My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 03/2005

October 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

« Strike a Blow for Families | Main | Art Rulz »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54ecb4e39883301310fddc9ac970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Alice in Disneyland:

Comments

Jeff Hendrix

Disney's Prince Caspian, left me - for all the unrelenting noise and spectacle - completely unmoved throughout

Perhaps we had this experience because Prince Caspian was Peter-Jacksonized - rewritten to near unrecognizability when compared with Lewis's actual story. Peter going fistacuffs in the London tube; Peter and Caspian nearly going at it as rivals in Narnia (!); Caspian and Susan romantically interwoven ...(_!!!).

This all was like Faramir nearly handing Frodo and the ring over to his father. Never happened in LOTR; any more than Aragorn ending "negotiations" with the mouthpiece of Sauron by lopping off his head in a blind strike. Hmm.

If Disney wants to move hearts and perhaps pocketbooks, they'd best not try to improve Lewis via focus groups and marketing studies. Did a demfine job on the first movie (TLWW). You'd think they'd notice.

M.B.

Your comments on the Jabberwock remind of how I felt about seeing the Balrog in Jackson's LOTR films. It was somehow less impressive on screen than it had been in my imagination in reading the books.

Paul

We found the Alice miniseries a much better "updated" Alice (I think it was Syfy that did it?)

Or American McGee's Alice, which is a PC game that fully embraces the macabre.

The Looking Glass War books even look better.

Alice just didn't seem herself in Burton's version....

Shakespeare's Cobbler the ever loginner forgetter who needs to sync all his blog IDs

"Your comments on the Jabberwock remind of how I felt about seeing the Balrog in Jackson's LOTR films. It was somehow less impressive on screen than it had been in my imagination in reading the books."
There are places in the book where things are described as being not quite able to be seen, not in an out-of-view sense or a slightly transparent sense but as in slightly beyond the ordinary reach of the senses. It would be impossible to do in a movie because movies work directly with the senses, whereas what the book was asking of us was to imagine having a touch of ESP. One might, however, attempt it in the style of Malacandrian historical carvings -- but, that sort of mythos-allusion is not movie style, now is it?

The comments to this entry are closed.