I don't think I've seen much worse an actor can do than what he did on screen. It is sad that Tim Burton did not notice his terrible acting... Now, we can talk about Johnny Depp's Mad Hatter. Let's face it- no other actor could have fit the role. He played the Hatter to the best of his ability recognizing the shortcomings of the script itself. Basically, the Mad Hatter is insane. He's a crazy and whimsical character who needs to be as crazy as he can to stand out of (or to simply deal with) the craziness of all others. To live in a world like that, you'd have to be a bit mad or off-your-rocker. Summarizing the role- he's a hatter who is mad! There's not much else to him...at least not much else that the script allows to really show. Depp plays him a bit confusingly and differing from moment to moment, but that is what the Mad Hatter is supposed to be like. He's got his cute accents, his smart moments, his "wtf?" moments, his simply hilarious moments, his touching moments, and his dark moments. And the makeup screams ACID TRIP! As for the clothes-- you can't take them all in at once. Only at the end of the movie did I realize the Hatter was wearing a kilt the whole time. Oh boy...the performance was quite all over the place, but it worked for the character, and I'm sure Depp meant to do everything he did and meant to come off as he did. Being very familiar with Depp's work, I know what great acting skill he has, and if a character comes off a certain way, Depp meant him to, and the director meant him to.
So, as for the movie as a whole, it lacked a decent and well-organized plot. And even for people (like me) who aren't very familiar with Lewis Carroll's books, the story is very verrrryyy predictable. There are no twists or surprises. Without the visual effects, the movie would be nothing. Certain characters also add a lot of substance to the movie. Alice in Wonderland is a concoction of beautiful and engaging sights with humor and madness. That's what it is. It is not something that will mentally engage you. But, nevertheless, it will entertain you. A great movie to see on a Friday night after a long day at work. Your eyes are in for a treat! There is barely a purpose or message to this film...just loads of eye-candy that will make you wish you lived in Wonderland. It's a fantasy world that really comes alive in 3-D. The plot will not impress you though. And some of the acting could be a lot better. And it isn't always a very smooth ride. Oh well... It's like a dream! A dream world...a sort of land that is housed in your imagination. It is random and weird, but creative and filled with energy. I'm probably going to see it again in theaters...just to get a second look and see if any of my opinions change. I don't really know if it's worth another 13 bucks though.
Well...7.5-8/10 because it definitely could be improved.