Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

Pluto23 · Post by **Pluto23** » Mar Fri 05, 2010 8:08 pm

disneydreamer58 wrote:I went and saw it in 3D today, it was AWESOME!!! I want to go see it again =)

I was hoping somebody saw Alice on opening day. So this is a keeper. Good to hear. Disney can use another blockbuster.

mindflipper · Post by **mindflipper** » Mar Fri 05, 2010 10:29 pm

So far, the few reviews I have seen have been very positive. Roger Ebert gave it 3 out of 4 stars.

Amy · Post by **Amy** » Mar Sat 06, 2010 12:43 am

How was the music?!?!

elizabethswann · Post by **elizabethswann** » Mar Sat 06, 2010 12:54 am

I saw it in 2D since the IMAX was sold out and I really loved it. I may go on Monday to see it in the IMAX.

Pluto23 · Post by **Pluto23** » Mar Sat 06, 2010 7:25 am

elizabethswann wrote:I saw it in 2D since the IMAX was sold out and I really loved it. I may go on Monday to see it in the IMAX.

If you do, make sure to let us know how the 2 compare. I only saw Avatar in 3D, but I'm sure it held up well in 2D.

sandi · Post by **sandi** » Mar Sun 07, 2010 10:06 pm

We saw it today and the 3 D effects were wonderful. Probably the best 3D I've seen so far ( haven't seen Avatar). I did not go in with any preconceived expectations and walked out a big fan. Well done and what a nice message for kids, especially girls.

mindflipper · Post by **mindflipper** » Mar Sun 07, 2010 10:47 pm

The 3D was well done. The movie was good, but too many Wonderland characters were left out, such as the carpenter, the walrus, the gryphon, and the mock turtle. Those who go to see MUST NOT think of this as a sequel to either the Disney animated movie or a sequels to Charles Lutwidge Dodgson's two books. Think of it as "loosely based" on Dodgson's books.

MadEye · Post by **MadEye** » Mar Mon 08, 2010 4:07 pm

So... Alice did better than Avatar's opening weekend box office ($116.3 million). Close to $40 million more!!!

MetalRage · Post by **MetalRage** » Mar Mon 08, 2010 4:32 pm

I still have not seen it. I will be able to this weekend. So from what I have read on here, it isn't exactly like the other movie?

Jacca5660 · Post by **Jacca5660** » Mar Mon 08, 2010 6:47 pm

All I heard about it so far was the 3D wasn't done very well. It was filmed in 2D and put into 3D as an after thought. I've only seen one review and that reviewer did think much of it. He called it a rehash of The Nightmare before Christmas. I'm so glad everybody is enjoying it! I look forward to movies the Hollywood people don't like! ;+>

elizabethswann · Post by **elizabethswann** » Mar Tue 09, 2010 12:43 am

I saw it in the 3D today and I didn't care for it much in 3D. The glasses made the colors darker than they should be. I prefer it in 2D and if there's a chance that I can see it in the IMAX anytime soon, who knows. 2D is my preference since I'm not a fan of 3D.

Pluto23 · Post by **Pluto23** » Mar Tue 09, 2010 7:22 am

elizabethswann wrote:I saw it in the 3D today and I didn't care for it much in 3D. The glasses made the colors darker than they should be. I prefer it in 2D and if there's a chance that I can see it in the IMAX anytime soon, who knows. 2D is my preference since I'm not a fan of 3D.

This is a common issue with 3D. The colors get muted - we are wearing shades. I never saw UP in 3D for this reason. The colors were so amazing, and I wanted to see the full range.

mindflipper · Post by **mindflipper** » Mar Tue 09, 2010 1:23 pm

My problem with the IMAX 3D over the standard screen 3D is that depending upon how you turn your head you can "blur" the 3D image, but I don't get that problem when I have watched the standard 3D. Also, they tell me that the Disney 3D glasses won't work in the IMAX 3D because they use two different 3D formats (anyone know if this is true?).

bcgm3 · Post by **bcgm3** » Mar Thu 11, 2010 10:55 am

Saw it a few days ago in 3D with a bunch of friends. We all agreed it was a pretty big letdown from what we were expecting from the commercials/teasers/trailers. The 3D really only came into play in one or two scenes, and only then very briefly. The tone was very mild and low-energy through the first 85% + of the film, culminating in a "final battle" that was just barely any more exciting than the rest of the film. It all kind of felt like Tim Burton was just re-hashing his old formula (Depp + Bonham-Carter + Lee) and expecting it to carry the movie entirely.

I guess I was expecting something more like "American McGee's Alice," where Alice's return to Wonderland was met with more significant and sinister challenges and drama. I think the days of Burton producing darker children's films (a la Nightmare Before Christmas or Frankenweenie) are past.

To put something positive out there, Burton's rendition of Cheshire Cat was pretty fun.

packwingfn · Post by **packwingfn** » Mar Thu 11, 2010 7:10 pm

I enjoyed it but I had no expectations going into the movie itself though