Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Alice Through the Looking Glass (2016) review

(Disclaimer: The following review of Alice Through the Looking Glass will not be addressing the recent domestic abuse scandal surrounding its star Johnny Depp. Just like the sexual abuse lawsuits that Bryan Singer dealt with prior to the release of X-Men: Days of Future Past, Depp’s domestic issues are not connected to this film in any way.)


In 2010, Disney released what would become their first big ‘live-action reimagining’ of one of their classic animated films; Alice in Wonderland. Directed by Tim Burton, the film was a ‘sequel’ to the original story of the same name written by Lewis Carroll (which of course served as the basis for Disney’s 1951 animated classic) and followed a teenaged Alice as she returned to the world of Wonderland, or to be more specific, ‘Underland’, as it’s referred to in the film. Upon its initial release, the film received mixed reviews, attracting praise for its visual style but also criticism for its writing. But when it comes to its box-office performance, that’s another story because the film actually managed to join the billion-dollar club. I’m still in shock that it was able to do so given its extremely polarizing reception, though from what I hear this was primarily due to the fact that A.) since it was released in March, there wasn’t much competition in terms of family-friendly releases and B.) it was also released in 3-D, which was still a big deal at the time thanks to James Cameron’s Avatar unlike nowadays where it rarely gets attention anymore. So because of it, we now have a sequel in the form of Alice Through the Looking Glass, though like the previous film, this film is only loosely inspired by the story that shares its name (in this case, Carroll’s 1871 sequel, Through the Looking Glass). Tim Burton isn’t in the director’s chair this time around, however. Instead, in his place is James Bobin, who most recently helmed Disney’s last two Muppets films; 2011’s The Muppets and 2014’s Muppets Most Wanted. And like the first Alice, this film has been subjected to generally mixed to negative reviews from critics. It’s clear that when it comes to these films, people either really love them or really hate them. As for me, I’ll admit I lean more towards the former. Because while the film definitely isn’t perfect, there are still some genuinely good things about it that make it worth seeing.

The film opens up three years after the events of the previous film, which ended with young Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) taking up her late father’s business in overseas trade. However, when she returns home to London, she learns that her ‘former’ fiancĂ©, Hamish Ascot (Leo Bill), has taken over his father’s company and plans on buying her father’s ship. Amidst all of this, Alice soon finds herself summoned back to the world of Underland to help deal with a pressing matter regarding the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). She learns that the Hatter has been in a funk recently, claiming that the rest of his family, who supposedly died during the Jabberwocky attack (as seen in the previous film), is still alive. With his health slowly deteriorating, Alice, following the suggestion of Mirana the White Queen (Anne Hathaway), travels to the castle of the physical manifestation of Time itself (Sacha Baron Cohen) in order for her to travel back in time with the use of his ‘Chronosphere’ device, which powers all of the time in Underland. In doing so, she finds herself traveling through time, back to when the Hatter, the White Queen, and the rest of their Underland friends were young, in order to save the Hatter’s family from their supposed doom. But in doing so, Alice not only runs amok of Time himself but also finds herself once again crossing paths with Iracebeth the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter), who seeks to use the Chronosphere herself in order to change a certain event in her past that caused her to become the big-headed (figuratively and literally) tyrant that she is today.

Like the first film, this film definitely deserves recognition for its visuals and overall visual style. Clearly a lot of time went into making all of the film’s intricate visual effects and they do look really nice. With that said, however, like the first film, some might find all of the film’s CGI, which was pretty much done in the same way that the Star Wars prequels were by having the majority of Underland done in CG save for the human cast members, to be a bit overkill at times. And admittedly the writing is about the same as it was in the first film, tending to be rather messy and sometimes even a bit meandering at times in terms of its plot. However, even with that in mind, the film does at least have one major advantage over its predecessor and that is that it carries a much more pleasant color scheme in terms of its visuals. Whereas the previous film was very much a Tim Burton film with all of its gothic designs, this film has a much more vibrant look to it as a whole, which is definitely an upgrade if you ask me. Plus, the film doesn’t pull any of the rather extreme punches that the original did that did make you question if it was right to be rated PG, namely infamous scenes in which the Dormouse takes out one of the Bandersnatch’s eyes and another scene where Alice crosses the Red Queen’s moat on the heads of her unfortunate victims. So because of that, this film will definitely be easier for kids to handle than the first film. And at the very least, regardless of the film’s scriptural flaws, there really are some good messages for younger audiences, like being true to yourself and your friends and the fact that it’s okay to be a little weird sometimes. There’s actually even a few rather effective heartfelt moments.

A good chunk of the film’s heart and strong messages are exemplified by its main female lead Alice. While in the first film she spent a considerable amount of time questioning the fact that she was in Underland, resulting in her being a bit too passive of a protagonist at times, this film’s Alice is much more assertive and as a result actually becomes a pretty great ‘role model’ for young women. There’s a really great sense of confidence to her, not only in how the character is portrayed this time around but also in Wasikowska’s performance. As for Johnny Depp as the Hatter, it’s exactly what you would come to expect nowadays from Johnny Depp whenever he steps into a role that allows him to don quirky costumes, makeup, and/or accents. At this point you’re either fine with it or you’re really sick of it; me I don’t mind it. Plus, the Hatter is much more toned down this time around, though admittedly that’s primarily because he does spend most of the first half of the film in a muted state. In fact, this film definitely feels a bit more toned down in terms of how campy some of the performances are compared to the original. Though with that said, Helena Bonham Carter still relishes her role as the Red Queen, camping it up whenever she’s onscreen. The same goes for Sacha Baron Cohen as Time, although not as much as Carter. In short, I can say that, at the very least, the ensemble cast is a bit stronger this time around, mostly as a result of Bobin not cranking these characters’ personalities up to 11, which is sort of what Burton did with the previous film.

So here’s the deal with these live-action Alice films. As both of their critical receptions clearly suggest, these two films very much have their critics and quite a few of those critics have been very vocal in expressing their dislike of them. However, at the same time, it’s also clear that these films actually do have a pretty decently sized fan-base. This really can partially explain why the first film did as well as it did at the box-office and while this film hasn’t been doing anywhere near as good as the first film did from a commercial standpoint, I can tell that there will still be quite a lot of people who are going to like this film. And as someone who did like the first film, I can see why. Yes, the film does share some of its predecessor’s issues, namely in terms of the writing. Plus, like before, critics of CGI are no doubt going to take issue with the film’s very extravagant use of CG. However, this film really isn’t as bad as its low 30% rating on Rotten Tomatoes may suggest. Because despite its flaws, the film definitely deserves merit for its impressive visuals. Visually speaking, this is easily one of the best-looking films of the year. And in some ways the film actually does improve on its predecessor, namely in regards to a much brighter color scheme and a much more confident lead performance courtesy of Mia Wasikowska as Alice. So in short, if you weren’t a fan of the first film, then suffice it to say this film ain’t gonna win you over because it’s very much a sequel to Burton’s original film and fans of the books in particular are most certainly not going to be pleased with how the world and its characters are being portrayed. But if you’re someone who was a fan of the first film, then I’m sure you’re going to like this film just as much.


Rating: 3.5/5

(Closing Note: On a sad note, this film serves as the final performance of Alan Rickman, who reprises his role from the previous film as Absolem the Caterpillar (now a Butterfly). The reason why I didn't bring him up in the review is because, well, he actually isn't in the film that much. He only appears in the scene in which Alice first returns to Underland.)

No comments:

Post a Comment