MUBI

By and large, the biggest problem with most adaptations of Lewis Carroll’s fable is people’s tendency to read too much into it. I guess it could be said that he so effectively created absurdity that people cannot handle the absurdity of it and MUST give it meaning. Thus, film adaptations of Alice in Wonderland tend to either stray from the original story to include other random and bizarre things the director or screenwriter feels like inserting, or worse, includes some unnecessary theme or social statement. This short, over a hundred years old and the first ever adaptation of the book, succeeds mostly because its technical limitations, time constraints, and lack of sound allows the camera to just sit back and enjoy the absurd nature of Wonderland without too much deviation or social statement. It’s an abridged Alice, but a true to form Alice nonetheless. Unfortunately, “Alice” is still too old.

The effects are light and mostly done through double-exposures, sometimes giving away the process but they still tell the story, which is the most important part. Unintentionally, the awkward movements of silent cinema on today’s screens help create a much more surrealistic movement behind the characters which helps. Unintentionally, the damage and rot that has occurred to the only surviving print over the years is also tragic, as it blows over some of the best moments and sometimes makes the movie a little hard to watch. This is an early silent film, so the blocking is mostly along a traditional staging, with cuts only between certain locations (or effects). This movie is meant to be flat and allow the viewer to enjoy the magic as it happens, not skip around with jumpcuts and uneven spokes. Oh well, what exists is an impression of what once was, and the idea is still there.

—PolarisDiB

I find it utterly fascinating to look at a piece of film history that has survived for over 100 years. Thank you, MUBI/The Auteurs, for making it availiable to us and thank you BFI for restoring it.

I really enjoy the beginning and the end. The middle part is a little awkward, though. After all, this is a story that mainly lives from its puns, neologisms and nonsensical dialogues, which must be difficult to adapt for a silent film. I guess that if I had not read the novel before, this would have been rather irritating during some scenes. However, the performances might lack a little vigour but the costume design is wonderful.

Oh, and is it just me or does anybody else find the bit in which the March Hare and the Mad Hatter try to put the Dormouse’s head into the tea pot slightly disturbing?

British film pioneer Cecil M. Hepworth (“Rescued by Rover” & “The
Egg-Laying Man”) teamed-up with fellow film pioneer Percy Stow for the
first big screen adaptation of the classic children’s book by Lewis
Carroll which has since been innumerably remade.

Alice (May Clark) follows the White Rabbit down the rabbit-hole to
Wonderland where she shrinks and grows, gets directed to the Mad
Hatter’s Tea-Party by the Duchess’s Cheshire Cat and disrupts the Royal
Procession in a series of entertaining early effects.

Production secretary May Clark never entirely seems at ease in the role
and is outclassed by the professionalism of co-stars Cecil M. Hepworth,
Mrs. Hepworth, their cat and first British film star Blair the dog
(“Rescued by Rover”).

The film-makers have done a surprisingly successful job of brining the
original illustrations by Sir John Tenniel to life with some truly
pioneering effects and although much was lost when the original reels
were melted down by the receivers there is still plenty to enjoy.

“Until she remembers the magic fan.”

Before going to see the masterpiece by Tim Burton which opened recently. I had the opportunity to watch the first film produced about the history written by Charles Lutwidge in 1865. The 1903 film is the only copy that survived and was recovered by the BFI National Archive. The movie takes about 10 minutes, is in black and white and is full of sequels over the years of life he has. Has effects that are reminiscent of Georges Méliès in its infancy, yet it remains an interesting experience, if only to then make an analogy between the two films.