The Shocking Truth About Alice Through The Looking Glass: A Fantasy Flop

by

In contrast to expectations, “Alice Through the Looking Glass” was considered one of the poorest fantasy films from the 2010s, despite being a sequel to Tim Burton’s billion-dollar Disney hit, “Alice in Wonderland.” While “Alice in Wonderland” (2010) was a box office sensation, Tim Burton’s signature style offered a fresh take on the renowned Lewis Carroll tale. Mia Wasikowska played Alice in the film, which saw her returning to Wonderland to confront Helena Bonham Carter’s ruthless Red Queen. “Alice in Wonderland” was an imaginative movie that seamlessly blended live-action and CGI. Additionally, Burton’s longtime collaborator, Johnny Depp, appeared as the Mad Hatter in the film.

It’s no wonder that a follow-up was planned after the blockbuster success of Disney’s live-action remake, raking in an astounding $1 billion at the box office. However, Tim Burton took on a producer role for the sequel, with James Bobin taking charge as director instead. In 2016, we saw the release of “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” where Alice revisited Wonderland and ventured back in time to save the Mad Hatter. Regrettably, “Alice Through the Looking Glass” underperformed at the box office, earning only a small fraction of its predecessor’s earnings, with many critics labeling it one of the poorest fantasy films of the 2010s.

Alice Through The Looking Glass Was A Poor Follow-Up To Alice In Wonderland

Alice In Wonderland Released At The Right Time

2016’s “Alice Through the Looking Glass” had several factors contributing to its underperformance, but the primary issue was that it simply didn’t live up to the excellence of “Alice in Wonderland” (2010). Despite the 2010 film receiving criticism for its chaotic special effects and somewhat flawed narrative, “Alice in Wonderland” remains one of Disney’s highest-grossing movies. This was largely due to Tim Burton’s imaginative flair and the appeal of his name, as audiences were attracted by his signature blend of peculiarity and gothic style. Furthermore, a dream expert commended “Alice in Wonderland” for its authentic representation of dreams.

In a departure from the vibrant and whimsical Wonderland most people are familiar with, the film adaptation of Alice in Wonderland presented a darker, eerie version that seemed fitting for the 19-year-old Alice. Leveraging the surge in popularity of 3D animation following the success of films like James Cameron’s Avatar, which had been released just a year prior, Alice in Wonderland took advantage of this trend to offer a unique visual experience, using its story as an ideal canvas for director Tim Burton. This allowed him to showcase a strange and unsettling world that mirrored the mature perspective of its adult protagonist.

Movie Budget Box Office Rotten Tomatoes Score
Alice in Wonderland (2010) $200,000 $1,025,491,110 50% Tomatometer
Alice Through the Looking Glass (2016) $170,000 $276,928,112 29% Tomatometer

Contrasting with the visual effects, “Alice Through the Looking Glass” was criticized for its lackluster special effects, which may have been because it had a production budget $30 million less than the original film. Although some found the first movie’s visual effects subpar, “Alice Through the Looking Glass” received an even poorer rating on Rotten Tomatoes – dropping from a 50% Tomatometer to 29%. Critics panned the sequel for its “unnecessary” and “empty” storyline, labeling it as financially driven. This assessment was particularly true given that the movie was released six years after the initial release. Consequently, the sequel failed to earn nearly as much as Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” remake, which grossed over a billion dollars.

Alice Through The Looking Glass Didn’t Come Close To Its Predecessor’s Box Office

Tim Burton’s $1 Billion Legacy Provided An Impossible Challenge

The sequel of “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” unlike its predecessor, fell significantly short in box office earnings. To put it into perspective, the sequel garnered approximately $748,562,998 less than the initial movie worldwide. Given that both films had only a $30 million difference in production budget and featured the same cast, it’s quite astonishing to see such a vast disparity in earnings between the two movies. One plausible explanation could be that Tim Burton was not at the helm for “Alice Through the Looking Glass.

Tim Burton’s fame alone is often enough to fill movie theaters, demonstrating his directorial success. However, his role as a producer for the sequel, Alice Through the Looking Glass, didn’t detract from its underperformance. The new director faced a challenging task – surpassing the $1 billion legacy of Burton’s Alice in Wonderland and competing with its strong Rotten Tomatoes score. Unfortunately, the non-Tim-Burton sequel was released too late, with a weaker narrative and lower production value compared to the original. As a result, Alice Through the Looking Glass acquired a reputation as one of the least successful fantasy films of the 2010s.

Read More

2025-05-18 20:50