Topic: Alice in Wonderland (Probably will be spoilers at some point)
So I finally got around to seeing this, and i gotta say I really liked it. But I noticed an interesting trend with people I talk to about (who have actually seen it), some say they thought it was amazing, and others hated it with every fiber of their being.
And I just want to throw out some ideas I 've been thinking about since I left the theater.
I personally loved the movie, it felt like a perfect (Well damn near) representation of how to properly do a sequel to Alice in Wonderland.
I think alot of people going into it were expecting basically Avatar in wonderland. Thats just the sorta general vibe I got, you know where it has the typical Hollywood "A leads to Character B introduction that leads us to C which causes D" whereas that is totally not what Alice in Wonderland is about.
I mean the original Alice In Wonderland was essentially a collection of surreal/ nonsensical poems extrapolated and projected into a semi novel format. So there wasn't any sort of over arching plot to it or anything like that, it was simply "Alice meets characters A,B and C. They talk. Alice leaves. Alice meets character D and E. Repeat until you feel like having a conclusion.
And I am really glad that either Tim Burton or the writers realized this and actually played it that way (I will make a minor sidenote here, that if you look at Burtons AiW there is actually an overarching plot while still keeping that nonsensical feel to it.). Mainly because if they had tried to play Alice in Wonderland straight it wouldn't be Alice in Wonderland anymore, it would be just another of the weird kinda animated films that came out this year. And the fact that they managed to maintain that surreal quality to it makes me very happy. It just feels like a truer representation of "this is Alice in Wonderland". And I mean since this is technically a sequel I don't see why people would expect the style to change so dramatically from the original material.
Or maybe they just didn't know any better. Who knows. Or probably the more likely they were expecting the Disney-fied version. (I have a lovely rant on this later down)
I'll say that I do particularly love the way that they handled the 13 year time difference and the character changes that happened in that time. It really feels like a natural progression of the original. ANd thank god the Red Queen actual chops of the heads of people, I soooo loathe any edition that tries to play the lame gag of "Oh it's all just a game! We were never actually going to cut anyone's head off. La dee dah, isn't this fun! We're kid friendly!" Just such a load of bullshit.
Anyways I just wanted to see what all you lovely folks out there thought of it and see if I can stir up some conversation.
Disney-fied rant: (You can skip this if you really want, I've just been getting really pissed of at this, especially lately.)
basically I am sick and tired of always hearing people going on about the original story of Cinderella or insert famous Disney fairy tale here, and then starting to rattle on about singing mice and dancing brooms and <insert any other object here>. Especially with the whole Alice in wonderland thing lately. Where I'll be talking to people and I'll say something like "It's a sequel to Alice in Wonderland, yadda yadda whatever" and then they'll immediately jump to the Disney Alice in Wonderland. It's like we have lost ability to remember a time before Disney and anything that Disney has done (in regards to reusing a pre-existing thing, Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella etc. etc.) instantly becomes the only canon that people can remember. It just absolutely pisses me off.
Anyways, that's all i had to say on that.
Wow thats a long post