Disney Alice In Wonderland Figure Play Set 6Pc

Posted In: Alice In Wonderland

Silvia Panza says...

i have to say i didn't have any over or under expectations going into this movie. I loved it!! i found it a cross between the silliness of the disney alice and the super creepy Alice that came out when i was a child, with red buttons and sammy davis jr. i'm not sure why people didn't gather that its a sequel type move... did you see the commercials for it? people are upset that the movie is not for children, nor is the book, try reading sometime. add wizard of oz to that list, not all sweet, pretty and kind. also its tim burton, all of his movies are similar in style. i like his style personally. the details that are in this movie are amazing to me. the red queen and her palace blew me away. the "heart" detail from the clothes, to the floor, to even her lipsick. my only complaint would be that is wasn't longer, if left me wanting more, but then that's a good movie too. i adore anne hathaway as the white queen, and the johnny depp as the mad hatter is wonderful!! over all it will be a movie to add to my collection.

Posted on November 18, 2010

Jacqualine Holloman says...

19 year old Alice (Mia Wasikowska) returns to the magical Wonderland from when she was young and meets some old friends, and learns of her destiny.. to overthrow the evil Red Queen, sister to the good White Queen (Anne Hathaway).



I rather enjoyed it. Dark and weird, but it's really a sequel in feel, so why call it Alice in Wonderland? Return to Wonderland would have been an more apt title. Although that is probably too similar to Return to Oz...



Whereas the Disney Wonderland felt bright, surreal and colourful, this film had a very muted colour pallette even in the "real" world and Tim Burton's Wonderland had a kind of run-down, almost post apocolyptic feel. I pictured Alice being about 10 years old in the novel and 1951 Disney adaptation.



In that sense, by making this film a kind of sequel with Alice now in her late teens, maybe the broken, dark Wonderland becomes a metaphor for lost innocence and childhood itself, and how one's perception of childhood changes as you get older, which I think is actually quite clever.



I felt the 2 bookending parts of the film were boring (in the opening, we learn Alice is getting married to a slimy suitor) and I didnt feel for those characters.



Mia Wasikowska gave a good performance playing Alice as she was more independent and resourceful than I remember, surely ahead of her time!



I did like Helena Bonham Carter's turn as the Red Queen a lot - even though, talking with a high pitched, childish lisp, she reminded me of Miranda Richardson's Queenie in Blackadder II! In fact, she ripped off that interpretation wholesale. But still very funny.



Stephen Fry was excellent and probably gave the best "performance" of the cast as the Cheshire Cat but he was criminally underused I felt. Alan Rickman had just the right kind of stately voice of the Cattepillar.



In order to bring peace to Wonderland, Alice must slay the monster known as the Jabberwocky (I don't remember this Harry Potter type battle from the novel), which seemed shoehorned in to give the film some more structure and narrative and give the older, supposedly more resourceful Alice a mission, which The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) helps her with. His performance is a strange one - wearing lots of make up and adopting an occasional Scottish accent, there may be some sadness as well as madness in his air because he and the other characters have been waiting up to 13 years for Alice to come back.

However, in one scene the Hatter does a Michael Jackson inspired dance for no apparent reason, which I found cringeworthy.



The suggestion through the film that Wonderland may actually be real (with Alice often questioning her surroundings) reminded me of themes explored in Pan's Labyrinth and The Chronicles of Narnia. In my opinion this gave the film a darker edge and made it more appealing to adults and older children.

Posted on November 19, 2010

Rikki Simonson says...

This flick has a lot of problems.It is really just clips from other films re-shot.It would have been better maybe, or a little more entertaining at least, had they just used clips from the other movies.For example, if you splice together Lord of The Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia you have seen this film, but unfortunately this film is still not interesting.The film has some good points and lines, but because of its problems these seem like cheese on a lousy meal.



And the special effects may be groundbreaking (I don't know if they are, and I'm not about to look into it because I already feel this film has wasted too much of my time) but they don't really look convincing.Tweedledee and Tweedledum for example look like what they are- a man's face stretched and morphed onto a CG body.This kept taking me out of the story.Not that it took much to take me out of it since it was boring and didn't make sense.Why does Alice come to Wonderland the first time?Where is Wonderland?Who are the Red and White Queens?What happened between them and why is the Red Queen able to hold power?Why is Alice the only one that can restore the White Queen?



Instead of answering these questions and making an interesting movie we get the following:Alice is to be wed in real life, but!...she doesn't want to and the guy is creepy!She walks away from the proposal to have a think and falls down a big, big hole.She sees some folks who ask her if she is Alice.Is she?Isn't she?Is she again?Isn't she again?Maybe she is.Maybe she isn't.One thinks she is.But no, perhaps she is not.After some chases there is a big battle.Oh my God- it's a battle between the Red and White Queen!What!Then the White Queen gets back the crown, and the Red Queen goes away.Roll credits.



The cover of the DVD tells you that this film doesn't really have a direction.Alice, our main character who takes up the majority of screen time, is to the side on the cover looking off at what, we don't know.The Mad Hatter is in the center of the cover, skipping along, looking at us for some reason (this role could have been interesting, if the subtleties of this character were explained in the movie- bit they aren't, enough said). And the Rabbit is also on the cover- oh my God! - listening to his clock; I have never seen that before!



This movie put all its eggs in the computer animation basket, and since they don't really help the already very slighted story, the whole thing is a boring wash.Alice could have been a good film if it had been a film and not just a technical and marketing exercise.

Posted on November 19, 2010

Joelle Bielec says...

For starters, it seems that everyone I know is shocked when I tell them that this Alice in Wonderland is a sequel of sorts. At the age of 19 and about to be forced into marriage, this is Alice's second trip to Wonderland. I'm glad Tim Burton and his team came up with a new story that still featured all the great characters from the original source material. That's also where the weakest part of the movie lies. The dialogue given to the characters is great, but the script is razor thin. I think if more effort went into this particular aspect, I might have given it five stars.



I saw it in IMAX 3-D and the visuals are as grand and beautiful as you would expect from Burton. It's not quite as eye-popping as Avatar, which was shot completely in IMAX 3-D, whereas, Alice in Wonderland was upconverted (Clash of the Titans did the same thing to bad effect). The music by Danny Elfman is some of his best stuff in recent years and the costumes/makeup are top notch.



Aside from the look of film, the acting also makes it very memorable. There are so many well animated and voice acted characters running around I don't know where to begin. I guess I'll start with those made of flesh and blood. I didn't like Depp's take on Willy Wonka that much, and I'm a big fan of his, but his Mad Hatter is just the right amount of crazy. His voice goes back and forth from having a lisp to sounding like William Wallace from Braveheart. His look is so jarring, you probably wouldn't even know it was him if you somehow dodged all the advertisements before entering the theater. Helena Bonham Carter played the Red Queen brilliantly. I couldn't take my eyes off her giant head. Anne Hathaway really surprised me here (in a good way) with her take on the White Queen and it was nice to see Crispin Glover back on the big screen in a role that suited him. Last, but certainly not least, Mia Wasikowska was absolutely captivating as Alice. The way she talked and her reactions were just what the film needed in it's central role. All the digital animal characters were great, but my favorites were the Cheshire Cat, voice by Stephen Fry, and the March Hare voiced by Paul Whitehouse.



I'm somewhat surprised that the combination of violence and meanness, along with the smoking Blue Caterpillar didn't get this a PG-13 rating. It's not too harsh, but young kids might get a little freaked out.



Overall, Alice in Wonderland looks like a polished jewel, has great acting/voice acting, wonderful music and even manages to get quite a few laughs in the process. If only the simple story didn't let me down in the end, this could have been a classic in the making. Even still, I wouldn't mind Tim Burton taking us on another trip down the rabbit hole in a few years.

Posted on November 19, 2010

Ernestine Ilasin says...

I ordered these figures as cake toppers for my daughter's 4th birthday. They are so cute! They will look really good on the cake and the kids can't wait to use them!

Posted on November 21, 2010

Alease Dietzen says...

For this journey down the rabbit hole, Tim Burton is the driver and Johnny Depp the tour guide. Several film versions of Lewis Carroll's two "Alice" books have been released almost since the beginning of the 20th century. By and large, they have not been box office successes, though Walt Disney's 1951 animated feature has become perhaps the most iconic (I also like the 1933 Paramount film, the 1972 British musical film, the 1966 TV special of Through the Looking Glass, all on DVD, and the Hanna-Barbera 1966 special, which I wish was on DVD.)



Disney's new big screen version of Tim Burton's vision of Alice in Wonderland, or "Underland," gives us Johnny Depp once again creating an original persona to our sheer amazement, This film is the first mega-hit movie version of Alice ever, hitting the 1 billion dollar mark worldwide. It's a testament to Johnny Depp's astronomical star power within the right vehicle. It has also been accomplished not only through Burton's artistry, but Linda Woolverton's screenwriting (she penned Disney's Beauty and the Beast, after all).



But they also had to change the story to make it work as a movie. Every filmmaker has struggled with the Carroll texts because, like dreams, they are random experiences with no arc. Walt Disney was the most successful, in my view, at staying faithful to the story without adding an arc (and Walt's artists' vision of the rabbit hole is still the best of all time).



What was done with the 2010 Alice in Wonderland was to make it a revisit, of sorts, with Alice at marrying age and at a crossroads in life. This is her second Wonderland visit, to bring her confidence and direction. It's probably the most re-defined and altered story arc of any Alice adaptation to date (in the excellent Hallmark TV miniseries, Alice is afraid to recite a poem and the Wonderland characters give her moral support).



Alice, in this version, is a bit like the Pevensie children in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe -- sent by a prophetic destiny to rid the kingdom of an oppressive, deadly leader. The characters are given names (which my son loves: "It's not the White Rabbit, Daddy, he's McTwisp!"). Elements of the Carroll narrative (the rabbit hole, "drink me," etc.) are still here, but eventually the new adventure takes hold and the film becomes an action fantasy.



By the time Alice, the Mad Hatter and the Dormouse reach the Queen's castle, they've become a team more in the style of L. Frank Baum than Carroll -- in fact, I expected Alice to tell the Hatter "I'm going to miss you most of all." She even says a line similar to "and you were there, and you and you!" But I digress and perhaps spoil.



But you know what? It works. And it's more akin to Disney tradition that it may seem at first, since Walt himself considered changing the Carroll story as well, and also almost made a live-action/animated version with Ginger Rogers. This film, with its blend of live actors, CG animation and motion capture, was virtually all performed in front of a green screen, a descendant of the live action/animated sequences in Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks.



The cast is marvelous, on screen and off. Mia Wasikowska suggests Hayley Mills, with a physical resemblance as well as a similar spunky yet sober attitude. Helena Bonham Carter is having a ball with a juicy, outrageous villain to chew on Red Queen. Anne Hathaway channels Snow White (watch those bent elbows) and Billie Burke as the White Queen. The voices of Stephen Fry as the Cheshire Cat, Michael Sheen as the White Ra-- oops, I mean McTwisp are among the letter-perfect voice casting. And of course, there's to Johnny Depp's masterful, mercurial "Bozo-Blows-His-Big-Top," yet somehow heartbreakingly sympathetic, Hatter.



One note to Chitty Chitty Bang Bang fans: the legendary Barbara Windsor, who voices the swashbuckling Dormouse, was the blonde girl friend of Arthur Millard, the big goofball who got the ugly haircut from Dick Van Dyke's machine in the Sherman Brothers 1968 musical classic. And that's just a small part of a very big stage and screen career. It's nice to hear her in this film.



The film is visually amazing and as good a reason as any to plunk down the cash for a Blu-Ray player. The DVD has a handful of the bonus features included on the Blu-Ray disc, but I sure would have loved to hear an audio commentary from someone about such an interesting film.



Can't wait for the sequel -- how can there NOT be? I've always loved Alice in Wonderland and am glad to see it possibly become a franchise, as well as "cool" again. This is one instance where today's filmmakers have realized that total fantasy and escapism is what audiences want during depressed times.



And it still compliments the Walt Disney version without replacing it. There's always room for another Wonderland, and the Walt Disney version will always be landmark, especially because of its Mary Blair look, classic voice cast and unforgettable songs.

Posted on November 22, 2010

Eulah Mastella says...

Ok, so here it is the review that I thought I would never have to write, but you made me do it Mr. Burton. I have had some share of bad times with you at the theaters, with Ed Wood, Planet of the Apes, and the uproarious bomb...Mars Attacks! But never did I think that with Disney holding your goth inspired hand throughout the process that you would miss the mark completely. I only found 2 interesting things regarding your latest romp through another crazy place (i.e. Willy Wonka's Factory) First off where the visuals. Amazing scenes filled the screen with true to life representations of Lewis Carrolls' literary classic. You felt as if you where actually in Wonderland for seconds. (But only for seconds.) Secondly was Johnny Depps' portrayal of the great mad hatter. He did hit the nail on the (crazy) head. Nothing did delight me more to see him let loose again as an actor. And I appreciated the attempt at bringing in some one a little new to the filming process, but honestly you could of used a much better Alice, in fact, Anne Hataway would of faired MUCH better as Alice than the White Queen...role reversals...I do wish I would of gotten to see this flop on the 3D screens, but unfortunately thats what you have to deal with when living in a small town in Oregon. I heard the film was far superior in eye-popping 3D, than in traditional 2D. Maybe next time Tim!!!

Posted on November 22, 2010

Nicky Hodrick says...

The classic Alice in Wonderland story by Lewis Carroll is, in my opinion, a thin story. It was a profound statement regarding the fantastic for it's time but does not hold a candle to modern masterpieces of fantasy fiction. But it is nothing if not weird, and weirdness is what longtime fantasy director Tim Burton thrives on. What makes Alice inn Wonderland ultimately nothing special is the fact that it succumbs to the thinness of Carroll's storyline. Burton innovates the same way High School Musical 3 innovates from High School Musical 2, by taking Alice through the same steps that Carroll laid out for her as a teenager instead of a hapless little girl. There is no painting of roses in this take on Wonderland, or Underland, as Burton's creatures continously call it.



As in any Tim Burton film, we find Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter doing what they do best, being strange. Mrs. Carter and Mr. Depp are both very accomplished actors outside of the Burton sphere, but under his direction they are nothing nore than glorified chadpricatures, circus sideshow acts to be ogled at and talked about by audience after audience. They are buzz generating vehicles, which make both the Mad Hatter and the Queen of Hearts very one dimensional characters, interesting but without depth.



I argue that Alice in Wonderland is attractively designed and weird enough to focus a certain degree of interest, but the plot is wandering and boring, with an ineffective, complete with a made for 3-D climax. Best to skip this one.

Posted on November 23, 2010

Lavinia Gonzelas says...

Let me get this out of the way first.

And I have a feeling many of you will laugh when you read this.

But....I have never read the original story.

All I knew was some girl named Alice fell down a hole and met a bunch of strange characters and that's about it.

Honestly?

I think that gave me an advantage to actually watch the film without expecting things to go a certain way.

I know a lot of critics are saying this version is too much like "Lord of the Rings".

I can't say if that's accurate or not but the ending hardly reminded me of anything out of "Lord of the Rings".

I was scared, I mean REALLY scared that Burton, even with Depp and the rest of the cast wouldn't be able to pull this off.

I was scared right in the beginning that the film would rapidly dissolve into something so bad and so corny it would be painful to watch.

It didn't.

In a sea of weird movies, this one has to be Burton's crowing jewel of weirdness.

If you thought "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" was weird, you haven't seen ANYTHING.

This movie ups the weirdness factor by 100.

Is that a good thing?

It depends.....

Did you like "Charlie"? If the answer is yes, than you'll probably like this.

I liked "Charlie" but I though this was a hundred times weirder and better.



Ok...."Alice in Wonderland".

What was good?

Masterfull acting from Depp, Carter, and Hathaway.

Burton's most visually stunning movie ever.

Great score.

The film was paced well and wasn't a second too long or too short.

I know a lot of people were worried that the CGI would ruin the movie. It didn't, it blends seamlessly with the human actors into a film quite like no other. Some may say Avatar, but I haven't seen that yet so I really can't compare.



What was bad?

There really wasn't a whole lot of story to be had here.

It had A story just not a very deep one.

What little story was there was good and it wrapped up very nicely.

I'm knocking one star off due to lack of a more in depth story.

But considering I never knew what the original story was to begin with I really can't complain.



Let's sum it up.

Burton's most visually stunning film ever.

The entire cast is amazingly good.

Everything is perfect in every way except the story could have used a little more work.

I saw the movie in 2D not 3D but I loved the 2D version. I may or may not go see it again in 3D but I'm anxious to read what others say about the 3D version.

All in all,

"Alice in Wonderland" comes....

Highly Recommended!!!

Posted on November 24, 2010

Kareen Moret says...

Most of the many attempts at filming Alice In Wonderland haven't been particularly successful, for two reasons. First, directors seem to feel that the movie must have a strong male character. Lewis Carroll didn't give them one (all the male characters in the books are rather spineless and feeble) so they invent their own, usually, for some reason, the Mad Hatter. Second, they misread the character of Alice. In the book she is headstrong, inquisitive and feisty; she dominates the other characters even as she takes part in their fantastic world. She is not a spectator, watching what they do, but a full participant, accepting. or more often rejecting, their view of life. She's not, nor is she meant to be, a nice girl meekly accepting what befalls her.



Unfortunately, Tim Burton's 'Alice' falls into both these traps. Instead of being a passing character Alice meets along the way, the Mad Hatter becomes central to the film and in doing so destroys much of the point of the tale. Alice herself, though she has her moments of rebellion, is played far too passively; she's more often merely watching what goes on inWonderland. In making her character too detached, Burton loses the involvement that the audience should feel and which has made the books so successful for so long.



On the plus side, Wonderland itself is marvelously realized. I love the bright colors, the ever-more-convincing computer graphics and the strange flora and fauna which inhabit this suitably dream-like place. Everything looks as it's supposed to- distorted versions of reality, only possible in the imagination. The story meanders far from the original tales, but I have no problem with that, as long as it holds together. Tim Burton is the master at making a fantasy world come to life.



It's a fun movie to watch. It just doesn't make the audience feel involved.

Posted on November 24, 2010