Watch Alice in Wonderland For Free

Awesome Movie

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Blistering performances.

This adaptation of the "Alice" stories is one of my favorites; for one thing, this Hallmark has simply beautiful music. The enchantment, and occasional unease, of Wonderland is masterfully captured in the score, and the transformation of several of Carroll's famous poems into songs is brilliantly done. For another thing, the sets, scenery, and costumes fairly glow (in some cases literally), and the special effects are simply dazzling, giving everything a sense of pure magic.Tina Majorino is an exquisite Alice...the backstory, involving conquering ones fears, has been a subject of debate for many. The "Wizard of Oz"-esque opening/closing of the film are the same. While these are far off from what is in Carroll's work, I don't think they get in the way too much, and they give more of a purpose for Alice to search for the Beautiful Garden, aside from simple curiosity.These things aside, there are a few major problems with this film: first of all, this is one of the most accurate versions of "Alice" made to date...and, at the same time, it isn't. "Moral" values aside, this film retains at least 90% of Carroll's dialogue, but omits several poems/songs, and adds things in...not all of which make sense. The Mad Tea Party and Tweedledee & Tweedledum scene are the biggest culprits of this adding-in and taking-out problem. That being said, all of the characters present in Carroll's original story are present here, including Pat the Gardener and the Giant Puppy...two characters/scenes that seem awfully rare in adaptations of the story. Not only this, but this film still manages to add in scenes/characters from "Through the Looking-Glass," which many films before and after have done, with varying results; the transitions between Wonderland and Looking-Glass Land aren't seamless, but aren't so abrupt and unexplained that it throws the audience off course, either.Some of the actors – Robbie Coltrane and Norm Ferguson as the Tweedles, Peter Ustinov and Pete Postlethwaite as the Walrus and the Carpenter, Martin Short as the Mad Hatter, etc. – seem almost perfect for the roles they've been cast in. Jason Flymyng is remarkable as the Knave of Hearts, making my list as my favorite portrayal of the character yet, and Christopher Lloyd is one of my favorite White Knights, second only to Matt Frewer's portrayal in the SyFy miniseries. However, other roles aren't so well filled out: Whoopi Goldberg has the Cheshire Cat's grin...but that's all she has. The personality is all wrong, and I frankly get bored of her very fast. Simon Russell Beale isn't too bad as the King of Hearts...but the character comes across much too menacing, and, while still second fiddle to the Queen, this King seems far more cruel than I think the character should be played...but that's just me. The Duchess, by contrast, is much too friendly, acting "chummy" with Alice right from the beginning...although her Cook is fittingly raucous and mercurial, and the Frog Footman is, as Alice herself puts it, "perfectly idiotic," just as he should be.The creatures created by Jim Henson's Creature Shop aren't badly done at all (although the March Hare looks more like the March Donkey), and make some of the best characters here. However, they cause a few problems, too: some of the characters that are animals are these "creatures," while still others are just people, dressed in normal clothes, whose outfits give the impression of the animal they play. (Bill the Lizard, for example, does not wear a lizard costume, but a green "scaly" gardener's suit.) Then there's Gene Wilder – who isn't bad as the Mock Turtle, but doesn't come across tearful enough, and has lines that come across sounding a little bit contrived – who is neither one nor the other: he wears a full-out Mock Turtle costume. So...what are these characters that aren't puppets? Animals? People? A bit of both? It seems so disparate that it's a tad hard to keep up.The last problem, and probably the biggest, is, ironically, also one of this film's strong points: the special effects; when I said they were dazzling, I meant it. They ARE wonderful effects, but between glowing Caterpillars that explode into swarms of butterflies, cloud-beast Monstrous Crows, Hatters that can stretch their bodies like rubber, Duchesses that glide across the floor, Alice's growth (and shrink) spells, and Card Guards that turn, without warning, into normal playing cards, it gets hard to "get in the spirit of things" and not just sit back and enjoy the eye candy, so to speak.All things told, this is a spellbinding take on "Alice," and if the sometimes odd portrayals of the characters don't scare you off, and the effects don't become too much, you should find a lot to enjoy in this film. I have now finished my rambling.

I am not entirely sure whether this version is the best version of the book, as I grew up on the Disney film. The book is a real delight, it is admittedly oddball, but it is charming and visionary with memorable colourful characters. That is the same for Through the Looking Glass, I do prefer Alice in Wonderland as a book, but Through the Looking Glass does have a nice narrative and the characters still have their appeal.Back on target, this TV version is not bad at all. Actually it is decent. The length is rather excessive though making some scenes drag on a bit, and as sweet as it was the subplot about Alice being asked to sing at a party I had mixed feelings about. While it meant that Alice goes on a sort of journey in the film character-wise, it felt somewhat unnecessary. Plus in terms of performances, while I enjoyed the acting on the whole, Whoopi Goldberg as the Cheshire Cat disappointed me. She has the grin and her costume was wonderful, but she should have had more screen time.However, there is lots to enjoy here. For a TV movie, the visuals are pretty amazing. The sets are really colourful, the landscapes are vivid, the special effects are fairly impressive and the costumes are visionary. And I found the music surprisingly memorable, quite sweet really. I know people have complained of the screenplay being poor, personally I didn't find that. I enjoyed spotting the quotes lifted from the books and the actors seemed to having fun with it. Some of the added lines didn't quite work as well, but they were entertaining. Likewise with the merging of the two books, I for one didn't find that a problem. The director also does a good job making Wonderland as magical, as odd and as dreamlike as it should be, and some scenes were very well directed, especially the Mock Turtle sequence, the Caccus race, the Hatter's tea party, the Walrus and the Carpenter and of course the courtroom scene.The acting is also very enjoyable. Like Goldberg, Christopher Lloyd as the White Knight could've done with more screen time, but he does a very good job with what he has. Ben Kingsley is entertaining as Major Caterpillar, even if he did have some of the film's weakest dialogue, he delivers very well. Shiela Hancock, while she has been better, was fun as the Cook, a lot of shouting but hey she was fun. Tina Majorino I had no problem with as Alice, I sometimes find Alice in film adaptations bland but Majorino isn't bland, she is appealing and likable. Peter Ustinov is a perfect Walrus, likewise with Pete Postlethwaite as the Carpenter. Gene Wilder does fine also as the melancholy mock turtle, he started off a tad uncomfortable, no wonder with his costume as they are horrible to wear, but once he gets into the role he starts enjoying himself more. My favourite performances though were Miranda Richardson as a suitably shrill Queen of Hearts, Simon Russell Beale in a amusing turn as the King of Hearts and Martin Short as the somewhat eccentric Mad Hatter. Jason Flemying was also a riot as the Knave of Hearts as were Robbie Coltrane and George Wendt as Tweedledee and Tweedledum.Overall, flawed but perfectly decent made for TV adaptation. 7/10 Bethany Cox

My Take: A visually-entertaining made-for-TV effort.When I watched this movie when I was a kid, I really loved it. And it didn't differ when I grew up. I still love this movie. It's so abundant in ideas and imaginative wonder, also sharing the imagery of Lewis Carroll's classic story. It stars a very familiar cast. Their's Miranda Richardson (Queen of Hearts), Christopher Lloyd (White Knight), Ben Kingsley (Sgt. Caterpillar), Robbie Coltrane (Ned Tweddledum), Martin Short (Mad Hatter), Gene Wilder (Mock Turtle), Pete Postletwaite (Carpenter), Peter Ustinov (Walrus) and of course, Whoopi Goldberg as the mysterious Cheshire Cat. Tina Majorino is perfect as Alice, with a fine British accent to fit her role. I remember seeing her younger in Kevin Costner's "Waterworld", but she was quite memorable, for me, in this film. The strange creatures and make-up effects are great too, as supplied by the artists at Jim Henson's Creature Shop. Not the best in a long line of 'Alice' adaptations, but it's curious settings and trippy characters is faithful to the pages of Carroll's classic story. TV movie rating: ***1/2 out of 5.

To the person who compared this production to the Disney animation and was disappointed: you only have yourself to blame. I imagine that you took great joy waiting in endless lines for the spinning tea cup and "Small World" rides at Disneyworldland.This was an amazing film with an amazing cast that didn't cater to John or Jane Popcorn and their 2.5 children.If you have the attention span of a gnat you'll hate this movie. If you think that Lewis Carroll is the guy in accounting, you'll hate this movie.If, on the other hand, you enjoy cinema and want to give your kids a respite from saccharine shows, you'll enjoy this treat.