"Alice Through the Looking Glass" Review

Title: Alice Through the Looking Glass

Directed by: James Bobin

Written by: Linda Woolverton

Year: 2016


It is shocking how much money Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland made back when it was released. The film broke one billion dollars; that is insane, especially given the quality of that picture. So, because that film performed so well at the box office, we now have a sequel -- because that is what we all wanted, right? So, can this newest venture to Wonderland reinvigorate interest in the world, or is this another example of a cash-grab sequel?

After traveling the world for a few years, Alice finds that the inhabitants of Wonderland need her help once again. The Mad Hatter has become depressed at remembering the death of his family. It is up to Alice to go back into the past and save the Hatter's family from death.

The first Alice film was directed by Tim Burton. This one on the other hand, is directed by James Bobin, with Burton acting as a producer. Perhaps this shake-up in the team behind the camera is just what the franchise needs. Or this could plummet the film further down the rabbit hole. Either way, one thing that has not changed much since the first film is the cast.

Mia Wasikowska returns as Alice and, though I believe that Alice was cast too old, Wasikowska is acceptable in the role. She is trying to make the material work but it is beyond her capabilities. Every once in a while, her performance looks like something clearly coached by the director, which comes across as a bit stilted. I will say that Wasikowska probably gives the best performance in the film. Opposite her is Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter. If you liked his acting in the first film, then you will like it here. If you were not a fan of the Hatter from the previous picture, then you are out of luck because Depp plays the character the same as he did before. Just when you thought Depp was back on the rise after Black Mass, he once again reverts to playing another cooky, strange character. Personally, his Mad Hatter irritates me. I am not a fan of his lisp or even the look of the character, and Depp's performance does not help fix these issues.

Helena Bonham Carter reprises her role as the Red Queen and she is faintly entertaining, but mostly gives a loud yet hollow performance. Carter spends most of her time shouting, which gets tiring very quickly. Anne Hathaway plays the White Queen and it seems like she does not know what she is doing. She wanders throughout the film with an expressionless look on her face and inexplicably moving her arms all over the place. New to the cast is Sacha Baron Cohen, who portrays Time. Cohen's performance is gloriously bad, not knowing the difference between eccentric and goofy. His character had great potential, but Cohen is unable to make Time appealing in the least, though that also comes down to the script.

So how does the story shape up? I will give the writer this; the story is rather creative. But that is just about all the credit I can give her. The plot has Alice hopping through Wonderland's past. As such, we are shown the Mad Hatter in his youth, as well as the two queens. We learn of the Hatter's tragic past and also why the red queen is so hateful. Is this information we needed to know? No. Is this information we wanted to know? Once again, no. The characters of Wonderland are supposed to be inexplicably ludicrous and likable. They are who they are because of their personality, no more. But once you give these characters a backstory, the magic and wonder is lost.

Alice Through the Looking Glass does something quite amazing. It manages to be a busy film, yet also a boring one. So many things happen in this movie but it also feels like nothing is happening at all. My eyes glossed over so many scenes because there was little dramatic heft to the material. The story could be an emotional one, but the execution of it leaves it stale and uninteresting. I was not invested in any of the characters and everything occurring on screen felt like visual noise.

The direction by James Bobin is not very distinct. It still feels like Burton still has a major say as to how to the film is structured. Bobin's direction is uninspired and it feels like he is not close with the cast. The actors seem to have slipped into their old roles with minimal advice from the director. A lot of the scenes could have been performed better but it appears that Bobin offered little to improve these moments. I do not want it to seem like I am bashing on Bobin directly, as the quality of the final product is not entirely his fault.

The script is also at fault here. Much of what the characters say lacks the charm and uniqueness that should emanate from them. The dialogue given to Time is horrendous, none of the jokes stick, and the story is overflowing with stupidity. Also, there are quite a number of plot holes that, if fixed, would have cut this film's runtime so significantly that it would barely be categorized as a short film.

In addition, much of the recurring characters from the previous movie are only here for fan service. The March Hare does nothing; The Tweedles do nothing; the Dormouse does nothing; I could go on and on but to put it simply, all of these characters were put in the film only to get more people to go watch it. Even the White Queen is forced into the story with an unnecessary plot thread.

Furthermore, the film follows the beats of the first film almost note for note. I stated earlier that the story is original, and I meant it. However, the overarching themes and emotional changes are almost exactly the same as the first film. Despite the story being different, the emotional beats are terribly telegraphed if you have seen the first film. Watching the conclusion to this movie had me beyond furious. It is a shameless copy-and-paste job that will have you screaming "deja vu!"

The visual effects are fine at best. Many times, the characters look a bit too cartoonish and the backgrounds look too fake. But every once in a while you will get a striking set-piece or an inspired color palette, which begs the question. Why is Wonderland so colorless? Wonderland should be a place every child wants to visit. So then why does it look so doom and gloom? But if I could give this film only a single positive credit, it would go to the appearance of the Great Clock. The design of this gargantuan structure is beautiful, being densely detailed and copiously creative. Putting the character of Time aside, everything about the Great Clock is wonderful, even the seconds and minutes that maintain time.

Another positive to this film is actually the moral. I have attacked the story and shredded almost every other aspect of this film, but I cannot deny that the moral presented is a good one. Alice Through the Looking Glass stresses the idea of family. The movie gets across the message that being with your family is important, and it something that you should never leave behind. The only downside to this lesson is that you have to sit through a nearly two hour mess of a film to get it.

If you were a fan of Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, then chances are you will like this film quite a bit. But if you disliked the 2010 reimagining, then this film will not sway you. Alice Through the Looking Glass offers a good moral and some good visuals, but that is about it. The story is not engaging, the characters feel disconnected, and the movie retreads old ground. Burton may not have been listed as the director, but it still feels like his fingerprints are all over this film. With weak performances, a flimsy script, and cheap emotions, Alice Through the Looking Glass can be classified as a tremendous cash-grab. Hopefully a third film will not make its way into theatres.

Grade: D