Alice In Wonderland

Term Burton's latest, presumably his biggest budgeted, piece. Modelled on elements of the Alice books, but interpreted and taken very differently.
It left us asking; why has Time Burton done this. The man obviously started out as an artist, with his particular aesthetic and intellgient sensibilities ('Sleepy Hollow' as his best work). Yes, the visual style of vivid sharp colours, the kohl-eyed actors and sense of the macabre, all remain (even if his distinctive style was never THAT original or different, and if it now wears more than thin as a broekn record, at least it is SOMETHING). However, the way the film is constructed and plotted is little better than your standard blockbuster rubbish.
Who is it that decides we have the rather mind-numbing set-pieces and the simplistic characters? If it was Burton, his excuse would presumably be that this is a kids film, which is undoubtedly true. It may have been the bean-counters or the test-audiences, more likely, however. The poor pacing leads to unnecessary action scenes and a rather formulaic structure.
Among this though are some nice touches. The opening and closing evocation of reality is more interesting than what happens in between. Depp, never knowingly underplayed, is fun. The ticking clock motif is very good....but woefully underutilized. Compare to the masterful, nightmarish rythms of Disney's 'Alice' and we have the comparison of one film which wants to follow a tone, and one which doesn't. Depp's dancing and rather drawn-out comedy again give the impression of a film lacking tonal coherence, at times.
We do not want to give the impression that this film was BAD. It has a well played and refreshing heroine, is engaging enough in its momentum, and has that distinctive look. Yet, we feel that Burton asserting himself as an artist could have made this a better film for both kids and adults. Perhaps to do that, Burton needs a commercial disaster. Alice won't blow the world away, but it's not a disaster.