A story lacking meaning and absurdity at once.

Rating: 4/10 (27 March 2010)

When I first heard that Tim Burton and a whole squadron of actors I've already loved in other films are working on their version of "Alice" I was thrilled. Especially because I've read Tim Burton's poetry and I thought that if he and Lewis Carrol lived in the same era they would just love to spend time together telling each other unbelievable stories while having tea and oysters. Needless to say I was wrong.
The first question that comes to my mind is in what era the minds of the creators of this movie got stuck. A story about emancipation would have been big in the 1960s, while a story about a young person slaying a dragon would have become cult among teenagers in the 1980s. Yet we are in the year 2010, when the visual effects developed much, but the poor storyline is far less innovative that the books which became famous over a century ago.
The visual effects, however, are no big argument in favor of the movie. It could have been the theater's fault, the angle or just my eyes, but in many places the picture seemed out of focus or with low contrast and there were no breathtaking 3D effects. So the pleasure of seeing it in 3D didn't make up for the weird adaptation as it happened in the case of "Beowulf".
Lewis Carrol's books hasn't become popular because of their plot, but because of playing with logic, illustrating the literal meaning of conventional phrases with nonsensical situations and bringing the characters from proverbs and nursery rhymes to life. These creatures had all the right to act illogically, because they were nothing but meaningless words trying to become real in Alice's dream. Tim Burton's movie did have a plot, which was unfortunately the most banal one - the title character has to accomplish a quest because apparently no one else can. All the minor characters for some reason have got new names, but not a bit of personality.
Certain situations could seem repetitive for a person who had read the books or seen any of the earlier "Alice" movies, yet I imagine it would be difficult to understand the movie without having any previous "Alice" experience. I would recommend knowing the "Jabberwocky" poem by heart just to be able to grasp all the nonexistent words that appear in the movie and to know why they are there at all.
Since we are faced with a simple plot and flat characters we should be able to recognize their motives and goals. In fact we can only draw the conclusions that the Red Queen is evil and she shall not rule the land because she shouts a lot, the White Queen is good and she shall rule the land because she is pretty, and only Alice and no one else but Alice shall slay the dragon because... well, because! Frankly speaking I fail to see any more reason behind Alice's quest. The division into good and evil is being forced upon us without proper argumentation. Since it is no longer an adventure of a child but of a young adult we could have expected that the story and the world would be more complex and intellectually challenging, yet we face the exact opposite - everything has been painfully simplified.
The final questions are: what did the director want to tell us through this picture? What have our heroine achieved and learned during her adventure? Has Alice learned that she doesn't have to obey all the rules of the real world and rather be herself? I'm sorry to say, but such a movie was made in 1999 (the one in which Whoopi Goldberg played the Cat). Has Alice found out that she can be smart and independent? This role was not convincing enough when it comes to these two traits. Or is the message of the movie that we shall be imaginative because we can make good money of it? That's exactly what Alice's father believed and also what I think Alice and the creators of the movie have really understood.