Good movie but grossly overrated

Good concept, poorly executed.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

As an Alice in Wonderland fan, I thought this was a good interpretation of the sequel Through the Looking Glass.I thought this film definitely had the atmosphere of the original novel. And although she is too old, Kate Beckinsale, I think, looked good as Alice and I thought she acted the character very well.It follows the book mostly well, except they skipped "The Lion and the Unicorn" chapter in this film and just moved onto the "It's My Own Invention" chapter after Alice was talking to both the White King and his messenger Haigha. In the scene when Alice goes into the dark shop before she meets Humpty Dumpty, the White Queen didn't turn into a sheep, although there were shots in that scene of a sheep.If you want to look for a good adaptation of Through the Looking Glass, here is one to watch. As a fan myself, I rate it 10 out of 10.

Clear yet subtle, funny and sophisticated in its apparent simplicity: an excellent rendition of Carroll's own quirky humor, and vastly entertaining. A fine cast, appropriate staging, and a literary pace combine to make this an outstanding film. Would that it were available on DVD!

I taped this for my four year old daughter, who is obsessed with the Disney version and was watching it twice a day if I let her. This was a charming, wonderful change. The actress playing Alice is fantastic, she is really like the character, even though she is an adult. I was shocked that she was also Darlene in "Brokedown Palace" ...she really can play a wide range. This movie is very aesthetically beautiful to watch. It's fun watching humans play the animals and picking out who is whom.

Without infringing on the IMDb guidelines, can I just suggest that this film is a disappointing visualisation of the greatest book ever written? Lewis Carroll's masterpiece is too mercurial to depict - taken out of its literary context, its ideas, incidents and characters simply don't make sense. Its humour and traumas are literary and philosophical. The filmmakers fail to adapt forms, instead relying on swathes of dialogue.Different film styles are used to try and disrupt normality, a la Carroll, but the incoherent script, uncertain acting and muffled diction only grate. There is no sense of narrative momentum (even if only to be subverted), and targets are missed because it is unclear what they are. Changing the book's view from that of a child to a woman renders the whole exercise redundant. Graver still is the unwillingness to trust the audience - the dream/reality ambiguity, crucial to the book's meaning, is too clearcut. The colours and set design can be extremely beautiful though.