Watched this last night - one of my favorites, especially as and ex-art student. He animated everything from socks to lumps of meat. Very dark, and would have been darker yet without the little girls voice over. My favorite scene, I think, is when the water rat sets up camp on her head. There is a lot to watch out for in this film, a hundred little touches, and references. Follows the book to a certain extent, but goes its own lunatic-asylum way. If you have very vivid dreams and wake up in the morning wondering 'what the heck was that all about?', it is a bit like watching this film:)
Add a Review
-
hotspur9513 August 2001
-
This film mixes the live action of just one actress - Alice - with a ghoulish array of stop-motion animated characters and objects. Whereas Lewis Carroll's original "Alice in Wonderland" story is a celebration of childhood innocence, fantasy, and magical belief, Svankmajer's "Alice" tells the reverse - the loss of childhood innocence through the pain of coming to terms with a less-than magical world. Inspired by the original tale, Svankmajer uses Carroll's idea of a childishly implausible and wild dream to symbolise an escape from a tormented childhood, rather than a daydreaming fantasy in the sun.
With very little dialogue at all, Alice's job as an actress is restricted entirely to responding appropriately to the puppets - which involves no more than recoiling or widening her eyes. This takes nothing away from the film, however; Alice's muteness is a reflection of the classic "children should be seen and not heard" oppressive school of parenting. Indeed, Alice is seen throughout the film to, despite the hellish surroundings, still wipe her feet on doormats, remove her shoes before entering rooms, and do as she is told. She has been brought up through a harsh discipline that keeps her mute, polite, under control and unquestioning - indeed the very first scene of the film shows her older sister wordlessly slap her for being curious as to the contents of a book. This oppressive discipline is part of what makes up Alice's dismal reality, and hence is part of what she is both trying to escape and rebel from by dreaming.
The sad result is that even Alice's dreams are tormented. Children can only dream about the things presented to them in reality. In the first scenes of the film, the camera pans across Alice's room and displays all the junk carelessly surrounding her - a keen viewer will notice that these are the very same objects that Svankmajer later animates inside Alice's dream. It is precisely because Alice's real world is so abysmal that her dream reflects it. Her house seems devoid of life - we never see any parents, and the sister is still out by the riverside - and the house itself is claustrophobic, dark and utterly unfit for human habitation. The ornaments are stuffed bugs, the only visible food is being pickled in tightly clasped jars, and every single surface is smothered in brown grime. The lack of any other life in the house and the lack of any form of homely care, all depict a tragedy of childhood neglect - Svankmajer blames the nightmare entirely on the parents.
Within her dream, Alice suddenly finds that her room expands outwards into an endless muddy plain. This expanse, a dream of freedom, is tragically desolate and uninviting. Nevertheless, she follows one of her now-animated "toys" (the white rabbit) out into the field. Over the course of the film she will meet with a sailing rat, a truly insane depiction of the Mad Hatter and March Hare, and the murderous Queen of Hearts. But ultimately these are only the dream-animated versions of toys Alice detests. The truly sinister characters in her dream are those that come directly from her house, her life. The pickled jars of food turn out to be mixed with drawing pins, the "Drink Me" and "Eat Me" potions and cakes are bottles of ink and nondescript tarts, a mousetrap spells the demise of the sailing rat; when left on her own in a room, its contents attack her - slabs of meat slither around, bread turns to a porcupine of nails, food cans turn out to contain the stuffed beetles used as ornaments in her house (now living).
It is in this scene that Alice first starts to experience some symbolic victory. Throughout the film we see Alice begin to show more curiosity, begin to learn, begin to rebel against what she is told to do, and begin - most importantly - to come to terms with her surroundings. She is ultimately locked away in a dark room - the culmination of all the negative forces around her - trapped inside a doll of herself. Nothing could be more symbolic of the repressive upbringing that has spawned this twisted dream. She has realised that she's been made into a doll - inhuman. It is with this realisation that Alice achieves her first rebellion, tearing her way out of the doll and - through unhindered curiosity - discovers the key to leave the room by.
We are constantly reminded that the dream is a learning process for Alice. Every single time there is dialogue within the film, we immediately see Alice's lips say the words "...the March Hare said", or "...Alice thought to herself". These metatextual scenes suggest Alice is fully aware that this is all a story of her own imaginings. At bare minimum, it suggests that Alice has a level of awareness that oversees the story as a whole - she is looking upon these events with some purpose.
Alice wakes from her dream a changed person. She has grown up the hard way - her last vain attempt at a childish fantasy built from her sordid life has led her to come to terms with how reality really is. She has learnt that we cannot be mute and polite little girls - the world will attack us, and we must defend ourselves. It's a sorry world-view she ends up with, but one necessary for her to be able to live in the neglected environment she's been brought up in. Thus the film ends with her own decision and dialogue - "the rabbit is late again" - she snaps a pair of scissors - "perhaps I'll cut his head off".
Svankmajer's "Alice" is a masterpiece of stop-motion animation. Puppets come terrifyingly to life, and the surreal dream Alice undergoes is an intensely striking barrage of disturbing images. It is no film for children. -
GSmith907218 May 2007Wow, an 'Eraserhead' for children. This film has some of the most gorgeous imagery in an animated film that I've seen. I don't remember too much of "Alice in the Wonderland" from the Disney version that I've seen a couple years ago, but I've got a hunch it didn't involve a girl crawling through a drawer after a rabbit with clicking gopher teeth and a limited diet of sawdust that he has a problem containing in his body, only for her to be left in a room that she fills with her own tears while a small rat has a cookout on her head. "Alice" is a re-telling of the popular children's tale, but it's a vivid and imaginative version that has the ability to disturb to the very same effect of the David Lynch film. The stop-motion animation enhances the creepiness of the film where familiar characters are given a Gothic and dark makeover. The story takes place in an old fashioned setting; the walls faded with age and abandonment. I loved the setting of this odd little tale and its very morbid idea of a "wonderland" and its characters including a frog with a very realistic tongue, a "catapiller" that we wouldn't normally think of such, and a moving wad of meat. The resulting film is a stunning achievement. My only somewhat minor qualm, the narration of the main character Alice's lips popping up repetitively throughout the film really started to get grating in the first couple of minutes. However, completely random and unpredictable, "Alice" moves at a somewhat slow pace but develops a level of coherency in the midst of all its strange happenings. The sounds, all though a bit loud, give so much life to the smallest objects. The film effectively evokes the emotions of the human psych that a surrealist film should aim for. And, in the context of a celebrated children's story, it elevates its effect with jarring imagery and sound that make it memorable and an important film in the history of animated film.
-
Pangborne6 June 2003This movie may be labeled frustratingly plotless by some, and that's fair, but the imagery in this strange combination of stop-motion animation and live footage is so hauntingly rich and evocative that you get the feeling that someone has secretly filmed your own childhood dreams and translated them into Czech - perhaps for the viewing pleasure of the former commissars. The basic idea is that all of ALICE IN WONDERLAND is occurring in Alice's house, and a staggering variety of household items are animated into jerky sort of life, while all the character voices - Mad Hatter, Queen of Hearts, White Rabbit - are spoken by Alice. Alice's house, however, is a Czech house, and the items are old even by Soviet bloc standards. It's as if an antique rummage sale suddenly sprang to life to act out a monstrous little comedy for one girl. And the architecture is simultaneously comforting and frightening. Windows, for example, merely open onto other rooms, all lit by bare light bulbs. What keeps the thing tied to Lewis Carroll is the performance of the little girl playing Alice. She appears to be about six or seven, and despite the disturbing events going on around her, she never appears frightened, and always investigates events as they grow curiouser and curiouser with a determined pluck. This little girl is always in control. What this adaptation lacks in forward momentum or narrative drive it makes up for with a surreal poetry of the domestic space as dreamed by a child.
-
mike_sean8 May 2000Animation legend Jan Svankmajer applies his distinctive style to Lewis Carroll's most famous creation, crafting one of the most original and unforgettable takes on Alice's adventures ever put to film. Having previously adapted Carroll in his 1971 short film, "Jabberwocky," Svankmajer returns to the author's work with this amazing feature-length film. Employing a magnificent blend of live action and stop-motion animation, he uses many of Carroll's ideas as jumping-off points. Many of the characters are reconstructed as nightmarish abstracts of the way they have usually been depicted in previous adaptions. The white rabbit is a stuffed real rabbit who keeps his watch tucked in a sawdust-leaking gap in his chest. The Dormouse has been reduced to a creepy crawling foxlike hide, and the Caterpillar is a sock with eyeballs and teeth that sews its eyes shut when it sleeps. Although familiar characters such as the Mock Turtle and the Cheshire Cat are left out, Svankmajer's film is incredibly faithful to the book's sense of fantasy and absurdity. The minimal dialogue and pronounced sound effects also add to the overall unsettling mood. The key to truly appreciating this version is to forget the common associated imagery from other adaptions, and treat this as its own entity. Just as a dream makes a totally different impression on you than a person you describe it to (regardless of how well you describe it), this film is one man's surreal interpretation of another man's surreal description. The skull-headed birds, walking dolls, and broken-down furniture of Svankmajer's world make this a pretty disturbing telling of Alice's journey, but a masterful, enthralling, and undeniably unique one as well.
-
A mix of live action and stop-action, this arthouse flick is intriguing but bizarre. But if I was a little kid I'd be scared out of my wits by The White Rabbit with bulging glass eyeballs & long, hamster-like fangs. Socks become wood-eating worms, Alice starts eating marmalade full of tacks, a tiny mouse lands on her head, punctures it & starts a fire, the rabbit hole she falls down starts as a desk drawer that grabs her & draws her in. The Alice doll she becomes when she's shrunk is sweet but sad. I have to admit it's fascinating and 180 degrees from the saccharine sweetness of the Disney film. See it on video to experience something completely different, and probably more towards the way Lewis Carroll intended the story to be...
-
I grew up loving Alice in Wonderland, both the story and the animated movie by Disney. I believe the movie even got a sequel (perhaps even several) but I've only seen the first one. That happened a long time ago too, as I barely remember the plot. It's even harder to remember it as some media, inspired by Alice in Wonderland, invaded my mind over the years. That includes the point & click detective flash game series "Alice is Dead" and the psychological horror hack and slash game Alice: Madness Returns. Both of these installations paint Alice's world in a darker tone, so it's not surprising that I stumbled upon this dark fantasy Czechoslovakian production and ended up liking it.
Stop motion production is hard. I mean, really hard - just 3 seconds of live footage can take anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours of work. That includes the time you mess up and have to restart the shot from scratch. So seeing how they make a movie with multiple long and short takes of stop motion is nothing less than impressive. Reversed shots, speed manipulation, and other techniques that I haven't recognized were used to great effect. Some of those shots looked so clear that I'm scared to imagine how many shots per second they actually used. 30? 60?? 120?!? I don't know the answer to that but the work put into the productions has been noticed and appreciated.
Another thing that really caught my eye, or rather - my ear, was the lack of audio used. I noticed that the majority of the movie is really quiet or at parts completely silent. It's not until our little protagonist encounters another habitant or another miscellaneous noisy event that happens. The only voice we hear is the little girl's as she narrates every sentence, even her own. On one hand, a movie without a score is harder to digest as other senses are used to create a memorable experience but on the other hand, when we actually hear a sound in the movie, it has a bigger impact, even if it's an insignificant one. I'm the kind of person that finds it better to remember information when it is presented audibly, and as a result, the moments that I remember most vividly are the ones that involved unconventional sounds - dishes being smashed, Alice filling the whole room with tears (side note - this was an amazing surreal moment that the movie provided, it was the breaking point where I actually started to like the movie), the mechanic dialogues of the marionettes and so on. In a sense, it was the opposite of Black Sunday (1980), which created an eerie atmosphere throughout the sound that cast a musical shadow and made every scene memorable. I'd say Alice lacked that "oopth" by allowing too much silence. Absence makes the heart grow fonder, I guess, so every line and every sound here did have a bigger impact. In a way, Alice, the movie, played by different game rules when it comes to audio design and still manages to come up above average in this aspect.
This movie raised a big question in my head - is it enough to be impressed b a movie for it to be good? In this case, I wouldn't say so. Even though I respect this form of art, I just can't force myself to see the result as eye-catching. It's charming, quirky in some ways but never... "beautiful" for me. I guess. I was terrified of some claymation shorts, mostly on Nickelodeon, when I was a kid. That fear translated into me feeling slightly uncomfortable with stop motion pictures in my adulthood. I'm not going to go as far as saying this movie is bad, as it's far from being bad, but I'm not willing to rank it as anything more than above average either. I'm really happy that I watched it, as it made me want to dive deeper into cinema again after a long absence. It's different from what I'm used to watching in the most literal sense and it's just another reminder that there's a world of media out there that I'm yet to explore and there are still stories and approaches to the said stories that can give me a unique and genuine experience. -
nmb66624 February 2001There is simply nothing i can say derogatory about this movie. Jan Svankmajer is a genius in his mixture of live footage and animation. His work is at once beautiful and disturbing, yet hypnotic in its use of visual style. there are very few animators with his unique style and flair. carrolls Alice was quite adult in tone, something that previous cinematic versions failed to bring across, possibly seeing the childrens market that could be capitalised upon. I would urge anyone who has seen Alice in Wonderland or has read the books to watch this if they can, and marvel at his unusual take on the story. Full of dreamlike and creep imagery, this is one movie that will stay with you for a while....
-
jookyseacaptain2 November 2003I really wanted to enjoy this movie much more than I did. First, I rented this movie along with Faust and Little Otik. I watched this one first as it was the earliest of the 3.
I enjoy foreign films, and art films, and stop motion animation and puppetry and this movie is all of these things, however, i can't help but wonder why on earth this was dubbed. I can read subtitles and would have enjoyed hearing if the young actress that plays Alice was as monotonous of voice as her British voice-over. even if I overlooked the poor dub why on earth was the foley also dubbed? all sound effects from breaking dishes to footsteps to creaking puppet arms etc, was on this dubbed sound track, making for a too loud and cloying sound experience. I like the idea that you immediately "get" that Alice is making up this story from her imagination as she goes along. hence the "said the white rabbit" but to have her repeat this narration voice over in monotone over and over and over again made the experience needlessly painful.
like the mad hatter scene, the puppetry was excellent and the animation was great, but to hear each line of dialog followed with a close up shot of Alice's mouth
speaking who said what was too much of a diversion and took me out of the story. I just kept saying to myself: ok ok we get it, enough all ready. Just let the freakin puppets talk!
Good things about this movie: the animation was fantastic. also the use of things, that would presumably be in a child's room, as the characters props was great. eg: socks as caterpillars, a doll house and tea set. it made it very reasonable that a child's imagination would fathom such things.the scene with the door-mouse making camp, was enchanting.
I just wish I could say I liked it more. I liked Faust better than Alice, and I like Little Otik better than Faust and Alice.
6.5/10 -
doo-312 October 1999This by far is one of my favourite movies as well as dark city and the city of lost children. I think this is how Alice in wonderland should be . In this version the only human actor in the movie is Alice herself . Alice enters a wonderfully creepy world where nothing is What it seems. This movie is also quite interesting visually ,Like when Alice is entering wonderland in a creaky old lift going down past jars of marmalade with pins in them and the speaking parts with the extreme close ups of her mouth . This movie definatly captures the dream-like feel of the original Alice in wonderland.
-
frankde-jong2 February 2022Jan Svankmajer made his first feature film "Alice" (1988) when he was already 54 years old, it would not be his last. His films are not animations in the normal sense of the word, but a mixture of real actors and puppets. The praise confined in the formula proposed by Milos Forman that reads "Bunuel + Disney = Svankmajer" maybe somewhat exaggerated but without any doubt Svankmajer makes unique movies.
Älice" is an adaptation of the children's novel "Alice in Wonderland" (1865, Lewis Carroll). This is a very famous book and there are many adaptations. The Svankmajer one is higher rated then the 1951 Disney adaptation (too sweet) and that of Tim Burton from 2010. By the way Svankmajer has been a source of inspiration for Burton.
Despite being one of the best adaptations, at the end the film is a bit too long. The puppets are all craftfully made, but the surprise value slowly fades away. The fact that we are looking at an adaptation of a children's novel takes its toll after all. In this respect the film is somewhat stuck in the middle: too grim for children, too long for adults. Maybe the "Faust" adaptation that Svanmajer made in 1994 manages to hold the attention better.
While watching the movie I missed some story elements, for example the frequently quoted one that you have to run to remain stationary. To my shame I must confess that I was unaware of the fact that this story element belongs to the sequel to "Alice in Wonderland", "Through the looking glass" (1871, Lewis Carroll). Also the evil queen of hearts struck me. Normally the queen of spades is the symbol of evil. Think of the short story of the same name by Alexander Pushkin from 1833. -
About five years ago, when I had just graduated from high school, a friend of mine who had been to college introduced me to the works of Jan Svankmajer. He had checked out a VHS copy of three short films, Darkness/Light/Darkness, Male Games, and The Death of Stalinism in Bohemia. All three of them were works of great genius, and I immediately stored Svankmajer's name in my vault. So it's sad that it took me all five of these years to see another one of his works. I had thought about buying his Faust back when DVDs were dirt-cheap (do you remember those happy days?), but had passed over it for something else. Now I finally found another one of his films, Alice, this one a feature, his adaptation of Lewis Carrol's Alice's Adventures of Wonderland. And, wow, this is one frightening little film, a mix of live-action (well, one little girl) and stop-motion animation of characters like the White Rabbit, the Mad Hatter, and the Queen of Hearts. Stop-motion animation has always looked creepy, and Sankmajer knows it. He also knows that dead animals are scary, and he incorporates their bones into his animation. It makes the whole film more visceral and surreal.
There are two parts of this film that deserve particular attention. 1) the soundtrack. There is no musical score, and the only music at all is the tiny piece that plays over the closing credits. No, by soundtrack I am referring to the sound effects, and they are absolutely amazing. 2) the setting.The original novel and the Disney film set the story in a bizarre forest. Sankmajer sets the story in a delapidated house, with rotting and filthy wooden beams everywhere, creaky doors, and old cabinets. The setting is what makes the film particularly creepy.
As for standout scenes, the caterpillar is pretty awesome. The very best scene, though, is definitely the tea party, with the Mad Hatter and March Hare. Svankmajer's conception of those two characters and of the tea party is truly inspired, and ranks among the best scenes in cinema, in my opinion.
So is it perfect? No. The idea to have Alice speak all the lines, and then show her lips speaking such words as: "The Mad Hatter said" every two minutes grows annoying quickly, and the film would perhaps have been a masterpiece had this flaw been avoided. It seems to be in there for adding time, and it's truly unfortunate. I also wish that Svankmajer would have hurried up the beginning of the film, so as to get to other great scenes in the novel. It takes a half hour before Alice gets into Wonderland, and that's the only time the film grows boring. Whatever. This is still a great film. 9/10. -
jboothmillard12 March 2009I think I liked the idea of seeing another adaptation of the Lewis Carroll classic, Alice in Wonderland, especially with stop motion from Czechoslovakia and Faust director Jan Svankmajer. It follows most of the same storyline, but with originally bizarre digressions, as Alice (Kristýna Kohoutová, the only flesh and blood character) says at the beginning, "it's a film made for children... perhaps?" So Alice follows the complex White Rabbit into the Wonderland world, where she also encounters the Caterpillar (made of a sock, a couple of glass eyes and false teeth), the Mad Hatter (an old wooden puppet) and March Hare (a wind up tatty puppet), and the King and Queen of Hearts (cards), and a new addition, as well as scary fish, skeleton birds, and a slab of raw meat? This is certainly more absurd than the Disney or Fiona Fullerton versions, it is darker, a light sinister feel, and even with its simplicity, the animation more than makes up for it, and makes this quite a watchable film. With English narration by Camilla Power. Very good!
-
Samsterp11 August 2009Rather than enjoy this film I could only endure it. And was extremely glad to see the end. I might as well get through what I DID find positive which is simply how well made this film is. The stop-motion technique is perfected by Jan Svankmajer. Right, now that's out of the way..
I just don't understand why this film is so inaccessible. The sound is what I found to be the most irritating aspect, with every single action in the film being accompanied by a massively exaggerated (and LOUD) noise. As many others have mentioned the voice-over of 'said the white rabbit' also contributes to making this film ridiculously annoying.
Away from the sound issue I just find this film stupidly pointless. You can make a film using stop-motion/surrealist techniques that is enjoyable, I'm sure, but clearly Svankmajer hasn't attempted this. There's nothing that could draw me in to watch this again. It drones on and on with the main character of Alice being someone you really can't connect with, making me wish it was actually an unhappy ending for her. While I'm not saying don't watch this film, because it certainly divides opinions from surrealist film fans, it's comfortably one of the worst I've ever had to sit through. -
tedg25 June 2002The Alice books are one of the two richest works of literature yet produced. Of the best literature, Alice lends itself to cinematic reinterpretation. And this filmmaker has vision.
But Alice is a coherent work, following the 'apprentice' novel and having kabbalistic structure. This film is episodic, each episode conceived as a different world, connected only by doors. The stories establish an abstract world, a world of logic so pure that the weaknesses of logic are apparent. That's only in part attempted here.
Though in Czech, there is some dainty wordplay: Alice is messing about in her drawers. Initially, these contain drawing equipment, later scissors. The filmmakers' signature 'large person in small room' image is used here in the episode where 'Maryanne' (Alice plus her 'house) is attempted entry by Bill the lizard, Dodgson's image of sperm. Bill is mirrored later in the frog-footman, heavily phallic as is an introduced sequence where the feet themselves become penile, then advisory.
Svenkmajer understands the cards as Tarot, a seldom understood insight and adds a vignette of the March Hare and Hatter playing cards (almost certainly a nod to 'Seventh Seal'). There's some very good visual handling of inside/outside ambiguities, and stage/reality shifting -- this alone makes this project worth sharing. But aside from that, it seems that the magic of Alice's world has yet to be tapped by a filmmaker.
Note: in Carroll's vision, innocence trumps all: logic is seen as manmade and fallible. In this world confabulated reasoning threatens but no one really loses their head. Not so in Svenkmajer's bleak world. Heads really are lost. Innocence is at least dumbfounded and possibly unreal (those socks). Many heads are already decayed with only the skull remaining. Some beings are composed of empty skulls alone or with some ambulatory object. This is not a happy man, nor a world with any sunshine. I would not give these images to any child. -
Stephen-1213 July 1999While not as overtly creepy or unsettling as Jonathan Miller's BBC adaptation (which falls apart towards the end, anyway), Svankmajer's great achievement lies in his version's huge versatility of imagination. Alice's comments are dehumanised as we focus on a huge close-up of her mouth, and the creatures she encounters are bizarre fragments of the familiar world (eg the caterpillar is an enormous sock). And let's not forget that the quirky humour of this version mirrors Carroll's own. To compare this to Disney (other than favourably, anyway) would be a great insult.
-
lee_eisenberg29 August 2014Aha! We've all seen Disney's animated feature and Tim Burton's live-action feature, but you can't truly say that you've seen a movie version of "Alice in Wonderland" until you've seen Jan vankmajer's "Něco z Alenky". The animals are of course stop-motion (including a carriage that has a literal skeleton crew). Wonderland is not an enchanted forest, but what appears to be a derelict apartment building. Basically, it's a much darker interpretation of the story than we're used to. After all, Lewis Carroll's original story had nothing to do with cuteness.
Whatever the case, I've liked every vankmajer work that I've seen, both his shorts and his feature films. Their sheer surrealism serves to remind us of a very important fact: animation is simply another type of filmmaking. It doesn't have to be "family-friendly". And believe you me, what you have in these movies is more like what you find in a Terry Gilliam movie! I recommend starting with vankmajer's shorts before watching one of his features. Even so, you're sure to like either one. Another feature is "Little Otik", based on a Czech folk tale. -
gavin69422 October 2010This is a story of Alice, with a very odd version of Wonderland. The story follows the plot relatively close, but instead of the traditional rabbit hole, Alice crawls through drawers and into a bucket... and meets creatures made up of junk, puppet parts and dead animals.
Most odd, and unique, is a sock with glass eyes for the Caterpillar. Other new developments include Alice changing into a doll -- first a small one, then a large one (which turns out to be merely a shell).
The visuals have been described as "grotesque, perverse, or disturbing, but overall not repulsive." That seems fair -- this is creepy, but not outright scary or subversive. Just odd. Some have said it references "Un Chien Andalou" with sawdust (rather than ants) pouring out of the rabbit's hand... I do not know how intentional that was. -
johnstonjames24 February 2010I'm not sure Carroll meant for his book to be interpreted in such a dark and creepy way, but if that's the way ya' wanna see it, that's the way ya' wanna see it.
This film made me want a prescription for antibiotics. Everything here is sharp and rusty. Not to mention all the icky bugs and dead things and moldy cheese and...whats up with eating sawdust? that can't be good for you. Should kids see this? they get all sorts of stupid ideas and might try some of these things. There was a rusty sharp nail in the orange marmalade. I'm sure this whole thing would have given the author, Carroll, nightmares. I'm sure he would have wanted antibiotics also.
I find it pretty hard to watch this film without screaming, and afterwards I sort of feel like I might need a padded cell(actually i wonder if its Svankmajer who needs the padded cell), but I realize that Svankmajer is a talented and artistic film maker and you have to accept his vision. I didn't say get used to it, I never will probably, just accept it.
Film makers have always interpreted Lewis Carroll's book however they envisioned it. When Carroll's book was faithfully adapted in 1972 based on the original Tenniel illustrations and stuck closely to Carroll's actual dialogue and used his poems from his text, audiences yawned and poo-pooed the film and still do in favor of flashier versions. If people wanted a faithful adaptation like they say they do, they would be more than satisfied with the 72' version or even the excellent Eva LeGallienne/Florida Friebus revival on KCET in the late seventies.
I like this film I really do.
It scares the BeeJeezus out of me, but I like it. -
First off - ALICE is actually a strinkingly interesting film visually, and some people will (justifiably) like it much more than I did. I personally don't really care so much about the ALICE IN WONDERLAND tale, as I haven't read it in probably 20 years and therefore don't remember it very well - I really only picked ALICE up after seeing LITTLE OTIK, liking it, and wanting to see something else from Svankmajer. It's definitely visually stunning interpretation of the ALICE story - it's just a story that I'm personally not all that interested in.
ALICE is the story of a young girl who follows a rabbit around a strange "alternate universe" and has run-ins with several strange characters and environs along the way...
Svankmajer's film is told in narrative, live-action, and stop-motion animation, which makes for a heady blend of styles that works perfectly for the film. Consistent with Carol's story, ALICE has a dark undertone that off-sets some of the "childish" qualities of the story. Svankmajer's use of stop-motion animation and other set-pieces is well-done and artful. The only real reason that I didn't rate the film higher, is that after a while, it all became a bit tedious and I was ready for it to be over. Experimental/Art-house film lovers, or those that REALLY enjoy films like VALERIE AND HER WEEK OF WONDERS or THE COMPANY OF WOLVES and other such "grown-up" fairy-tale films will probably jizz over this one, and granted - it is a VERY cool film for what it is - but it really isn't the type of thing that interests me all that much...but there's no denying that Svankmajer is an interesting and original director and I'd recommend ALICE in order to make up your own mind about it. -
Rectangular_businessman25 November 2012I found this film to be one of the most fascinating and beautifully made adaptations of Lewis Carroll's masterpiece: While the Disney version captured perfectly well the humor, joy and lighthearted elements of the "Alice in Wonderland" books, this movie does a great work portraying in a very original manner the other side of the same story, showing how dark and twisted it could be And yet, this is strangely faithful to the original story (Well, at least to a certain point)
The result, in my opinion, was fairly impressive, being one of the best and most memorable works of Jan vankmajer, combining perfectly well stop-motion animation with live-action, while at the same time it includes many of the recurring motifs in the rest of the movies and shorts directed by this Czech filmmaker.
I would recommend this movie to any viewer who wasn't completely satisfied by the Disney version of this same story, since "Alice" is able to show the dark and mature side of what is often considered just an ordinary fairy tale, despite being much more complex than that.
9.5/10 -
planktonrules23 August 2008I agree with the other reviewers who said this was an incredibly creepy and disturbing film--one you should NOT let younger viewers see. Instead of the cute animated Alice like you may have seen in Disney's ALICE IN WONDERLAND, this one uses stop-motion for animation AND the characters are very, very weird.
The White Rabbit begins the film as a stuffed dead rabbit in a display case. Suddenly, it tears itself free and begins running about--as old sawdust (what they stuffed old anatomical specimens with in the old days) comes pouring out during the course of the film. If that isn't enough, later malevolent skeletal animals with bizarre bodies and horrible bug-eyes appeared and began attacking her--and it isn't surprising that Alice is afraid--heck, I was feeling a bit afraid! Other demonic-like images appear--amazingly weird playing cards as well as the decapitation of the March Hare and Mad Hatter!! In many ways, this film looked inspired by the 16th century Dutch painter, Bosch--who was famous for paintings of Hell--complete with demons and creatures much like you'd see in this film.
While in general the stop-motion animation is rather jerky and poor, the imagery and weirdness make it very watchable---plus I love the imaginative sets that make up for the cheesy movement. However, one thing I could not get used to and hated was the way the little girl narrated and always said phrases like "...said the White Rabbit" or whatever creature she was narrating for in the film as well as closeups of her lips as she said it. It was highly repetitive and combined with the fact that the film was dubbed and not subtitled (which I greatly prefer), it was not needed and distracted the viewer. In fact, the girl was the voice for EVERY character--a poor decision in retrospect.
Overall, you've gotta respect this film for being so different and for taking so long to make. However, it's super-creepy and not particularly pleasant, so you be the judge as to whether or not to take a chance with this mondo-bizarro flick. -
sugerfoot6 January 2008I was fairly young when I first saw this movie, nine I believe, I happened to stumble upon it on t.v. one night and I was immediately drawn in by the creepy images.
This is not the Alice in Wonderland that we know! What I love about this film is it holds on to the bizarre, and sometimes frightening world Lewis Carrol created. Is it exactly canon with the book-No. Is it a Disney fest suitable for the young ones-No! Is it intelligent, captivating and entertaining-Yes! I'm now 27 and I still get chills watching the White Rabbit leave his display case. If you ever get the chance to watch it, do so. You may not like it, but you'll probably never see something so strange again. -
Bunuel197630 December 2008This is possibly the best-regarded of the myriad film versions of Lewis Carroll's "Alice In Wonderland", a relatively recent undertaking but a distinctly individualistic one by famed Czech animator/puppeteer Svankmajer (and which actually served as my introduction to his work). Knowing of its reputation, I had long desired to watch the film; however, having done so, I can't help feeling slightly let down not because it's not as good as I expected, or as weird as I had been led to believe but, rather, because of the liberties it takes with Carroll's original.
God knows there are enough bizarre characters, situations and dialogue in the perennial children's classic (popularized by previous film and TV adaptations, both live-action and animated); however, Svankmajer opts to drop many of these (we're left with an awful lot of the White Rabbit, The Frog, The Fish, The Duchess and the Baby-turned-Pig, the members of the eccentric Tea Party, the Croquet game, etc.) for his own creations. It's not so much that I'm a purist where such things are concerned but, to me, what novelties we get in this version are not only unnecessary (though they sure make for some arresting, to say nothing of far from kiddie, visuals and occasionally amusing such as the fact that the White Rabbit's interior consists of sawdust which it also eats[!] or The Mouse building a fire and setting up tent on Alice's scalp) but, frankly, no match for what Carroll himself had envisaged to begin with. Consequently, the author's absurdist but essentially innocent viewpoint doesn't jell with the film-maker's outbursts of savage surrealism so that one has a hard time believing at the end that it was all a little girl's fantasy!
With this in mind, the heroine here is perhaps the only one I've seen who's anywhere near the right age for the character (incidentally, Alice is replaced by a doll when she shrinks in size!); even so, Svankmajer's decision to have her provide constant narration often of the most elementary kind, thus rendering it somewhat monotonous is baffling to say the least! -
sanguine_sailor6 November 2019An impressive achievement in stop motion animation, yes.
A creepy exploration of a young girl's descent into a Fantasyland, no doubt.
But is it also repetitive, largely boring in huge chunks, with little story structure to keep you interested? 'Fraid so.
Others may not mind the complete lack of anything resembling a compelling narrative. But I do, and so am marking the movie accordingly.
Maybe I don't 'get' the reasons why this is such a 'stunning achievement', or perhaps I'm one of the 'non-purists' who prefers a more coherent version of Lewis Carroll's book.
Whatever. I think what I think, and I think this movie kinda stinks. 3/10