I never interpreted the moral as "be careful what you wish for" I saw it more as a little girl trying to figure out the adult world. Alice is a curious girl and questions a lot of things. The rude people in wonderland represent people in the real adult world. It's representative of things she doesn't understand about the real world. Thus why it is called. "Wonderland." I agree with you on the fact it is not as good as the book though and it definitely is a hard piece of media to handle to adapt on film.
Basically everyone who claims a movie is bad because it "followed the source material _too closely"_ has got something majorly wrong with them. Fortunately, you had a lot more to say than that, but seriously... how can you possibly claim it was "too close to the book" with a straight face? Assuming you said it with a straight face? I'm not gonna go over a hundred little nitpicky differences, but most of the dialogue is different, the order of everything's different, scenarios from both books are used, and ones from both are missing. It's closer than _Jungle Book,_ where supposedly Disney started production by holding up a copy of the book and throwing it in the trash, then saying to his team "Your first order is _not_ to rēad the book" (or something). In any case, I don't really understand where people are coming from when they claim that characters who's decisions don't affect the plot aren't relatable. What kinds of lives are you leading? No decision I was allowed to make ever had any lasting consequences, my life's been one big horrible railroaded RP with a dozen DMs that actively hate me... okay, I'm being a _bit_ hyperbolic now. Although, that _is_ a good point about the King Midas thing. Alice can't really learn to "be careful what she wishes for" if her wishes don't fail ironically _because_ of what she wished. I mean, there's "In a world where flowers and rabbits talk, they can be rude," that's _halfway_ there.
This version of Alice in Wonderland portrayed her as dull, uninteresting, and morose. Not that her family was any better, though. They were her forcing into marriage, when she clearly wasn't ready. It was also too dark in tone. And then Wonderland wasn't much better than her real life, when they were expecting her to be the hero. She couldn't even remember Wonderland, so how could she have been expected to save it? I understand that this was Tim Burton's version of the story. But the execution could've been stronger. Instead of making her a more well-developed character, the movie focused more on a feminist message, which was made evident by the finale, where she left her family behind to explore the world. It seemed to be focusing more on the "be your own person" message then on making her likeable. I don't think Disney will ever be able to properly adapt this story.
As a child, I'd read the book, and I'd seen the animated movie. Back then, I enjoyed both. When my sister was a child, we both enjoyed the movie. But now, as an adult, I can see why the movie was flawed. My mom had told me that Lewis Carroll was a mathematician, so the book was supposed to be based on skewered logic. But then the Walt Disney Studios had come along, and turned it into a cutesy, nonsensical movie. Now, I have nothing against Disney. But clearly, the movie was unfaithful to the book. I suppose Disney wanted a simplified version of the book, for audiences to understand. Charles Solomon, the author of The History of Animation, had mentioned that the movie didn't fare well with British audiences, and I can see why. They take their literature very seriously. I would also have to agree that in this version, Alice wound up as lonely as she did at the beginning of the movie. Her sister was cold and calculating towards her, and her only friend was her cat, Dinah. She imagined Wonderland to be a place where she could be accepted and find a sense of belonging but found no real connection or solace. The Wonderland characters are mainly antagonistic towards her, except for the Chesire Cat, and the Un-Birthday party doesn't feel earned. At the end, her sister didn't even try to understand her fantasy. "Caterpillar? What are you talking about? Oh, come along. It's time for tea." She and her sister had no real connection, either. Clearly, this movie would've been better, if it had been more fleshed out.
I love Walt Disney's Alice in Wonderland. Just from the look of the backgrounds and animations, it's gorgeous. I get annoyed that people think movies always need an overarching plot or moral. It's boring. I think your critique of Disney shoving in a "be careful what you wish for" moral is thoughtful but overall, it's good they stuck with the book. The problem is changing it *too much* not *too little*
The book is meant to have no meaning so why should the movie have? I don’t think is has to. And it’s more believable, that in her dream Alice reflects the real world. All somehow off, but still a childish reflection. Not the world she would have dreamed of but the world she has a dream about. There is nothing to learn, nothing to achieve. Just a dream on an afternoon nap.
huuhhhh Alice is my favourite Disney film wym, there’s a plot, alice is charming and flawed, a little defiant and cheeky yet obviously has some behaviours adopted from adults who clearly talk to her - I’ve always loves that it was jokey and fantastical but mostly an interesting story about a girl that does NOT revolve around having a love interest. I love alice in wonderland.
i watched this every day sometimes twice when i was little it was made in 1951 so it shouldnt be adapted to how kids like today. in the 80s we were supposed to be boring and dainty
:)She must have infleunced the character design by late,lamented Harry Devlin in the 1969 iconic book HOW F:ETCHER WAS HATCHED (the design of owner Alexandra, herself very young teen)
You know, I’ve never head of anyone disliking this movie before. You have a neat perspective. I disagree entirely, as Alice in Wonderland is my favorite silver age Disney film. However, it's interesting to hear what you think its shortcomings are as I never thought of them myself.
Well, Walt Disney himself was not pleased with how this film turned out, so I’m surprised that this is the first you’ve heard anyone disliking it. LOL I agree that it’s not one of Disney’s worst by any means, but I personally wouldn’t rank it in my Top 10 Favorite Disney movies. In my honest opinion, “Peter Pan” is the better Silver Age Disney film. But, I can somewhat see the appeal and can understand why some people like this film. 😄
In my opinion, Alice was definitely painted as a "Mary Sue" in this Tim Burton version. When she's not busy being wanted to marry a man at a party in honor of her surprise engagement, shes wanted because shes some kind of chosen one in wonderland that must unlock her power and who everyone is helping out. (Not to mention a bad guy is also lusting for her.) Its kind of hard to root for her as a character when characters keep throwing her a bone or shes constantly perceived as admired even though she didnt do jack shit. For goodness sake, even the father of the guy she was supposed to marry is on her side, when in actuality he shouldve turned against her for daring not marry his son!
In my opinion, I think American McGee adapted the Alice in Wonderland story the best Yes, this version of the story in the game is twisted and dark as hell, but the whole "defining flaws in our society" is definitely understood the best when it is sharpened and makes a lasting traumatic impression when told as a psychological horror story.
This movie has always been one of my all time favorites, but even before I'd read the book, I always wondered why no one had sympathized with her in Wonderland if it was supposedly *her* world. I was honestly surprised to know that the movie was going for a message about being careful what you wish for because i didn't see it like that at all when I'd first watched the film. I always viewed it, especially after reading the books, as a fantasy/self-fulfilling world for Alice.
Carol’s original book has definitely garnered a following of pretentious critics who projected a little too much of their own perceptions and interpretations onto the material, when really, the author’s true intentions were just to entertain a little girl. In a way, it’s almost become the opposite of “Gulliver’s Travels”, where the latter’s social satire has become generally regarded as a mere children’s book. It’s incredibly ironic.
I felt this was another movie that focused more on the background than the story. This recent obsession to show off art and computer graphic skills over the past 10 years is killing a lot of content. Sure it's pretty to look at (look how far we've come) but it's becoming a distraction tool for subpar plot writing and execution. Just my opinion.
Very good point. I like your comment, it’s very valid. Back in 2010 after avatar released, cgi started going up. I still enjoyed the movie, wish for more out of the story. But I gotta at least appreciate that this film has a lot more effort and care put into it than whatever copycat remakes there creating today
....The cat's name is Dinah. Through the Looking Glass is a much better fever dream. Lol I love Alice trying so hard to do things in the shop and failing over and over again because reality keeps mocking her. Get got, rich kid.
i think that alice in wonderland 1950 version is supposed to be like the louis Carroll version but isn't, it's just alice walking around in wonderland and talks to dinah her cat in the real world.
Yea, I liked the movie, but it's really just a C+, meaning good but not great, I mean it's not as weak as The Sword in the Stone, but it's the one I like the 2nd least from the Silver Era, I mean I like the wonderland part of it with all the characters, but I felt it didn't really give a strong enough story, but it had enough good humor to where I could give it a like, but it's on the light level of like.
I do concede it has its issues but it is genuinely weird to me how the fandom so disowns it more than even The Black Cauldron or Chicken Little or Home on the Range, any of which have more issues than Alice ever did. It lost money for the studio, sure, but so didn't Sleeping Beauty, Fantasia, and Treasure Planet...
Aside from "Alice in Wonderland" being unfilmable, it already had a distinctive look, due to the original illustrations, which the Disney artists completely ignored. And you can't replace the topsy-turvy logic of the prose with sight gags and mediocre songs.
Night on the Galactic Railroad is also kinda the thing of unfilmable due to not knowing what the characters look and so they use the manga adaption with the cats as the protagonist and this movie won a price.
I think they tried their best with what they had. Replicating the original illustrations would’ve been way too difficult to animate with the budget they had at the time (hell, they would’ve been too much to handle even before the war), so they simplified the designs to make it easier for the animation staff. Also, I disagree on the sight gags and songs undermining the book’s topsy-turvy logic. If anything, they’re the best resources of conveying the story’s surrealist nature to the audience without resorting to boring exposition. Film is an entirely different medium from literature; you need to utilize its greatest strengths when adapting a work since adhering too much to the original text can create problems in the immersion. I mean… compare Kubrick’s “The Shining” with the TV miniseries adaptation - the latter may be more faithful and informative to the original book, but it’s incredibly slow, monotonous, and far less engaging and scary as a result.
This is my favorite movie of the Silver era, but I'd say one thing that hasn't aged very well is the repeated upskirt shots of a girl who's like 11 years old. I guess it was forgivable back then because not as many people simped over animated characters back in the 50s, so I can't really blame Walt Disney or anyone on that movie's development team for this, but it's still something that hasn't aged well, because it makes a child way too easy for people to sexualize.
I don't think that's really their fault, though. I mean, when animating kids, adult animators are required to draw every part of them - including scenes that can raise eyebrows when taken out of context. It all boils down to the intention of the scene. For example... I recall a scene in "My Neighbor Totoro" where the two girls take a bath with their father, but the intention is meant to be an intimate bonding moment between the family since bathing together is a casual thing families do in Japan. Does that make it poorly aged in that same regard? Sometimes, the story needs to come first.
I remembered that this movie is on Disney plus and it's also in the program Once Upon a Studio. As a matter of fact, this is my first favorite Disney movie along with Mary Poppins. I remembered that on the masterpiece version of this movie, it's the Mickey Mouse cartoon Thru the Mirror.
Disney channel movie with oasr awesome picture awards TCM hollywood netflix original email address post office box office in more information about adventures in wonderland before New Year interview review history books documentary about biography
@@MaryJane-ll8hithey should have adapted the Savile clarke version from 1886 in that one Alice defends the knave of hearts with her song not guilty i declare. there was also that bit from the play where the oysters became ghosts and trampled on the feet of the walrus. it was approved by Lewis Carroll. it’s ironic the Alice Lewis Carroll wrote about is nothing like the Alice he envisioned when writing Alice on the stage he described her as loving and gentle courteous to all.
Thanks, I figured I make this video since there’s not that many video essays on Alice. Part 2 will consist of Tim Burton 2010 movie. Might be a while but definitely stay toon in if you want to see that
@@MaryJane-ll8hi i saw a comment that the tim burton version of alice in wonderland is a sequel to the 50's film like there are literal versions of alice in wonderland.