THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => ENJOY => Topic started by: Eris on 22 Jun 2009, 18:11
-
Oh dear god (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1194668/First-glimpse-Johnny-Depp-Helena-Bonham-Carter-Alice-Wonderland-movie.html)
See, now, in reading the article up there I will admit there are some good casting choices in there (Stephen Fry and Alan Rickman are two I am looking forward to seeing), and some of the shots look lovely, like the one with all the faces in the flowers. But for every thing I like there is something like this that makes me want to vomit out my eyes.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/22/article-0-056E4A90000005DC-272_468x694.jpg)
Unless the awfulness of the character designs are overshadowed by really good acting, they're going to make me go "Ah shitballs" and ultimately not like the movie. What are your thoughts about this? Like what you see? Refuse to go see it? Disappointed there are less swirls in the architecture shown?
-
Stop making the same movie over and over again, Tim, kthxbai.
-
Is that Elijah Wood?
EDIT - Oh, it's Johnny Depp. Durr.
-
Don't worry, I thought the same thing
-
As did I
-
Yeah, but what is his costume going to look like?
-
Yeah, but what is his costume going to look like?
Who is that costume even supposed to be? Is it the rabbit? The Cheshire Cat?
Fuck. Fuck Tim.
-
The mad hatter.
-
Pretty obvious, really.
-
Obvious? For Tim? We're talking about a guy who has made the same movie five times and cast Johnny Depp in it almost every time. He thinks he's clever.
-
Oh god i cannot say these are good artistic choices.
Oh no they are not.
-
I've got to be honest. Everything promo shot I've seen from this movie so far has been hideous, in my opinion. I think I'd get a headache from just five minutes of a film with the colour palette that Burton's apparently chosen for this film.
In another thread we're ripping into Michael Bay for being "explosions EVERYWHERE!" In all honesty I can't see much difference between Bay's approach and Burton's; i.e.: neither seems to have any grasp whatsoever of the concept of subtlety. Sometimes I want to go into a cinema and not get eye-fucked, ya know?
-
Ok so the scenery looks ok and the White Rabbit and Alice look decent from what little I can see, but the rest of them are fucking terrifying and garish. And yes, Depp looks like Wood, which makes him look even creepier, not that the costume isn't bad enough. And I guess the white queen looks ok, but I dunno.
This does not make me more excited for the movie. It makes me really worried.
-
A Tim Burton movie starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter? IMAGINE THAT.
-
'Cause nepotism is totes rad.
-
In another thread we're ripping into Michael Bay for being "explosions EVERYWHERE!" In all honesty I can't see much difference between Bay's approach and Burton's; i.e.: neither seems to have any grasp whatsoever of the concept of subtlety. Sometimes I want to go into a cinema and not get eye-fucked, ya know?
Yeah, I'm getting a bit worn out on Burton's so-quirky/creepy-it-hurts style as well. I wish he'd do something along the lines of Ed Wood again.
Though, in a textbook example of damning with faint praise, I can't imagine Burton's take on Alice will be worse than Marilyn Manson's one.
-
I concur with most of what's already been said. I want to add that Burton should probably go back to making original things instead of subjecting any more established stories to the Burtonation process.
-
You know what Burton movie I really liked?
Coraline
-
"I LOVE Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter, they are so weird and quirky. And I will def watch this film when it comes out"
*barf*
-
You know what Burton movie I really liked?
Coraline
That wasn't even his, though. Henry Selick. Who also did Nightmare Before Christmas, which Tim Burton wrote, but did not direct.
-
The one thing I have to say is that Johnny Depp's costumes looks like Lewis Carrol intended the Mad Hatter and pretty much every character in the books to be... a mockery of the English court.
-
You know what Burton movie I really liked?
Coraline
That wasn't even his, though. Henry Selick. Who also did Nightmare Before Christmas, which Tim Burton wrote, but did not direct.
Yes, I already knew that. I was making fun of people who thought it was a Burton movie.
-
I can't get behind Burton hatred. Yeah, he's sort of gotten into a rut, but at least it's a unique, interesting rut as compared to the rest of Hollywood.
-
Fuck all of you guys.
This film has alan rickman as the caterpillar and stephen fry as the cheshire cat. What more do you want?
Christopher Lee as the Jabberwock? Okey dokey.
Jeez.
-
BARBARA WINDSOR IS THE DORMOUSE.
-
I can't get behind Burton hatred. Yeah, he's sort of gotten into a rut, but at least it's a unique, interesting rut as compared to the rest of Hollywood.
I don't think it's a hatred so much as a tiredness. Burton has a fairly unique vision, and when he first came on the scene it was certainly refreshing to see films like Beetlejuice and Batman and Edward Scissorhands and Nightmare Before Christmas. But---and this is the problem with having a vision so personal as Burton's---repeatedly applying that style becomes a crutch.
I think that from a purely technical standpoint, as separate from a stylistic one, Burton's a good director. That's why he hasn't sunk into self-parody like, say, M. Night Shyamalan did. I'd like to see him more often apply that skill to something that's not a cracked re-imagining of an existent work (see Planet of the Apes, Sweeny Todd, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Alice in Wonderland).
-
What rynne said, basically. I don't hate the guy, but for me to like him he needs to make something different from everything else he's done. If someone wants to take me to see this, I won't protest. But I'm probably not going to see another Burton-helmed movie until he stops relying on his stylistic vices. Last one I saw in theaters was Big Fish. Which admittedly still had his stamp on it in a Scissorhands kind of way, but it wasn't subjected to Johnny Depp/overeager & gloomy color palettes/macabre images like his other stuff.
-
Am I the only one really looking forward to this movie? Sure Burton is repetitive, but to me it's repeating something very good, so it doesn't bother me.
-
Yeah, a lot really depends on how much you enjoy his aesthetic. My sister for example has always really liked it and she has a ginormous crush on Johnny Depp, so there you go. Personally, I'm not really bored of the Burton's films, but that's probably in large part due to the fact that I've seen less than half of them.
-
Hmm. I liked the concept art, but the costumes are just ugly.
-
It's the colors that bug me more than anything.
-
(http://i39.tinypic.com/34y1p5k.png)
(http://i42.tinypic.com/2ni1yx5.png)
(http://i44.tinypic.com/30ib86t.png)
(http://i41.tinypic.com/dnhlcj.jpg)
-
What I am saying is that Burton's aesthetic in this regard echoes the vintage transvestite aesthetic of Rubnitz' whimsical shorts.
-
Like, I am pretty sure that if these were his own characters that he made up himself I wouldn't be quite so harsh on him.
-
I would be. Tweedle(dee/dum) and the Red Queen are serious nightmare fuel over here.
-
How the hell did you guys confuse Depp for Wood?
-
I knew he was playing the Mad Hatter & the news article mentioned him specifically, but he does look a lot like Elijah Wood in that picture.
-
RESPECT
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Elijah_Wood-D.jpg)(http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/24/madhatter.jpg)
-
Ah, so it's the eyes.
Johnny Depp wishes he had Elijah Wood's eyes naturally.
-
I just can't imagine him wearing that much makeup.
-
Ah, so it's the eyes.
Johnny Depp wishes he had Elijah Wood's eyes naturally.
I was thinking it was the nose and the chin too.
-
Johnny Depp wishes he had Elijah Wood's eyes naturally.
What? I hope not. Partially due to the fact that Depp's eyes aren't deer-caught-in-the-headlights-creepy.
I mean, really, the facial structure is similar. Depp's eyes are enlarged and light now, they both have strong jaw lines, and similar noses. I mean, if they both were wearing the same makeup, I'm sure they'd look pretty much the same.
-
Ah, so it's the eyes.
Johnny Depp wishes he had Elijah Wood's eyes naturally.
And the cheekbones. It was the combo of eyes and cheekbones and five thousand pounds of makeup that fooled me.
-
Oh come on, how can this not be good?
Either it will be awesome, or we'll have something to mock for years to come.
-
My money is actually on mediocre.
-
As long as it does better than Corpse Bride, I think it will be ok.
-
I actually do like the aesthetics they are going for. It's all horribly garish and irritatingly bright and as was mentioned before, basically a mockery of everything that is proper and right.
I'm looking forward to it!
-
Fuck all of you guys.
This film has alan rickman as the caterpillar and stephen fry as the cheshire cat. What more do you want?
Christopher Lee as the Jabberwock? Okey dokey.
Jeez.
BARBARA WINDSOR IS THE DORMOUSE.
this is a very well-made, well-spoken point.
I for one will go and see TIM BURTON's Alice in Wonderland
Although to be honest I'm more curious as to the format of the story rather than the garish costumes and Burton's Deppsession. IMDB bills the Jabberwock and The Red Queen so we're getting a bit of an Alice/Looking Glass mashup, but given between both books there's a huge amount of stuff for Burton to sink into, he's got a pretty good shot at coming up with something pretty interesting, I think.
-
Is this going to be a remake of the Disney movie, or starting over again from the books.
Either way, I probably won't see it. I can't claim to have ever really gotten the fascination with Burton.
-
It's set 10 years after the books.
-
What is that true?
If so, that is even more shit. It's not "Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland" it is "Time Burton's non-canon fucking Alice in Wonderland fan-fiction (The Movie)"
-
Alice, now 17, attends a party at a Victorian estate only to find she is about to be proposed to in front of hundreds of snooty society types. She runs off, following the white rabbit into a hole and ending up in Wonderland, a place she visited 10 years before yet doesn't remember. Wonderland was a peaceful kingdom until the Red Queen overthrew her sister. The creatures of Wonderland, ready to revolt, wait for Alice to help them.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
-
Burton's film : Alice in Wonderland :: Return to Oz : The Wizard of Oz
-
Any idea what this thing will be rated? I'm assuming PG-13 but I guess I keep thinking of American McGee's Alice and how violent that 'un was. I wouldn't really put it past Burton to go that route considering how gruesome Sweeney Todd was.
-
What is that true?
If so, that is even more shit. It's not "Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland" it is "Time Burton's non-canon fucking Alice in Wonderland fan-fiction (The Movie)"
Man, I ain't get why people have to get the shits up in their ass about "canon" and balls.
I mean, take all the damn complaining about the new Star Trek- Gene Roddenberry died two seasons into TNG. If we honestly just give a shit about the original author's work, then the best parts of TNG, all of DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise, and all 4 TNG movies are non-canon. We're only considering that stuff canon because it's owned by the production company that produced the other stuf. Whoopty-balls-do.
Hell, the expanded universe of Star Wars, which Lucas has explicitly said "nah, that shit ain't canon", is better than 66% the fucking canon.
If something is good, it's good whether it's canon or not. Just like Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, honestly, I can't be arsed to give a damn because it looks enjoyable.
-
Yep, you're right. Canoncity makes no difference to whether or not something is good or bad. It's a pretty crucial distinction to make for continuity though, which is something I think is important in a series or franchise. I understand why fans try to distinguish canon from non-canon because the canon is somewhat connected to the consistency of a franchise as a whole. Sure, you can judge each part seperately if it's an independent piece, but within a canon it's far more likely to be judged as part of a series, whether that's fair or not.
For the record, I don't think anybody has criticised the Guy Ritchie Sherlock Holmes because of it's non-canon status, but rather because it looks likely to be a terrible movie.
-
Any idea what this thing will be rated? I'm assuming PG-13 but I guess I keep thinking of American McGee's Alice and how violent that 'un was. I wouldn't really put it past Burton to go that route considering how gruesome Sweeney Todd was.
That's what I'm hoping for.
-
My main complaint was that the title should be changed. It's not the same story, it is entirely different. It should have a different name to reflect that.
-
and fuck yeah, most of the Star Wars UE stuff is about a brazilian times better than the original movies.
-
The trailer is out.
It looks pretty stupid.
-
My co-worker was hoping for something like American McGee's Alice. No such luck it looks like.
-
Why is it that a Macabre CGI Alice movie hasn't been made, American McGee style?
-
Because people are dicks
-
Yeah it looks pretty dull. I guess some people have made comparisons to 300, but this one seems to be even more CGI-intensive. The only non-touched characters I saw were Depp and the Alice actress.
The sequence where she drank from the bottle and shrunk was pretty nice-looking, I'd say.
If they were going to do a dark Alice I'd rather they get somebody like Chris Cunningham for it.
-
I have never, in my life, been turned off by a movie trailer so quickly. I can now say that, without a doubt, that I have absolutely no interest in the film. The CG stuff looks terrible, especially for the people. I don't even know what to think about any of it. I'm fine with having a crazy Alice that's bright and colourful....I think the story has a lot of potential....but I think that Tim Burton is going to horribly mangle this film. The part that killed me the most though....seeing the first name come up in big gold letters:
Johnny Depp.
And then the last bit of the trailer was all about Depp. I really wish that they would just get a room and get it on. Burton and Depp really NEED to stop making movies together, they suck. Corpsebride tried too hard to be Nightmare and failed to be interesting, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was heinous, and Sweeney Todd was unwatchable the second time. Depp is a good actor but when he teams up with Burton it's all about Depp playing these silly cardboard characters, he reminds me of a Lucky Charms marshmallow.
-
Man....this looks awful. I didn't have high hopes before but I had some. Now...nothing. I began losing what little hope I had with the 'falling down the rabbit hole' animation but the second that absurd, garish, tacky Cheshire Cat popped up on the screen, they had lost me completely. Depp is not at all a bad actor. It's too bad that in this, however, he looks ridiculous and idiotic. I really don't know what to make of this at all. The only thing that stands out: how bad the CG looks. Sorry Tim, I don't see how this 'un won't be a dud.
-
Eh, I'll wait to see more before I say it's bad.
-
I'm not surprised really. Still,it doesn't ruin my opinion regarding Carrol's novel and later sequel.
-
I love Alice In Wonderland... So I really hope that they will follow the books.
-
Uhm, dude, it's a sequel set 10 years after the books. I don't think they can really "follow" them that closely.
-
The trailer is out.
It looks pretty stupid.
-
Uhm, dude, it's a sequel set 10 years after the books. I don't think they can really "follow" them that closely.
You can always hope.
-
The Cheshire cat looks like a douche in the trailer
/wrists
If you want CGI goodness go see motherfucking TRON
-
I am mainly confused as to why Tim Burton is giving Depp top billing for this. It's Alice in Wonderland, not "Lets Watch Johnny Depp and I Ruin Something!"
-
The trailer is out.
It looks pretty stupid.
-
A Tim Burton movie starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter? IMAGINE THAT.
Depp was best in fear and loathing, never again to shien that bright and thsi is gonna suck
-
He was a bit of a cartoon in Las Vegas. He was much better in Ed Wood and Dead Man.
-
You know, I am less terrified of Depp's makeup when he's moving. I'm also less terrified of the movie now that I've seen the trailer. However, it doesn't look very good and I'm still on the fence as whether or not I actually want to see this. I think maybe it's one of those movies that will be rented on dvd, watched with a lot of people, and only when ridiculously drunk. It's really the only way I think it'd be good.
-
I don't feel like making a new topic for this, but I'm going to eat the words of my post above and say that this movie was actually kind of fun! This is the first movie I've seen in 3D, and while it was not fun to wear 3D glasses over my own, it was a rather enjoyable experience and added quite a bit to the film. And really, I think this movie is kind of turning Burton's work around, because I think this is another good step out of the funk he's been in. Very colorful, interesting, well done scenery in the world, it was a good move to make it a sequel, and the characters were fun. It's definitely better than what I was expecting and really was fun to watch.
-
I was reading a review for this today and it looks pretty cool. It got 4/5 from one of the Sydney papers and it's sounding pretty good.
A couple of the quotes
No one is better than Burton at interpreting and embellishing the more provocative children's fantasy writers. And if his version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory proved he and Roald Dahl were made for one another, then he and Lewis Carroll are a match made in, well, Wonderland
And then there's Johnny Depp, whose Mad Hatter, a soulful union of gallantry, wit, sadness and big-heartedness, elevates the film to the point of being truly and poignantly memorable.
-
I'll probably see this within the week.
-
if his version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory proved he and Roald Dahl were made for one another, then he and Lewis Carroll are a match made in, well, Wonderland
how convenient of them to fashion this into a syllogism for me
-
it was not fun to wear 3D glasses over my own
This was my one and only beef with Coraline.
contributing to topic: No desire to see this movie but I'll probably end up watching it on netflix instant someday
-
I don't mind wearing glasses over my own. You whiners
-
I am ok with it if they are like the big ray-bans that they gave out at sasquatch but the 3D glasses are tight-fitting and poopy
-
I've never had a problem wearing the 3D glasses over my own glasses. Maybe it's because my glasses are only half rims and I don't have to deal with big stupid clunky frames (see Fashion Thread for further spectacle-hate).
-
:-P I wear my sunglasses over my glasses, but my sunglasses are huge and 3D glasses aren't. I think if they were a little bigger, it would have been fine.
-
It got 4/5 from one of the Sydney papers and it's sounding pretty good.
On the other hand (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/entertainment/a/-/movies/6892242/movie-review-alice-in-wonderland/)
Worse still, for a guy who made his career on unique and highly original tales, his recent efforts are all remakes.
Which brings us down the rabbit hole to Wonderland and lands us squarely in the blander latter half of Burton's career, with few wonders to rave about at all.
the demented tea party pals led by The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp), whose pale face, hypnotic eyes and gap-teeth resemble Madonna after midnight.
But it comes with a flat, formulaic and traditional story where everyone wonders if this is the same Alice who visited them before, and if she's "the one" to defeat the evil Red Queen (a scene-stealing, bobble-headed Helena Bonham Carter) and slay her nasty Jabberwocky.
As if to compensate for the lack of story, Burton has beefed up the Hatter's role, giving Depp time to shine with a twisty climactic dance that mimics moves by Michael Jackson. More wacky visual set pieces like these would have made Alice a lot more fun.
But I'm not surprised. It was shot in just 40 days against green screens, with another year in post-production adding the visuals, colours, CG characters and voices. Burton was rushing to finish it just two weeks before its premiere, and it shows, for the whole film feels rushed, incomplete and underwhelming.
Perhaps he wanted a dark, adult twist but Disney wanted it more kid-friendly? As such, its mash of loopy colourful characters and heady adult themes puts this Alice in Wonderland in the no-man's land between something too adult for kids and too juvenile for adults.
-
Yeah, it was a nice, but it needed more razamataz, y'know?
-
That's what she said!
:(
-
watched it over the weekend and was left unfulfilled. No idea why but i had high hopes for this movie. It just failed for me, utter disappointment. The 3d seemed contrived and did nothing for the story. Actually the coolest 3d effects were in the cat food commercial before the movie even started. The plot was not even close to what i had expected. Very much like some critic stated it was like Tim Burton made Alice to suit the Hot Topic crowd. Mad hatter was annoying and overplayed, Wasn't sure if Johnny Depp thought itd be cool to channel Jack Sparrow for the role but it wasn't. Basically not my cup of tea...
-
Tim Burton made Alice to suit the Hot Topic crowd.
Hot Topic agrees with your assessment (http://search.hottopic.com/search?w=Alice%20In%20Wonderland&type=product)!
-
Damn, that sucks so bad...