Customer Reviews

Alice in Wonderland

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

If you are expecting a light cartoon version of Alice and Wonderland, you won't get it with this.

This is one of the wierdest versions of the story I have seen yet. It is somewhere between a dream and a nightmare. The story flows like a dream where scenes jump from one spot to another in a sort of almost episodic flow. This version is also a satire of the British aristocracy and culture.

This was made for the BBC as a Christmas special in 1966.

The soundtrack is by Ravi Shankar. The cast is composed of some of the best known names of British comedy and theatre. Among the cast Peter Cook plays the Mad Hatter, Peter Sellers is the King of Hearts, But the real scene stealer is Leo McKern as the Duchess(!).

All in all, this is a pretty dark version of the story. It is also one of the more "British".

The British release also has an 8 minute silent version from 1903, director's comentary, production stills and cast bios. The American release may have more or less of these things.

In Lewis Carroll's original work, Alice is a charming, witty and precocious 7-year old, engaging in sparkling point-counter-point exchanges with all manner of strange characters and situations as she wanders from one scene to another, not always predictably and not always to her liking or desire. This reviewer is unfamiliar with Victorian English society of the period, but surely these encounters are brilliantly realized satire, the animal characters selected to portray various characteristics of the nobility and commoners.

So it should be no surprise that this low-budget (£32,000 and a 6-week shooting schedule) 72-minute BBC B&W production is done with all live actors, no animation, yet is faithful to the book. . Quoting from the enclosed folder, "...there was no script; Miller (the director) simply typed out the dialogue from Carroll's book each day and presented it to the cast on the set, and after a few rehearsals, they would do a take." Principal characters are portrayed in human form in Victorian period costume, making full utilization of the Tenniel illustrations where possible. For example, the white rabbit (Wilfred Brambell in an outstanding portrayal) is a fussily dressed, brisk-gaited English gentleman with pocket watch, top hat, braided uniform with tails, bow-tie, white gloves, and a white fan. Alice's dress and hair style is perfectly realized.

Some of the key scenes are shortened. For example, the pool of tears leading to the caucus race (to dry off) was created by a giant Alice crying in frustration, not shown, so the sudden appearance of water is confusing. The recitation of Father Williams to the Caterpillar (an excellent Michael Redgrave) was regrettably truncated to only a verse or so. And when the Duchess throws Alice the squalling brat, it is not completely clear that the brat became a piglet only after she received it. Only someone thoroughly familiar with the original work would be able to fill in the blanks in such cases.

Another aspect of this production is the use of voice-over whispered thoughts and recitations to convey various poems, conversations with the Cheshire Cat, or Alice speaking or musing in dream conversations where her lips don't move. One must strain very hard to pick up the gist of many of these whisperings (reviewing helps), which detracts from the viewing experience. Perhaps the audio recording equipment of that day wasn't up to the job. Or more likely the diction of the persons doing the voice-overs wasn't up to the task. Yet this reviewer finally realized on subsequent viewings and after being initially annoyed, that these whisperings are an innovative way of conveying in an efficient manner elements of the book not otherwise expressed. In retrospect and because of devices like this, a surprising amount of Carroll's original work survives.

Among the best scenes are Peter Cook (superb!) as the Mad Hatter, and Leo McKern (absolutely fantastic as the Duchess!) with Avril Elgar (superb) as the Peppercook in the kitchen scene right out of the Tenniel drawings. Other characters include Michael Gough as the March Hare, Wilfred Lawson as the Dormouse, Peter Sellers as the King of Hearts, John Gielgud as the Mock Turtle, Malcolm Muggeridge as the Gryphon, John Bird as the frog footman (his performance gets progressively better with each viewing!), and a huge supporting cast of lesser players. Most characterizations are admirable, though the Queen of Hearts (Alison Leggatt, who does a pretty good job) was not quite the intimidating and threatening dominatrix this reviewer remembers. And the Cheshire Cat - alas - what a hokey disappointment! Why wasn't this crucial character portrayed by an actor just as all the other characters were?

Yet all the brilliance of this cast is barely sufficient to rescue the production from its' major and near-fatal flaw. Regrettably the young actress playing Alice (Anne-Marie Mallik) was not up to this most difficult central role, and almost succeeds in sinking the entire production. This Alice is by turns a snotty, sullen, blasé, and detached (11-year-old) girl. The director never seems to get enough of having interminable full-face close-ups of her filling the entire screen or major portions thereof, whose visage is devoid of expression or reaction and during which, little if anything else happens to advance the rest of the story. (Meanwhile all this precious screen time goes down the tubes when it could have been used so profitably elsewhere! Aarrgggghhhh!) Lewis Carroll, whose whole focus revolved around Alice, must surely have turned over in his grave.

This work was done for BBC. Using color video-tape was rejected by the director because he felt B&W camera work would better simulate a daguerreotype atmosphere characteristic of the Victorian period. (This writer's opinion is that having the Wonderland portions in color with a younger and better considered Alice, and a better Cheshire Cat, would have made this production a major classic.) Repeated viewings led this reviewer to have a progressively higher regard. Indeed, this is THE definitive version! The excellence of the satire; the cleverness of the word-play; the care the director lavished on effects and his dedication to the letter and spirit of the original work; and the highly concentrated information density (when one is not viewing Alice's complexion, that is) make this a mandatory experience for mature Lewis Carroll fans and the mature intellectually curious person. (Others need not apply.)

The DVD is well packaged in a quality case, with an enclosed three-page folder giving an interesting history of the production. Production values of picture and sound are exactly as the director intended. An optional informative voice-over commentary track by the director is also provided, as are an (un-previewed) still scene gallery and a 1903 film production.

This is the most complex movie rendering of Carroll's classic, and one of the stranger ones. It's a 1966 BBC production in black and white, and done on a shoestring budget. As a result, there's just about nothing in the way of special effects - and certainly no animal-shaped costumes for the dormouse, white rabbit, and all the others. Instead, the characters simply dress in a deliberately over-done Victorian style, probably put together by raiding the stock BBC costume closet.

But what characters! Peter Sellers (who played in other Alice movies as well) is the King of Hearts, Peter Cook is the Mad Hatter, Leo McKern is the Duchess(!), and that's just the start of this star-driven production. Ravi Shankar composed the music and performs much of it, giving an other-worldly sense that fits Carroll's dreamscape perfectly. It's a kind of dream continually on the edge of nightmare without ever quite crossing the line, the same feeling you get when watching "The Prisoner" TV series.

But Alice truly makes the story. Ann-Marie Mallik, in what may be her only acting role, was the perfect choice. She moves through the dream with all the reserve you'd expect of a browbeaten Victorian child, but with all the presence and a little insolence of a woman-child entering her teens. Although she's more observer than participant in most scenes, she conveys a quiet sense of being fully engaged in it all.

This isn't a disneyfied, silly production for children. Nor is it a surreal exaggeration like Jan Svankmajer's (which I also enjoyed). It's a serious and baffling work. In that sense, it's more true to Dodgson's original work than any other Alice I've seen. This one has my highest recommendation.

//wiredweird

What a surprise that a gem like this exists!! I had never even heard that this was created until just recently. The 4 previous reviews all have very good points so I won't go into great detail. It is a disjointed affair, but well worth the trouble to delve into. The girl chosen as Alice seems years too old for the role though. If bizarre 60's movies are not something you are into, then I would advise those people against getting it. If you like weird films like Wonderwall or shows like The Prisoner, you may be able to enjoy this film. I find it fascinating and it is highly psychedelic. There is no doubt that this is a 60's take on Alice. Incredible camerawork with much detail put into camera angles and setting really add to the surreality of this work. Leo McKern is hysterical as the Dutchess. Peter Cook and Peter Sellers have some fun with their roles as do all the cast. No one has a very large role. This looks like it was a blast to make and should entertain anyone with an open mind. I would say that it is not geared toward children as many versions of Alice are. Most little kids will be confused and possibly disturbed. This is much more fun for grown-ups. See if you can spot the Monty Python cameo.

This release of BBC-TV's 1966 black-and-white Alice in Wonderland is very fine indeed. The film is a surreal, theatrical, and dark "Alice," designed as a dream version of Victorian life - there are no animal costumes here. The caucus race is a scene in a public school, the Caterpillar is a sort of headmaster, the trial is a massive church setting, and so on. Alice herself is almost completely impassive, and rarely speaks aloud; I found myself interpreting the whole thing as an autistic girl's skewed and nonsensical view of the world around her. Despite its short length, the film takes its time, and has a very dry sense of humor; I found it endlessly fascinating once I got into it, though. It's almost hypnotic - something greatly helped by Ravi Shankar's sitar music.

The picture quality is excellent, unusual for British TV of this period. Director Jonathan Miller personally contributes an excellent commentary track, discussing the film's themes, his actors, and why he felt a darker "Alice" needed to be made. The disc is rounded out with a short picture gallery, and a real surprise: the first-ever "Alice" film, a 10-minute silent from 1903, with commentary. Really my only complaint is the lack of subtitles for the feature film; Alice's own dialogue is frequently whispered, and to the casual ear can be hard to decipher. Otherwise, this is a great film with an excellent DVD presentation that demonstrates quality over quantity. I recommend it very highly.

I really vacillated over whether to give this 3 or 4 stars. I've watched the film twice now (with and without the director commentary) and I can say that I do not fall into the "this film is genius" camp. What pushed it into four stars was the bonus features: the 1903 Hepworth version and the "Alice" docudrama (more about that in a bit). I should add that I did not buy this through Amazon, and apparently some of the reviewers who did got a disc that was not the Miller movie.

Never having seen the film before, I found it too much a product of its time. Much like Austin Powers (the character, not the films) it's frozen in the '60s. The Ravi Shankar music, Alice walking around in a drug-addled like haze, the long straight hair parted in the middle, my sustained impression was that this was the "flower power" Alice and it just seemed incredibly dated. The croquet match sequence reminded me more than a little of the grape-stomping scene in Frankenheimer's "Seconds" (which came out the same year).

After watching it the second time with the director's commentary turned on, I can see that I wasn't too far off. It's amazing how close some of the hippie/flower child counterculture values of the '60s matched the Victorian satire of exactly 100 years earlier. I don't agree at all with Miller's choice for Alice. Listening to how he chose her seems like he had a creepily Dodgson-like infatuation with the actress. He put a casting notice in the local papers and received hundreds of photographs of young girls hoping to get the part. Apparently, after he saw Ann-Marie's photograph he never even called in a second candidate. Whatever he saw in her didn't translate to the screen, at least not for me. I know she was supposed to be a detached, dream-like observer, but to me she came across as almost catatonic. There was no interaction at all with any of the characters (you do interact in your dreams at times), and her delivery of lines was so deadly wooden that it was like a script girl doing the read-back for other actors to play off of.

I will give props to all of the famous actors who appeared for apparently a pittance. Their performances were, while understated, the best parts of the film...once you got used to the lack of costume. As others have said, you have to know the story going in to know what's going on.

About those bonus features. The reason I bought this is that, as a huge Tim Burton fan I had recently picked up his new "Alice" film (I missed it in the theaters). After watching it, I pulled out my musty VHS copy of "Dreamchild" for a viewing with my wife and daughter. I got this disc since it looked like an interesting counterpoint to that film, especially when I noticed that it had its own Dodgson/Alice Liddell docudrama included. As I watched it, I was astonished to find that most of the set pieces were IDENTICAL to the flashback scenes in "Dreamchild." Checking the credits, I was not surprised to find that Dennis Potter was the writer on both of them. Also, as a silent film buff, the inclusion of the 1903 version was almost worth the price of the disc by itself! I'm sure that with the digital processing techniques available today that some of the horrible degradation of the nitrate print can be repaired. One can dream.

WARNING for those who want to see Johnny Depp. Of course, Tim Burton might love this version. Might not be as twisted...
I only heard of this movie because Jonathan Miller was the director. An actor/comedian (Beyond the Fringe) among many other things, he captures a psychological look at the "children's story". This one gets the reputation of not being so child-like.
The actors listed are...Peter Cook, Peter Sellers, Alan Bennett, John Bird, John Gielgud, Michael Redgrave, Leo McKern, Wilfrid Brambell, Wilfrid Lawson, Wilfrid Lawson, Malcolm Muggeridge, and the unknown actor Anne Marie Mallik plays Alice.
Music by Ravi Shankar...
According to the version from 2003, Dr. Miller said in the commentary that he revisited this story and tried to capture what he had felt when he first read the book. Images of obscured characters which give one a tainted feeling remains throughout this movie. Of course, that's my perspective. Jonathan Miller would transition scenes very often in order to gain that feeling as if you as a person was walking through a dream. You will experience this movie as if you just dreamt it up. It's not supposed to make sense. Don't bother to connect the dots . . .
There are no costumes to cover up famous actors' faces. They are seen in complete view as it is strictly the acting that creates the characters from the book. I feel this movie is the closest to the story than any other Wonderland movie. The only things in this version that are altered are the genius improv lines in which John Bird, Peter Cook, and Peter Sellers have said on the spot of filming. The rest is true to the Victorian book. This is a very artistic movie and many should watch to appreciate the mood that is set.

Did i mention that Eric Idle is in this also?!

This 1966 BBC-TV version of Lewis Carroll's classic story is, no doubt, one of the more strange and unusual versions of this tale that one is ever likely to see on film. Filmed in black and white, and given a Victorian Gothic look; director Jonathan Miller voted against the usual presentation of talking animals and flashy visuals. Instead, he presents a Wonderland firmly rooted in reality as seen through the distorted vision of a child's dream. Instead of a fuzzy White Rabbit hopping hurriedly to keep his appointment, we get a fussy, hyper, and wild-eyed Victorian gentleman in white top hat and coat with bristling mutton-chop sideburns and mustache. Also, some of Alice's dialogue is presented as a voice-over, as if we're reading her thoughts. Alice herself rarely looks anyone in the eye and the conversations are very fractured. Even her classic conversation with the Cheshire Cat leaves a sense of discomfort as we only see Alice, and not the Cat,during the scene. Indeed, this Wonderland is a dark and sinister place compared to the brightly colored versions of Disney and Hallmark.

For the most part, the cast of this version reads like a Who's Who of British theatre and film. Peter Cook makes for a delightfully daft Mad Hatter, while Peter Sellers makes for a loopy King of Hearts. Sir John Gielgud is a dignified Mock Turtle, while Sir Michael Redgrave is a wonderfully pedantic Caterpillar. Anne-Marie Mallik is solid as a somewhat distant Alice. Leo McKern is definitely fun to watch as he cavorts in drag as the ugly Duchess. Ravi Shankar's score perfectly captures the mood of this dark and wonderful film.

This DVD also has insightful commentary by the director, as well as an early 1906 silent film version of the story. Overall, this is an excellent film version that captures the darker elements of Carroll's classic tale and is definitely worth your while. However, this version might not appeal to youngsters who may be more inclined to the Disney or Hallmark versions.

This version of AIW movie was beautifully hallucinogenic and beautifully photographed in B&W, the music by Ravi Shankar was wonderful and there were some standout performances, especially Peter Cook's as the Mad Hatter. Overall, however, a kind of dry and emotionless atmosphere prevailed, oddly bleak against all the silliness and merriment of Carroll's words. This was brought to the fore by the incredibly detatched, emotionless performance of Anne-Marie Mallik as Alice. So it gets only 3 stars.

The play Alice (written by Dennis Potter & directed by Gareth Davies), on the dvd as an extra, gets 5 stars however and is well worth the price of the dvd. (The 1985 film Dreamchild is really a remake, somewhat re-imagined, of Alice.) It's presented as it was broadcast on BBC and it is brilliant. The play is full of emotion. The character of Dodgson/Carroll is brilliantly portrayed and his intentions regarding Alice are left to the viewer to sort out. He appeared to have a kind of childlike innocence about him (as befitting the creator of the fantastic book) yet some, particularly Alice's mother, were deeply suspicious of his motives. Anyway, it's a great play/movie, a must-see.

This is the most intelligent of all the 'Alice' adaptations. Even though it was filmed for BBC TV, it was filmed in 35mm B&W,using deep focus, wide-angle cinematography. A technology usually associated with theatrical feature films. The result is the best cinematography of all the 'Alice' films.
The musical score by Ravi Shankar is hypnotic and mesmerizing. Jonathan Miller's direction is daft and subtle and calls to mind the offbeat films of Richard Lester at that period.
And the mad tea party. It's the best and most subtle of all the Hatter tea parties on film. It's truly mad and crazy, and it's done without special effect gimmicks or cute little songs.Peter Cook is the best of all the Hatters I've seen and I've seen over a dozen in just film alone. He is truly mad. Not a cute,sweet mad like Johnny Depp, but a disturbing and real sort of mad.
This film is a great adaptation and a beautiful work of cinema.
James(the 'Alice' fan)
Dean just has the account