In short, Depp is still you Depp, but unfortunately "Mirror Flower" is not "Mirror Flower" anymore.
The script written by Linda Wolfton this time seems to be still loyal to the characters created by Lewis Carroll, but the film is full of laziness and routines under the control of James Pobin, a director who has more than enough fun and lacks strength. has lost its soul. In terms of performance, Depp, who was completely reduced to "box office poison", returned to the big foundation and finally showed some real talent, convincingly playing the fragile and lonely, equally eccentric elegant, courageous Mad Hatter. . But the heroine Alice's mission in this episode is really contrived, reduced to absurd feminist pawns and humanoid self-propelled troublemakers. James Poppin's efforts to inject emotion into the film, but unfortunately, like the exquisite and exaggerated costumes, it all surfaced.
Why Disney wants to hold fast to the light-hearted entertainment banner, we find out in this film. The surface is rich but empty, the characters in the scene are not developed, and the self-denial of the plot is worthless. It can be called the reincarnation of "Raiders of the Ark"
-Alice is back, but this adventure in the mirror is lacking fun and difficult to enjoy. The excitement is boring, the story is confusing, the laughs are there but feel flat, the characters are restless, there is no personality development, and the performances cringe. Only the exquisite and completely independent service is worthy of praise, but the use of special effects is outdated compared with the fake "Fantasy Forest".
"Alice in Wonderland 2" isn't a complete mess, it's more just boring.
In "Raiders of the Ark", Dr. Indiana Jones chased all the way in front of the Nazis to find the Ark of the Covenant, then was killed by the Nazis, and finally the Nazis died - which led to a famous argument: if Dr. Jones did not get involved If so, wouldn't the Nazis die the same way? Wouldn't that be the end of collecting the spoils at the end? Isn't the whole story completely unnecessary?
In "Alice in Wonderland 2", we see that in the first half of the story, there is cynicism Alice of Color's entire time-travel back-in-time stuff is unnecessary like that, doesn't change anything, doesn't make any difference, the only difference is finding out that she should have believed in the Mad Hatter in the first place.
However, in this visual story, which can no longer be simplified, the point of letting go of the past in order to move forward is instead pointed out by the villain Red Queen. The only thing that can be learned from the Mad Hatter is: when it is time to trust friends TM's to believe in friends, chirping and harming others and harming yourself.
2010's "Alice in Wonderland," despite being a box-office blockbuster, is similar to Tim Burton's pinnacle of the '80s and '90s -- notably Edward Scissorhands and Edwood. It can only be regarded as a bold transformation in the post-"Planet of the Apes" era. When it came to James Pobin, the reason for the high box office of the previous work was completely exposed. As a beneficiary of the "Avatar" effect, the exaggerated art style is not the key element to attract the audience. The key factor is 3D.
Of course, that's not to say that Alice in Wonderland 2 is completely bad, the visuals and acting are terrific, it's just that there is every reason and ability to do better at the execution level of the film. "Alice in Wonderland 2" inherits the world style of the previous work, although it does not carry forward and go further, but it is still eye-poppingly bright and vivid, and it looks very soft at the same time. The effects of time travel are less original but still impressive, not to mention architecture and costume design. However, like "Alice in Wonderland", this year's "Alice in Wonderland 2" is also a very loose adaptation, even further away, and more flawed than the previous work. The only element related to the original is The title character and Alice literally walked through the mirror - that's all.
In terms of new characters, Sacha Baron Cohen once again proved that he is the perfect candidate for this kind of quirky role, and his appearance takes almost all the fun of the film. In addition, there is Helena Bonham Carter, who has a broken personality, who can be completely washed by beheading - not to say that it should be washed - 80% of the credit depends on the performance of the actors. The Depp character and the Anne Hathaway character are, as always, less and less, the former a little pity, the latter no pity. Depp's facial expressions are constantly pushing the envelope, but Anne Hathaway is listless and anxious, with no convincing emotional cues except for her pretty face.
As for the other old and new characters who should have written a lot but have become human backgrounds, they are pitiful except for being pitiful.
In particular, Alan Rickman's final voice was utterly bewildered by the poor lines and design.
The soundtrack created by veteran scorer Danny Elfman for the film is better than the film itself, and it can be regarded as one of its best works in recent years.
Alice in Wonderland 2 is still a special effects game without much heart or soul, not to mention Lewis Carroll's crazy, dark, unique colors and refined language. Too many plots in the film seem immature and logical, yet refuse to budge. However, if you liked the first episode, you might also like the second episode. But just don't use the excuse of young age to prevaricate the carelessness of production, and don't expect it to leave a good impression in people's minds.
Visuals often do great things because they give viewers just two hours of justification for escapism. "Alice in Wonderland 2" is big, but it's rarely interesting, let alone engaging, and it can't catch people. Instead, it proves that a movie can't be played with special effects alone. It's a big step back from "Alice in Wonderland," and it generously provides a sense of disappointment that has been lacking in other recent Disney film adaptations of live-action fairy tales. The story is mediocre, meaningless, simple and ordinary to the point of incompetence, a waste of the potential and imagination of the original absurd and crazy world.
When a movie fails to grab the audience's attention, especially when the movie has a unique worldview, that's a big flag. Unfortunately, this flag keeps going up again and again.
After all, this is a routine, and the owner of the routine who would rather lose money and reputation, just let it be done.
View more about Alice Through the Looking Glass reviews
