With all those great movies, why would you worry about a movie that falls short of the classic books that inspired them. Particularly when you have movies like The Jungle Book (which I didn't like), Captain America: Civil War, Zootopia, Captain Strange all being critically acclaimed. It's not bad, not by any definition of the word, but it's just not a good movie. And, if I'm being honest, the movie just isn't that good.
The fact they greenlit a sequel felt more, to me, like a way to do a quick cash grab, instead of a way to actually build a long and successful franchise. And not to mention the fact that with the rise of Marvel Studios and the resurgence of Star Wars, Disney doesn't NEED this movie or this franchise as a whole for that matter. Alice Through the Looking Glass is just another one in the assembly line of live-action adaptations of old Disney movies. Alice in Wonderland was just the first one. Not to mention the fact that Disney has done so many of these live-action adaptations of their animated films, that there's no more novelty. Six years later and Depp's routine is old and tired, despite the fact that he's an incredibly talented actor, Mia Wasikowska has mostly kept out of mainstream fare and Tim Burton is nowhere to be seen. Johnny Depp's shtick hadn't gotten old, Mia Wasikowska became a bit of an 'It' girl after its release, so that helped with word of mouth, and Tim Burton's name carried a lot of weight with it. I think it was more the novelty of it being one of the first big budget live-action adaptations of a Disney classic.
I reviewed the first movie quite positively, but it's a movie that I definitely need to watch again, but I didn't get a sense that people really loved this movie enough that it would justify a sequel. The problem comes in the fact that this wasn't a movie that anyone really wanted. That's not the worst drop in history, as there have been worse (Hot Tub Time Machine 2 being one of them, among many others), but it is a pretty big drop. The surprise comes in the fact that they waited 6 whole years to actually release it. So, really, there should have been absolutely no surprise that a sequel was, eventually, gonna be commissioned. A conservative estimate would be that the first movie must have made Disney something closer to $1.2 billion. I'm sure Depp's Mad Hatter character was really popular back in 2010, so merchandise featuring the character must have sold like hotcakes. And that's not even including the merchandising aspect of it. "Alice: Through the Looking Glass" is certainly an entertaining movie, but it is hardly one that you will sit down and watch again any time soon.To give a little bit of perspective as to why this movie exists, the original Alice in Wonderland, Tim Burton's one at least, made Disney slightly over $1 billion worldwide. No matter where you look there is something breathtaking. And the level of creativity is just astounding. The special effects and wardrobe teams really are the ones shining in this movie, because there are just so many wonderful things to look at throughout the movie. And it was nice to get to see more of that quirky character and get to know more of his background. I do enjoy the Mad Hatter character and Johnny Depp does a great job in portraying him. He is not an actor that I am too fond of, so in my opinion another cast would have been preferable. The Time character was interesting, but it left a less than savory taste in my mouth that they had cast Sacha Baron Cohen for this role. The actors and actresses in the movie were doing good jobs with their given roles, and it was a great treat to have the original cast return to play their characters once again. Lots of details, vivid colors and memorable characters. And it was nice to see the beloved characters from the first movie return, and also to see the amazing job that the special effects team pulled off at bringing the world to life. The effects in "Alice: Through the Looking Glass" were great, as they also were in the previous movie. It is a good movie in itself, and works quite well as a stand-alone, if you will. "Alice: Through the Looking Glass" is not a bad movie, it just seems like a movie that hardly was necessary to have been made. Why? Well, because just what more could there be to tell about this story? With that being said, then don't get me wrong. But I wasn't in any rush to get to see the 2016 sequel "Alice: Through the Looking Glass". I enjoyed the 2010 "Alice in Wonderland" that had that unique Tim Burton touch to it.
0 kommentar(er)
