 |
| From http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e5/Alice-poster-1972.jpg |
Dir. William Sterling
Having discussed films inspired
by
Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures In Wonderland (1865),
through
Roman Polanski's What? (1972), its befitting to actually
cover an adaptation of the story. With both the story and its sequel
Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice
Found There (1871), I've only experienced them within the last year or so.
Material adapted, referencing or inspired by the stories though have been
something I, along with many, have grown up with. My first encounter was
probably with the
Disney adaptation,
but as I desire to find as many adaptations of the story as possible, it has
been adapted in various ways from a
Jan
Svankmajer film with stop motion animation to porn. What stands out with
the stories, within this drastically fluctuating body of versions, fan depictions
and takes, is how unconventional they are and how good
Carroll was as a writer to make this possible. Nonsensical material
you could read to a child, but its developed as an obsession for many adults,
myself now part of this grouping, because they provoke so many bold, elaborate
ideas and have inspired numerous people. An absurdity, that thankfully
translates into this adaptation, where all the parts in depicting it are as
important to
Carroll in showing the
strange. The visual metaphors - playing cards, cats - that anyone can
understand but are skewered. The symbolic and mathematical references. The
dialogue full of puns and incomprehensible phrases that become sonic poetry,
why
Jabberwocky, his famous poem, is
as famous. Other readings have been added too, possible because its open to
many interpretations in its nature, a simplistic journey narrative to both
stories that are both about the individual scenarios that Alice encounters on
the way. From the clear satirical tone in the stories - like the farcical court
room trial that takes place in the story - to the reading added by readers of
sexual overtones, allowing British comic book writer
Alan Moore and American seventies pornography to be awkward
bedfellows. You can adapt it light heartedly, like in this film, or as a disturbing
work like
American McGee has.
Alice's Adventure In Wonderland is a pretty faithful take on the
original, more well known Carroll
story. Alice (Fiona Fullerton) falls
asleep and ends up in Wonderland, full of size changing foods, mock turtles, a
decapitation obsessed Queen of Hearts and enough multicolour, psychedelic
foliage that it's no wonder Jefferson
Airplane were inspired to link the white rabbit to LSD. Probably the draw
for this one, before viewing it, is that, with the all-star British cast, it
includes Peter Sellers, Dudley Moore and Spike Milligan. What makes the existence of Alice's Adventures In Wonderland greater for me too is that it's a
piece of British art that is timeless, can still inspired people and does so
while being a perfect proto-example of one of my favourite areas of artistry,
absurdist and surrealist works. Surrealistic artists, especially the British contingent,
praised Carroll for preceding them,
and anyone, whether the result is good or not, from Poland's Roman Polanski to a Japanese manga
artist, can take a crack at using these stories iconography to create
intentionally odd and weird works. So what a better thing to do, despite a
faithful adaptation being out-of-place next to sex comedies and the likes of
Get Carter (1971), then to adapt it
within a heyday of its offspring, absurdist comedy that Sellers, Moore and Milligan were part of? Particularly as Sellers is the March Hair and Moore a narcoleptic Dormouse to the Mad
Hatter played by Robert Helpmann.
 |
| From http://static2.dmcdn.net/static/video/680/799/51997086:jpeg_preview_large.jpg?20121109133833 |
Unfortunately this faithful
adaptation is one that treats its source material with utmost care and respect
as a national treasure...which means that it's too precious for its own good
and ignores the greatest virtue of the stories. Even as quaint, Victorian
English literature, the greatest virtue of the Alice stories are that they're anarchic
and are madder in tone than a box of frogs, more greater in these areas in that
it's done with a precise wit, whimsy and solid structures to the plotting. Most
egregious to the story's original tone is that this is a musical, songs and the
swelling orchestral backing behind them abrupt and too many in appearance, all
really sounding the same. The original story is light hearted, but it's
completely ridiculous too such a pronounced end. There is an unbridled,
uninhibited nature to the stories that makes the polite, gentle tone of the
film a betrayal of the original spirit. One where, along with being a mere
bystander, has Alice back talking to the populous of Wonderland and nothing
makes sense just to be purposely arbitrary to her. If there is a relief from
this, it's that remnants of the original tone thankfully still exist. To do a
faithful adaptation of the story, you have to include some of its best virtues
without question. With its brightly coloured, overexaggerated and artificial looking
Wonderland with giant flowers and tiny doors, it's another example of how the
production designers are unsung heroes who stand out even in awful films. In
fact the whole wholesome tone of the film becomes fittingly bizarre in aspects,
especially the animal costumes actors have to wear and the obvious fake,
shot-at- Shepperton-Studio look of
the setting. If the film dampens the virtues of the story, that doesn't mean it's
completely drained out. The moments of rampant verbal punning, bickering about
the lack of logic and tangents, from the original story, are all amusing, the
Mad Hatter and his compatriots stealing the show because of the actors playing
them.
Yes, it's bad that this wraps the
original material up in cotton wool, but it still survives in some way despite
this. This is why I enjoyed the film nonetheless, but I viewed it as
entertaining especially as an example of someone else adapting Carroll's work in its own way, faithful
adaptation or not. So far the best version has, paradoxically, been the one
that's taken the most liberties while still retaining the tone perfectly, Jan Svankmajer's Alice (1988), reviewed a long time ago on this blog if you search
the tool bars. I guess not having to work with something that's your own
national heritage gives you advantage. I'll see if this is true as more Alices
go through more Wonderlands in my future viewings.
 |
| From http://cinemanostalgia.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Alice-White-Rabbit.jpg |
