DVD Review HTF DVD REVIEW: Alice in Wonderland (1933)

Discussion in 'DVD' started by Kevin EK, Mar 21, 2010.

Tags:
  1. Kevin EK

    Kevin EK Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,035
    Likes Received:
    494
    XenForo Template


    Alice in Wonderland
     
    Studio: Universal (Original Theatrical Release by Paramount)
    Original Release: 1933
    Length: 1 hour 17 mins
    Genre: Fantasy
     
    Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
    Color/B&W: Black & White (Packaging incorrectly says Color!)
     
    Audio:
    English Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono
     
     
    Subtitles: English SDH, Spanish, French
    Rating:  Not Rated (Appropriate for all ages)
     
    Release Date: March 2, 2010
     
    Rating: 1 ½     
     
    Starring: Charlotte Henry as “Alice”, with Richard Arlen, Rosco Ates, Gary Cooper, Leon Errol, Louise Fazenda, W. C. Fields, Skeets Gallagher, Cary Grant, Raymond Hatton, Edward Everett Horton, Roscoe Karns, Baby Leroy, Mae Marsh, Polly Moran, Jack Dakie, Edna May Oliver, May Robson, Charlie Ruggles, Alison Skipworth, Ned Sparks and Ford Sterling
     
    Directed By: Norman McLeod
     
     
    In 1933, Paramount Pictures released a film adaptation of Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, roughly a year after the 100th anniversary of his birth. The idea was audacious enough, with Paramount utilizing every major talent under contract to them at the time in character roles as part of Carroll’s menagerie of fantastical creatures. Unfortunately, the film didn’t turn out as well as later works like The Wizard of Oz, which clearly owe a debt to this early rendition of the same idea. (You can track many similarities between this film and The Wizard of Oz, especially the conceit of the main character dreaming the fantasy adventure after encountering many of the key characters in her normal life.) Looking at the film today, the story doesn’t gel, the scenes bog down in many places, and the extreme makeups applied to the many stars that appear here render them unrecognizable. Gary Cooper and Cary Grant are but two of the bigger names who come through without the viewer knowing who has really just been on camera. W.C. Fields probably makes the biggest impression, given that his voice is unmistakable, but even he can’t do much behind the huge makeup head they’ve placed over him. In the end, this edition of Alice in Wonderland is more of a curiosity than a film that can draw much attention on its own merits.
     
    This DVD release, clearly timed to coincide with the new Tim Burton movie showing in theaters as I write these words, features an adequate print of the print that Universal Studios has been using since it acquired the film from Paramount for home video release. I note that this print is apparently an edited copy which removes footage from the original Paramount version.   The picture quality varies – at some points there are large vertical lines running through complete shots. The sound quality is decent but nothing to make the film any more intelligible. (More on this in the sound section) And there are no extras or special features at all. One thing I must clear up, however,is that the packaging could fool some shoppers into thinking that this is a color film.   The packaging even notes that this is a Color print. This is NOT TRUE. The film is presented in black and white, through and through.
     
     
    VIDEO QUALITY   2 ½ /5
    Alice in Wonderland is presented with a black and white print in the film’s original 1.33:1 ratio.  The print looks relatively clean, but there are many places in the movie where vertical lines appear through complete shots in the middle of scenes.   It’s hard to really see any complexity to the flesh tones or the picture details, as most of the cast is trapped under heavy makeup that really doesn’t stand the test of time.  
     
    AUDIO QUALITY 2 ½ /5
    Alice in Wonderland is presented in an English Dolby Digital 2.0 mono mix that doesn’t completely compensate for the problems with hearing clear dialogue through the large makeup appliances covering the actors’ heads. In several places in the film, I found myself needing to run the movie back and turn on the subtitles to understand the dialogue.. 
     
     
    Subtitles are available in English, French and Spanish.   A standard chapter menu is included for quick reference.  
     
     
    IN THE END...
     
    Alice in Wonderland is presented on DVD, at the same time that Tim Burton’s new production is filling theaters.  This early version from the 1930s doesn’t present anything more than a historical curiosity.   Film buffs may enjoy trying to find the stars under the heavy makeups used here, but this winds up being of limited entertainment value. If anything, the film here is a useful primer of the lessons used and utilized by later and more effective productions.
     
    Kevin Koster
    March 21, 2010
     
  2. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    46,413
    Likes Received:
    4,358
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    I don't know anything about this particular adaptation but I
    did find many reviews on Amazon stating that this is an

    EDITED version of the original 90 minute film.
     
  3. ahollis

    ahollis Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    6,536
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    New Orleans
    Real Name:
    Allen
    The story goes that the film was edited by MCA when they purchased the Paramount titles in the early 50's for TV sales. However, the AFI Film Catalog states the running time between 75 and 76 minutes. I know that does not end the discussion. I have been told that there is 90 minute print at UCLA, can anyone verify that? If so, I wonder why Universal did not make arrangements to use it. I have this DVD and boy is it a strange journey. I get the feeling that Tim Burton saw this while doing research for his version.
     
  4. chas speed

    chas speed Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    41
    MCA seems to own most early Paramount titles and I've never head of them "editing" any of them. I don't think much of that rumor.
     
  5. ahollis

    ahollis Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    6,536
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    New Orleans
    Real Name:
    Allen
    I concur with you even though I forwarded the rumor. I put some trust in the AFI Catalog since they looked at a lot of the reviews from the Hollywood Reporter and Variety on the films. But I also know mistakes can be made. If the film was edited for time on television, it would have been done at the local station in those days.
     
  6. Richard Gallagher

    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2001
    Messages:
    3,740
    Likes Received:
    543
    Location:
    Fishkill, NY
    Real Name:
    Rich Gallagher
    The supposed 90-minute version is looking like an urban legend to me. So far I have been unable to find a single authoritative source to back up the 90-minute story. A poster on another forum claims to have seen the original Variety review in 1933 and says that it lists the running time as 76 minutes. IMDB also has it listed at 76 minutes, while Maltin's "Classic Movie Guide" says 77 minutes.

    I found the New York Times review by Mordaunt Hall (12/23/33), but it doesn't list the running time.
     
  7. BrianRi

    BrianRi Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Donald Deschner's THE FILMS OF W.C. FIELDS (1966) lists it as 90 minutes. Deschner only provides a synopsis and vintage reviews, so there are no comments about different running times.
     

Share This Page