
By now, you will have noticed my obsession with 3D films. Well, let's not call it an "obsession", but rather, a "devotion" to what I consider the medium of the future.
As such, the first part of this review shall be devoted to its 3D-ness, while the second part will be the regular review.
First, I didn't like its 3D-ness. When I was in the theater, I could really sense something was amiss. This wasn't like Avatar.
So when I got home, I researched on it, and confirmed my suspicion: This film was shot in conventional 2D, with the footage converted to 3D in post-production. James Cameron, in all his Avatar arrogance, criticized this, saying that "It doesn't make any sense to shoot in 2D and convert to 3D." Tim Burton felt, however, that 3D cameras were too bulky and expensive, and that there was really no difference between converted 3D and those originally shot with 3D cameras. Well, maybe to regular moviegoers there isn't; but Mr. Burton, there is a difference, because I felt it.
Okay, how did I feel it? I could feel it in the depth of the shots. There was just not enough depth.
And now I consider myself a certified 3D addict. You know you're a 3D addict when you can detect the difference between converted 3D and original 3D footage.
And now, on to the regular review.
This version is based on, but is definitely not, the original Lewis Carroll books of Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. Those stories were more of a stream-of-consciousness hallucination all throughout. In this version, however, screenwriter Linda Woolverton attempted to put a narrative structure to it, and so it ended up as a retelling (which Tim Burton would vehemently deny). It worked, I must say. But I sort of liked the hallucinatory quality of the Lewis Carroll version.
Helena Bonham Carter, a.k.a. Mrs. Tim Burton, was perfect as the Red Queen. Plus I loved how Burton made her head bigger. Bonham Carter brought a new edge to the Red Queen. Tyranny with insanity.