Movie Review: Alice in Wonderland 3D (2010) – or does everything need to be in 3D??

Alice in Wonderland iPhone wallpaper
Image by xploitme via Flickr

Hi all…

Yes, I went gaga over the 3D effects in James Cameron’s Avatar. And I loved the 3D world of Coraline. But does everything need to be 3D?

Last weekend I went to see the new Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland movie starring Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover, Michael Sheen, Mia Wasikowska, and many more. And yes, I liked the movie. I think it has a great message for girls and boys alike to have the courage to follow your dreams and not bow to the whims of the pressures of parents, peers, or society at large.

Depp was great as the truly mad Mad Hatter. Stephen Fry’s voice for the Cheshire Cat was spot on and I think Alan Rickman as the voice of the perpetually stoned Blue Caterpillar was divine casting. Add to that the fact that Carter and Hathaway as the Red and White Queens seemed to really dig into their roles and the unknown quantity of Wasikowska who did a great job through the movie as an older Alice finding her way in the world and you have a great movie that should hold up to repeated viewings.

[rating:3/4]

That said, I don’t understand why the heck it needed to be in 3D. Did Disney really need the extra $3 per ticket for 3D glasses?

And somehow it’s managed to make $400 million worldwide in two weeks at the box office. According to Box Office Mojo, $208.6 million of that is domestic, meaning a whole lot of people have sprung for $3 disposable 3D glasses.

But why? Watching the film, really only one scene (the one in the trailer where the Hatter rolls two bolts of cloth towards the audience) stood out as being 3D. That really wasn’t worth an extra $3 for the ticket for me.

Add to that the bizarre looking animation every time Stayne got on or off his horse and I was left really scratching my head.

Honestly I think I might have enjoyed it more without the film being in 3D. I guess that’s what I’m getting at.

And the fact that there are so many more movies coming out this summer in 3D for no apparent reason just makes it seem like a gimmick to get more people spending more money at the box office, which kind of skews all the box office $$ for me since you’re paying more for a ticket from the start. How to Train Your Dragon, Clash of the Titans, Shrek Forever After, Toy Story 3, and Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore are on the 3D bandwagon for the next few months… Most of them are for kids and they’ll like the gimmick, but why Clash of the Titans?

Do we really need all this 3D? I don’t think so. I hope the fad wears off soon and we get to watch some good movies and not wear those dang glasses!

What do you think?

–Fitz

p.s. Look for Avatar to find its way to DVD soon:

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

3 thoughts on “Movie Review: Alice in Wonderland 3D (2010) – or does everything need to be in 3D??”

  1. We were planning to go see Alice in Wonderland today, but we got hammered last night with ice and snow and more snow is on the way. I would hope that there is more reasons to producing movies in 3D than just getting additional money from box office receipts. We had hoped to watch this movie on a 3D IMAX screen. I love Burton’s Cheshire Cat …its bright eyes are compelling, and with Stephen Fry doing the voice this will surely be one of the favorite characters that will come forth from this movie. Stephen Fry once said, “I sometimes think that when I die there should be two graves dug: the first would be the usual kind of size, say 2 feet by 7, but the other would be much, much larger. The gravestone should read: ME AND MY BIG MOUTH.” Enough said … Stephen will make an absolutely perfect CHESHIRE CAT!

    Now if this snow will just leave I will be seeing this movie in near future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.