Could Tim Burton's "Alice In Wonderland" suck? Review inside...

most viewed right now
 137
Dec 11 - The bubble is here: People taking out mortgages to cop bitcoins
160 comments
@news
most viewed right now
 93
Image(s) inside New IG PIcs of Cocain.Lorraine
94 comments
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 78
Whoo Kid says 50 Cent used to be out here beatin up random drug dealers
98 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 57
Image(s) inside Stoner slut Nani -- would fu-k 4 weed
54 comments
@thotsdimesetc

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 8 years ago '05        #61
DaOmega_1 271 heat pts271 OP
space
avatar space
space
$13,830 | Props total: 4096 4096
 smokeweed101. said:
Anyways anyone here a fan of the Disney Alice from 51? About to burn some blueberry and watch this with my son. s**t was trippy as hell for a Disney cartoon, that and Fantasia, my two favorite Disney films.
Fantasia more than a movie to me... it's the type of thing that should be shown in museums, and should be mandatory viewing for anyone going into either animation or film scoring.

And, Alice is one of the most visually insane movies ever.
 03-02-2010, 05:07 PM         #62
lazerface 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 smokeweed101. said:
Not saying it does, but when you say resume I a.ssume you mean his whole career, now saying only 5% of Hollywood can match his resume doesn't make much sense, I understand we have different opinions but this is something I strongly disagree with.

The only director I would put over 95% of Hollywood alive today is someone like Scorsese.
you're right, 95% was definitely a bit of a stretch. while i love all the directors you listed minus von trier (only thing i saw by him was antichrist and it was s**te, but we all have different tastes), tim burton's not trying to make movies like them, he's got his own style just like they do.
 03-02-2010, 05:41 PM         #63
smokeweed101. 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 lazerface said:
you're right, 95% was definitely a bit of a stretch. while i love all the directors you listed minus von trier (only thing i saw by him was antichrist and it was s**te, but we all have different tastes), tim burton's not trying to make movies like them, he's got his own style just like they do.
I wasn't comparing styles just uniqueness, anyways Antichrist is one of his worst film, check out Dogville, a good drama, 3 hours long but the ending is worth the build up.
 03-02-2010, 05:43 PM         #64
smokeweed101. 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 DaOmega_1 said:
Fantasia more than a movie to me... it's the type of thing that should be shown in museums, and should be mandatory viewing for anyone going into either animation or film scoring.

And, Alice is one of the most visually insane movies ever.
Yea they made us watch it in middle school I think but I didn't appreciate it until I was grown and grew a real taste for film.
 8 years ago '08        #65
DooM 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$28,000 | Props total: 19897 19897
girl paid for my tickets... goin opening night... gonna be high and excited
 8 years ago '04        #66
persuazion 2 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$16,208 | Props total: 2097 2097
 smokeweed101. said:
So is many others, who do movies better, what is the point of naming mediocre films? I have already seen them.
I dident say he was the only good director......but to do these strange kind of movies and add that certain kind of imagery to them.......hes the best at that.
 8 years ago '09        #67
Gonzilla 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$4,485 | Props total: 57 57
I wanna see this s**t. Probably gonna go Saturday.
 03-02-2010, 11:03 PM         #68
BobbyNitro808 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
I'm still not sure about this one. I think Tim Burton has run his course. I'll probably wait till it comes out on video.
 8 years ago '07        #69
TH35 103 heat pts103
space
avatar space
space
$85,775 | Props total: 14587 14587
 BobbyNitro808 said:
I'm still not sure about this one. I think Tim Burton has run his course. I'll probably wait till it comes out on video.
He still has it in him but like it was said earlier in the thread he needs to stop doing popular adaptations.
 03-02-2010, 11:15 PM         #70
Motivated 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Ms Ambitious said:
I liked Alice in Wonderland from Disney, but when people try to remake animated films into movies, they always turn me off to them. Just like when they made the Grinch who stole christmas into a movie, and I was like hell naw lol. I might see it and it's a strong might.
I use to rock to Alice as a young n*gga from time to time
 8 years ago '09        #71
Ms Ambitious 249 heat pts249
space
avatar space
space
$8,395 | Props total: 7107 7107
 Tommy_Bunz said:
I use to rock to Alice as a young n*gga from time to time
Are you saying you watched it Or something else lol
 8 years ago '05        #72
DaOmega_1 271 heat pts271 OP
space
avatar space
space
$13,830 | Props total: 4096 4096
 Peterparker said:
have you read any Batman comic books??

Tim Burtons first Batman is probably the most accurate batman adaptation to date..more like the comic then the recent batman films..actually Dark Knight took alot of its story from the original batman..

Batman in itself is over the top..Dark Knight joker had just as much camera time then Batman's joker..Dark Knight just took a more realistic approach..Tim's version felt more like a comic..Joker has alwayssssss been over the top...n btw

Batman>>>>>Dark Knight..the 2nd film was pretty coo..was a lil bit more cheesier I'll agree.. but it was coo..wasn't great..wasn't bad either..the other 2 films had nothing to do w/ Burton..

Nolans Gotham felt like Chicago...didn't feel like Gotham City..Burton had it dead right w/ tha visual...


[pic - click to view]

Yes, I have read the comics, that's why I don't like Burton's Batman.

What always set Batman apart from other comic book properties was that it was dark, gritty, and it also felt like those story could actually happen in real life. Plus, when it comes to the character of who Batman is, we don't get that in Burton's films... We get lots and lots of scenes of The Joker dancing around the museum while listening to Prince. No, not Batman. It's Tim Burton's vision of Batman for sure, but I don't call it Batman as canon because it never got the character of Batman or The Joker right for me.

And, I liked the fact that they took of different tact with Gotham City, and I'm also glad that they didn't just try and make it 'pretty' just because they had the budget to. It felt like an ACTUAL city, it felt like a real place, and not just a place in a comic-book standpoint. That's what I mean, and that's the reason why I will never take Burton's Batman seriously, because it didn't take the character or its world seriously..

Again, this is all my opinion based on MY perception of what I think of Batman to be. So, it's whatever.
 8 years ago '04        #73
persuazion 2 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$16,208 | Props total: 2097 2097
 DaOmega_1 said:
Yes, I have read the comics, that's why I don't like Burton's Batman.

What always set Batman apart from other comic book properties was that it was dark, gritty, and it also felt like those story could actually happen in real life. Plus, when it comes to the character of who Batman is, we don't get that in Burton's films... We get lots and lots of scenes of The Joker dancing around the museum while listening to Prince. No, not Batman. It's Tim Burton's vision of Batman for sure, but I don't call it Batman as canon because it never got the character of Batman or The Joker right for me.

And, I liked the fact that they took of different tact with Gotham City, and I'm also glad that they didn't just try and make it 'pretty' just because they had the budget to. It felt like an ACTUAL city, it felt like a real place, and not just a place in a comic-book standpoint. That's what I mean, and that's the reason why I will never take Burton's Batman seriously, because it didn't take the character or its world seriously..

Again, this is all my opinion based on MY perception of what I think of Batman to be. So, it's whatever.
I read this on another site and thought it went well with this discussion

"Its so sad to see Burton getting all this hate from you supposed Batman fans. You're forgetting all the crap Burton had to go through just to make Batman remotely dark. The Batman everyone was used to was the Adam West Pow Bang Wham crap, hokey bright colors and Gordon waiting by the red phone for Batman to answer and save Gotham. Burton took Frank Miller's ideas of a dark, gothic Gotham and turned into a reality. And he had to f!ght Warner Brothers every step of the way. Michael Keaton did just as good of a job as Christian Bale at Bruce/Batman, if not better. And the studio fought Keaton's role the entire way. Burton wanted a darker Joker, but Jack Nicholson wanted to do him a certain way, too. The studio sided with Jack, because he was the one who would help make the studio money from the film. (I bet the reason Burton k!lled the Joker was so he wouldn't have to work with Nicholson again.)
Burton's film is the superior one (though not the more exciting or intense one) because he doesn't load it down with extraneous dialogue like Nolan did, he didn't stretch the film out too long (half hour shorter), and he still made it beautiful. Nolan's film has no concept of art, he leaves no handprint on it, it's just brilliant action, an incredibly well-constructed villain, and holy-crap effects. The characters in the original are so much more real than the new films, where everyone has a feeling of "I'm here to do this for the plot." (This is why half of the audience leaves thinking "at what point did Harvey Dent become evil?") You may hate the Prince music, but Danny Elfman's score is INCREDIBLE, and blows Hans Zimmer/ James Newton Howard's out of the water. Their score sounds exactly like Pirates of the Caribbean and Gladiator (guess who wrote those scores?).
Dark Knight is a dang good entertaining film, but as far as a piece of art goes, it's not up there with Burton's Batman, which is both visually stunning and entertaining. That's why Burton's film will stand the test of time, whereas only Heath Ledger's Joker will continue to impress for years to come. "
 8 years ago '09        #74
TriniSoldier 64 heat pts64
space
avatar space
space
$48,953 | Props total: 22223 22223
I see no reason in going to see an Alice in Wonderland movie as a man. Nothing negative to say about Tim Burton or Johnny, just not my cup of tea.
 03-03-2010, 09:10 AM         #75
smokeweed101. 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 persuazion said:
I dident say he was the only good director......but to do these strange kind of movies and add that certain kind of imagery to them.......hes the best at that.
I guess that is a difference of opinion, i'll take Lynch, Cronenberg, Jodorowsky, or Bunuel for strange any day.
 8 years ago '05        #76
DaOmega_1 271 heat pts271 OP
space
avatar space
space
$13,830 | Props total: 4096 4096
 persuazion said:
I read this on another site and thought it went well with this discussion

"Its so sad to see Burton getting all this hate from you supposed Batman fans. You're forgetting all the crap Burton had to go through just to make Batman remotely dark. The Batman everyone was used to was the Adam West Pow Bang Wham crap, hokey bright colors and Gordon waiting by the red phone for Batman to answer and save Gotham. Burton took Frank Miller's ideas of a dark, gothic Gotham and turned into a reality. And he had to f!ght Warner Brothers every step of the way. Michael Keaton did just as good of a job as Christian Bale at Bruce/Batman, if not better. And the studio fought Keaton's role the entire way. Burton wanted a darker Joker, but Jack Nicholson wanted to do him a certain way, too. The studio sided with Jack, because he was the one who would help make the studio money from the film. (I bet the reason Burton k!lled the Joker was so he wouldn't have to work with Nicholson again.)
Burton's film is the superior one (though not the more exciting or intense one) because he doesn't load it down with extraneous dialogue like Nolan did, he didn't stretch the film out too long (half hour shorter), and he still made it beautiful. Nolan's film has no concept of art, he leaves no handprint on it, it's just brilliant action, an incredibly well-constructed villain, and holy-crap effects. The characters in the original are so much more real than the new films, where everyone has a feeling of "I'm here to do this for the plot." (This is why half of the audience leaves thinking "at what point did Harvey Dent become evil?") You may hate the Prince music, but Danny Elfman's score is INCREDIBLE, and blows Hans Zimmer/ James Newton Howard's out of the water. Their score sounds exactly like Pirates of the Caribbean and Gladiator (guess who wrote those scores?).
Dark Knight is a dang good entertaining film, but as far as a piece of art goes, it's not up there with Burton's Batman, which is both visually stunning and entertaining. That's why Burton's film will stand the test of time, whereas only Heath Ledger's Joker will continue to impress for years to come. "
Dude, I call bullsh*t on this whole argument myself. In Burton's Batman, I didn't give two sh*ts about the characters because they got no development AT ALL (except for The Joker, and even that's a stretch). I believed in the characters in The Dark Knight because they actually had character themes, they actually go through a story arc, they actually have more to them and more subtle things going on mentally and emotionally. This is NOT the case with Burton's batman, and anyone who really loves Batman as a character can vouch for this. SECONDLY, I don't give a sh*t about art if it doesn't aid in storytelling.

Every Batman movie before Nolan's was just a series of showy clashes and action scenes in the middle of the city. Burton's film's had incredible art direction, but everything else WAS LACKING. I DON'T GIVE A SH*T about Gotham City being beautiful if everything else involved with the movie is sh*t. That's the one bullsh*t argument I hear Burton defenders go on and on and on about.... That it's "art". Nolan's film is just as, if not more, artful because it takes an actual city, and actual place with an architectural history, and make it totally Gotham City without trying to over-goth it.

And, that kid who talks about extraneous dialogue must have a low attention span, because all that dialogue was to further story and plot... They aren't characters going on long tangents, everything works to further the PLOT. There aren't bits that are there just to be there (like The Joker dancing in the museum to prince). Everything in Nolan's Batman pushes the story forward, and everything introduced gets a payoff...

And as for the score, did that guy you're quoting actually listen to those two scores? Because, I actually have them on CD, and they sound NOTHING alike. This guy is full of sh*t.
 8 years ago '04        #77
persuazion 2 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$16,208 | Props total: 2097 2097
 smokeweed101. said:
I guess that is a difference of opinion, i'll take Lynch, Cronenberg, Jodorowsky, or Bunuel for strange any day.
so they make strange fantastical kind of movies like Burton? f!ght Club, A History of Violence,Lost Highway are a different kind of strange then Burtons choice of flicks......
 8 years ago '04        #78
persuazion 2 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$16,208 | Props total: 2097 2097
 DaOmega_1 said:
Dude, I call bullsh*t on this whole argument myself. In Burton's Batman, I didn't give two sh*ts about the characters because they got no development AT ALL (except for The Joker, and even that's a stretch). I believed in the characters in The Dark Knight because they actually had character themes, they actually go through a story arc, they actually have more to them and more subtle things going on mentally and emotionally. This is NOT the case with Burton's batman, and anyone who really loves Batman as a character can vouch for this. SECONDLY, I don't give a sh*t about art if it doesn't aid in storytelling.

Every Batman movie before Nolan's was just a series of showy clashes and action scenes in the middle of the city. Burton's film's had incredible art direction, but everything else WAS LACKING. I DON'T GIVE A SH*T about Gotham City being beautiful if everything else involved with the movie is sh*t. That's the one bullsh*t argument I hear Burton defenders go on and on and on about.... That it's "art". Nolan's film is just as, if not more, artful because it takes an actual city, and actual place with an architectural history, and make it totally Gotham City without trying to over-goth it.

And, that kid who talks about extraneous dialogue must have a low attention span, because all that dialogue was to further story and plot... They aren't characters going on long tangents, everything works to further the PLOT. There aren't bits that are there just to be there (like The Joker dancing in the museum to prince). Everything in Nolan's Batman pushes the story forward, and everything introduced gets a payoff...

And as for the score, did that guy you're quoting actually listen to those two scores? Because, I actually have them on CD, and they sound NOTHING alike. This guy is full of sh*t.
How old are you.......just saying alot of people that I know that dident like the first one were to young to remember it and ended up watching it way later and not appreciating it as much.I understand everybody having their own opinion but Burtons Batman was just a whole different take on it then Nolans and your giving it 0 credit.....Im saying I like both movies....both are great Batman films in their own right......you have a more comic like over the top version and you have a more realistic version.....
 8 years ago '04        #79
persuazion 2 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$16,208 | Props total: 2097 2097
 Peterparker said:
this is my theory and my post probably won't get you to see the original Batman in any different way...if there were no Burton film..there would be no Dark Knight..how can you have such a big problem with Burton's film when Nolan took so many storylines from the original Batman..

Nolans Batman is overhyped...yep I said it OVERHYPED..the lore of Heath Ledgers death attracted movie goers more.."Your nobody to somebody k!lls you"..that's not to say Heath isn't a great actor..he did a great Joker..matter fact the only scenes I really like in Nolans batman where the scenes with Joker..and if you ask most ppl about Nolans Dark Knight most ppl will say Joker..

Keaton was more of a factor in Batman then Bale was...in Dark Knight nobody really cares about Batman or even Two Face(ppl talk about Venom having a small role in SP3, they just threw Two Face in there for a cheap thrill..no great scene with Two Face in it)the only decent scene involving Two Face was when "YOU GUESSED IT" Joker pays a visit to him in the hospital...that damn Joker hoggin the spotlight

you talk about no development?? What development did Nolans Joker have?? NONE..he just pops up on the scene causing chaos..we never know his full orgins..he doesnt' even have direct beef with Batman..Burtons Joker had development and a legit reason to beef with Batman...the famous doctor scene(when the transformation reaches the climax)

this is also another theory for the overhype of nolans Batman series..the schumacher batman films were soooooooo horrible..that Nolans take on batman was soooo refreshing.. cuz ppl had low expectations for Batman Begins and were shocked to see that it was actually good so the anticipation for Dark Knight was much higher..but mostly due to Ledgers death..
true .........that Joker scene wear he first sees himself in the mirror and starts laughing all crazy is great!
 03-03-2010, 11:22 AM         #80
smokeweed101. 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 persuazion said:
so they make strange fantastical kind of movies like Burton? f!ght Club, A History of Violence,Lost Highway are a different kind of strange then Burtons choice of flicks......
I was thinking more a long the lines of: Mullholland Drive, Eraserhead, Lost Highway, Twin Peaks, Blue Velvet, Videdrome, nekkid Lunch, Belle De Jour, Phantom of Liberty, Un Chien Andalou, L'Age D Or, Holy Mountain, and El Topo.

Throw in Gilliam's Brazil, Twelve Monkey's, and Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas, Maya Deren's Meshes of The Afternoon, and Federico Fellini's 8 1/2, La Dolce Vita, and Satyricon, Alain Resnais' Last Year At Marienbad, and Polanski's Le Locataire and Repulsion.

Puts Burton out of business with ease IMO.
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 39
Image(s) inside Sweet Colombian....Baddie... IDK nigga she got ass and she pretty. peep
84 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 31
NBA IT OFFICIAL: Lamelo & LiAngelo Ball Have Gone Pro, Sign 1 Year Deal With L..
241 comments
19 hours ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 19
Video inside My experience after record deal (warning)
300 comments
2 days ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 18
That 8mile soundtrack had some classic jams for real
36 comments
19 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 12
Image(s) inside PUBG XBOX ONE Official Thread
95 comments
19 hours ago
@games
most viewed right now
 10
Article inside Kodi addon site TVAddons to stop proactively checking for piracy
29 comments
2 days ago
@tech
most viewed right now
 8
Akademiks low-key proved he lurks here
77 comments
19 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 7
Image(s) inside LMAO: Boskoe 100 SPAZZED OUT On Joe Budden!!
113 comments
19 hours ago
@hiphop
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy