TheLittleSongbird Both Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass are classics, rich in atmosphere and with colourful characters. Admittedly they are episodic but in a way that is part of the books' charm. Both are also difficult to adapt because of the structure, the atmosphere and Carroll's way of words, especially Through the Looking Glass where the structure is even more nonsensical and the characters even kookier. This adaptation is a valiant effort and it is on the most part the most faithful adaptation of Through the Looking Glass, whether it is the best is up for debate, I remember liking the 1973 BBC adaptation more but that may change on re-watch. This version is far from perfect, the ending is abrupt, Kate Beckinsale's hair did look too modern and the Walrus and the Carpenter scene felt very badly rushed through, the production values in this scene did look on the amateurish side. While the Wasp with the Wig segment was interesting and well done the adaptation may have made more sense with the Lion and the Unicorn scene intact- it felt like it was meant to be there in the first place but edited out- and the White Knight scene really could have done without the black and white footage which added nothing to the scene. Some of the adaptation especially at the end felt rushed, if they had slowed things down those who had trouble following the story may have understood it a little more. The adaptation does look decent though, very TV-movie-bound, but it is colourful and attractive enough once you get used to Alice's constant clothes changes and Tweedledum and Tweedledee made up to look like characters from A Clockwork Orange. The photography is nicely done and flows decently into each frame and scene. The music is laden with whimsy, a sense of wonder and subtle edge, very like a fantasy adventure score should sound. The script is very true to Carroll's humour and how he wrote, the sing-song-like poetry and oddball nature are most endearing too. A-Sitting on the Gate stood out in this respect. The story maintains the episodic feel that the book has and also the wonderful weirdness(in a couple of scenes a little too weird admittedly) and whimsical charm. In terms of individual scenes, the melancholic White Knight scene and the really genuinely spooky train sequence stood out. The flower garden scene was colourful also, and the White Queen and Red Queen encounters are nicely done. The jabberwocky is much scarier in the Natalie Gregory adaptation(which I also preferred over this despite some of the songs and casting not quite being there), but it still makes the same impact here. The cast are fine. Kate Beckinsale is too old- Kate Burton was also too old, around the same age, in the excellent theatre production from 1983 and she actually still worked- but there is still the winsomeness, assertiveness, sense of confusion and simple charm that you'd expect Alice to have. Ian Richardson, Marc Warren and Steve Coogan also give nice contributions, but the standouts were Sian Phillips' menacingly imposing Red Queen, Penelope Wilton as a riotuous White Queen(though much more subtle than the hilariously batty Carol Channing in the Natalie Gregory adaptation) and especially the touching White Knight- the only sympathetic character on Alice's adventures- of Ian Holm. In conclusion, a good if flawed version(though if people dislike it it is easy to see why), Through the Looking Glass is a very difficult book to adapt and this does valiantly with it. 7/10 Bethany Cox

tedg In 1871, A deacon logician at Oxford published a sequel to his surprisingly popular children's story. In that original, he had dabbled in the mix of logic and mysticism that he thought respectable. Fortunately for him, it was characterized as the sort of nonsense genre created by Edward Lear. But he was deeply disturbed in the years that followed as the Church and what came to be called spiritualism diverged. So to make amends to his God, and to deflate the Kabbalistic origin of the first work, he formulated something with much the same structure and tone, but without the magic.This work was based on conundrums created by the symmetries in the world. It became as popular as the first. His later works tried harder to distance himself from divination and became tepid Christian allegories. "Through the Looking-glass" was so successful that it and the original Alice are often merged as if they were seamless. The symmetries in the later work are easier to quote, so the looking-glass symbology and structure is re-used and quoted far more than the dangerous and slippery original Alice.In 1979, auteur Raoul Ruiz made "The Hypothesis of the Stolen Painting," a remarkable film, using the Alice structure as a template for narrative folding and a painting as the conflation of both book and mirror.Based on this, cinematic novelist Arturo Pérez-Reverte, wrote a rather complex and ambitious novel. "The Flanders Panel" published in 1990. In 1994, filmmaker Jim McBride continued on of his two film careers, the one where he starts with extremely ambitious material, making a mainstream film based on Pérez-Reverte's novel. While the novel was inherently cinematic, McBride added an extra dimension: the folds of inner narrative, of dreams and fantasies were mapped onto the body of the on screen detective, with insight conflated with nudity. To accomplish this insofar as he could, he found a quite beautiful and intuitively talented young actress. Like Nastassja Kinski and Asia Argento before her, she grew up in an acting family and genuinely knew how to map narrative on her body, unafraid to be as sexually complex as possible. Together, Kate Beckinsale and McBride made an interesting if not profoundly successful film.Like Kinski and Jovovich, Beckinsale would go on to make films directed by lovers, films that would shamelessly exploit this talent. But in between her First Alice and her leathered vampire phase, she was Alice in a literal film version of the book. Well, it is not quite literal in that we have to explain why a redheaded sexual being is in this looking-glass world, and plot accommodations are made based on the Pérez-Reverte model.This film is a disaster, an utter disaster if you take it as it comes. It has none of the magic of the book, though the language and images are used exactly. It has none of engagement that other experiments have with whatever mix of mystery and sex they use. And though it experiments with cinematic inner visions, the devices used are from Terry Gilliam and all utterly fail.But if you see it in this greater context of Kate's mother, the Lewis Carroll cover-up and deliberately obfuscated magic; if you see it as overtly sexual but with the sex completely hidden: homeopathic seduction, then it works amazingly well. Alice as a redhead!Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

Foux_du_Fafa I am a long-time fan of Lewis Carroll and "Alice in Wonderland" and will gladly watch many of the adaptations of the stories - as good or as bad as they may be! I have not actually seen this version of "Alice Through the Looking Glass" in quite a while, so I can't call myself an authority on it, but from what I remember, it was very good. We recorded it when it was broadcast for the first time (and as far as I am aware, the last) on Channel 4 one Boxing Day, and my ten-and-a-half-year old self watched it quite a bit. Of the two books, this one is the hardest to adapt to the screen in terms of structure and theme; this is perhaps the reason why simply a few of its best episodes are relocated to Wonderland in numerous adaptations. Despite these short-comings, this version succeeds quite well. The film uses an adult Alice (played by Kate Becknisale) imagining/dreaming herself passing into the mirror realm as she reads the tale to her daughter one bedtime. Using fancy costumes and simple yet whimsical effects reminiscent of Jean Cocteau, Alice embarks on a journey through a chessboard-cum-forest and meets many wonderful characters: TweedleDum and TweedleDee, Humpty Dumpty and numerous chess pieces. This version is hard to find; I unfortunately taped over this by accident (with EastEnders, of all the embarrassing things!) and pre-recorded copies are hard to track down as well. Needless to say, if you can, have a nosey at this.

alice liddell 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.