I don't actually think it looks as dark as Burton can make things Granted, he stays very close to the original book by the look of things, but that's not a bad thing at all in this case, and it is a Disney film after all.
Most of the Alice in Wonderland films to date miss out parts of the original story, like it was too much effort to include everything. This looks to be more true to the original story, although I wish he'd been more original with the rabbit hole scene.
As for designs uninspiring.. Id say the White rabbit is the only one in the trailer Im not so keen on, along with the head-shot of the cheshire cat (looks like it's been specifically made for a 3D movie, which annoys me)The cat itself isn't a bad design, just very obvious CGI. Alice's clothing and look in general lookS pretty nice, and like a more mature version of the original in the illustrations by John Tenniel. So glad they didn't seem to choose a brat-like child like the Narnia kids, The golden compass or any other brat like child actors -_ -;
The other characters (Queen of Hearts and Tweedle Dee/Dum) surprised me too, nice mix of CGI and live action faces. They kinda remind me of some of the designs in Mirror Mask
I think Burton's style is actually developing a little. In James and the Giant Peach he started playing with the saturation of colours to make things miserable or dreamy, an effect that he used even more so in Sweeney Todd, and that I find works really well in live action (although I'm pretty sure I've seen other film studios using the effect now )
So yeah, Ill probably try not to expect too much from it. I got overhyped about the latest Harry Potter film and came out of the cinema feeling pretty empty
Looks cool. I was expecting it to be darker. Also, I believe this is not about the original story. It's about Alice returning to wonderland when she's older.
Also, Tim Burton didn't direct 9 or James and the Giant peach. He didn't direct Nightmare before christmas either but I think he was more hands on with that one.
Fine then, it was produced by Burton. Still clearly has his influences. And are you sure about the story? I'm pretty sure it's the original story with some of the characters from Through the Looking glass incorporated into it.
James and the Giant Peach had a brilliant style, the feel of the story and all the designs meshed perfectly. Compare that to... Charlie and the Chocolate Factory... it was pretty much just Tim Burton weirdness attached to the story with masking tape.
Harry Potter 6 was a disappointment. I don't know who's fault it was, it's directed well I think, but not written so great. A little better than the previous movie, though.
I just think the sets need a lot of work from that Alice trailer. After the first couple of scenes they show, they're all grey, with really plain lighting.
Originally Posted by JustinC Also, I believe this is not about the original story. It's about Alice returning to wonderland when she's older.
Where did you read this? The trailer looks very close to the original story. Just because shes a lot older than we probably all expected, shouldn't lead to pretty bold assumptions like that.
"I just think the sets need a lot of work from that Alice trailer. After the first couple of scenes they show, they're all grey, with really plain lighting."
I'm pretty sure a large percentage of the scenes were green screened digital sets filmed in LA (from an interview I watched of Matt Lucas ). The beginning was filmed in southern England >_< As for them being grey and "plain" , Im pretty sure there'll be a purpose or a damn good reason, Wonderland isn't supposed to be the happiest of places
"Where did you read this? The trailer looks very close to the original story."
Perhaps he presumed it The White Queen is from the Sequel to Alice in Wonderland as is the crow and a couple of other characters.
Just noticed the Cheshire Cat is also pretty similar to the original illustrations
I can't tell if I sort of like the obvious CGI effects or not. Like some characters faces obviously look stretched and transformed as if by Photoshop, not like their warped facial structure is believable to a viewer.
Originally Posted by jthongbai I can't tell if I sort of like the obvious CGI effects or not. Like some characters faces obviously look stretched and transformed as if by Photoshop, not like their warped facial structure is believable to a viewer.
I think that's sort of the point. Most of Tim Burton's movies warp the characters somehow. I like it that way. Overrated is sort of a personal thing. I thought Spider-Man (the movie) was overrated, but that's just my taste in movies.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Hmmm, not really followed this film though i saw a few stills in the Sun on Saturday and it looked okay. Then again i thought that about Godzilla when i saw stills of that in the Sun too!
I'll probably watch it since a) i haven't seen a Tim Burton film since Batman Returns, which i liked and b) the whole Alice in Wonderland story is alien to me, therefore it'll seem like a new story!
Advertisement
Post Reply
Granted, he stays very close to the original book by the look of things, but that's not a bad thing at all in this case, and it is a Disney film after all.
