C'era una volta nel Paese delle Meraviglie

Not only is this (admittedly) spin-off series cleverly written, plus a cast that doesn't look Hollywood mannequin-esque, but is wonderful to listen to and look at, and it manages, as few old-school networks do, to make more quality-driven T.V. as is now being delivered on cable channels! Thank goodness that a mainstream, non-cable network has the proverbial balls to air such an engaging new series!!!! The lead, Alice, is refreshingly cast and portrayed by a skilled actress who, physiologically, does NOT (thankfully) look like just another robotic or plastic model, This series has major promise in terms of quality, client writing and performance, which leads me to believe based on extensive experience with decades of mainline 3-network TV. that this series might not survive!

I've only watched half the first episode so far, but this features an Alice who really does things. A lot of the asylum scenes seem reminiscent of American McGee's Alice, and she's just the sort of dish -- erm, girl -- to spice up a story to perfection. Not like the weak Alice of Tim Burton's film, this is a girl who's willing to muck in and fight, to take charge of her own life, to be more than just a damsel in distress (or a damsel in dis dress, although she does wear some pretty ones).

CGI in anything relating to Wonderland is of course going to be critical. I've seen the full gamut - openly cheesy, nice try but the tech's just not there, fairly good but flawed - and this is far from terrible. I wouldn't expect perfection, partly because everyone's idea of perfect is different. It's easily adequate.

I wasn't sure what to think when I saw that there was a spin off of "Once Upon a Time". I was initially skeptical of that show, but it grew on me. Maybe Disney just can't resist the tie-in to all those potential money-making cartoons of theirs already out there.

It's not bad, although the initial scenes of Alice in the asylum reminded me very strongly of the beginning of "Return to Oz". The brief scene in Storybrooke at the start was a bit useless, but I found the actors to all be quite likable, oh yay, more actors from Lost, and wow, doesn't that Red Queen have some lips! It will be interesting as time goes by (provided Disney/ABC doesn't cancel it after 3 episodes like they do most everything else) to see what characters may crossover between the shows.

I was really looking forward to hearing Paul Reubens take on the white rabbit, but maybe it will come out later.

I can't help but feel slightly disappointed with Once Upon a Time in Wonderland. I have only seen the first two episodes, and maybe there will be hope for the rest of the season, but right now I'm not too pleased.

The thing about this show is that it's actually pretty good as far as the actors go, and visually it's nice. I like the fact that everything in Wonderland looks pretty unreal, as if you've jumped into a hallucination. Sophie Lowe as Alice was a perfect choice, and her genie is very attractive. The writing is interesting, and I think it's awesome that they were able to weave in the parent show as well.

So if everything else is fabulous, what could be wrong with the show?

Well, in my opinion, it makes too much sense.

I know, that sounds weird, but think about it...Lewis Carrol's Wonderland is supposed to be a world occupied by insane, head-strong, eccentric, and often obnoxious characters. There is no madness in this story, and the characters are all quite logical and perfectly sane. It's just NOT Wonderland.

I don't think that movies/shows inspired by or based on books have to be carbon copies of the source material. That just wouldn't be realistic, of course, and I have no problem with a sequel/spin-off, just like I had no problem with Tim Burton's film. In fact, I loved his adaptation, because he captured the real essence of Wonderland, not the squeaky- clean Disney cartoon of the 1950s. And all the characters were a bit mad and rude.

But this version of Wonderland isn't really Wonderland. Again, I'm no stickler, but is it too much to ask that Wonderland is a world of madness? That's the most basic element of book, and the fact that this ABC version hasn't showcased that at all is a bit annoying.

Of course it is early so far to say in confidence yet but based on this episode premier: this is the first more and less decent Alice in Wonderland adaptation since my all-time favorite version of 90's with Tina Majorino and Martin Short. This is a sequel to the original book, so not a direct adaptation just like recent Tim Burton's version was. It is OUaT's version of Wonderland but I am glad that so far this spin-off is more Alice Wonderland rather than Once Upon a Time.

Wonderland – the main asset of the original book is the world itself. Considering that it is only a TV show and, judging by OUaT, not the richest one in budget terms, I prepared for the worst but hoped for the best. In terms of special effects, the reality turned out to be… if not quite the second one but still pretty close. I loved almost everything: from deem and gloomy Asylum where Alice's path in the series began (surprisingly, directors didn't try to save money even there: quite many parts of the Asylum are completely CGI made) to the dreamlike surreal landscapes of Wonderland. CGI is not better than it was in the first season of OUaT but in this context, little graphical details only add dreamlike delusional feel to the world Alice appears in. To my taste, Burton's version of Wonderland was way too detailed, it was way too fleshed out. So fleshed out that it lost its "dream" feel which certainly was in the book and was supposed to be in the adaptation. I hope the readers, especially fans of the original book, follow my logic here. Usually I am against bad CGI but here it actually served the dreamy and surreal context of the world.

All in all, I liked the creativity of graphical design, I liked that the amount of special effects in just this one episode is more than in the first 2 seasons of OUaT all together, I liked the carefulness with which the creators have approached this particular book adaptation: they managed to preserve the adventurous feel of the parent show but also didn't lose the overall book atmosphere which I so hoped to see in this story. Even if you don't care about surrealism and the book, if you were fine with the CGI quality of OUaT season one, you should be fine here also.

Actors- to those who say that the acting was bad: I disagree. Sophie Low shows us the finest Alice performance I have seen in a while- definitely better than Mia Wasikowska's performance. Sorry but where the heck was Sophie when Burton was making his movie? Sophie and Mia both perform a mature version of book Alice but in quite similar ways with an exception that Sophie actually acts and her mimics change. Her talking style and behavior is a bit modern, to my taste (I just don't believe that this girl was raised in Victorian London) but maybe I am bit picky here. Overall, solid performance of the main protagonist. Michael Socha, who plays the Knave of Hearts, didn't open up quite yet (neither in acting nor as the character) but it seems that the script writers do have couple As in their sleeve regarding this character for future episodes – and I will be waiting. Peter Gadiot (Cyrus) plays his part in the show well enough but just to the point. His performance is not superb but neither the script so far demands it. Loved the white rabbit (voiced by fabulous John Lithgow), just want to see him more and more. The new version of Cheshire Cat was… odd but I still was glad to see one of my most loved characters right in the first episode. Despite of slightly altered personality, this cat still didn't lose its charm and I do hope we are not done with him yet. More cat and the rabbit!

Emma Rigby as the Red Queen (Red Queen, not Queen of Hearts) is the only one from the cast who slightly disappoints with her wooden acting (in this sense, can't help but compare Rigby to fabulous Helena Bonham Carter and not to the merit of the first one). However, the actress is pretty (so are her dresses) and her character doesn't irritate which is already something. Appearance of Jafar takes by surprise but it was a joy to see Naveen Andrews on a screen one more time. After all, with the wooden Red Queen around, charismatic Jafar is exactly what we needed (well, I needed for sure at least).That it is with the cast. Let's hope together for Hershey and Stan's at least cameo appearances in future episodes. No Alice adaptation is fun without the Hatter and Queen of Hearts!

Story – again, too early to judge yet but so far it seems to be more complicated than the Burton's version. After 2010 Alice in Wonderland, which disappoints terribly with its simplicity, any plot differentiated with at least a bit of creativity will be met with applause by me. And so far the first episode promises to provide us with something special.

Outcome- so far not great but quite decent. Worth attention, worth watching: if you are a fan of the parent show Once Upon a Time, if you are a fan of the original book (adaptation is not perfect but point me the one which is), if you are neither of the first two mentioned but you just like fairy tales. Who knows?- if you didn't like OUaT you still might like this spin-off. It is fun, it is fresh, it is adventurous. It is a new story and more and less meticulous adaptation of the book. For that – thanks to the creators. Seems that it is going to be a fun ride and I, personally, can't wait to see what this roller coaster hides behind the corner.