Delayed Reaction: Alice Through the Looking Glass

The Pitch: Alice in Wonderland made so much money that we don't have a choice in the matter. There must be a sequel.

These days, crossing the $1 billion threshold doesn't mean much. All it says is that China really likes that Fast and Furious movie, people around the world aren't tired of Pirates movies, or Europe was really happy that James Bond has been around for 50 years. In 2010, it meant something. When Alice in Wonderland was released in the spring of 2010, here's a list of all the movies to break $1 billion in the worldwide box office:

• Avatar: 3-D movie sensation that the world ate up for some reason, still holding the all-time box office record by $600 million.
• Titanic: A global sensation, the likes of which we may never see again when you calculate in inflation.
• The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King: The culmination of one of the most impressive series runs in history.
• Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest: A testament to the overwhelming popularity of Johnny Depp and the first Pirates movie.
• The Dark Knight: A perfect mix of hype and domestic box office dominance that only made it to $1 billion thanks to a strategic IMAX re-release.

That's it. 5 movies. Then comes along Alice in Wonderland. Despite lackluster reviews, it uses the 3-D appetite created by Avatar and Johnny Depp appetite won by 3 Pirates movies to become the most improbable movie to earn $1 billion. Even now, it sticks out in list of the 30 movies to reach that amount as the one that makes the least amount of sense.

What I'm trying to say is that Disney should've known better. There was no reason to assume that Alice Through the Looking Glass would be a hit. As I discussed with Now You See Me 2 the other day, there's such a thing as an accidental hit. Alice in Wonderland had all the markings of one. When the film was release in March 2010, audiences were only 5 weeks removed from Avatar's record-breaking streak at #1 in the box office. They were starved for any kind of 3-D. Keep in mind, shortly after Alice in Wonderland, audiences made a hit out of Clash of the Titans' shoddy 3-D conversion. People hadn't grown tired of Johnny Depp's shtick yet either. The stars aligned for Alice. In the six years since that surprise success, Johnny Depp had a sting of flops (Mortdecai, Transcendence, The Lone Ranger), Mia Wasikowska hadn't managed to become a star, and no one cared about 3-D anymore. Tim Burton didn't even return as the director. Disney should've known better. The really incredible thing though, is that even despite releasing the fewest number of films in 2016 of any of the six major studios and having major disappointments like The BFG, Pete's Dragon, and Alice Through the Looking Glass, Disney managed to DESTROY the studio box office record that year.

I guess I could talk about the movie itself now. It's not very good though, so why would I want to? It looks like a poor imitation of a Tim Burton movie and makes the mistake of adding backstory to characters who didn't need them. It feels like Mia Wasikowska is trapped in this because neither Jane Eyre, Lawless, Stoker, Tracks, nor Crimson Peak caught on with audiences or awards circuits. Like the Pirates movies, this makes the mistake of thinking that Johnny Depp's character needs to have more focus simply because he's the biggest name attached to the movie. And, the story is convoluted nonsense. I'm being harder on the movie than it deserves because it's such an obvious example of studio hubris.

Verdict (?): Weakly Don't Recommend