Strange. I'm not getting "dark" from the trailers I've seen. Admittedly, they 
may have held back the truly grim stuff for airing, so as not to scare off 
viewers.

And, here, I daresay that we have a case of *critics* who don't read. If memory 
serves, the source material isn't exactly sunshine and roses.

"If all the world's a stage and all the people merely players, who in bloody 
hell hired the director?" -- Charles L Grant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik




To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com
From: keithbjohn...@comcast.net
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 07:01:29 +0000
Subject: [scifinoir2] USA Today not Big on SyFy's "Alice"


















 



  


    
      
      
      
Interesting, USA Today thinks the Alice reimagining is both too dark, and 
unimaginative. I was going to start having some doubts about it--don't know 
why, as I'm not a big follower of USA Today's critics--but then they dissed 
"Tin Man". The critic says it was too dark and not very good either. That makes 
me wonder know if "Alice" might be pretty good after all...

 

*************************************************************************

Syfy's 'Alice': Through a looking glass, only very darkly

 

By Robert Bianco, USA TODAY
All told, it might be best to keep Syfy away from looking glasses and tornadoes.
Last time Syfy decided a children's classic needed to be, in the network's 
words, "re-imagined," we got Tin Man, a bleak tweaking of The Wizard of Ozthat 
buried a simple, gentle story under an ugly universe-saving quest. Now we get 
Alice, which throws Lewis Carroll's Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass 
adventures into the same revisionist blender and spews out something close to 
the same unappetizing gruel.
 
Close, but not quite. What gives Alice a slight edge over its Ozian cousin is a 
less-heavy hand, a few brighter performances and a source better suited to a 
darkling outlook. Nor does it hurt that Alice, while still overextended, has 
two fewer hours than Tin Man. None might have been best, but less is more.
 
Written and directed by Nick Willing (who also directed Tin Man), Alice turns 
Carroll's curious girl into Alice Hamilton (Caterina Scorsone), a 20-ish 
martial-arts expert with commitment issues and a father fixation. When her 
boyfriend (Philip Winchester) is kidnapped, Alice follows his assailants to 
Wonderland, landing in the not-completely-trustworthy hands of Hatter 
(Andrew-Lee Potts, Alice's best asset).
 
This is the same Wonderland the first Alice found, but time – and, apparently, 
an ambitious building program – have imbued it with the arid post-apocalyptic 
air of which Syfy is so inordinately fond. And it's ruled by an even more evil 
queen (a disappointing, inexplicably English-accented Kathy Bates), who plies 
her compliant subjects with emotions she drains from kidnapped humans.
 

For an hour or so, simple pleasures suffice, such as matching old characters to 
new and faces to names (Tim Curry, Colm Meaney, Harry Dean Stanton and Matt 
Frewer among them). And some of the literary translations are clever, led by 
Wonderland's adoption of flamingo-shaped flying scooters.
 
But Alice soon bogs down in Willing's superimposed plot, with its shifting 
motives and dreary lectures. And while there are times Alice fends (or punches) 
for herself, too often Scorsone succumbs to a drab weepiness.
Willing has recast Carroll's story as a heroine's journey to enlightenment, but 
it's tough to see what precisely Alice learns – unless the moral is "Dump the 
loser, and if he's really worth anything, he'll chase after you." So you're 
left with a woman whose main quest is unsuccessful, and a movie that's glum, 
long and devoid of any sense of wonder.
That's two classic strikes, Syfy. For literature's sake, let that be enough.

 



    
     

    
    






                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail is faster and more secure than ever.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?ocid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_1:092009

Reply via email to