Alice in Wonderland

This version of Alice in Wonderland tries to tell us how Lewis Carroll came to create the characters he did. After a very British beginning, he tells the story of the young girl to some young girls. Of course, it starts with the trip into the rabbit hole. Alice follows, carelessly, running willy nilly through brightly decorated caverns. She has the usual encounters with growing and shrinking, making it hard to get through doors. What follows is quite good. The stop action Wonderland characters are striking. Some are grotesques; some are quite tame. But all of them have been created with thoughtfulness and skill. The story isn't as good as the visuals. I now must confess, that having read this book several times, I can't say I've ever enjoyed it. I think that I should try some critical works and they might assist me in the allegorical features. i did learn about Disney's successful efforts to keep this film out of release to promote his animated piece.

Produced and released shortly before Disney's feature-length cartoon version, this "Alice in Wonderland" has a curious legal history whereby Disney frivolously sued to delay or prevent its release and the competition it might bring. Curiouser, the two Alice films share a couple important similarities. They're both animated, although in different ways; Disney's is drawn, and this one is stop-motion puppetry mixed with live action. Both regrettably add songs that lend logic and order to what was otherwise a Wonderland of episodic nonsense. And, yes, Alice is a blonde in a blue dress for both. Apparently, the coloring of this one has become degraded in the intervening years and has since not been restored, plus Disney prevented it from being filmed in Technicolor, so it literally pales in comparison to the colorful Disney picture. Moreover, some now claim the Disney film a "classic," whereas this one remains relatively obscure. That's a shame, too, because it's somewhat more faithful to Lewis Carroll's books and especially the first one, and the "reality" framing device is an insightful bit concerning art reflecting life.

The outer narrative shows Carroll's story to be "not so simple, because you will see that Lewis Carroll modeled his creatures of Wonderland on the foibles of real people." This framing, then, is similar to the Kansas scenes of the 1939 "The Wizard Oz," which in turn is based on L. Frank Baum's book that was intended as an American counterpart to the Alice books. And, unfortunately, although not likewise photographed in black and white, as were the Kansas scenes in the 1939 film, the outer narrative here is bland. It sets up that the characters seen surrounding Oxford will later lend their voices and attributes to the inner animated story's cast--most of all, of course, that of Alice Liddell and the fictional Alice, as portrayed by the same actress (an adult one, by the way, which is common in film adaptations). Alice mostly provides voiceover narration of her thoughts, which was surely helpful for translation as the film was released in French and English-language versions. The most interesting part here is the inclusion of Charles Dodgson's (a.k.a. Carroll's) interest in still photography, which adds another layer of reflexivity to a film that already features its author as a character telling the story. This largely replaces the usual dream framing, although this is hinted at, too, by the Alice Liddell's reactions to the story Dodgson tells her.

The main, inner narrative is largely plotted around Alice being chased by the vengeful White Rabbit, whom Alice was pursuing in the first place to land her in Wonderland. He schemes to set her up for the crime of stealing the Queen's tarts after the incident of her causing havoc by growing taller inside his house. Other episodes are also oddly made sense of here; for example, the scene where the mouse decides to recite the driest bit of history he knows--a humorous pun in the book--is turned into a song here, which is hardly dry at all. Nevertheless, the puppetry appreciably lends weirdness to the proceedings, and some of the decidedly-artificial settings are well designed, including the checkered layout of the hall at the bottom of the rabbit hole. The rapid cutting of Alice and the Rabbit running is effective, too. On the other hand, some of the cutting between live-action Alice and the animated puppets seems a blatant workaround to otherwise having to do more composite shots--rendering the fantasy that Alice and the characters of Wonderland are inhabiting the same place less believable. Despite it not all smoothly succeeding, it's interesting how many layers are worked with here, between a real actor combined with puppets and the fictional Wonderland inside the outer world of Carroll as author and photographer and Alice as dreamer of her fictional self.

This version of 'Alice in Wonderland' (a co-production between the UK and France) suffered from being released around the same time as the Disney cartoon with little advertising; and through being suppressed from release in the UK due to the portrayal of Queen Victoria in the early pre-fantasy scenes.

It was also filmed in Ansocolor, a process which has not travelled well if the print in the archives is anything to go by. Carol Marsh is an OK Alice, but looks older than she should be - the puppets are mainly hideous and would be frightening to children (especially the Mock Turtle, the Duchess, and the Mouse Alice encounters in the lake of tears). I did like the footmen-fish however and the combination of live action with puppet work, if a bit creaky, does have charm.

At the start of the film, we meet the dons of Oxford and the Queen (the Vice-Chancellor then becomes the White Rabbit, the Queen is the Queen of Hearts, with the same actors providing the voices). The switch into the 'Wonderland' story proper comes with a boat trip in which the stuttering Dodgson entertains the Liddel girls to compensate from them missing the visit of the Queen to Oxford.

There is much to enjoy in this film - the score is good, if a little saccharine, the puppets are memorable (although one or two, especially the Caterpillar, compare unfavourably with their Disney counterparts), and the story still has charm. There is also enough humour to entertain adult audiences while the main story enthrals their children. Recommended, if hard to track down these days.

What a weird film! So much wrong with it, but so much right about it. Wanted to see this version for years after catching part of it on TV in the 1950s. I've just managed to achieve my goal through a reconstructed edition on Youtube. Having said that, the colour wasn't very good. It needs a proper digital restoration.

Let's be honest, this is always going to trail behind the Disney version which is warm and cosy. Bower's film trends all of the Victorian attitudes towards children and you feel at times as if you've had your knuckles rapped!

Carol Marsh is far too old to play Alice, and yet she does it perfectly. Possibly Jean Simmons could have filled the part, but we'll never know. Anyway, like most of the live cast, she has long faded into obscurity. In the framing segment, my favourite was Pamela Brown as the malapropistic Queen Victoria; absolutely right for the role. And to think it was her portrayal that held up the release of the film, being considered disrespectful. Says a lot about deference in 1949 doesn't it!

Unfortunately, the animated puppets are unappealing, having rather grotesque faces. The best characterization was the White Rabbit, a real unlikeable mean so-and-so. Also, since the opening credits tell us that Carroll based his characters on real Oxford people. I think it would have been better to have the same actors in the framing sequence, in costume as the Wonderland characters; like in The Wizard Of Oz. The scenery is what you would expect. Looking very much like stage props with lots of hidey-holes for the puppets to use. The songs aren't up to much, apart from the fish-footmen sequence which I found highly amusing; Marsh seems to have a good voice; but it's really an uncredited Adele Leigh. Having Lewis Carroll in the scenario was a good idea. But, he comes across as a rather weak character. Not having the courage of his convictions when he has the opportunity to ask The Queen about removing the noisy bell at his Oxford college. Also, I don't understand why there is an American narrator.

Worth watching for being faithful to the book and for comparison with other movie and TV versions. But, it's never going to be the one you remember.

It's a hideous little production, apt to give one nightmares as well as headaches. It's an unsightly blend of live action and ugly stop-motion animation. It's weird, but it's not the kind of fun, weird trip anyone optimistic might expect. It's the cold, inhuman, unfriendly, sickening, even creepy kind of weird. There is absolutely no reason to watch this movie. After all, Disney did a fantastic job with the same source material. And Cosgrove-Hall did far more attractive things with stop-motion.

Interestingly, this is a French production. As such, it re-enforces the stereotype that the French have no concept of scary.