just wondering, is there anything questionable in it?

I guess it just depends on your taste, there where a few things like, 1. An eye being stabbed and then poked out (Not gory though) in one of the creatures from the previews. It later gets back it's eye and puts it back in without any problem.
2. Some decapitated heads in a pond that were obviously thrown there after the Queen ordered "Off with their heads".
3. And also in the beginning Alice's sister's husband is seen kissing another women when Alice catches them.

I hope that helps , But I do suggest you read Plugged In's review before, I myself haven’t read it yet, but I'm sure they mention everything and probably in better detail then I can. I was a bit surprised that they added in things like number 3., and 2. only because it’s supposed to be a kids movie.

7chronicles: I don't think Alice in Wonderland was ever intended to be a kid's movie. I saw it last night, and all of the things that I or any of my friends found amusing, it would go completely over the head (no pun intended) of a child. Yes, of course Lewis Carol's book was targeted towards children, but Burton's Wonderland was never made for that audience as far as I can see.

The film was excellent, though. Besides a couple obviously 3-D shots that stood out to me (I didn't see it in 3-D, I mean $15 for a ticket?) the cinematography was a work of brilliance. I've never seen a Tim Burton film before, and I was determined to have this be my first, so I can't compare it to his other movies. But all in all it was very amusing, and artfully done movie.
One question though:

So far everything about AiW has been telling me the same thing about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: wierd and I truly sense that I will walk out of it not knowing whether I will actually like it or not. But I am not a fan of the 3D movies, certainly the price, and since El Paso is only offering a 3D version, I expect to see it some other time. So I am passing on movies this weekend.

I also saw "Alice" yesterday; I liked it. I wouldn't claim it was an absolutely awesome movie, but it was very creative, exciting and just all the way around interesting. I admit I was a bit confused by some of it, as I couldn't make out what the characters were saying, but it didn't stop me from liking it. Really I can't think of any one specific thing that made me dislike the movie.

The one part I REALLY liked was

I'll always be a,
NL101

7chronicles: that third one is the most concerning to me. It's only PG so I'm sure the other two objections aren't very gory or graphic. I'll probably still wait til it's on DVD though, for the reasons I stated before. I don't think I'll be going to the theatres again for a long time. My mom was traumatized from PJO

I went to see Alice in Wonderland last night and I noticed a number of striking similarities to the Narnia movies. If you haven't seen the movie yet, I'd recommend watching it before viewing this post.

With such a Narnian plot, I wonder why Disney didn't keep the Narnia franchise going.

Why didn't Burton choose to remake the first movie in live action instead of making a sequel that stole the plot from Narnia?

In fact, the story was so Narnian, I wonder if Burton would be interested in directing The Silver Chair?

My sister and I are going to see it today.

I didn't read your spoiler yet Movie Aristotle, as I haven't seen the movie. I would like to see Burton direct The Silver Chair actually. It's been one of my "Narnia movie" wishes since LWW came out. I think he could get the dark element in to it fantastically. So Alice is really like Narnia then? Hmm I want to see it . Btw, is it called Alice in Wonderland or Almost Alice?

Btw, is it called Alice in Wonderland or Almost Alice?

It's called Alice and Wonderland, Almost Alice is a CD with songs inspired by Alice in Wonderland, very similar to Narnia's Inspired CD that came out before the movie in 2005.

^^aah ok. Thanks for letting me know . I've been confused about that for a long time . I saw Owl City had a song on that CD

Just got home from Alice in Wonderland,
While I thought it was enjoyable I felt underwhelmed by it as well.
I've waited since before they even started filming it, I've kept close track on its production and in the end...

All that wasn't worth it.
Not a bad movie and I liked the story, original to the movie, but I would have much preferred they go by the book and do a literal adaptation since all the past ones have fallen short of greatness.

narnian1: I see where you're coming from (the whole underwhelmed thing) but no movie-maker in his right mind would make a literal adaptation of Alice in Wonderland. There is absolutely no plot! There is no story arch, characters come and go with absolutely no purpose whatsoever, Alice never actually does anything except explore Wonderland. Though it was an enjoyable read, there was never a single reason for it to be written except that Lewis Carrol was under the influence of drugs that caused him to hallucinate terribly. And with such talent, just think of the wonderful things that he could have created if he wasn't under such an influence? I think all that wasted talent is so tragic.

narnian1: Though it was an enjoyable read, there was never a single reason for it to be written except that Lewis Carrol was under the influence of drugs that caused him to hallucinate terribly. And with such talent, just think of the wonderful things that he could have created if he wasn't under such an influence? I think all that wasted talent is so tragic.

This is a very common myth and very wrong. There is no evidence to suggest that Lewis Carroll ever took drugs. In fact, the idea for Alice in Wonderland came to him while he was boating. Carroll was an Oxford University Professor like Tolkien, and was a good friend of George McDonald's I believe.

Wonderland is far too complex to have been created while on drugs. The poetry from the books have beautiful meter to them and are great parodies of other famous poems. It takes a sharp mind to do that. Carroll did create wonderful things because he wasn't under such an influence! There is no tragedy, because there was no wasted talent. On the contrary, his talent was used very wisely. I encourage everyone to pick up a copy of the Complete Works of Lewis Carroll to see for yourself. His complicated puzzles alone should convince you he wasn't a druggy.

narnian1: I see where you're coming from (the whole underwhelmed thing) but no movie-maker in his right mind would make a literal adaptation of Alice in Wonderland.

There have been various adaptations of the book itself so yes I do think it could be done. I've seen several of them, but none have I loved. I respect that you feel it can't be done, but I think it can.

I knew this was going to be an original story, but if this is the best they could come up with than they shouldn't have done it. IMO the movie tried to have a plot, but when you look right down to it there really wasn't much of a plot at all.

narnian1: Though it was an enjoyable read, there was never a single reason for it to be written except that Lewis Carrol was under the influence of drugs that caused him to hallucinate terribly.

This is a very common myth and very wrong. There is no evidence to suggest that Lewis Carroll ever took drugs. In fact, the idea for Alice in Wonderland came to him while he was boating. Carroll was an Oxford University Professor like Tolkien, and was a good friend of George McDonald's I believe.

Wonderland is far too complex to have been created while on drugs. His complicated puzzles alone should convince you he wasn't a druggy.

Thanks,
I thought as much but I couldn't find proof so I didn't bothered to enter this topic in case I was in the wrong.

narnian1: I'm not saying that a movie can't be made. It is physically possible to film a movie that's a literal adaptation of Alice in Wonderland, I'm just saying that no major producer would fund it because they would never expect to make a profit. The thing is, until my dad just recently got into the whole Hollywood scene I was innocently unaware of what the real agenda of movie-makers. Most major production companies only truly care about how much money the movie will make, not whether or not the movie is faithful to the book etc. I know, disappointing.

MovieAristotle: Really? I never knew that. I have to admit that I've never actually researched it in depth, but I could have sworn that I read it in some sort of literary encyclopedia or something. Oh, well.