DVDizzy Forum

Walt Disney himself didn't like his own materpiece weird?

He also didn't liked the character of Peter Pan.

Jack Skellington wrote:I read somewhere that Walt disney never really liked his version of Alice in Wonderland, why is this ?

SwordInTheStone777 wrote:Walt Disney himself didn't like his own materpiece weird?

Walt didn't want to make the film to begin with. Even though he was a huge fan of the book (or books if you include Looking Glass), he felt it wouldn't lend itself well to film because of how episodic it was. He also was afraid of it because of how famous the novel was. With fairy tales, he could be true to the basic elements everyone knows and add his own material to bridge them together. With Alice, the book was too detailed and well-known for him to put his mark on it without affending the Carroll purists. Other people at the studio kept pestering him to go through with it, though, so he did. During production, Walt kept suggesting ideas to add more conflict and warmth to the story (I believe he wanted to add the White Knight, decrease his age, and make him a romantic interest for Alice; I also think that for a while, Dinah was going to come to Wonderland with Alice to give her someone to interact with consistently), but people would always tell him, "You can't tamper with a classic." He basically just let the story people do their thing and didn't really get involved much anymore, something that would become increasingly common once he made Disneyland his main focus.

When the film came out, Walt hated it. He thought it was too cold and too outrageous. He said that for every laugh, there must be a tear, and that while Alice was heavy on laughs, it was short on tears. Even the story team and animators didn't care for it much. Each sequence in the film was assigned to a different animator for both animation and story purposes. Eventually it became a competition as to who could create the zaniest material, and that's also why each segment has a different flair than the other.

Walt thought so little of the film that he aired it on TV three years later as the first film shown as part of the Disneyland show. While this is nothing for us today, back then it was a big deal. Disney refused to show most of his films on TV, particularly the animated ones, saying that it cheapened their luster and that theatrical re-releases are where the profits roll in. Alice was the exception. He still had a fondness for the story (though not the film), which is why Alice in Wonderland got two rides at Disneyland. Some people, though, consider Alice to be the beginning of the end. After that film, Walt started participating less and less in each animated film, and some people think it's because the rocky production turned him off from animation.

Disneykid wrote:

Walt didn't want to make the film to begin with. Even though he was a huge fan of the book (or books if you include Looking Glass), he felt it wouldn't lend itself well to film because of how episodic it was. He also was afraid of it because of how famous the novel was. With fairy tales, he could be true to the basic elements everyone knows and add his own material to bridge them together. With Alice, the book was too detailed and well-known for him to put his mark on it without affending the Carroll purists. Other people at the studio kept pestering him to go through with it, though, so he did. During production, Walt kept suggesting ideas to add more conflict and warmth to the story (I believe he wanted to add the White Knight, decrease his age, and make him a romantic interest for Alice; I also think that for a while, Dinah was going to come to Wonderland with Alice to give her someone to interact with consistently), but people would always tell him, "You can't tamper with a classic." He basically just let the story people do their thing and didn't really get involved much anymore, something that would become increasingly common once he made Disneyland his main focus.

When the film came out, Walt hated it. He thought it was too cold and too outrageous. He said that for every laugh, there must be a tear, and that while Alice was heavy on laughs, it was short on tears. Even the story team and animators didn't care for it much. Each sequence in the film was assigned to a different animator for both animation and story purposes. Eventually it became a competition as to who could create the zaniest material, and that's also why each segment has a different flair than the other.

Walt thought so little of the film that he aired it on TV three years later as the first film shown as part of the Disneyland show. While this is nothing for us today, back then it was a big deal. Disney refused to show most of his films on TV, particularly the animated ones, saying that it cheapened their luster and that theatrical re-releases are where the profits roll in. Alice was the exception. He still had a fondness for the story (though not the film), which is why Alice in Wonderland got two rides at Disneyland. Some people, though, consider Alice to be the beginning of the end. After that film, Walt started participating less and less in each animated film, and some people think it's because the rocky production turned him off from animation.

That's really strange to hear that from Walt Disney. Alice In Wonderland is one of his most famous movie, as well as chracters.

We will see just how much leeway Tim B. gets doing the 3D version of Alice. Disney has asked other creative people to "throttle back" on the darkness before ("Something Wicked this Way Comes" is a classic example. Still, it's another class project for him and could be quite a memorable work.

Has Tim started doing any work on this movie already, if not we might not see this movie for awhile do to the writers stirke.

SwordInTheStone777 wrote:Has Tim started doing any work on this movie already, if not we might not see this movie for awhile do to the writers stirke.

The strike won't affect this movie at all. The script's been done for months, now, and filming begins either January or February. Now that I think about it, the strike probably IS affecting this movie, but not in the way you'd think. It seems Disney is rushing this film's production so that they have something fairly major to release in between The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian and The Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (the latter of which HAS been post-poned due to the strike).

The strike isn't over so, they can't go into production yet. This strike looks like it's going to go in the first half of 2008, so unless they have the cast are put together, then this movie is not going to be made, because no one will cross the picket lines, at least you not suppose to cross their lines.

umm, the strike is pretty close to being over at this point. they made a lot of progress on Thursday and Friday. the studios have set up the proposal, and the guild is now looking over the new contracts. they want untill the 5th to analyze the new contracts to make sure there's nothing fishy going on. but from the looks of it, unless they find some hidden loophole, I expect them to make nice once again soon.

I hate to say this, but from what I read every day about the writers stike, is that Tuesday they're going to have another get togther, but they have read the "new proposal" and aren't happy with it, so they most likely aren't going to take it.

oh? I guess I'm not as up to speed as I thought. do you happen to have a link to recent reports on this?

Burton briefly mentioned this film while doing a press junket for Sweeney Todd:

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.ph ... 3&id=46213

He doesn't really tell us anything new, but there are two interesting nuggets. One is that it seems he's going to try to connect all the episodes together to form a cohesive narrative (if I'm inferring correctly). I'd really like him to be able to do that since that's the #1 criticism people have of Alice as a story: it's too episodic. I just hope he doesn't try to tack on a moral to it. I'd prefer he simply connect the events via some sort of adventure/quest plot line.

The other tidbit is that the article refers to this by the book's full title: Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Makes me wonder if that's just the writer of the article calling it that or if that's actually going to be the name of the film. If it's the latter, that would be our first confirmation as to whether this is sticking with just the first book or combining both. Either way, I hope casting announcements and concept art aren't too far away.

I think Sweeny Todd was the last project he got completed before the writers strike happend.

Well, I don't know if Burton means he'll use some plot to connect all the events together. He said they just never felt whole, they never felt like they were all one story. So perhaps, somehow, merely mood, characterization, or amazing directing skills will do that. Or there may be some spin to make the adventures seem like they are apart of something, like the events reflect Alice's mood or all of the events seem to be heading somewhere, since Alice is someone from the outside world, she is the most unusual guest they can learn about/mess with, or they could try to convince her that she belongs with them...and they wouldn't necessarily have to change the events, just how they're played out, how the Wonderlandians act, what effect they have on Alice.

Director Tim Burton, who will helm a new film adaptation of Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland stories, said that he will stay true to the stories' essence.

Stories? I thought it was one book with one story, unless it means Tim is going to try both books, and thus both stories...

Disney has now announced a March 19, 2010 release date. I'm both pleased and confused at this. I'm pleased because I was afraid that if Disney released this in the summer or around Thanksgiving/Christmas, it'd be overshadowed by other mainstream films. Giving it a March spot just a couple of weeks before easter will give it the time in the spotlight that it needs since this is a time of year that's usually rather slow.

I'm also confused, though, because this project supposedly started filming now (or is just about to) with filming wrapping in May. So either those plans changed, or the animation in this film is going to be so jaw-droppingly amazing that they need nearly two years of post-production. The second option doesn't seem likely to me, and I was already getting suspicious of a filming taking place now considering we've heard no casting news. My first thought was that Burton would do his Frankenweenie remake first, but Disney hasn't given a release date for that one, where as they did with Alice. I guess Burton just needs a vacation. At least I can be guaranteed that this production will be given the time and care it needs.

And oh my gosh, I just realized that this is coming out two months before The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and four months before Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. 2010 is going to rock. Hard.

2010 will be the best movie year in a while for me!

2010 theatrical release, 2011 DVD release as part of 60th Anniversary Alice in Wonderland franchise perhaps (including DVD re-release of animated movie)? If it happens, I have no idea, I'm just guessing.

Disney Duster wrote:Well, I don't know if Burton means he'll use some plot to connect all the events together. He said they just never felt whole, they never felt like they were all one story. So perhaps, somehow, merely mood, characterization, or amazing directing skills will do that. Or there may be some spin to make the adventures seem like they are apart of something, like the events reflect Alice's mood or all of the events seem to be heading somewhere, since Alice is someone from the outside world, she is the most unusual guest they can learn about/mess with, or they could try to convince her that she belongs with them...and they wouldn't necessarily have to change the events, just how they're played out, how the Wonderlandians act, what effect they have on Alice.

Director Tim Burton, who will helm a new film adaptation of Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland stories, said that he will stay true to the stories' essence.

Stories? I thought it was one book with one story, unless it means Tim is going to try both books, and thus both stories...

he could be taking elements from through the looking glass,
tweedle dum and tweedle dee perhaps?

Personally, I'm excited about this film, it will be interesting to see Burton do a Disney film in 3D.

SwordInTheStone777 wrote:2009net wrote:

I was searching for something else, but came across this post from long long ago about sequels.

long long ago I wrote:
Alice in Wonderland 2: Alice in Bedlam

Unfortunately, Alice decided to tell all her family and friends about her strange time in Wonderland. However, in mid 18th century Britain, refined young women were not allowed to talk about odd smoking caterpillars, size changing mushrooms, vanishing grinning cats or singing walruses and carpenters. However, a bigger crime is that all of her accounts of her time in Wonderland are incredibly episodic and even when all the accounts she tells are collected and placed in order, they have no relationship to each other at all; thus convincing everyone that she is delusional.

Reluctantly, her family signs the paper. Alice is sent to Bedlam – the infamous asylum. There locked away night and day with nobody for company Alice begins to hallucinate again. However, this time her delusions are cruel mockeries of her enforced captivity.

Now the size changing mushrooms simply make her bigger and bigger, emphasising her confinement as she has to squeeze into her cell, or they make her so small that nobody can hear her when she attempts to protest her sanity. The grinning Cheshire Cat is dressed like the asylum guards, as it teases and torments her, always beaming with pleasure at her misery. The Mad Hatter and Mad March Hare are fellow inmates, encouraging her to descend even deeper into madness.

Finally, she hallucinates having her head chopped off by the Queen of Hearts, while at the same time she is undergoing a lobotomy by the asylum's head doctor.

The film ends with Alice slouched in the corner of her cell, drool escaping from her lips and a happy smile on her face, as she vaguely remembers her exciting time in Wonderland.


Now to me, that sounds more like a Burton film.

That sounds just disturbing. Burton wouldn't do something like that, Disney would deem it to scary, that and Burton could get fired again like he was after making Frankenwinee.

Pardon my ignorance, but I never knew that Tim Burton was fired. I thought he just left to do other projects. Why excatly was he fired?