A modern adaptation of the classic children's story "Alice Through the Looking Glass" written by Lewis Carroll and John Tenniel, which continued on from "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland". ... See full summary »
Alice follows a white rabbit down a rabbit-hole into a whimsical Wonderland, where she meets characters like the delightful Cheshire Cat, the clumsy White Knight, a rude caterpillar, and the hot-tempered Queen of Hearts and can grow ten feet tall or shrink to three inches. But will she ever be able to return home? Written by
Christopher Lloyd and George Wendt appeared on Cheers (1982). See more »
Major Caterpillar said that one side of the mushroom makes you smaller and the other side makes you larger.
Initially, Alice takes a bite from the piece in her left pocket and it makes her larger.
During the hearing she takes a bite from the piece in her right pocket.
It should have made her smaller, but it makes her larger. See more »
You don't seem to have much riding practice.
What makes you say that?
You keep falling off your horse!
I've had plenty of practice at THAT, plenty of practice!
See more »
I love the two Alice books and quite often I find myself looking through the pages, reading some of my favorite parts.
I think for a TV_version, this film works quite well, it is a treat to watch all those celebrities becoming some of the most famous characters in literature. Strangely though, my favorite sequence is the one with Peter Ustinov and Pete Postlethwaite as the Walrus and the Carpenter, probably the only scene in the movie that does not contain CGI.
So, why only six stars? As in most versions, the makers of the movie have mixed all kinds of elements from "Alice in Wonderland" with "Through the looking glass" (Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum, The Walrus and the Carpenter, The White Knight). It may work, if you really look at the books just as a collection of episodes, but whenever this is done, the makers miss the point of the books. Alice in "Through the looking glass" is quite different from Alice in "Alice in wonderland" and also, there is a completely different composition to the latter book which is explained in the preface and which finds no acknowledgment whatsoever here. I think the makers of this movie again don't understand the books at all and though I enjoy watching these scenes independently from each other, the whole leaves me unsatisfied.
I have gotten used to mixing the Alice stories, Walt Disney has done the same thing and others as well. But what bothers me most about this film it that it turns the whole thing into a story of initiation. Come on.... Alice does not dare to perform a song in front of her parent's guest but after walking through Wonderland she finally does? This is just plain wrong and completely in contrast to the meaning of the books. Why would you want do make sense out of nonsense? The books are meant to portray Victorian stereotypes, make fun of language etc, but not to enrich a child to become more independent and self-assured. Moreover, it does not make sense at all, why Alice should finally be able to sing in front of the others.
All in all, this movie has fine performances and puppets and decent (considering the time it was made and it being made for TV) CGI, is nice to look at but in the end only mediocre TV-entertainment.
16 of 23 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?