Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland Full Review

Back in the 90s, Tim Burton can never go wrong. He was the fresh new visionary filmmaker that brought many things not many people have seen. It was quirky, dark and twisted, completely different to the eyes of the contemporary audience. As the world entered the next decade, the audience have already gotten to anything quirky and twisted. And yet Tim Burton is still riding along his own styles throughout his recent movies. It can work to some and it can go horribly wrong to others. Like for one example, his film adaptation of Sweeney Todd really works along with his own trademark styles. His adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and his new film, Alice In Wonderland... not so much...



Frankly this is a what if scenario on what if the story of Alice In Wonderland is all "Tim-Burtony". Why if thats the case, lets have Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, Helena Bonham Carter as the Queen of Hearts (or Red Queen in this case), lots of spirals and twisted shapes here and there, Danny Elfman's boys choir echoing throughout, be it as freakishly as possible. Predictable and nothing new. You already got a classic story that is already freaky and insane and you're adding someone who make something freaky and insane, so you'll have something that looks more freaky and insane. If we see David Lynch's adaptation of Alice In Wonderland, it would be overkill.

The plot hole of this film is THIS big!

In order to be a little bit different from the rest of the adaptations, the story goes in the whole Narnia direction while taking some bits from American McGee's version. After many years, teenage Alice (Mia Wasikowska) runs out of a marriage proposal and chase after the White Rabbit (Michael Sheen) down the rabbit hole and back into Wonderland, which is somehow corrected as "Underland". It turns out that Underland has been conquered and ruled with an iron fist by the big headed Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) and it has been prophesied (really... Tim Burton went onto that angle for something like Alice In Wonderland?...) that the Alice, along with the help of resistance fighters: The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp), Tweedledee and Tweedledum (Matt Lucas) and The Cheshire Cat (Stephen Fry), will defeat the Red Queen and her pet, The Jabberwocky and restore the White Queen (Anne Hathaway) back to the throne of Underland. Yeah, you saw this from Narnia, Eragon, Wizard of Oz, hell even from Star Wars and this is no different. Its predictable and formulaic, you'll know what happens throughout the film.

That "special" medicine made my hangover EVEN worse

It is somehow an excuse for Tim Burton to have his own vision of Wonderland to the big screen and instead of giving a proper sequel to the actual classic literature, they'll give you a ripoff of every other fantasy films out there. Ok so, they didn't work on the story, so they'll give a whole lot of range for the characters. Sadly almost all of the characters in the film, including Alice, was very much wasted and unused. You'll think that with the mix of Wonderland's inhabitants and the visionary of Burton that you'll see so much potential in what Burton can do with these characters other than how it looks. His design of Tweedledee and Tweedledum was kinda unique, but they weren't used to full effect. They just stand there, talk for a little and left. That is what its like for most characters.



The character, Alice became nothing more than a device that acts like a tour guide and brings the audience to one quirky scene to another. Even being the title character herself, its a shame that she was a tad bit boring. It is the same apply for Johnny Depp's Mad Hatter which is by far his most wasted and bland character in a Tim Burton film. Gone are his insane, colorful and wild personality seen in other adaptations as he was dark, moody and brooding like Batman... ugh.. And his "futterwacken" performance at the end (you'll find out and you'll be surprised) was very very pointless. Anne Hathaway's White Queen is the Glinda of Wonderland. She's entirely sweet and kind, one-dimensional. But really if she had her crown stolen and was in hiding from The Red Queen while her people have been slain under her rule, she's pretty comfortable and safe living in a giant pristine White Castle while others are pretty much fending for their own lives... What an assh*le she is! Probably the character that has been used to full extent is the Red Queen. You can tell that Helena is actually having fun.

I would look like this if I ever saw that Planet of the Apes remake again...

Tim Burton did have some time making Wonderland looking twisted and murky, but the world wasn't all imaginative. It seems that instead of seeing an entirely new creation of Wonderland, Tim Burton borrowed many elements from his other films and applied them in that world. You can expect that Danny Elfman will have a spot and produce the same composition you hear in other Burton movies. And I didn't see this in 3D, but I can see it won't do much for me. This is again another misstep for Tim Burton as he applies his vision to existing classics and he can put this mistake on the shelf including Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Planet of the Apes. I want to say this to Tim Burton: "NO MORE JOHNNY DEPP IN YOUR NEXT MOVIE!"



2 and a half out of 5 stars

My Pick for the Winners for The Academy Awards 2010

Well its that time of the year where this Sunday, movie-geeks draws their attention to this big event: The Academy Awards, where it celebrates what Hollywood deems to be the "best". And if you are a huge movie geek like me, you should know that the Academy Award show are not as credible as it used to be in the past. Thats what you read. With only a few films from the past awards that deserved "best" picture, most of the films nominated have been a bit underwhelming, at least according to my eyes. But it doesn't stop me from having fun by picking out my winners among the nominees, picking out which really deserves the title of being the "best". So here are my picks for this year's Academy Award winners...



Best Animated Feature Film Of The Year

The Nominees are:

Coraline (2009)
Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)
The Princess And The Frog (2009)
The Secret of Kells (2009)
Up (2009)

Surprisingly there have been alot of wonderful and greatly-made animated films in the past year (and I'm surprised Cloudly With A Chance Of Meatballs didn't make the cut), with a few that was disappointing (Ponyo) and very atrocious (Planet 51 and Avatar... Ha, kidding! Not kidding for Planet 51). Coraline was pretty creepy and The Princess And The Frog was an excellent return to the traditional Disney nostalgia. I haven't seen Secret of Kells and I would like to see it, as it looks pretty gorgeous to look at. Fantastic Mr. Fox is downright Wes Anderson: his style, his characters, his cinematography, with only a group of people including me can only love this film. But of course, come on.. Up is brilliant. Even if its becoming like a broken record, you can't deny the brilliance and wistfulness of Pixar. Even though most animated films are now getting close to Pixar quality, this is still Pixar's year.

My pick: Up



Best Achievements in Visual Effects

The Nominees are:

Avatar (2009)
District 9 (2009)
Star Trek (2009)

I'm very surprised that Star Trek is up there and it is deserving of that spot. Though Avatar does bring out very impressive visuals with a giant budget, I'm more impressed of the visuals of District 9 as they were able to create such great designs, characters and exterior with such a low budget. The Prawns have much better and sympathetic character designs than the Na'vis. Though I would have to give Avatar that much slack. I don't know which to choose so...

My pick: Either District 9 or Avatar



Best Achievements in Music Written For Motion Pictures, Original Score

The Nominees are:

Avatar (2009)
Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)
The Hurt Locker (2008)
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
Up (2009)

Only four out of five nominees (including Avatar) have music scores that isn't overwhelming or considered important to enhance the movie. James Horner have been making great scores for James Cameron's film like Aliens and Titanic, which proved to be great, but this one film, Avatar, is where his music didn't shine through. The only film out of these that has the music so greatly complement the film is Up. You have to think about that four minute sequence where the story is told with only the visuals and the music.

My pick: Up



Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

The Nominees are:
Penelope Cruz for Nine (2009)
Vera Farmiga for Up In The Air (2009)
Maggie Gyllenhaal for Crazy Heart (2009)
Anna Kendrick for Up In The Air (2009)
Mo'Nique for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)

Penelope Cruz was the most impressive among the cast in the disappointingly Nine and damn... is she so ever hot and gorgeous. Famiga and Kendrick from Up In The Air were also gorgeous and they both did a wonderful performance, while Gyllenhaal just did a fine job. Now for Mo'Nique... I never liked her and any of her comedic acts. She was never a good comedian, nor being good at being funny. But she's very good at being scary. And to be someone to be completely despised and hateful, going the opposite of what she was before, is REALLY impressive.

My pick: Mo'Nique



Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

The Nominees are:
Matt Damon for Invictus (2009)
Woody Harrelson for The Messenger (2009)
Christopher Plummer for The Last Station (2009)
Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones (2009)
Christoph Waltz for Inglorious Basterds (2009)

Matt Damon (Mattt DAY-MON... sorry can't help it) was pretty standard in Invictus, while both Woody Harrelson and Stanley Tucci gave such great performances in their own movies, especially for Tucci being so damn creepy. But Christoph Waltz is the landslide winner. His role in Inglourious Basterds is just so deliciously evil. You despise him yet you can't look away from him.

My pick: Christoph Waltz



Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role

The Nominees are:
Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side (2009)
Helen Mirren for The Last Station (2009)
Carey Mulligan for An Education (2009)
Gabourey Sidibe for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)
Meryl Streep for Julie & Julia (2009)

I'll tell you I haven't seen The Last Station or An Education, so I wouldn't know from the perfromance from Mirren and Mulligan. Though I have heard that Mulligan's performance is something to look out. But I can say that Sandra Bullock's was not entirely special. I wouldn't know if the blandness of the film, The Blind Side also affected her performance or its just that really is nothing special except she did a poor man's version of Erin Brockovich. Gabourey was a little short of giving an outstanding and inspiring performance, but was indeed impressive. Meryl is always there in the nominees every year and you can always see why. She is just outstanding as the wistful Julia Child.

My pick: Either Meryl Streep or Gabourey Sidibe



Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

The Nominees are:
Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart (2009)
George Clooney for Up In The Air (2009)
Colin Firth for A Single Man (2009)
Morgan Freeman for Invictus (2009)
Jeremy Renner for The Hurt Locker (2008)

Like the lineup for Best Leading Actress, there is not one that was totally outstanding and most were just fine. George Clooney, while he was actually great, (admittedly) was just being George Clooney and Morgan Freeman was pretty much ok in the film. The two that were kind of impressive by me were Jeff Bridges and Jeremy Renner, as they made me believe that one is really a struggling country singer and the other is an uncontrollable bomb expert respectfully. So again...

My pick: Either Jeff Bridges or Jeremy Renner



Best Achievements in Directing

The Nominees are:

Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker (2008)
James Cameron for Avatar (2009)
Lee Daniels for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)
Jason Reitman for Up In The Air (2009)
Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds (2009)

The Academy Awards are now about the battle between an ex-wife and an ex-husband, Bigelow and Cameron as they are the frontrunners for most of the award categories. Reitman did also an outstanding job too, while Daniels and Tarantino(unexpectedly) did a passable job. One can argue that Cameron brought the biggest high-end technology to create the best visuals to the screen only to enhance a story that is not only predictable, but written downright piss-poor. While Bigelow gave us a wild ride through the eyes of three soldiers who's occupation can kill them any moment. So I ask which is the best director, the one that heavily relies on technology to get his best results or the one that made an entirely great film without relying any form of CG technology?

My pick: Kathryn Bigelow



Best Motion Picture of the Year

The Nominees are:

Avatar (2009)
The Blind Side (2009)
District 9 (2009)
An Education (2009)
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)
The Hurt Locker (2008)
A Serious Man (2009)
Up (2009)
Up In The Air (2009)

This year is different because there are now ten nominees for Best Pictures. Geez I wonder what would cause to make such change... (*cough* Dark Knight *cough*). So this would make a hard decision for me. Two films that don't really deserves those spots are The Blind Side and A Serious Man. I mean The Blind Side was just bland and completely trite and A Serious Man was just boring. Inglourious Basterds and Precious were just average and Up In The Air was good, close to great. The films that really blew me away were Up, District 9 and The Hurt Locker. And no, Avatar didn't blow me away, not even with all of its CG visuals. I'm not the kind of guy that gets sway by just CG visuals. If the story was just passable and provide decent performances, then this film would be deserved the nominated spot. But no, the story was badly written and the performances were ranged from poor to embarrassing. While I would like to see Up or District 9 winning, I would have to think like the Academy and have to choose The Hurt Locker for Best Picture. Either of those three and I would have my faith on the Academy restored. But my single choice is...

My pick: The Hurt Locker

And those are my choices. What would be yours?

Mini Reviews - Daybreakers

Daybreakers

Ethan Hawke plays Edward Dalton, a researcher in the year 2019, in which an unknown plague has transformed the world's population into vampires. As the human population nears extinction, vampires must capture and farm every remaining human, or find a blood substitute before time runs out. However, a covert group of vampires makes a remarkable discovery, one which has the power to save the human race.

Don't expect this to be a total action blood gore romp. It is a slow and pretty nice observation on a what-if scenario in the vampire world: what if vampires do rule the world and how would they function as a society? It includes nice little niches on many modern culture niches with vampires acting like normal people, but walking on the tightrope of human and animalistic behavior. Unlike the directors' previous film, Undead, the film gives a serious tone and it is a worthy attempt, but not entirely a strong one. The writing is decent and the performances are pretty standard, with Mr. Creepy Face, Willem Dafoe sticking out from the rest. Of course, the Spierig Brothers wouldn't come in without giving a good dose of blood and gore and the amount is fairly enough, but less than what we expect. Though it is a worth checking out if you need reminder what real vampires are and an escape from the gay Twilight ones.

3 out of 5 stars

Mini Reviews - Nine

Nine

, Kate Hudson , Sophia Loren , Stacy Ferguson , Ricky Tognazzi , Giuseppe Spitaleri

"Nine" is a vibrant and provocative musical that follows the life of world famous film director Guido Contini as he reaches a creative and personal crisis of epic proportion, while balancing the numerous women in his life including his wife, his mistress, his film star muse, his confidant and costum... (read more) "Nine" is a vibrant and provocative musical that follows the life of world famous film director Guido Contini as he reaches a creative and personal crisis of epic proportion, while balancing the numerous women in his life including his wife, his mistress, his film star muse, his confidant and costume designer, an American fashion journalist, the whore from his youth and his mother.

There are many adaptations of the classic Fellini's film "8 1/2" and in this case, this is the film adaptation of the broadway adaptation.... wrap your head around that. Though don't expect this to be another smash hit like Rob Marshall's last musical, "Chicago" as some of the songs are not that memorable or anyway spectacular as the previous film. The women of the film are very beautiful, but their performance in both acting and singing can be ranged from great to very subpar, while Daniel Day Lewis (one of the greatest actors of all time) gave a pretty forgettable. Its a nice little musical, but not worth the spotlight.

2 and a half out of 5 stars