Movie Review - Alice in Wonderland (2010)

by Alex Popp



Fantastic fun for the whole family.

Not really.

In "Alice in Wonderland," directed by Tim Burton, now 19-year-old Alice is welcomed back to the fantastical land that she went through 13 years earlier. There she meets up with the Mad Hatter, played by Johnny Depp, and encounters random creatures and objects including a floating, ghostly cat and a smoking caterpillar. Alice realizes that she is there to conquer the horrific Jabberwocky and restore the rightful queen to her throne.

How this film made over $1 billion, I will never know. Maybe everyone just wanted to see another performance by Johnny Depp. He isn't a bad actor at all, but his role as the Mad Hatter doesn't come close to the charming wittiness of Jack Sparrow.

I felt like I was on speed or something watching this movie. I guess it's supposed to be kind of a sequel to the hand-drawn version from the fifties and I actually remember being seven and liking it. But this one was just plain weird. The effects are pleasant to the eye, though nothing like "Avatar." I'll tell you when we saw trailers for it, my brother said it looked to him like a children's horror flick.

Rated PG for intense violence and perilous situations, far out of anything that young kids could view. But it was also PG for something that no other movie has been before: a smoking caterpillar. Yes, it literally says that in the MPAA rating! I guess they had to tell you some way that it isn't a human smoking.

Two stars (out of four) for the weird and vaguely unsatisfying, "Alice in Wonderland."

Review by Alex Popp for The Animation Empire blog.

==================

Emperor's thoughts... I think there was a little more to it. I really enjoyed Anne Hathaway as the White Queen. Johnny Depp's performance was great, but it did seem similar to his Willie Wonka.

And the movie had a fun story with good action and effects. I could tell, though, that Burton was having a lot of fun with creepy things like having Alice jump onto floating decapitated heads.

Overall, I have to agree that it was a tad too creepy for Disney. Was it strange and seem like a bad trip? Sure, a little, but then again, so do the books. Disney originally painted the weirdness with a fun and light perspective. But Burton views the weirdness with a haunting and violent perspective.

- The Emperor

The Mickey Mouse Revue, Walt Disney World 1971

The Mickey Mouse Revue performs at Walt Disney World 1971.

This animatronic musical show was moved to Tokyo Disneyland in 1983.




This attraction originally opened in 1971 at Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom and closed there in 1980 before moving to Tokyo. It was in the spot where Mickey's Philharmagic is today. It's kind of interesting how the two attractions are a different medium but the idea is still pretty much the same.

Here it is in Tokyo:



Enjoy!

- TAE

Will Mickey's Sorcerer's Hat be removed from Disney Hollywood Studios?

From WDWMAGIC:



As part of today's 20th birthday event at the Studios, guests got to hear from senior members of Imagineering, including Bob Weis. (Bob was one of the key imagineers who originally created the studios). Most interestingly, he showed a photo looking along Hollywood Blvd towards the Chinese Theater prior to the hat install. He made comment that this view can't be had now, but MAY be had again in the future (sorry don't have the exact quote, no recording was allowed). This was met with huge applause from the gathered crowd, and lots of laughs from all three of the Imagineers. Bob in particular had the look of knowing something we don't. The hat was brought up a couple of times, and again, all three Imagineers laughed about it, and seemed to fully understand how it's not particularly liked by the fans. It may well be that too much is being read into this, but certainly today you could walk away with the impression that the hat is going to be removed.


==================================

Enjoy!

- TAE

Yeti logo - Pixar Parody

Yeti logo - Pixar Parody

Pixar Intro Luxo Jr. Outtake #4-37-2

Another Luxo parody or two:

No Narnia 3?

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-narnia25-2008dec25,0,7412331.story



No Narnia 3? At least not from Disney.

Walden Media continues looking for a finance partner and director Michael Apted is still attached (along with the actors and crew).



"We're disappointed that Disney has decided not to go forward," said David Weil, chief executive of Walden's parent company, Anschutz Film Group. "But we regard 'Dawn Treader' as an extremely valuable property and remain committed to the franchise."


- TAE

Tidbits about Pixar

George Lucas sold Pixar to Steve Jobs.





Apparently in the mid 80s Lucas got a divorce and was strapped for cash. He sold Pixar to Jobs for 5 million. Pixar was the section that did all the technology for ILM (and also the animation through Lassetter, which was used to showcase the technology). So Lucas sold the technology, but he only sold a license of it, so that he could keep the technology and continue to build ILM on it. Pixar came with a license of the technology and all the assets. Steve Jobs used Pixar initially to sell hardware and software, but Lassetter’s little side projects soon proved to be the future of Pixar.



One interesting tidbit is that the first planned Pixar movie was “Monkey.” The budget got too high ($50 million back in the mid 80s) and Lucas pulled the plug.



It was also interesting that Lassetter had to be hired as a UI Designer (even though he was hired to make shorts) because Lucas didn’t want animators (he didn’t connect his effects projects with animation yet). Jobs seemingly allowed Lassetter and Pixar to pursue animation because the hardware and software businesses weren’t working. Jobs also almost sold Pixar to Microsoft, but he ended up believing in Toy Story at the last moment and instead sold use of patents to Microsoft, which is what saved Pixar and kept it going financially. Then on to commercials and movies.



Also interestingly, Jeffrey Katzenberg tried to hire Lassetter back to Disney after Lassetter released each of his animated shorts. Lassetter always said no. Eventually Katzenberg gave up and decided instead to offer a movie deal with Pixar, which is what led to Toy Story.



Katzenberg’s leadership in Disney’s early 90s animated film success is fairly evident. It also makes sense why he embraced 3D animation so quickly when he left Disney to form Dreamworks (resulting in Antz (which was the second 3D animated film, after Toy Story), Shrek, Madagascar, etc.).









So who wants to see the Pixar Monkey movie??? =^)



Can we make requests to Lassetter to go back and make this movie? Space Chimps is coming out, but I think the Monkey movie would have been a completely different story.



- TAE

The Lion King in 5 Seconds

Enjoy!

- TAE

Disney's "Glago's Guest" clip and info about director

When Lasseter set to replace Chris Sanders (Lilo & Stitch) with a new director, one of the two directors he chose was Chris Williams, the creator/director of Glago's Guest, a new Disney short to be released next year.

Here's a clip:



It basically looks a little similar to the art style that Star Wars Clone Wars was pulling out, but it's even more realistic, and they totally nailed the animation and emotion (something sorely missing in the Star Wars animation). I'm very interested in seeing Chris Williams' work when Disney lets him write his own film. Trying to save Bolt, was destined to fail (it's Incredible Journey goes Hollywood; no reason to do that in 3D).

Before directing Bolt and this short, Chris was a writer at Disney on Mulan, Emperor's New Groove, Brother Bear, and now Bolt. (I loved Mulan and New Groove.)

Enjoy!

- TAE

Disney Repurposes Animation

This hilarious video shows how Disney has repurposed its animation. Some people have argued that this happened with films after Walt died (or as he was dying), but Disney directors have said in interviews that they repurposed animation throughout the company's history.

It gets really interesting at 1:03 where you see that the cat with flute in Robin Hood is the exact same cat as the one with the trumpet in Aristocats. Of course, we all know that the bears in Jungle Book and Robin Hood are the same. They're the same character design and feature the same voice!

So I think it would be possible to create a video 10 times this length if you wanted to go through all the animations.

It's also interesting to note that Disney did a lot of rotoscoping for the original animations in order to save time (it took a lot longer to get realistic animation without rotoscoping it).




Enjoy!

- TAE

New Tron cartoon on Disney XD

Disney XD orders 'Tron: Legacy' toon

Tron Legacy:


Disney is spinning its upcoming "Tron: Legacy" feature into an animated TV series.
Boy-centric cabler Disney XD has given a series order to "Tron: Uprising," which is set for a summer 2012 bow.

Charlie Bean ("Samurai Jack") will exec produce and direct, while "Tron: Legacy" writers Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz will serve as consulting producers. "Tron: Legacy" co-producer Justin Springer is also on board.

"Tron: Uprising's" voice cast includes Elijah Wood, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Mandy Moore, Paul Reubens, Nate Corddry and Lance Henriksen. Bruce Boxleitner will reprise his role as Tron.

Disney XD had already picked up a 10-part "Tron" microseries, which airs next fall.

Disney TV Animation is behind the show. Disney Channels Worldwide entertainment prexy Gary Marsh called the new show "a culmination of an extraordinary collaboration between Disney Television Animation and our feature film studio."

"Tron: Uprising" will focus on Beck (voiced by Wood), who leads a revolution inside the Grid's computer world.

From:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118026910

Enjoy!

Why is Disney/Pixar making a sequel to Cars?

First, let's talk about why they shouldn't.

Here is every Pixar movie.

The number is the total worldwide gross...


Toy Story
1995
$361,958,736

A Bug's Life
1998
$363,398,565

Toy Story 2
1999
$485,015,179

Monsters, Inc.
2001
$525,366,597

Finding Nemo
2003
$864,625,978

The Incredibles
2004
$631,442,092

Cars
2006
$461,981,604

Ratatouille
2007
$620,261,049





Cars was clearly the stinker of the bunch, if $461 million, two Oscar nominations, and a Golden Globe could possibly be called a stinker. =^)


This makes me wonder why they’re making a sequel to Cars instead of The Incredibles, Finding Nemo (maybe a Crush movie), or Monsters Inc.


My answer is... Merchandise.


Merchandise is probably the motivation for creating a sequel to Cars, seeing how it certainly isn’t the Box Office. (It makes more sense from a Box Office perspective to do a Crush movie, or a sequel to Incredibles or Monster’s Inc.)


Disney made more money off of merchandising Cars than any other Pixar movie.


Disney makes more revenue in merchandising than any other source. Even in the parks, more money comes from merchandise than food or tickets.

I remembered reading an article where Disney said they were hitting it big with girls with the Princess franchise and hoped to continue to get merchandise brands out of Pixar from Toy Story (which was their biggest success with boys), Incredibles, and Cars. (On the DreamWorks side, I’m sure they’re raking it in with Shrek and Madagascar.)

On a side note, they should make an Incredibles cartoon and place it in the older time frame when Supers ran rampant. That’s where the big money is for boys: TV cartoons and related merchandise (Warner Bros. has banked on it for 15 years).

Plus Pixar probably already thought of a killer idea for a Cars sequel, and that’s a motivating factor. It doesn’t take much to think of a sequel to Cars. The concept has “road trip” written all over it (which is pretty much the whole story of both Toy Story movies and Finding Nemo), and the road trip concept wasn’t used to its fullest potential in the first Cars movie.

- TAE

Pixar Intro Luxo Jr. Outtake #4-67-1

Luxo Jr. is the first film produced in 1986 by Pixar Animation Studios.

ELRO recovers never before seen Pixar outtakes 20 years after the release of the original short.

Luxo Jr is 20 years old this year, happy Birthday, enjoy our parody.

Is Pixar doing live action?

Is Pixar combining live action with animation?



If this is true, it’s not surprising. Technically, Pixar came from George Lucas’ Industrial Light & Magic (ILM), and this is the same sort of thing they’re doing with their Star Wars movies. Pixar could do even better. Plus, the action-oriented films starring humans do very poorly in animation (Beowulf, Final Fantasy, Titan AE, Sinbad, etc.).



So Andrew Stanton may be uncovering new territory by making live-action films with an animation twist. The first film may be Princess of Mars (Andrew Stanton). Andrew Stanton is currently running Pixar, and he won an academy award for and had the biggest Pixar success with Finding Nemo (plus his Wall-E this year will surely also exceed expectations).



He would be leaving behind capable directors who will still concentrate on the animations, like Pete Doctor (directed Monster’s Inc., Mike’s New Car, and will direct Up in 2009), Lee Unkrich (co-directed Toy Story 2, Monster’s Inc, Finding Nemo, and will direct Toy Story 3 in 2010), Gary Rydstrom (directed Lifted (short before Ratatouille), and will direct newt in 2011; also won 3 Oscars for sound and 14 nominations), Brenda Chapman (directed Prince of Egypt, and will direct Bear and the Bow in 2011), and Brad Lewis (produced Ratatouille, and will direct Cars 2 in 2012).







From Wikismack:





Rumors began appearing in early 2007 that the Walt Disney Company was in negotiations to acquire the rights to the [John Carter] property for development through Pixar Animation,[2] or that it had already done so.[3]

In what was an April fools joke, Pixar blog Upcoming Pixar broke the news that John Carter of Mars would be Brad Bird's live action feature length debut as director. However the same blog confirmed that the film was to be made by Pixar on May 22, 2007. A month later, however, it was revealed that Brad Bird's first live-action film would be 1906. But it was revealed that Carter will use a combination of animation and live-action and is said to be in theaters in 2012.

On October 2, 2007, the director of John Carter was revealed to be Andrew Stanton and the screenwriter Mark Andrews. Both were visiting Tarzana, California to look into the Edgar Rice Burroughs Archives. [4]





So most of this has been confirmed:

- Pixar is doing the John Carter series
- The first one is probably going to be called Princess of Mars
- It is currently set to be released in theaters in 2012
- They would then continue the series, one film a year (or close to that)
- Andrew Stanton is directing
- Brad Bird is doing a live-action film, 1906, which seems to be a break from Pixar for him




It looks like the April Fools joke confused a lot of people. I think it was too close to the truth, which made it believable. =^)






Enjoy!

- TAE

Disney's Gummi Bears: The Movie

Another funny Disney movie parody...



- TAE

Disney's Story Of Menstruation - 1946

A basic explanation of the purpose and process of menstruation, told largely with diagrams (and completely avoiding the subject of sex).
It was co-produced with Kotex to teach pre-teen girls about Menstruation, supposably. It only educates at a superficial level, so it does not go into heavy detail for the animated "Ram's Head"/ Reproductive System sequence.
The Story of Menstruation is believed to be the first film to use the word vagina in its screenplay.

"Family Guy" Goes Disney (VIDEO): The Pie Song

Methinks this universe has a little more Warner Bros. influence than Disney. There are a few things that push toward Disney, though, such as Lois in her Snow White clothes and Mr. Herbert as the Queen in witch garb. Good gag where they say no to the witch.

I don't actually understand the part where they beat the salesman.

What's also very interesting is that Fox is clearly spoofing other shows/brands here, including Disney and Robot Chicken. It's interesting because Disney wouldn't want Fox to do this (due to the blood), so they probably didn't get permission. Which means legally Fox would be relying on the parody laws to justify this (which are very gray right now). This is a good case to bring to Fox the next time they accuse of breaking parody laws when we spoof their brands (because they've done it 3 times purposefully and 1 time on accident, so far).

Enjoy!

- TAE

Disney park opening in Maryland?

http://dc.citybizlist.com/yourcitybiznews/detail.aspx?id=48916

"As we began identifying possible locations to grow our business, the Washington, DC area immediately jumped to the top of the list," said Jay Rasulo, Chairman of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts. "National Harbor offers an array of entertaining activities for regional visitors, but it is also a family-friendly base camp, from which visitors from around the world can explore the stirring sights and inspirational stories of our nation's capital. We believe National Harbor has the unique opportunity to offer a new level of family-friendly hospitality."

Disney purchased the Maryland property from the Peterson Companies for $11 million.

===================================

I wonder if this is another Disney Vacation Club resort, like the one in Hawaii.

Enjoy!

- TAE

Online Disney Games

Did you know that Disney tried an online theme park game, and it didn't work?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Magic_Kingdom



Disney's Virtual Magic Kingdom, also known simply as VMK, was a free massively multiplayer online game run by Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Online. It was a virtual representation of the Disneyland and Magic Kingdom theme parks, containing areas and minigames which were based on real park scenery and attractions.

They closed it after two years. So after that failure, they might not try it again, but they probably could do it successfully with a new business plan. Basically, they were only doing it to advertise the parks, rather than making it a separate world that could be magical and could include Disney characters. I even remember seeing these VMK kiosks in the theme parks, where they were obviously trying to build awareness.



I think they should try again with a new name (“Disneyland Online” works), the usual “pay for more features” business model (and the “buy merchandise to also unlock more features” business model), build a version with lower needs for active staff monitoring and involvement (staff cost money, which lowers the profits), add Disney characters, make the park(s) a “magical” place (maybe where you can battle other people, cast spells, or something “magical”), don't try so hard on the boring Disney park ideas (like Hidden Mickeys, pins, etc.), and basically try to make it fun and entertaining like their other online games…


Other online Disney MMOGs:

§ Toontown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toontown_Online

§ Club Penguin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_penguin

§ Pixie Hollow (Tinker Bell): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixie_Hollow

§ Pirates Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toontown_Online


I often wondered why Disney did a Penguin-themed game that isn’t connected to their licenses, but then I realized it’s because they bought it. They didn’t start it.




So I definitely think a theme park game should be in there. They just have to make it enjoyable, market it right, and give it a better business model.



I loved the classic 1990 NES game, Disney’s Adventures in the Magic Kingdom:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventures_in_the_Magic_Kingdom



You walk around the park, talk to the Disney characters, answer trivia to unlock levels, go on rides as levels, beat the levels, and slowly progress through a story that unlocks more of the park.



Funny. I don’t remember the graphics looking this horrible. =^)

- TAE

Why is Sorcerer's Apprentice doing so horribly?

Why? Why? WHYYYY????



It looked so good, and yet here it is...

Domestic Total as of Jul. 25, 2010: $42,609,020

Well, is it doing better overseas? No, it's doing worse...

Foreign: $25,300,000

Well, how much did it cost? Much more than it's making...

Production Budget: $150 million

So with Prince of Persia hitting below expectations (I think it's because the movie had an Orlando Bloom--Jake Gyllenhaal--but no Jack Sparrow), and Sorcerer's Apprentice bombing hard, does this mean Jerry Bruckheimer's clout is going down?

Maybe he should stick to adult action movies instead of trying to bridge gaps to the family market?

My best guess is that this movie fell in the middle. With the lack of exotic locations and adventure that was missing from the trailer (just some jokes and cool effects), the audience really didn't get any sense of story or fun from the trailers, which means it didn't appeal to women and families: the action and dragons were aimed more at an adult male audience. However, the adult male audience looked at the humor and Disney branding and wasn't interested.

The result is that the film got lost in the middle, between the two audiences.

Anyway, that's my best guess why this movie didn't do well, because a lot of people were pleasantly surprised by it when they saw it (which is another hint that the trailer wasn't doing it justice).

- TAE