Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss was actually one of the worst fantasy movies of the 2010s, despite being a sequel to Tim Burton’s $1 billion Disney blockbuster film. Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland was a big box office hit in 2010, and the director’s usual flair provided a unique reimagining of the well-known Lewis Carroll story. Starring Mia Wasikowska as Alice, the film followed Alice’s return to Wonderland to confront Helena Bonham Carter’s tyrannical Red Queen, and was a fantastical film that combined live-action and CGI. Alice in Wonderland also starred Burton’s long-time collaborator, Johnny Depp, as the Mad Hatter.
With an impressive $1 billion box office result, it came as no surprise that a sequel to the Disney live-action remake was soon announced. However, Tim Burton only returned to the sequel as a producer, with James Bobin directing instead. Released in 2016, Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss followed Alice as she returned to Wonderland, traveling back in time to save the Mad Hatter. Unfortunately, Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss bombed at the box office, earning just a fraction of its predecessor’s $1 billion, with many regarding the movie as one of the worst fantasy movies of the 2010s.
Alice Through The Looking Glᴀss Was A Poor Follow-Up To Alice In Wonderland
Alice In Wonderland Released At The Right Time
There are many reasons why 2016’s Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss failed, but the main one is that it was just a poor follow-up to Alice in Wonderland. Although 2010’s movie was criticized for its messy visual effects and somewhat poor story, Alice in Wonderland still managed to pull in one of Disney’s highest box office results. This was mostly down to Tim Burton’s creativity and the fact his name was attached, as viewers were drawn to the film because of the director’s strange and usually goth imagination, and a dream expert even praised Alice in Wonderland for its accuracy.
Alice in Wonderland capitalized on the growing trend of 3D animation
Alice in Wonderland followed a dreary version of Wonderland, which felt fitting for a 19-year-old Alice. Instead of the contrasted and colorful version that audiences are used to seeing from a child’s imagination, the movie showcased a strange and unsettling world befitting of its adult protagonist. To do this, Alice in Wonderland capitalized on the growing trend of 3D animation. James Cameron’s Avatar had been released one year prior, and so Alice in Wonderland was released at the perfect time to explore the novel effects of 3D, with its story making it the perfect sandbox for Burton to play in.
|
Movie |
Budget |
Box Office |
Rotten Tomatoes Score |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Alice in Wonderland (2010) |
$200,000 |
$1,025,491,110 |
50% Tomatometer |
|
Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss (2016) |
$170,000 |
$276,928,112 |
29% Tomatometer |
In contrast, Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss’ visual effects were definitely lacking, which was likely due to its $30 million lower production budget. While some had negatively reviewed the first movie for the visual effects, Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss received an even lower Rotten Tomatoes score – from a 50% Tomatometer down to 29%. Critics disliked the sequel’s “pointless” story, regarding the film as unnecessary, empty, and financially driven, especially as the movie came out six years after the original. As a result, the sequel didn’t make anywhere near as much as Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland remake’s billion dollars.
Alice Through The Looking Glᴀss Didn’t Come Close To Its Predecessor’s Box Office
Tim Burton’s $1 Billion Legacy Provided An Impossible Challenge
Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss did not earn anywhere near as much as its predecessor at the box office. In fact, the sequel earned a shocking $748,562,998 less than the first movie at the box office worldwide. Considering there was only a $30 million difference in budget, and Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss starred the same cast, it’s surprising how big the difference in earnings is between the two movies. There are plenty of possible reasons for this, but a prominent factor has to be that Tim Burton did not direct Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss.
Tim Burton’s name is enough to draw a large audience to theaters, and this is evident due to the director’s success. Therefore, the fact that he only operated in a producer capacity for the sequel cannot have helped Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss’ lack of success, as the new director had to somehow top Burton’s $1 billion legacy, and Alice in Wonderland’s Rotten Tomatoes score. Unfortunately, the non-Tim-Burton sequel was released too late, with a flimsy story and cheaper production, and so Alice Through the Looking Glᴀss earned a reputation as one of the worst fantasy movies of the 2010s.
