“Bowery at Midnight” (1942)

Bowery at Midnight

Brief Description:

Kindly soup kitchen operator and professor of criminology Brenner uses his soup kitchen as a front for a criminal gang who commit a series of daring robberies and murders.

Date: 1942

Genre: American horror film

Running time: 1 hour

Cast: 

Bela Lugosi (Professor Brenner)

John Archer (Richard Dennison)

Wanda McKay (Judy Malvern)

Tom Neal (Frankie Mills)

Vince Barnett (Charley)

Anna Hope (Mrs. Brenner)

John Berkes (Fingers)

Dolan J. Farrell MacDonald (Capt. Mitchell)

Dave O'Brien (Peter Crawford)

Lucille Vance (Mrs. Malvern)

Lew Kelly (Doc Brooks)

Wheeler Oakman (Stratton)

Ray Miller (Big Man)

Bernard Gorcey (Clothing Shop Proprietor)

Director: Wallace Fox

Production/Distribution Company: Banner Productions & Monogram Pictures

Wikipedia Page

Watch on Archive

(watched on Tubi)

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 3/5

No notes, really. Felt very 1940s. I enjoyed the secret staircases and sliding doors. 

Characters: 3/5

The only likeable person throughout was Judy, and my favourite—Peter Crawford, the detective who wants to settle down and get a family. 💙 I felt sorry for Mrs. Brenner though, of course. And Fingers was fascinating, if awful. 

Plot: 2/5

Tubi, which seems to have a thing of really bad blurbs, completely confused me by listing this as, "A seemingly kindly criminology professor secretly runs gang operations out of a soup kitchen. Anyone who gets in his way winds up dead—and zombified." The zombification barely figures. It's never explained. And it's extremely confusing. Brenner's double life and criminal activity was interesting, anyways, and Dennison's sociology experiments. 

Romance: 3/5

Cute little romance between Dennison & Judy, though I wasn't his biggest fan sometimes. 

Content: 3/5

1 kiss. 

Violence: 2/5

Mild violence & death. 

Overall: 2.5/3

Just kinda dumb? I feel like I wasted my time. 

“Max” (2015)

Max

Brief Description: 

A military dog that helped American Marines in Afghanistan returns to the United States and is adopted by his handler's family after suffering a traumatic experience.

Date: 2015

Genre: American family adventure war drama film 

Running time: 1 hour 15 minutes 

Cast: 

Josh Wiggins (Justin Wincott)

Carlos (Max)

Dejon LaQuake (Chuy)

Thomas Haden Church (Ray Wincott)

Robbie Amell (Kyle Wincott)

Lauren Graham (Pamela Wincott)

Luke Kleintank (Tyler Harne)

Jay Hernandez (Sgt. Reyes)

Miles Mussenden (Maj. Miles)

Mia Xitlali (Carmen)

Owen Harn (Dep. Stack)

Joseph Julian Soria (Emilio)

Director: Boaz Yakin

Production/Distribution Company: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures, RatPac-Dune Entertainment, Sunswept Entertainment, & Warner Bros. Pictures

Wikipedia Page

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

Yeah, this film definitely had elements of the 2015 American summer vibes. It took me a while to figure out that although it appeared conservative, it wasn't religious; but it certainly was very stereotypical. 

Characters: 3/5

The only character I really liked was Carmen, although Chuy did redeem himself a tiny bit at the end, as did Justin. I hated Tyler; I disliked Ray except when he delivered an awesome speech to Justin; and Pam was okay. I liked the sergeant too, until he handed Justin classified military information... 

Plot: 3/5

I don’t know, it felt both predictable and startling? The ending especially didn't impress me. 

Romance: 2/5

Hint of romance between Carmen & Justin, culminating with Carmen giving Justin a big kiss. 

Theme/Message/Topics: 3/5

Renewed appreciation for war dogs & the PTSD fireworks can trigger. 

Content: 3/5

Mild euphemisms; teenage rebellion; Justin illegally rips and sells CDs; gun trafficking; drinking; a scene where American soldiers take over an Afghanistan town which I struggled with. 

Violence: 3/5

Shooting; car explosion causing a death; dangerous dogs. 

Overall: 3/5

It was okay, but I won't be rewatching it. 

“Mr. Wong in Chinatown” (1939)

Mr. Wong in Chinatown

Brief Description:

When a pretty Chinese woman seeks his help, then is killed by a poisoned dart in his front hall, a San Francisco detective takes on a perilous case.

Date: 1939

Genre: American mystery film

Running time: 1 hour 10 minutes

Cast: 

Boris Karloff: Mr. Wong

Marjorie Reynolds: Roberta Logan

Grant Withers: Capt. Street

Huntley Gordon: Mr. Davidson

Peter George Lynn: Capt. Jackson

William Royle: Capt. Jame

James Flavin: Sgt. Jerry

Lotus Long: Lin Hwa

Lee Tung Foo: Willie

Bessie Loo: Lilly May (maid)

Richard Loo: Tong chief

Ernie Stanton: Burton (butler)

I. Stanford Jolley: Hotel clerk

Angelo Rossitto: mute Little Person

Director: William Nigh

Production company: Monogram Pictures

Wikipedia page

Watch on Archive

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

I watched this years ago and finally rewatched it tonight to review. The setting is all right—I liked the ship especially, but Jackson's bureau also interested me. It's certainly very late-1930s in feel. 

Characters: 3/5

The only one who was somewhat likeable was Mr. Wong, the princess (who dies within seconds), and her servants (who only show in one scene). And for a lead detective, Mr. Wong was rather too quiet and slow. It almost looked like Street was trying to make up for Wong's lack of activity by being extra himself. I hated him—he was so aggressive and rude towards everyone, but especially Bobbie, and he did nothing but yell. As for Bobbie herself, I'm not a fan of the argumentative, shallow little "career woman" stereotype of the 1930s, but at least she had the distinction of saving a life. 

Plot: 3/5

I guessed the main bad guy as soon as he came on screen, which was kind of fun. The plot itself was nothing shiny. The touch of WWII hint with the Chinese buying airplanes was the most interesting part. 

Romance: 2/5

I don't see why we're supposed to ship Bill Street & Bobbie Logan. He's nothing but dismissive and nasty to her except in like 2 scenes where he rescues her/acts protective. She's just as loud and argumentative as he is but she comes off worse (what's with him physically shaking her and stuffing an apple in her mouth?!) so I feel more sorry for her. 

Content: 4/5 (low)

Maybe an euphemism or two; slight racism and ablism towards Chinese and a Little Person. 

Violence: 4/5 (low)

Murder; fighting. 

Overall: 3/5

Not the worst 1930 movie I ever saw, but certainly not my favourite and probably not something I'll rewatch. 

“Barbie & the Three Musketeers” (2009)

Barbie & the Three Musketeers

Brief Description:

It's "all for one and one for all" in this action-filled adventure as Barbie stars as Corinne, a young country girl headed to Paris to pursue her big dream—to become a Musketeer.

(from IMDb)

Date: 2009

Genre: animated American fantasy film

Running time: 1 hour 21 minutes

Cast: 

Kelly Sheridan: Corinne (Barbie)

Willow Johnson: Aramina (Summer)

Dorla Bell: Renée (Nikki)

Kira Tozer: Viveca (Teresa)

Tim Curry: Philippe

Mark Hildreth: Louis

Bernard Cuffling: Treville

Merrilyn Gann: Mme de Bossé

Kathleen Barr: Hélène

Nicole Oliver: Corrine's mother

Amelia Henderson: Miette

David Kaye: Alexander

Brian Dobson: Brutus

Director: William Lau

Production company: Mattel Entertainment & Rainmaker Entertainment

Based on: The Three Musketeers by Alexander Dumas

Wikipedia page

Watch on Archive

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 3/5

Okay, this is about the un-Frenchiest thing I ever saw. It's worse than the Aristocats. It's so bad. If it was a fantasy kingdom, I could take it. As France, and Paris, it's just too much 😆 however, I did enjoy the palace itself, with all its secret rooms. That part really fired my imagination! 

Characters: 3/5

While I don't actively dislike the characters, except Philippe and Mme de Bossé, I also couldn't take any of them seriously. The girls were way over the top; Louis was an idiot—a sweet idiot, but still an idiot—and M. de Treville, though nice, was a bit stupid. Hélène was just confusing; Philippe actually had a good motivation, though.

Plot: 3.5/5

It's about as far as you can get from The Three Musketeers without removing the musketeers, but anyways, the plot is about the only part that redeems it. I enjoyed the last quarter of the movie despite its stupidity (Lady BBQ? Really?) because of all the drama and action. It inspired me heavily for my own fantasy retellings. But the first 3/4s are painful. 

Romance: 3/5

Nothing inappropriate, I just found it very blah.  

Theme/Message/Topics: 3/5

It's heavily "you can do whatever you set your mind on," and "all that matters is chasing your dreams" and "girls can be whatever they like" and "boys are stupid because they underestimate girls." Personally, I don't find any of inspirational. 

Content: 5/5 (low)

Can't recall any.

Violence: 5/5 (low)

Basically none. 

Overall: 3/5

The first time I watched it, I was appalled. The second time, I enjoyed parts. Mostly, I find it inspired me. 

“The Great Discovery” (2008)

The Great Discovery

Brief Description:

Thomas rediscovers the long lost original station which in its day was called Great Waterton and he also becomes jealous of a new tank engine called Stanley.

(from IMDb)

Date: 2008

Genre: family animation 

Running time: 1 hour

Narrator: Pierce Brosnan

Director: Steve Asquith

Production company: 

Based on: the Railway Series by the Rev. W. Awdry

IMDb page

Watch on Archive

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

I have to admit, Sodor is super cute. And I love railways, and the English countryside and houses. And everything is so old-timey and cute. <3

Characters: 3/5

Thomas is an idiot. Except he’s meant to be a kid, so he’s realistic. He’s still an idiot though. Sir Topham Hat has no excuse. He’s also an idiot. Why on earth did he think he was making good decisions, putting and removing the trains in charge?? Like how did he not realise this was gonna make problems between Thomas and Stanley??? Anyways. I love Stanley. He’s so sweet.  

Plot: 3/5

Well, it’s a cute film. Kinda. It’s just really boring and drawn out, and very one-track (pun intended). It’s for kids, I get it… but… it’s still pretty boring for a kids’ film. My siblings liked it better than I did though, so I don’t know. 🤷🏻‍♀️ I got annoyed at Thomas’s brattiness and the conductor’s stupidity too much to enjoy everything else, maybe. I liked the little songs scattered throughout though. They use nice, big words. ;) 

Theme/Message/Topics: 4/5

Good themes of actions have consequences, letting go of being in charge, not getting jealous, not worrying about your place being filled by someone else, and making friends.  

Content: 5/5 (low to none)

Some music I didn’t care for; maybe a euphemism or two? 

Overall: 3/5

I don’t know, I feel disappointed. I thought I’d like this more. I’ll give it another shot though, and see what I think that time. 

“Alias Mary Smith” (1932)

Alias Mary Smith

Brief Description:

A young woman on a mission to prove a gangster’s involvement in a murder, spends time with a playboy who has a passion for boozy nights.

(from Tubi)

Date: 1932

Genre: American mystery crime

Running time: 52 minutes 

Cast: 

Blanche Mehaffey (Joan)

John Darrow (Buddy)

Raymond Hatton (Scoop)

Edmund Breese (Father)

Myrtle Stedman (Mother)

Gwen Lee (Blossom)

Henry B. Walthall (Attwell)

Alec B. Francis (Lawyer)

Matthew Betz (Snowy)

Jack Grey (Kearney)

Harry Strang (Yeager)

Ben Hall (Jake)

Lionel Backus (Hood)

Jack Cheatham (Cop)

George Chesebro (Mac)

Director: E. Mason Hopper

Production company: Mayfair Pictures

Wikipedia page

Watch on YouTube 

(watched on Tubi)

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 3/5

I've never noticed before if 1930s films are less better produced than 1940s or ’50s, but I felt like this one was pretty lame. Some parts felt overkill and melodramatic—and I like melodrama, generally. However, I enjoyed the very 1930s costumes and feel. It was very American. ;)

Characters: 3/5

Everybody was always biting at everyone else, except for Joan and Buddy. They barely even acted friendly, if they were friendly at all. I don’t love the blonde streetwise sarcastic character, unless she’s well done, so Blossom wasn’t my type. Scoop, Yeager, etc., were irritating; Snowy was at least interesting, though. And Buddy’s parents were okay. I wasn’t a fan of Buddy, either. I suppose we’re just to hope he reforms after. 

Plot: 3/5

I don’t know, I just wasn’t a fan. It was so simple, so low-stakes, somehow. I liked the bit about lemon juice for the fingerprints, but otherwise, everything was kinda lame… so much so I forget it all. 

Romance: 3/5

So Buddy & Joan were okay as a couple, I guess, but I was not a fan of Buddy. He’s not respectful or respectable. But his parents were kinda cute. 

Content: 3/5 (medium)

Kissing & canoodling between Joan & Buddy; drinking; language; Blossom says Buddy “has a bad case of wandering hands” and refuses to sit by him. Blossom dresses in her room while an officer waits outside and calls out if he can fasten snaps; he gets excited and she tells him to fasten one on his mouth. Blossom packs Joan’s trunk in her dressing gown and is caught—and photographed—with her shoulders and legs bared. Asked where he was last night, the butler hesitates and says he was playing ping-pong with the maid next door; the detective laughs and says, “I’ve heard it called everything but ping-pong.” 

Violence: 5/5 (low)

Man murdered off screen. 

Overall: 3/5

Meh. Doubt I’ll watch it again. There’re better films with the premise of “sister tries to get revenge/justice for wrongfully executed/jailed brother”—such as “The Bridge of Sighs” and “Conspiracy.”

“Curious George: Go West, Go Wild” (2020)

 Curious George: 

Go West, Go Wild

Brief Description:

 George and Ted travel to cousin Ginny's farm for a relaxing outdoor weekend, but plans take a turn when her farm animals escape.

(from IMDb)

Date: 2020

Genre: American children's fantasy 

Running time: 1 hour 25 minutes 

Cast: 

Frank Welker (Curious George)

Jeff Bennett (Ted / Conductor)

Max Mittelman (Emmett)

April Stewart (Ginny)

Phil Morris (Frank)

Adrienne Barbeau (Ginny's mom)

Dee Bradley Baker (Billy / Frick / Frack / Ricochet / Prairie Dog / Sadie / Spittoon)

Director: Michael LaBash

Production company: Imagine Entertainment & Universal Animation Studios 

Based on: the Curious George books by H.A. & Margret Ray

IMDb page

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 3/5

There was definitely a prairie/Wild West/farm feel, which was quite nice. I'm not a fan of over-bright animations but I didn't mind this too much. Also, watching characters cross the country always makes me wanna travel so badly!!

Characters: 3/5

The characters were pretty one-dimensional and shallow. Emmett was way too clumsy at first. But I guess for a kids' film they were okay. 

Plot: 3/5

Some stuff was wildly inaccurate, but overall it was a fun, simply film with some quite funny moments. Even the inaccurate stuff was quite amusing. I enjoyed watching the vacation and the search for the animals, and the climax was enjoyable... yeah, overall, it was a fun film. 

Theme/Message/Topics: 4/5

I enjoyed the message of believing in yourself and trying new things over and over. 

Content: 4/5 (low)

Possibly some mild euphemisms.

Overall: 3/5

Not the greatest kids' film or the best George movie, but it was a fun time well spent with my siblings. 

“Home Alone 3” (1997)

 Home Alone 3

Brief Description:

8-year-old Alex Pruitt defends his home from a dangerous band of international criminals working for a terrorist organization.

(from Wikipedia)

Date: 1997

Genre: American family comedy 

Running time: 1 hour 42 minutes 

Cast: 

Alex D. Linz (Alex)

Haviland Morris (Mrs. Pruitt)

Kevin Kilner (Mr. Pruitt)

Olek Krupa (Beaupré)

Rya Kihlstedt (Alice)

Lenny Von Dohlen (Jernigan)

David Thornton (Unger)

James Saito (the Mob Boss)

Seth Smith (Stan)

Marian Seldes (Mrs. Hess)

Christopher Curry (FBI Agent Stuckey)

Pat Healy (FBI Agent Rogers)

Baxter Harris (Police Captain Jackson)

Neil Flynn, Nick Jantz, Tony Mockus Jr., & James Chisem (Police Officers)

Freeman Coffey (USAF Recruiting Officer)

Adrianne Duncan (Flight Attendant)

Jennifer A. Daley (Police Photographer)

Darren T. Knaus (the Parrot)

Director: Raja Gosnell

Production company: Hughes Entertainment & Fox Family Films

Wikipedia page

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

A quiet neighbourhood of old Tudor-style homes with everybody gone during the day. Nice enough setting. 

Characters: 4/5

I liked these characters better than those from Home Alone 1 & 2. Alex is much less of a brat (and more 8-year-old-ish). His parents are quite nice; and his siblings are much more loving, and their picking on him is much more fair and teasing than hateful. Mrs. Hess was such a nice surprise, and the villains were fun because they could be taken more seriously. 

Plot: 4/5

I enjoyed this much more than the first two films. It’s more of a series of misunderstandings than deliberate unkindness, and Alex isn’t forgotten at home, but forced to stay behind by a series of circumstances (aka his parents are much more responsible). I also liked the extra issue of his parents’ lack of money. And I was pleasantly surprised by how the 911 calls were handled. I enjoyed how the film played out with the microchip and where + how it got to Alex, and the build of suspense as the robbers try to retrieve it. The showdown is less violent than HA 1&2, but just as fun, and I liked the little snippets that reminded me of the original films! And I really liked the ending :) Also, love how the parrot played into all this! Made me laugh out loud. 

Theme/Message/Topics: 3/5

There actually wasn’t much of one at all, unless it was to trust your kids, lol. Christmas is really a totally incidental thing... it's basically just set in December.  

Content: 2/5 (high)

Alex’s brother has a picture of an unclothed model with her chest area and hips covered in sticky-notes, & Alex removes a few of the sticky-notes but nothing is really revealed. Later a villain opens the bathroom and you can dimly sees a female form in the shower; he opens it and finds the picture hanging there sans sticky-notes (side chest can be seen, and the image cuts off above her bellybutton). There’s a picture of a girl in a bikini in Alex’s brother’s room as well. A scene where Alex undresses in the bathroom; his family hears him scream and say he “slammed the toilet seat on his thing again.” A scene where Alex watches a recording of women exercising and shoots a dart at a woman’s behind. A scene where a mouse climbs out of a man’s suit near the groin and a woman tries to kill the mouse (“you smacked my winky”). Language: OMG.

Violence: 3/5 (medium)

A little less violent than HA 1&2 but along the same lines. 

Overall: 3/5

I wasn’t a fan of the content at all, but it is centered in a few specific scenes, and easy to skip. And I loved the rest of the film. If it wasn’t for the content, this would definitely get 4 stars!

“Home Alone 2: Lost in New York” (1992)

Home Alone 2: Lost in New York

Brief Description:

10-year-old Kevin McCallister is separated from his family on their holiday vacation to Florida, this time in New York City where he has another encounter with the Wet Bandits after their escape during a prison riot.

(from Wikipedia)

Date: 1992

Genre: American Christmas comedy 

Running time: 2 hours

Cast: 

Macaulay Culkin (Kevin)

Joe Pesci (Harry)

Daniel Stern (Marv)

John Heard (Peter)

Catherine O’Hara (Kate)

Devin Ratray (Buzz)

Hillary Wolf (Megan)

Maureen Elisabeth Shay (Linnie)

Michael C. Maronna (Jeff)

Gerry Bamman (Uncle Frank)

Terrie Snell (Aunt Leslie)

Jedidiah Cohen (Rod)

Senta Moses (Tracy)

Daiana Campeanu (Sondr)

Kieran Culkin (Fuller)

Anna Slotky (Brooke)

Tim Curry (Mr. Hector)

Brenda Fricker (Pigeon Lady)

Eddie Bracken (Mr. Duncan)

Dana Ivey (Hester Stone)

Rob Schneider (Cedric)

Leigh Zimmerman (Fashion Model)

Ralph Foody (Johnny)

Clare Hoak (Johnny’s girlfriend)

Monica Devereux (Hotel Operator)

Bob Eubanks (Ding-Dang-Dong Host)

Rip Taylor (Celeb #1)

Jaye P. Morgan (Celeb #2)

Jimmie Walker (Celeb #3)

Ally Sheedy (New York Ticket Agent)

Rod Sell (Officer Bennett)

Ron Canada (Cop in Times Square)

Director: Chris Columbus

Production company: Hughes Entertainment

Wikipedia page

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

I love the NYC aesthetic. I don’t know why. I also love hotel aesthetics... and rich hotels are pretty cool. ;) I feel like the film did a good job of getting the good and bad sides of a big city... the Christmas decor, the indifference, the kind strangers, the frightening nightlife... very interesting balances. But Kevin running around in NYC gives me anxiety for him—poor little kid!! 

Characters: 4/5

I liked the family better in this film than in the first one. Buzz is still pretty nasty... and I’m still mad at Kate for punishing Kevin unfairly. However, it probably is realistic... Anyways, Peter made a better father here. Frank is still nasty, but Leslie and the kids aren’t too bad. And I liked Pigeon Lady. The concierge is sooooo irritating, but the bellhop isn’t too bad...  

Plot: 4/5

I really love how the plot is similar to the first film yet different... same enough for you to tell what parts are similar but different enough that you’re unsure what will happen or surprised that something doesn’t happen. Kevin was more a brat here—definitely should have gotten in touch with his parents and shouldn’t have made the choices he did—but at least he felt remorse and tried to make up in a little way. I enjoyed the adventures around the hotel, and the toystore, and the fighting with Marv & Harry... that climax was just as much fun as the first, and sans swearing!! And the ending is pretty great again :) 

Theme/Message/Topics: 4/5

I love the message about your heart... about how people don’t forget about you, but forget to remember you... and Kevin’s encouragement to the Pigeon Lady that she’s “good at talking to people…” and about how he think he’ll have fun by himself but ends up not. 

Pigeon Lady: I’m just afraid if I do trust someone, I’ll get my heart broken again.

Kevin: I used to have this really nice pair of rollerblades. I was afraid if I wore them, I’d wreck them. So I kept them in a box. Do you know what happened? ... I outgrew them. I never wore them once outside. I just wore them in my room a couple times.... If you aren’t going to use your heart, then what’s the difference if it gets broken? If you just keep it to yourself, maybe it’ll be like my rollerblades. When you do decide to try it, it won’t be any good. You should take a chance. Got nothing to lose.... Your heart might still be broken, but it isn’t gone.

Wasn't a fan of the bogus “a good deed erases a bad deed” though.

Content: 3/5 (medium)

1 scene in a swimming pool (off-screen, Kevin’s shorts float off). Kevin watches a film where a gangster accuses his girlfriend of “smooching” with his brother and plenty of other guys; K later uses the film to play with the hotel people, causing people to assume the concierge “smooched” other guys, including a hotel worker. Kevin says Uncle Frank told him not to come into the bathroom when he was showering because if K saw him naked he’d “never grow up to be a real boy”; Peter tells him to go in anyways to get his tie; Kevin covers his eyes but you dimly see Uncle Frank in the shower; K records him singing & Uncle Frank calls him a pervert. 2 women smoke in one scene. Language: d**n, a**, g*d-dar*ed, OMG*d.

Violence: 3/5 (medium)

Basically the same thing as “Home Alone.” Bricks are thrown, fire is used, Harry’s head is burned, and a nail gun gets Marv twice. The robbers try to kill Kevin & the Pigeon Lady. 

Overall: 3/5

Much better than the first film, and I actually quite enjoy it!

“Alice in Wonderland” (1988)

Alice in Wonderland

Brief Description:

A young girl named Alice falls down a rabbit-hole and finds herself in Wonderland, a fantasy land of strange characters and ideas.

(from IMDb)

Date: 1988

Genre: family fantasy comedy adventure animated film

Running time: 51 minutes 

Cast: 

Olivia Martin (Alice)

Philip Hinton (Mad Hatter / King Phillip of Hearts / Bill the Lizard / Card Painter)

Paul Johnstone (Cheshire Cat / Chef / The Dormouse / Mock Turtle / Mr. Mouse / Duck / Card Painter)

Moya O'Sullivan (Duchess / Queen of Hearts)

Keith Scott (March Hare / White Rabbit / Dodo / Card Painter)

Director: Richard Trueblood

Production company: Burbank Films Australia

Based on: Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll 

Wikipedia page

Watch on Archive

Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 2/5

I LOVE Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. It’s one of my favourite books. This film, however, was a very disappointing adaptation. I didn’t expect it to be perfect—I just expected it to be better. Especially from Burbank Films.

To start off, the portrayal of Wonderland is weird and not at all pretty (contrary to the book). It’s also way too colourful and bright and pixilated—hard on the eyes. 

Characters: 3/5

I find it hard to be impartial about the characters. I suppose the greater portion were pretty much as they were in the book, but there were additions that bugged me. Alice was much less charming; the Dodo was just kooky; the Mock Turtle was ludicrous; the King wasn’t funny; the Duchess was really ugly; the Cook was Italian (??!!); and the Cat was straight-up creepy.  

Plot: 3/5

The plot followed the book pretty closely, I’ll admit. However, since the book hinges mostly on spoken wit, and the film removed 95% of it, the film was boring and irritating. It was also barely funny, although some of the physical comedy was, I suppose. I found the sound effects and exaggerated slapstick more annoying than anything but my 7-year-old brother was amused. 

I will say though that I liked the theme song. Although I don’t appreciate the syncopation and drum, the tune and lyrics are surprisingly poignant. 

Overall: 3/5

To be fair, I was very ill the first time I watched this and it felt like a fever dream. I still haven’t gotten rid of the impression. But rewatching it now, I wasn’t more impressed. So I’ll give it a 3 stars to be fair, but I probably felt more like a 2 stars. 

Anyways, don’t let your opinion of the book be created by this film or any other. The book is fantastic—just hilarious, and so clever. Read it ;)