Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Not rated yet!
Director
Tim Burton
Runtime
1 h 48 min
Release Date
3 March 2010
Genres
Family, Fantasy, Adventure
Overview
Alice, an unpretentious and individual 19-year-old, is betrothed to a dunce of an English nobleman. At her engagement party, she escapes the crowd to consider whether to go through with the marriage and falls down a hole in the garden after spotting an unusual rabbit. Arriving in a strange and surreal place called 'Underland,' she finds herself in a world that resembles the nightmares she had as a child, filled with talking animals, villainous queens and knights, and frumious bandersnatches. Alice realizes that she is there for a reason – to conquer the horrific Jabberwocky and restore the rightful queen to her throne.
Staff ReviewsAround the Web ReviewsAudience Reviews

Check back soon when the reviews are out!

Or why not join our mailing list to stay up to date?

 

SIGN UP!

Box office recaps sent twice a month (maximum).

( ̄^ ̄)ゞ (☞゚ヮ゚)☞ No spam! ☜(゚ヮ゚☜)




 ✍🏻  > 🗡️   Want to join our team? Email us!  
PJ Media Staff9
PJ Media



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Too Shocking for Words: A White House "Alice In Wonderland" Costume Ball in 2009 As Country Sinks into Recession
    PJ Media class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/blog/too-shocking-for-words-a-white-house-alice-in-wonderland-party-as-country-suffers/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The only known photos from the White House's 2009 "Alice in Wonderland" party
    PJ Media class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/blog/the-only-known-photos-from-the-white-houses-2009-alice-in-wonderland-party/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Obama in Wonderland
    Ed Driscoll class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2012/1/9/obama-in-wonderland/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Alice in Wonderland: Full of Girl-Power Feminism
    PJ Media At last, we have an Alice in Wonderland for these times: Gloria Steinem meets Joan of Arc -- with a touch of Carrie Bradshaw.Tim Burton's big-budget movie loses touch with a lot of the whimsy from Lewis Carroll's Alice books in favor of lots of girl-power feminism. That doesn't ruin the movie, but in a world that's supposed to grow curioser and curioser, things quickly get conventional and conventionaler.Alice (newcomer Mia Wasikowska) is the headstrong daughter of an English businessman, now deceased. At 19, she is a proto-feminist who refuses to wear a corset ("Who's to say what's proper?") to a splendid garden gala that, she discovers with a shudder, is her own engagement party. She is facing the public humiliation of being asked for her hand in marriage by a dim and chinless aristocrat. "You know what I've always dreaded?" her prospective mother-in-law asks her. "The decline of the aristocracy?" Alices replies. We're only minutes into the film, and already the script has established that Alice is exactly how the girls and women in the audience see themselves: modern, free-thinking, populist.How rebellious is this film? It is surely the first one in history to be rated "PG for fantasy/action violence involving scary images and situations, and for a smoking caterpillar." A movie that arrives in an age when our children must be warned that a mythical creature might smoke is likely to be wary of taking chances.It is, though much of it is wonderful to behold. After Alice's trip down the rabbit hole to the animated "Underland," as it is called here, she is confronted with a garden of unearthy delights. The Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) has an enormous head of red hair balanced on a tiny body; her henchmen look like the spawn of playing cards and Iron Men. Tweedledee and Tweedledum are wittily drawn Charles Addams-like creations, and both Alan Rickman's Blue Caterpillar and the Cheshire Cat (voiced by Stephen Fry) are delightfully droll.Yet the film is little more than a parade of fantastical beings and set pieces in which the Red Queen's leading soldier the Knave of Hearts (Crispin Glover) chases after the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). These scenes, while often frantic, aren't really scary and they aren't really comedy, which brings up a problem with Depp, and with Burton. class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/blog/alice-in-wonderland-full-of-girl-power-feminism/ previous Page 1 of 2 next   ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • 10 Disney Classics Which Deserve a Live-Action Remake
    Lifestyle var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'Cinderella Official Trailer #1 (2015) - Helena Bonham Carter, Lily James Disney Movie HD', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); Above, you can view the new trailer for Disney’s live-action remake of Cinderella. The film marks the third such reimagining, following this year’s hugely successful Maleficent and 2010's Tim Burton-directed Alice in Wonderland. If Cinderella proves successful, which seems to be a foregone conclusion, the question becomes: which other Disney classics might lend themselves to a live-action treatment?Not every old Disney film stands as an ideal candidate. Many feature talking animals as their main characters and, if you were to try to translate them into CGI within a live-action setting, wouldn’t prove that much different than their animated originals.Weeding those out, let’s rank what’s left. Here are 10 Disney classics which deserve a live-action remake. class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2014/11/21/10-disney-classics-which-deserve-a-live-action-remake/ previous Page 1 of 11 next   ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Pay Attention To That Man Behind The Curtain in Oz: The Great and Powerful
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Lifestyle Three years ago Disney made a bazillion dollars off Alice in Wonderland, and this spring they’ve followed that up with a film that delivers a similar experience and is likely to be equally profitable. Like Alice, the Wizard of Oz prequel Oz: The Great and Powerful is a little too goofy, but it has its moments and your eyeballs certainly get their money’s worth. The special effects and the 3D are as brilliant as the jokes are dim.James Franco, who is completely the wrong choice for the part, stars as Oscar (friends call him Oz, Z being one of his many middle initials), a cheap fairground magician in a black-and-white 1905 Kansas. He’s on the run from some circus freaks he has cheated when, wouldn’t you know it, here comes a twister that batters Oscar in his hot-air balloon. Next, the image widens, the black and white is replaced by color and we’re in the merry old land of Oz.Launching this movie exactly the same way The Wizard of Oz got started seems like a failure of imagination, though merely rehashing much the same plot with 21st century special effects would give you a film better than most. Like Dorothy (who isn’t in this one), Oscar encounters some unusual friends (first up, a flying monkey who vows to become his lifetime servant after the lame and cowardly Oscar saves him from a lion with a two-bit magic trick). The monkey and others are versions of people Oscar knew back home. They hit the Yellow Brick Road for a quest to defeat an evil witch (by breaking her wand this time), and Oscar becomes the toast of the Emerald City.All of this is sprinkled with dumb humor more appropriate for a spoof than a second entry in the series; Oscar wants to know why the wisecracking monkey is dressed “in a bellhop’s uniform” and he and the monkey muse that there must be some yellow-brick potholes in the road. When Oscar mentions bananas, the monkey (voiced by Zach Braff) grouses that it’s a stereotype to accuse monkeys of liking bananas (which he loves, but never mind). You know what’s really easy? Making fun of The Wizard of Oz. You know what isn’t? Creating a piece of dramatic fantasy that lingers in the popular imagination for four generations. So guess which movie is better? var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'If I Only Had a Brain - The Wizard of Oz (4/8) Movie CLIP (1939) HD', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/3/8/pay-attention-to-that-man-behind-the-curtain-in-oz-the-great-and-powerful/ previous Page 1 of 2 next   ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • FLASHBACK: Remember When the White House Threw a Secret 'Alice in Wonderland' Party?
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    VideoDisney  It's Mad Hatter Day, a celebration of the Alice in Wonderland character that happens every October 6 (or 10/6).On this Throwback Thursday, here's a classic Trifecta segment from their PJTV days looking back at the time the Obama White House threw a secret Alice in Wonderland party for Halloween.Tim Burton was there, director of a 2010 film based on the children's story. Johnny Depp was also there, in character as the Mad Hatter.Bill Whittle, Scott Ott and Stephen Green unpack a lot here: a lavish party on the taxpayer dime during a recession, the media's silence about the event, rigged White House visitor logs and much more.Do stories like this make you glad that President Barack Obama's White House term will soon end?Tune into the segment, and let us know in the comments section! class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/video/flashback-remember-when-the-white-house-threw-a-secret-alice-in-wonderland-party/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The Film Remains the Same
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Ed Driscoll var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'Monty Python- Du00E9ju00E0 Vu', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); It's not just that 200-million dollar Hollywood blockbusters these days are limited to franchises such as superhero movies, James Bond and other action flicks, and sci-fi such as Star Trek, and when Disney starts cranking out the next round of sequels, Star Wars. But as Peter Suderman notes at Slate, within those already limited genres, their plotting is even more limited:If you’ve gone to the movies recently, you may have felt a strangely familiar feeling: You’ve seen this movie before. Not this exact movie, but some of these exact story beats: the hero dressed down by his mentor in the first 15 minutes (Star Trek Into Darkness, Battleship); the villain who gets caught on purpose (The Dark Knight, The Avengers, Skyfall, Star Trek Into Darkness); the moment of hopelessness and disarray a half-hour before the movie ends (Olympus Has Fallen, Oblivion, 21 Jump Street, Fast & Furious 6).It’s not déjà vu. Summer movies are often described as formulaic. But what few people know is that there is actually a formula—one that lays out, on a page-by-page basis, exactly what should happen when in a screenplay. It’s as if a mad scientist has discovered a secret process for making a perfect, or at least perfectly conventional, summer blockbuster.The formula didn’t come from a mad scientist. Instead it came from a screenplay guidebook, Save the Cat! The Last Book on Screenwriting You’ll Ever Need. In the book, author Blake Snyder, a successful spec screenwriter who became an influential screenplay guru, preaches a variant on the basic three-act structure that has dominated blockbuster filmmaking since the late 1970s.Read the whole thing. As far back as 44 years ago, Stanley Kubrick told an interviewer that "The problem with movies is that since the talkies, the film industry has historically been conservative and word-oriented. The three-act play has been the model. It's time to abandon the conventional view of the movie as an extension of the three-act play." I wonder what he would think of how rigid and sclerotic Hollywood structuring has become; check out the page that Suderman wrote to accompany his Slate article, laying out the formula in step-by-step fashion.Occasionally a film deviates from that structure, such as most of Kubrick's post-Strangelove efforts, and Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, with their circular plotting.  But as Suderman notes, when there's $200 mil or more on the line, Hollywood has a formula, and it's going to run it into the ground -- and it essentially has.Meanwhile, a very different director bemoans another Hollywood formula:"I hate 3-D," moaned Alfonso Cuarón yesterday at Comic-Con. "The black and whites, they suck. It takes away the color, and it takes away the resolution." So why did Cuarón shoot his next movie, the Sandra Bullock–starring space epic Gravity, in 3-D?Oooh, I know! I know! And so does Hollywood producer Lynda Obst, who touches upon 3D in her new book, Sleepless in Hollywood:At first 3D was thought to be the savior of the business, the technological breakthrough that would compensate for the DVD disaster. But it was overused, slapped on pictures that weren’t shot in 3D. Some insiders were investors, which complicated matters so much that at one point a famous mogul-investor suggested to Paramount and Scorsese that they release The Departed in 3D.It was such the rage that every movie that was being made in the wake of Avatar and Alice in Wonderland, the medium’s first two blockbusters, was going to be in 3D. But the onslaught of lousy conversions gave the process a black eye and exhausted the sophisticated young audience in the United States, and many very young kids in the domestic family audience rejected it as well.But in emerging markets, 3D is another story. In China and Russia, they Just Can’t Get Enough. The studios soon faced a puzzle in the wildly divergent appetites for 3D domestically and internationally. In the United States the appetite is diminishing from over-saturation; in the critical international audience, it is crack. Now it is necessary to make two versions of films, both 3D and 2D, so the 3D doesn’t keep the U.S. audience away.Perhaps because I hate putting cardboard glasses on top of my real glasses, personally, I truly loathe 3D, and always try to avoid it at the movies if at all possible. But then, I've tried to avoid a lot of Hollywood's current product, particularly since I've seen it all before: class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2013/7/19/the-film-remains-the-same/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Netflix and Disney Tie the Knot
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Lifestyle via UPDATE: Netflix Shares Soar After Announcing Disney Deal - Deadline.com.PREVIOUS, 10:55 AM: Today’s deal will make Netflix the first pay-TV window for live-action and animated feature films from Disney beginning with 2016′s theatrical releases. A separate catalog agreement also was made. The pact begins with Disney films released theatrically in 2016; direct-to-video titles will hit the service beginning next year. Disney titles haven’t been available on the online movie service since the February, when Netflix’s deal with Starz — which included rights to stream newer Disney and Sony movies — expired after negotiations broke down.Beverly Hills, Ca. and Burbank, Ca. –December 4, 2012—Netflix Inc. (Nasdaq:NFLX) and The Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) today announced a new multi-year licensing agreement that will make Netflix the exclusive U.S. subscription television service for first-run live-action and animated feature films from The Walt Disney Studios.Beginning with its 2016 theatrically released feature films, new Disney, Walt Disney Animation Studios, Pixar Animation Studios, Marvel Studios and Disneynature titles will be made available for Netflix members to watch instantly in the pay TV window on multiple platforms, including television, tablets, computers and mobile phones. Also included in the agreement are high-profile Disney direct-to-video new releases, which will be made available on Netflix starting in 2013.Separately, Disney and Netflix have reached agreement on a multi-year catalog deal that today brings to U.S. Netflix members such beloved Disney movies such as “Dumbo,” “Pocahontas” and “Alice in Wonderland.” var dataLayer = window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'videoName': 'Cinderella Diamond Edition Trailer - Available 10/2', 'videoType': 'Curated' }); *****Related at PJ Lifestyle:Disney Buys LucasFilm For $4.05 BillionVIDEO: Disney’s Re-education of Princess LeiaIs ‘Binge-Watching’ Whole Seasons of TV Shows Bad? class="pages"> https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/12/5/netflix-and-disney-tie-the-knot/ ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

Crosswalk3
Cross Walk



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Fantasy and Reality Blend Beautifully in "Wonderland"
    Movies Release Date:  March 20, 2009 (limited)Rating:  PG-13 (for thematic material, brief strong language)Genre:  DramaRun Time:  96 min.Director:  Daniel BarnzActors:  Felicity Huffman, Elle Fanning, Patricia Clarkson, Bill Pullman, Campbell Scott, Mackenzie Milone Aptly following in the sturdy acting footsteps of her now 15-year-old elder sister Dakota, 10-year-old Elle Fanning is that rare breed of child star who doesn’t simply fall back on being cute. In fact, Elle’s got that same wisdom-far-beyond-her-years quality that allows her to credibly tackle complex, demanding roles while maintaining that necessary child-like innocence in the process. And that rare combination ends up serving the younger Fanning particularly well as Phoebe, a nine-year-old misfit with a rather colorful imagination. As the daughter of two workaholic parents, (Mom [Felicity Huffman] is a literary scholar fighting a bout of writer’s block while penning a book about Alice in Wonderland, while Dad [Bill Pullman] is also a busy, thriving intellectual and professor), Phoebe is also an artist in the making. A lover of beauty, ballet and fine arts in general, Phoebe also has a natural gift for acting, which bodes well for the upcoming production of Alice in Wonderland, the much-beloved story that her mother introduced to her at a young age. Phoebe seems like the idyllic kid in terms of special talent and creativity, however, the typical “acting out” that naturally comes with the kid territory has taken a decidedly odd turn with young Phoebe—something her family, especially her Mom, isn’t quite sure how to handle. Not only does she spit at her fellow classmates when they mercilessly tease her for being different, but Phoebe blurts out inappropriate and mocking comments at the drop of a hat. And when things are really bad, she punishes herself with OCD-like behavior of washing her hands until they bleed. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-1'); }); With an absent father and a mother who isn’t quite sure what to make of her daughter when the going gets tough, thankfully Phoebe has a kindred spirit in her equally eccentric drama teacher Miss Dodger (Patricia Clarkson). Identifying with Phoebe’s pain and creative mind, she encourages Phoebe to audition for the lead in the Alice in Wonderland production, which Phoebe doesn’t agree to initially. That is, until she imagines Alice encouraging her to sign up. Now within the “safe” confines of Wonderland, many of Phoebe’s inhibitions and fears immediately start fading away, allowing her to be the happy, well-adjusted person that she, and everyone who loves her, desperately want her to be. But as Phoebe wholeheartedly throws herself into this imaginary kingdom, it doesn’t take long for the lines between fantasy and reality to blur. Imagining her mom as the Red Queen and her dad as the King of Hearts, her therapist (Peter Gerety) gets the unenviable role of the cloyingly judgmental Humpty Dumpty—a nice bit of comic relief. For those who like the movies they see to say a little something, and in a non-preachy manner to boot, there’s plenty of food for thought here. Not only does Phoebe in Wonderland explore the always timely career versus family debate that all working mothers face at some point, but it addresses the labels that are often affixed on people without much thought. Further fodder for discussion is an equally hot topic:  whether children should be medicated to ensure their happiness. With top-notch acting from all of the principals, gorgeous cinematography and a great musical score that really underscores the film’s emotional impact, it’s really no surprise that writer/director Daniel Barnz’s debut, Phoebe in Wonderland, was a recent favorite at the Sundance Film Festival. While certainly not the light, escapist fare tailor-made to be enjoyed with a big bucket of popcorn, it’s refreshing to see a movie where the messy complexities of life are explored without trying to provide all the answers in the process—especially in a society where conformity is often the path of least resistance.  CAUTIONS: Drugs/Alcohol:  Discussions on whether children should be medicated for their illness. Language/Profanity:  Some profanity, including instances of the Lord’s name taken in vain, plus one use of the “F” word. Sex/Nudity:  A derogatory word for those who practice homosexuality is a key plot point, which prompts further explanation from a teacher about what that word really means. Later, that word is used to vandalize property. Violence:  None, but there is mature thematic matter involving marital strife and mislabeling people too quickly.   Christa Banister is a full-time freelancer writer, specializing in music, movies and books-related reviews and interviews and is the author of two novels, Around the World in 80 Dates and Blessed Are the Meddlers. Based in St. Paul, Minn., she also weighs in on various aspects of pop culture on her personal blog.  For more information, including her upcoming book signings and sample chapters of her novels, check out her Website. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-2'); }); if (gptClientWidth >= 992 && gptClientWidth <= 1000000) googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-3'); }); ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Tim Burton's Wild Imagination Put to Good Use in Alice in Wonderland
    Movies DVD Release Date:  June 1, 2010Theatrical Release Date:  March 5, 2010Rating:  PG (for fantasy action/violence involving scary images and situations, and for a smoking caterpillar)Genre:  Adventure/Adaptation/Family/FantasyRun Time:  108 min.Director:  Tim BurtonActors:  Johnny Depp, Mia Wasikowska, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Matt Lucas, Stephen Fry, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman, Leo BillIn the first few minutes of Alice in Wonderland we learn the best people in the world are apparently "bonkers," perhaps, a fitting nod to the man behind the lens himself, Tim Burton.Given that Burton has been the guy responsible for everything from the bizarrely lovable Edward Scissorhands to the truly demented update of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (remember Johnny Depp's blindingly white buck teeth and anything but kid-friendly demeanor?) to the grisliest of all Broadway musicals, Sweeney Todd, where men are offed during their regular haircuts and promptly used as filling for London's famed meat pies, it's not surprising that Lewis Carroll's Alice, no matter how many times it's already been adapted, would be a perfect vehicle for Burton's unconventional filmmaking.And trust me, a little oddity in the right hands can be a good, good thing on the big screen—especially in 3D. But we'll get back to those eye-popping visuals in a moment…First, let's focus on the story, shall we? For those hoping for (or anticipating) a more straightforward approach, Alice won't likely please the purists because it's really more a "re-imagining" of the classic tale than anything. Sure, it features many of the same characters and zig-zagging motifs, but in the same way that Hook wasn't a page-by-page reenactment of Peter Pan, Alice's journey down the rabbit hole isn't strictly by the book.Instead of showing us Alice's first journey to Wonderland, it's now several years later, and Alice doesn't even remember visiting before (although in later scenes, we'll see that she has). While everyone tries their best to remind Alice of her  legendary "muchness" upon her arrival, she's all but convinced she's simply having another one of her crazy dreams.Before following the mysterious while rabbit with the ticking timepiece at his side into the forest, Alice, now 19 years old, is at the proverbial crossroads in her life. Rebelling against the conventional Victorian ideals of her peers about who she should marry (especially in light of a recent proposal from the drippy suitor at her impromptu engagement bash) or what a woman's expected role is in society, Alice believes that nobody should tell her what she can—or can't—dream, even if it involves drinking a mysterious shrinking potion or enjoying the company of a wacky Mad Hatter (Depp in fine comedic form), a disappearing Cheshire cat and a blue furry caterpillar with a bad smoking habit.Of course, Alice gets far more than she bargained for when entering the place formerly known as Wonderland. Not only is she avoiding capture from an array of scary predators, but she's tasked with fighting a frightening Jabberwocky to overthrow the reign of the conniving Red Queen (a delightfully menacing Helena Bonham Carter), something she's positive she can't do even if her life depended on it (and it does). Basically if growing up seemed hard to do before, well, she's in for quite a surprise.In the meantime, the audience is taken on the sort of fanciful, bourgeois journey that only someone like Burton could've dreamed up. With enough eye candy, humor and intrigue to keep anything resembling boredom at bay, there's plenty to love about Alice's latest chapter.However, be forewarned:  Just because Disney is involved doesn't necessarily make it family-friendly. There's enough disturbing content (see Cautions below) to give your little ones nightmares for weeks (think Coraline or the recent version of A Christmas Carol with Jim Carrey). But for anyone who enjoys a delightfully eccentric afternoon at the movies and isn't easily scared, well, there's still plenty of magic left in Alice, thanks to Burton teaming up with his motley crew of choice:  his always-engaging wife (Bonham Carter), Depp, the master chameleon and a wacky but lovable supporting cast of people probably regarded as slightly "bonkers."CAUTIONS: Drugs/Alcohol:  Alice drinks a mysterious substance that makes her small, a few bites of a particular cake make her grow. Absalom, a furry blue caterpillar, is rarely seen without puffing on his hookah, which makes him constantly surrounded by smoke. Language/Profanity:  None, aside from the British use of "bloody" as an expletive. Sex/Nudity:  Alice sees her brother-in-law kissing a woman who's not his wife. One of the creatures has freakishly large breasts (which actually turn out to be fake). The Red Queen's consort hits on Alice, and later in the story tells the queen that Alice hit on him. After getting wind of that, the Red Queen suggests she be arrested for unlawful seduction. Violence:  Like many of Tim Burton's films, there's a decidedly dark tone and a few scary, action-packed scenes in Alice in Wonderland that would be particularly frightening to younger children. Starting things off is Alice's fated fall down that rabbit hole. Not only does she bounce off the furniture, but her life is threatened by a plummeting piano that could've easily crushed her. Upon arriving in Wonderland (or is it "Underland"?), there are many disturbing realities. In addition to the Red Queen's "Off with their head!" declarations for anyone who fails to satisfy her every passing whim (and her general mistreatment of Tweedledee and Tweedledum, not to mention the animals, like the pig's belly she uses as an ottoman), there are numerous potentially perilous foes. First off, there's the Bandersnatch (a feline-esque beast with some freakishly sharp teeth that leave angry, festering wounds on Alice's arm at one point) and the Jabberwocky, the scariest, fire-breathing foe who's intent on ending Alice's life. In one scene, the Bandersnatch also loses an eye (thanks to a sword-bearing dormouse who stabs him and plucks its out). There's a big (but mostly bloodless) battle at movie's end with Alice and the Jabberwocky at the center of it.SEE ALSO: Creepiness Comes Wrapped in "The Chocolate Factory" googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-1'); }); Christa Banister is a full-time freelancer writer, specializing in music, movies and books-related reviews and interviews and is the author of two novels, Around the World in 80 Dates and Blessed Are the Meddlers. Based in St. Paul, Minn., she also weighs in on various aspects of pop culture on her personal blog.  For more information, including her upcoming book signings and sample chapters of her novels, check out her Website. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-2'); }); if (gptClientWidth >= 992 && gptClientWidth <= 1000000) googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('gpt-ad-3'); }); SEE ALSO: Copious Blood May Make Sweeney Todd Viewers See Red ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • A Special Behind-the-Scenes Look at Disney's New Dumbo Movie!
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Enjoy a special behind-the-scenes look at an extraordinary family film.
    ...
    (Review Source)

The Federalist Staff2
The Federalist



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • 9 Reasons Alice In Wonderland Is A Queen Among Disney Princesses
    I am a modern professional woman and a mother of daughters. As such, I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time determining the exact right exposure to Disney princess paraphernalia to give my kids appreciation of classic animated film without turning them into mute, man-pleasing marriage-chasers. Is it two parts Belle’s book-smarts and one part Merida’s marksmanship to a teaspoon of Ariel’s naiveté and a smidgen of Snow White’s, um, proficiency in housework? I’m sensible enough to assume my girls might take more from my example than the Little Mermaid’s — a VHS I wore out circa 1988, and subsequently managed not to abandon my family in a quest for a cute guy I’d met just once. (And, frankly, I wouldn’t mind if my girls went about housework with mute enthusiasm in my house once in a while, but I digress.) But Disney is well aware of this dilemma in modern moms, going to great pains to create princesses who defy the expectations of princesses past. Mulan and Merida are warriors, Pocahantas confident, Tiana clever. The drama of Anna and Elsa is wrought in filial love, not romantic. A short trailer on the Disney princess website features the traditional adventures of princesses spliced with ostentatiously fierce modern girls diving and skateboarding with the tag line, “Dream Big, Princess.” But the same site reveals Disney has ignored its greatest girl-power asset, leaving an independent, adventurous, assertive classic character out of the pantheon of princesses: Alice in Wonderland. I know what you’re thinking. She’s not royalty. But neither is Mulan, and Belle (“Beauty and the Beast”), Cinderella, and Tiana (“The Princess and the Frog”) only become royalty by marriage, taking the commoner-Kate pathway to princessdom. 1. Alice is adventurous. Alice gets a ticket to Wonderland when she abandons a staid Victorian-era school lesson given by her sister to chase an anthropomorphic white rabbit. She doesn’t ask for permission, she doesn’t need a partner in crime, and she seems unafraid, even reckless, in her pursuit. YOLO, girl. Her quest has nothing to do with romantic love, setting her apart from most of the princess pantheon, though that’s in part due to her age. Disney’s Alice was drawn from live-screen tests with 12-year-old British actress Kathryn Beaumont, who also voiced the character. The Alice of Lewis Carroll’s famous novels was only about 7. 2. She’s a faithful adaptation of a truly great book. Disney’s “Alice in Wonderland” is remarkably faithful to the Alice books, written by British author and logician Lewis Carroll (a pen name for Charles Dodgson) in the 1860s for a family friend’s daughters, one of whom inspired the tale by asking for a story on a rowing trip. The books are in the canon for a reason, full of skillful literary nonsense and word play and iconic characters. 3. She’s a self-assured, creative thinker. It only takes one song to establish that Alice is the kind of girl who disrupts the status quo — like the Uber of Disney princesses. “In a World of My Own” is exactly what it sounds like: Alice’s vision of a world in which she makes the rules and “Cats and rabbits/ Would reside in fancy little houses/ And be dressed in shoes and hats and trousers.” The signature songs of other heroines of her era were much more passive. Cinderella sang “A Dream Is a Wish Your Heart Makes” and Aurora of “Sleeping Beauty,” “Once Upon a Dream.” Snow White crooned simply, in 1937, “I’m Wishing.” 4. She’s assertive, even in the face of bullying. Although Alice puts an emphasis on good manners, she is no pushover. When faced with aggression, she pushes back and goes on her way. In the garden, the flowers declare small Alice a weed and chase her out, dousing her with water. “I’m not a weed!…If I were my right size, I could pick every one of you if I wanted to,” she threatens before wringing out her dress and huffing, “Seems to me they could learn a few things about manners.” She is also undaunted by the Caterpillar’s bluster, giving as good as she gets in an existential debate with the bug, even when he yells at her. 5. She’s sensitive to those with mental illness or addiction, but has appropriate boundaries. Alice is open to the new custom of an Unbirthday Party, but when the frenetic pace and circular illogic of the Mad Hatter and March Hare take their toll, she refuses to be manipulated. “Well, I’m sorry, but I just haven’t the time,” she says. “This is the stupidest Tea Party I’ve ever been to in all my life.” 6. She’s competitive even when the power structure demands she fold. When Alice is forced to play croquet with the Queen of Hearts, she is competitive even in the face of the queen’s well-known decapitatory tendencies. She’s openly frustrated with her flamingo/mallet and gopher/ball and the queen’s playing cards, who sabotage her and throw the match to appease the queen. 7. She fights for due process. Alice’s sense of fair play is on display once again in the queen’s courtroom, when she’s charged with “teasing, tormenting, and otherwise annoying…thereby causing the queen to lose her temper.” When the queen attempts to impose a sentence, Alice retorts: “Sentence? But there must be a verdict first.” Once again standing up for herself, Alice declares the queen “a fat, pompous, bad-tempered old tyrant” triggering the movie’s culminating chase scene. 8. She passes the Bechdel Test. The Bechdel test is a feminist rubric for evaluating filmmaking for gender bias. To pass the test, a movie must feature two female characters, with names, who speak to each other about something other than a man. There are plenty of arguments this test is overly simplistic or flawed, but it’s worth pointing out Alice easily passes it thanks to her interactions with the queen. (She also speaks with the flowers, though it’s unclear whether “rose” and “tiger lily” count as names enough to officially defy the patriarchy.) 9. She has a full range of emotions. For all the criticism of the sometimes one-dimensional Disney princesses, most characters in the early films lack much emotional range. The seven dwarves literally have one emotion each. But Alice is different. She’s at turns proud, playful, polite, confident, and insolent. We see her lose her temper and we see her despair. We see her question herself and stick to her guns. “I give myself very good advice but I very seldom follow it,” is a heartbreaking and relatable lament. This little heroine is a queen among princesses. If I got to choose, I’d want my kids to do less “wishing” and more building a “world of their own.” I hate to see Alice overlooked because her dress isn’t sparkly enough. ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Tim Burton’s ‘Dumbo’ Is A Dark But Beautiful Celebration Of Individualism
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Tim Burton's 'Dumbo' conveys to viewers that from now on, we must look to ourselves for freedom, not to larger-than-life fantasies.
    ...
    (Review Source)

Kyle Smith5
National Review



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Disney’s Live-Action Aladdin Remake Is a Tragic Carpet Ride
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Opting to play it safe, director Guy Ritchie, writer John August, and star Will Smith have produced a film unworthy of their talents.
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The Conservative Pride of The Lion King
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    Disney’s new live-action remake succeeds by sticking with what made its animated predecessor such a classic.
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The movie star is dead
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    celebrityjohnny deppwill smith The movies may be bigger than ever, but movie stars are over. Johnny Depp — a genuinely great and inventive actor — tops the Forbes list of the film stars generating the least box-office bang for the buck. The (extremely oversimplified) tabulation by Forbes puts Depp in first place because his movies lately have returned only $2.80 for each dollar spent on him. Movies cost a lot more than just the salary of the leading man, though; his too-long-delayed sequel to “Alice in Wonderland,” “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” took in $300 million on a budget of $190 million plus unknown worldwide distribution and marketing costs, perhaps in the $80 million to $100 million range. Movie studios only pocket about half of the box-office take, so break-even for the sequel would be something like $550 million. Every star has flops, but today’s audiences are no longer following favorite stars around. They aren’t even turning up for the opening weekend for films like Depp’s “Mortdecai” (worldwide gross $47 million), “Transcendence” ($103 million) or even the well-crafted “Black Mass” ($100 million). Will Smith, generally considered the biggest movie star on Earth a few years ago, was second on Forbes’ most-overpaid list because of duds such as “Concussion” ($48 million) and “Focus” ($159 million). Smith’s ensemble piece “Suicide Squad” was a big hit, but would it have earned less if his role had been played by a no-name actor? The franchise sells the picture. Audiences are showing up for special-effects spectacle and for intriguing characters: Benedict Cumberbatch may be great in “Doctor Strange,” but no one bought tickets to that saying, “Look, honey, there’s a new Benedict Cumberbatch movie!” Jennifer Lawrence has more star wattage than anybody, but does that mean audiences will show up to her next one, “Passengers,” which is generating bad buzz? Only if the audience is pulled in by the story. They certainly weren’t there for her last one, “Joy” ($101 million). Her appeal couldn’t prevent audiences from noticing the deterioration of quality in the “Hunger Games” franchise, in which the third episode did worse than the second and the fourth did worse than the third. Audiences have rejected star vehicles for Bradley Cooper (“Burnt,” “Aloha”), Channing Tatum (“Jupiter Ascending”), Christian Bale (“Exodus: Gods and Kings”) and Matthew McConaughey (“Free State of Jones”). Leonardo DiCaprio, who has first crack at the best scripts and directors, is riding a string of four straight hits, but before that he had four flops out of six. George Clooney? His entire movie career has been a stream of red ink with a few scattered exceptions (the three “Ocean’s” movies and “The Perfect Storm”). Comic actors pose less financial downside because their films are much cheaper than action spectacles, but the catch is that most comedy doesn’t travel well across cultures. Will Ferrell movies do OK here, but Europeans and Asians don’t get him. That goes double for Kevin Hart. (Put them in the same movie, “Get Hard,” and the results overseas are especially woeful: $21 million from the whole rest of the world.) According to Forbes, the world’s leading movie star is a Nautilus machine in human form: Dwayne Johnson, who took in $64.5 million this year and has had four big hits (including the animated “Moana”) in the past two years. Sure, everybody loves The Rock, but only as long as he doesn’t get too fancy. Johnson’s name on a movie signifies one important thing to audiences: No one is going to ask you to think for the next couple of hours. If he tries to stretch his wings and make “Mortdecai 2,” don’t expect audiences to follow. Share this:FacebookTwitterGoogleFacebook MessengerWhatsAppEmailCopy ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Don't visit 'Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children'
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    eva greenmovie reviews “Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children” certainly brings back that youthful feeling. The wonder of discovery! The exhilaration of possibility! The mild headache of trigonometry midterms! The film, based on the YA novel, is a Tim Burton special, a macabre mystery tour across space and time and in and out of fantasy. It just can’t stop coming up with limitlessly peculiar stuff, much of which has a familiar odor: It’s “X-Men” meets “Alice in Wonderland” meets “Groundhog Day,” plus there’s a kind of Addams Family versus the Holocaust vibe — “They’re creepy, they’re spikey, they’re totally Third Reich-y.” (Ghosty bad guys are called hollowgast.) “Miss Peregrine’s etc., etc.” isn’t just an explosion at the imagination well. It’s a Deepwater Horizon of ideas, a flaming wreck of a rig that spews so much creativity in every direction I was ducking for cover, scrambling for an escape hatch. We begin in Florida, where teen Jake (Asa Butterfield) discovers his beloved grandfather Abe (Terence Stamp) has been killed by your average giant monster that has something to do with a scary white-eyed freak (Samuel L. Jackson). The old man’s last wish is that the boy return to the home for oddball kids, on an island off the coast of Wales, where Abe grew up in the 1940s. Thanks to a time warp, Jake finds the home exactly as it was in 1943, right before it was destroyed by a German bomb, with the children as lovably strange as they were then. One kid is growing bees in his body; another has a mouth at the back of her skull; one is full of air and will float away if you don’t tie her down; another can make inanimate objects come to life; Miss P (Eva Green) herself can turn into a bird. Settle in: Uncle Tim has to explain who everyone is, what their superpower is, how the “time loop” they’re stuck in works, who the two types of villains are, and what their powers are. In nonpeculiar movies, this kind of thing is known as “setup.” Or Act 1. It usually takes 20 minutes. In this movie it takes an hour and 20 minutes. Then, and only then, do things start to lurch forward, with the “My gosh, Jake is the only one who can save us” scene, but by then the only thing that could save the movie is Stephen Hawking stopping by to diagram the thing out on a blackboard while ushers freely distribute Tylenol. Even in the last 30 seconds of the film, Jake is still explaining how the time-jumping works, before even he gets tired and gives up. It may be senseless, but it’s sumptuous: the picture looks like it cost about a billion bucks, with absolutely every detail giving Burton an excuse to take his mad picture-book mind and let loose, the way Emma the girl full of air keeps soaring away from earthly constraints. Burton may give us a bland hero, a tepid love story and a muddled plot but, hey, at least he’s got a skeleton army doing battle with giant tentacle monsters at an amusement park. Share this:FacebookTwitterGoogleFacebook MessengerWhatsAppEmailCopy ]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)
  • "Green Zone" "Legitimately Great, No Matter What Your Politics"
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    My friend Steve Zeitchik is making a rather laughable case over at the LA Times movie blog: It’s dispiriting to sit back today and soak in just how poorly “Green Zone” performed over the weekend, earning a meager $14.3 million. Depression sets in because the Paul Greengrass movie is legitimately great, a potent thriller and action picture that entertains no matter your politics (we’re not the only ones who feel this way — the movie is the second best-reviewed wide release of the year according to meta-review site Movie Review Intelligence). Come on, Steve. Did you think I wouldn’t call you on this? A movie may be, to you, great. But don’t pretend that everyone else thinks it’s great. They don’t. (I don’t pretend that everyone hates “The Hurt Locker.” Almost everyone thinks it’s great. I don’t hate it either, by the way, I just think it’s overrated.) “Green Zone” is rated Rotten on Rotten Tomatoes, with (the last time I checked) 61 negative reviews against 62 positive. Did you choose Movie Review Intelligence because it’s the only site you could find that came up with a positive spin? “Second-best-reviewed wide release of the year?” Tsk, tsk. Talk about grading on a scale. The year is not even three months old. What if every wide-release movie this year stinks? “Best of the stinkers” does not equate to “great film.” And according to Rotten Tomatoes, “She’s Out of My League,” “Alice in Wonderland,” “Shutter Island” and “The Crazies” all polled higher — all of them wide releases, all released this year. And “no matter what your politics” the film is great? Uh-uh. Actually, those of us who have a pro-American mindset pretty much all hate the movie, don’t we? Please show me where I’m wrong, Steve. Please give me a list of conservative critics who loved it. As for “dispiriting” and “depression sets in,” hooboy, Steve, you’ve got it quite backwards, haven’t you? The whole point of this movie is to dispirit and depress the audience about how American malevolence led us into an unnecessary war and then caused the insurgency to occur with treachery. (The movie, of course, doesn’t point out that despite everything, a semblance of a fragile democracy was the result, at least as of today.) If anything is dispiriting, it’s the idea of all that carnage being for no purpose. You know what isn’t particularly dispiriting or depressing? That a movie studio lost millions of bucks making a movie that is, according to box office and overall critical metrics, bad. Feel free to link to this post at the LA Times site, if you want. Or you can just pretend that I haven’t completely refuted your case and hide in a room of like-minded souls.]]>
    ...
    (Review Source)

Plugged In3
Focus on the Family



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Will the New Disney Movies Become Timeless Classics?
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    I grew up on the ’80s and ’90s Disney classics. I wanted to flip my fins like Ariel, run through the hidden pine trails of the forest like Pocahontas and live in a tale as old as time like Belle. If you were to look back into my childhood, you’d probably find me outside in […]

    The post Will the New Disney Movies Become Timeless Classics? appeared first on Plugged In Blog.

    ...
    (Review Source)
  • Culture Clips: Nostalgia Cuts Both Ways
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    Nostalgia is big business. If it’s been a hit in the last century, whether on the big screen or small, someone in Hollywood is figuring out a way to reboot, repackage or relaunch it. That’s because familiar entertainment properties from the past pack built-in marketing muscle, full of yesteryear’s fond memories. Disney, of course, has […]

    The post Culture Clips: Nostalgia Cuts Both Ways appeared first on Plugged In Blog.

    ...
    (Review Source)

Jay Dyer2
Esoteric Hollywood



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

⚠️ 𝐄𝐃𝐆𝐘 🔥 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐓𝐄𝐍𝐓 🔥 𝐖𝐀𝐑𝐍𝐈𝐍𝐆 🔥 (𝐍𝐒𝐅𝐖?) ⚠️

🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻🔻


  • The Matrix (1999) –...
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)


    By: Jay Dyer The Matrix, as I’ve joked many times, is one of those perennial topics in philosophy 101 classes that tends to evoke the most inane and mindless “philosophizing”...

    ...
    (Review Source)
  • The Hidden Meaning of True...
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    See my analysis of True Detective Season 1 here. By: Jay Dyer “All the most powerful ideas in history go back to archetypes. This is particularly true of religious ideas,...

    ...
    (Review Source)

Sonny Bunch1
Free Beacon



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • ‘Dumbo’ Review
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)

    BY:

    Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is considered a bit of a joke—the CGI is weightless and cartoony; the character design is a bit silly at times; don’t even get me started on the Mad Hatter’s dance-off at the end—but there’s still something interesting about it. It feels very much like a Tim Burton movie, alternately whimsical and horrifying, with crooked towers and doleful eccentrics lending a vitality to the proceedings.

    ...
    (Review Source)

Armond White1
The National Review / OUT



(Reviewers' Site/Bio)

  • Will Smith Goes from Genie to Uncle Remus in Aladdin
    (”Alice in Wonderland (2010)” is briefly mentioned in this.)
    May his daring at least get Disney’s closed minds to rerelease Song of the South.
    ...
    (Review Source)

Want even more consensus?

Skip Rotten Tomatoes, they’re biased SJWs too afraid to criticize things like the Ghost Busters reboot. Avoid giving them ad revenue by using the minimalist alternative, Cinesift, for a quick aggregate:

 🗣️ Know of another conservative review that we’re missing?
Leave a link in the comments below or email us!  

What’d you think? Let us know with a video:

Record a webcam review!

Or anonymous text review:

Submit your review
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Submit
     
Cancel

Create your own review

Average rating:  
 0 reviews
Overall Hollywood Bs Average rating:  
 
Anti-patriotism Average rating:  
 
Misandry Average rating:  
 
Affirmative action Average rating:  
 
LGBTQ rstuvwxyz Average rating:  
 
Anti-God Average rating:  
 

Buy on Amazon:
⚠️  Comment freely, but please respect our young users.
👍🏻 Non PC comments/memes/vids/links 
👎🏻  Curse words / NSFW media / JQ stuff
👌🏻 Visit our 18+  free speech forum to avoid censorship.
⚠️ Keep your kids’ websurfing safe! Read this.

Share this page:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail