#She probably read the original story tale for alice in wonderland...

[blondeaxolotl]

Ran-Mao would've loved Alice: Madness Returns

[anncanta]

Lemon Tart and the Man with the Axe

I am amazed at how archetypes work and how in a good book the image and the text always walk on the edge. Especially when the author and the text don't even hide what's going on.

I recently finished reading Heartless by Marissa Meyer and I'm still impressed.

This book is wonderful. I fell in love with it immediately, and now it's not just one of my favorite books – it's a book that is with me. Mine. The book I've been waiting for. It evokes so many feelings in me that I can't describe them all. Only the main ones: joy, delight, surprise, admiration. Recognition. Pain. Disbelief that such a book was possible. And admiration again.

Now that some time has passed since I finished reading it, I realize that I keep returning to one of its characters. Not only because he is exceptionally attractive – and I've been missing such a male character for many years – but also because he was surprisingly misunderstood within the text.

No, it's not the author's problem. The author is a genius, and she probably intended it that way. I can't remember another instance where a character in a text was surrounded by so many other people's views and was so different from what others saw. And yet, he doesn't argue with that view. He just lives his life. And it literally leaves you stunned. How is that possible? How could it be written? How could it be done so easily?

Well, it all seems so simple. There is a novel – a fan fiction based on Alice in Wonderland. The main character of the novel is Katherine Pinkerton, the young daughter of the Marquis, the future Queen of Hearts. There is a love story that failed, declared almost at the very beginning. It all seems like a typical romance. Everything points to it. Everything leads to it.

But this is Wonderland. Here, everything may not be as it seems.

And here I will digress and say a few words about the perception of the original.

Alice in Wonderland is often considered a fairy tale for children, a cute joke, a story told by a strange professor to his young friends on a hot summer day. Many people read it as such – as a bright ‘Disney’ pastoral. In a sense, it is. But only to a certain extent.

Because for Lewis Carroll, the story of Alice falling down the rabbit hole was, among other things, a parody of the scientists and friends around him, a logical exercise, a puzzle toy, a poetic exercise, a mockery of the ancient literary tradition (the ballad about the Jabberwock), a mathematical problem and just pure pleasure.

And this story is also extremely artificial, extremely conditional, almost a puppet theater.

And here I return to Marissa Mayer's novel. In order to understand what it is about, you need to remember one important thing: the characters in Alice in Wonderland are cards and chess.

No, there are people, animals, and strange creatures whose nature is difficult to determine there. But the main context is the two kingdoms in which the action takes place – these are two sets of chips and two spaces of the game.

And this is the main thing.

In Carroll's book, this game is permanent, brash, furious, seething, and absurd. It rolls over you at once and overwhelms you. So much so that you don't notice how the inexorable order emerges behind this crazy dance.

In Marissa Mayer's book, the game is more orderly, more restrained, and logical. Although it continues to be furious and passionate. This can only be compared to music, and all that comes to mind is, paradoxically, Saint-Saëns' Dance Macabre. However, what's surprising about that? Both cards and chess are games in which the stakes can be very high. Sometimes the stake is life.

Marissa Mayer understands this very well. That's why the Joker appears in her kingdom in a deck of cards.

I still can't get over his appearance. Besides how it was done – with such exquisite mocking grace and simplicity, with skill and taste. How much dignity, beauty, and sexuality there is in it. But the main thing is that the Joker is not just a card. This is a card that changes the game.

You can't help but reach for the image of the trickster, you just want to say that the deceiver and the lover of jokes has come to shake up the stagnant Kingdom of Hearts.

But it's more complicated. Tricksters are the public's favorites, it's hard to take your eyes off them. But you have to if you want to understand what the tale is about.

The Joker is a card that can change the current layout, which, if necessary, beats any other, including trumps, which in a certain sense is on its own.

That's why it was no surprise to me that Jest is playing his own game. By the way, Jest is a variant of the word ‘joker’, ‘jester’, ‘fool’. So, I suspect, we don't know the real name of this hero.

Everything is wonderful in his image. But the most striking thing is how, despite his mystery, he is shamelessly frank. And how frankly it is done.

There are many details that can be given here, but I will focus on one – Jest's friendship with Raven. As we will see later, it will pull others along with it, and not by chance.

From the very first moment he appears in the text, Jest appears in dual form – as a human and as a bird. Aside from the fact that a bird is a very powerful archetypal image in itself, especially a raven, it seems important to me that Jest does not simply split into two. He does not simply split into a human and a raven.

He splits into a joker and an executioner.

This is what suddenly struck me after a few days of reading the book.

I was not surprised that Kath did not see this – Kath is seventeen. How could I not?

In the amazing scene in the garden, where Kath, having fled from the king's proposal, rushes among the bushes and trees, suffocating in her tight corset, she sees how out of the darkness comes out to meet her first the figure of a hooded man with an axe, and then – Jest, sitting peacefully in a tree with a flute in his hands.

It is so obvious that there is no need to explain anything.

If anyone hasn't figured it out by the last third of the book, Jest says it outright: ‘The Raven was the executioner in the White Queen's court.’ It's both a warning to Kath – girl, I'm friends with the executioner. We've been best friends for years. Does that bother you? – and a reminder to the reader that jokers and rooks are not sweet romantic heroes.

There's another elegant twist hidden here.

Look. On the outside, the story of Jest and Kath is a sweet tale of an innocent girl who fell in love with a handsome young man who died tragically in battle.

A bright, beautiful, spectacular Disney story. Lemon tart.

But inside this tart is a very unusual treacle filling.

There are several moments, in addition to the one I mentioned above, indicating that everything is not so simple.

The first is the appearance of Jest in the Kingdom of Hearts. As Cheshire says, no one knows who Jest is or where he is from. He simply appeared at the gates of the royal palace, talked to the king, showed a couple of tricks, and offered his services.

However, this is just a joke. The Joker always unexpectedly appears in the game.

And there is more to come. The second moment is the Hatter's tea party. During which we see that if this is the king's joker, then there are at least two kings. The daytime one is the cheerful, frivolous, and carefree King of Hearts – and the shadow one is the thoughtful, strange, ironic, gloomy Hatta.

And even though the tea party is just a game, it is needed to show us that Jest as a character has a double bottom, a second meaning, a dark underside.

And the third moment is the conversation between Jest and Kath at the well, where he tells her directly, ‘I am the rook. I can walk any distance, if in a straight line. I come from a country that has been at war for many years. I have seen people die and I have taken many lives myself.’ In this scene, he seems very young and very much in love. And he is, but its beauty and strength is that if seventeen-year-old Kath sees only this youth and love, letting everything else pass in one ear and out the other, then the adult reader sees the rest.

They see a tired, very grown-up man who serves on the royal court. He has served there for many years. A man who fought, intrigued, persuaded, created alliances, destroyed them, carried out impossible missions, and killed. A man who is incredibly tired of all this. Who really wants to stay in a peaceful, calm kingdom and find a family. He does not know if he will succeed. But he clearly understands that the main obstacles to this are not the king, not his own low position, and not the Jabberwock.

The beauty of it is that Kath is not a lovesick fool who blindly throws herself at a handsome prince, although she is madly in love. Kat is a very young woman. All her thoughts, feelings, and actions are determined by her youth and lack of experience. In the finale, it seems to us that she is mad with grief. But the more I think about it, the more I am inclined to believe that it is not only from grief but from the fact that something has befallen her that she was simply unable to understand at the age of seventeen.

And this is a real tragedy.

When I finished reading the book, I couldn't understand why I didn't feel sorry for Jest. He's a fantastic character, smart, handsome, talented, ironic, sexy, kind, strong. What's the problem?

The problem is that Jest himself didn't see this story and its possible ending as tragic. Look above – he is a military man, a courtier, smart and calculating, a professional politician who is friends with a professional killer. A man who deliberately came to another country to seduce the queen, steal her heart, and leave. In the book, it's said quite delicately, but quite clearly: Jest wasn't trying to take Kath's heart because she wasn't a queen yet. His plan was to have an affair with her, make her fall in love with him, wait for her to marry the king, and become her lover.

This man knew how it would end. He had counted on it. He had no great doubts about it. He was simply not used to doubting such things. He had lived like this all his life. Hatta, who had spent much more time with him than Kath, saw it very clearly. His dull melancholy and slight contempt with which he speaks to her at the end of the book are the result not so much of hostility and jealousy towards her, but of the impossibility of explaining. He understands that he cannot explain to this frightened, grief-stricken girl that no matter how much pain he felt, no matter how terrible what had happened, the worst thing is that Jest did not see anything unusual in it. And this tears him apart from within. It was not time that caught up with him and stunned him with madness, but the realization that had finally come of what kind of life they both lived and the price they had paid for it.

But Kath cannot understand this. She is young and confused, she is under pressure from all sides and, among other things, she has no way of understanding it. These things can only be understood by life experience. So all that remains with her after what she has experienced, all that remains of Jest, is a man with an axe.

Without forgetting for a moment that she is writing a fanfic based on one of the greatest works of English literature, the author uses one of the most famous devices of this literature – an embodied metaphor. The dark side of Jest, his shadow, the part of him that Kath has tried desperately not to see throughout the story, splits off and stays with her.

And it doesn't matter what color the roses are if you don't understand anything. The Sisters take her heart, not because they take their pay for the opportunity to carry out revenge, but because there is no place for the heart where a person clings to the dead. Kath could have had the memory of Jest, of who he was – really was, of what happened, of their love. But she chose to hold on to a static image, of what she saw first. To a man in black with an axe. She can't be blamed for this. Her youth and inexperience made her do it. And in the end, she stayed with this man. She wanted to keep Jest, and she did – in the form she could. The irony of life. The irony of Sisters. The irony of the story and love.

In Marissa Mayer's interpretation, the story of the Queen of Hearts is the story of a girl who never became an adult.

And it is also a story about how important it is to play fair. First of all, with yourself.

* The art is from the internet. I don't know the artist. If you do, please let me know in the comments.

[12freddofrogs]

Okay. So having finished season one of OUAT, I might do a better summing up post of the things to actually sum up in a second. But first, I have just been thinking about all the characters who actually know their histories and backstories have been told to thousands of children as bedside stories, and how they probably feel about it.

There were four people who completely, 100 percent knew that they weren't from this world (who also had the theoretical opportunity to research fairytales; I kinda doubt Maleficent did): Regina, Gold, Jefferson, and August. As of yet, at least. Maybe later seasons will reveal that Tiana or someone was also there with her full memories.

Regina probably didn't buy a copy of Snow White for Henry (I maintain my theory Henry's first introduction to that specific fairytale was in the storybook), but she was probably curious. She might have picked up a copy of the Grimm's tale and laughed at most of it, successfully ignoring the slight twist in her stomach at the description of the Evil Queen's brutal death. Regina could have even put on the most famous movie version, the Disney cartoon, and deliberately gagged throughout the singing birds. She might have made a snarky comment at the Happily Ever After ("You sure about that?") and then tossed out the DVD. Ultimately, she's aware of the tale, but hasn't really studied it.

Mr Gold absolutely read a version of Rumpelstiltskin or two. He probably would have watched the movie, but there isn't really a mainstream American Rumpelstiltskin movie. A couple can be found here and there, but it doesn't seem to be a hugely popular movie to adapt. The biggest one I can think of is the third Shrek, and Mr Gold doesn't particularly strike me as someone who would sit down and watch Shrek for its own sake.

That said, he was trapped in time for almost thirty years, during which he could do very little. Refine his plans, gather information, the general running of a store, but he was stuck in Storybrooke for a long time. It's not impossible to me things would contrive until he found himself watching Shrek 3. And honestly? I think he wouldn't hate his portrayal in that movie. That particular Rumpelstiltskin was smart, made deals and kept them despite looking for loopholes, collected power, was terrifying in his own right despite being a comedic character in a comedic film. He was a villain, but it's not like the Dark One has ever particularly been surprised at that title.

My first thought on Jefferson was that he probably hadn't read Alice in Wonderland, but then I realised that he absolutely, most definitely had. So many times, in every variation he could find. Jefferson has spent those thirty years desperately looking for a way to go back. There is no doubt that the Mad Hatter has been intensely studying what seems to be the biggest link between the Enchanted Forest (and Wonderland) and the Land Without Magic: the fact that somehow the stories themselves are leaking through in variations.

He's watched movies. He's read Alice and Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, and read books on those books. He's played video games and watched kid's cartoons and read dumb romances that seem to have no link other than the characters having familiar names. Jefferson has noticed that, for some reason, the Disney cartoon appears to be the most accurate.

Not just for Alice in Wonderland, but for all of them. Some of the other stories he only knew by reputation, or rumour, and he can't actually ask Mary Margaret what elements of the Snow White tale were true or not. That said, he knows that dwarves have names like Grumpy and Doc, and only Disney seems to have given that name. He'd heard of the fairy Maleficient, and every other variation of Sleeping Beauty gave the uninvited fairy a different name. Disney isn't exactly accurate but they are closer than anyone else, including the original tales. What does that mean? He has no idea. He would break into Disney studios if he could.

And then August, I think, would absolutely watch Pinocchio. I'm fairly certain he was still going by the name Pinocchio when he first arrived, and people made connections. Small child by the side of the road, someone grabbed the Disney DVD from Blockbuster. The first time he saw it he was too startled to tear his eyes away. He watched it again a few weeks later, and had adjusted enough to the world that he sobbed the whole time.

August has, much like Jefferson, also noticed that Disney seems to be the most accurate one. He read The Adventures of Pinocchio when he was fourteen, tucked up in a private corner of a library and half expecting the book to cause a breakdown, and was instead just surprised at how different things were. The Field of Miracles? Bandits? Why is the whale a dogfish shark?

He hasn't made it a hobby to track down every version, but he has watched a few of them. He liked a couple, disliked others, more based on how he was portrayed rather than how accurate it was. He did at least once go on the Pinocchio ride at Disneyland and, despite how cartoony and wrong the little Jiminy Cricket was, he was nearly crying when he got out.

And, of course, Mr Gold isn't just Rumpelstiltskin, is he?

I'm not sure how it would come up, necessarily. Again, he's not really the type to watch children's movies for fun. He could pick up a book of fairytales and browse through, but honestly, his story was different enough that he might not connect who this Beauty is, with two older sisters and a father who steals a rose and a monster with an unwilling curse.

But it was twenty-eight years, and a lot can happen in that time. Maybe Regina did it on purpose - after all, she had a young son who was allowed to watch most of the Disney princesses, just not Snow White. She could have made a delicate suggestion to a man she was sure wouldn't get the reference about a Belle and Gaston, and certainly nothing showed in Gold's face that he recognised those names. But once she left, he curiously tracked down the Disney copy of Beauty and the Beast.

It didn't take long at all before he saw the familiarity, a girl who loved to read who, even in a cartoon, looked too familiar. Gold actually couldn't get through the whole movie in one go, and had to keep stopping. If it was more accurate, he might not have finished. He didn't realise that the singing teacup with a single chip in it meant something until he was well into the movie. And he didn't quite cry, not even in the privacy of his own house with the doors locked, at the ending when the Beast that was not him chose love and the woman who was absolutely Belle, but his eyes were a little wet. He spent the next few weeks making Mr French's life miserable, raising rent and insisting on quicker repayments, and didn't even pretend to justify it.

[seewetter]

Hm. This is both a good target of critique and a almost mythologizing criticism: Mary Shelley is not the "true inventor" of science fiction, even if the late Brian Aldiss argued for this idea. She is one of many voices that precede H.G. Wells and precede Jules Verne. In fact there's nothing wrong with praising Jules Verne for writing some superb and trailblazing sci-fi novels that are still remembered today or for praising H.G. Wells for writing a story so vivid that its radio play was believed to be a real news broadcast and caused a mass panic.

Like isn't Margaret Cavendish's The Blazing World from 1666(!), with its strong focus on the scientific exploration of another planet, science fiction -- hard science fiction, even? Isn't Taketori Monogatari (The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter) from the 9th or 10th century, written by an unknown author, with a child that falls from the Moon and is raised by the local community, similar enough to First Contact stories (like E.T.) to qualify (by some definitions) as sci-fi, despite the fae and magical elements (which we also find in Star Wars)? A True Story, written in what is today Syria by an atheist author includes groups of adventurers travelling to the moon and planets of our solar system, getting involved in alien politics of those celestial bodies... nothing to do with sci-fi?

Aren't medieval stories of the Brazen Head or ancient stories about the wild inventions of Archimedes (setting up hundreds of mirrors to protect a city from naval attack by burning them) technically science fiction? Isn't Alexandrian Romance, as a genre in Ancient Rome, totally sci-fi? With Alexander the Great exploring the skies in a hot air balloon (at the time didn't exist) and beneath the sea in a submarine (ditto).

I think it's interesting that the modern publishing industry keeps getting away with convincing us that one literary classic or another is the origin of the entire genre.

Like this goes for fantasy as well. J.R.R. Tolkien is the father* of fantasy*** -- and those asterisks are just a stylistic device I'm using to indicate that there's more going on. Tolkien did popularize fantasy, did cause a huge wave of ripoffs by mainstream publishing houses. His main contribution to fantasy isn't inventing it, though -- rather its being so comprehensive in amalgamating existing tropes within an existing niche genre and so good at expressing these tropes and making them all appealing that suddenly less skilled authors know how to appeal to much of the same wide audience that he appealed to.

Tolkien didn't invent giant spiders, not even in prose fiction -- Jeremias Gotthelf beat him to it by ~100 years -- and there are probably stories about giant spiders that go way back, not just in folklore and oral tradition, but also in fiction

He didn't invent adventure stories with goblins living under mountains, he was directly inspired by existing literature

Tolkien didn't invent adventure stories set in fantastical lands - not even with in published Western prose literature - his works were compared to Alice in Wonderland and there's lots of works of fiction that inspired Tolkien that can be seen in the same genre (Gulliver's Travels, Peter Pan, Wizard of Oz, the list goes on)

I need to stop myself from getting carried away (the back of my mind is like "and Sauron is based on that werewolf villain in what is clearly also a fantasy book that Tolkien read") -- the point is hopefully clear by now.

No genre exists in a vacuum. When Mame-Fatou Niang (the author of the screenshotted tweet) says that Mary Shelley "wrote what is still considered today the 1st science fiction novel" but follows up telling New York Times Books that they are continuing a tradition of erasing her, I find that to be kind of silly. Because there is clearly a tradition of not considering her the mother of sci-fi -- put differently, we could just as easily say that Jules Verne "wrote what is still considered today the 1st science fiction novel" and that there is a tradition of that. We could also say that Margaret Cavendish "wrote what is still considered today the 1st science fiction novel" and that there is a tradition of that, which would equally be true, because ever since Virginia Woolfe rediscovered Cavendish's work there definitely has been a tradition considering her the mother of sci-fi and fantasy.

The reality is that these genres are ancient and diverse. That they stretch back to when people first started fantasizing about inventing things (which must have been in the Paleolithic) or about things that weren't real (I believe this 40,000 year old statue to be an example of something that wasn't real then and isn't real now). We could view Plato's Republic as containing elements of fantasy when Plato wrote about Atlantis -- sure, it was a thought experiment, but he was writing about a non-real society in the knowledge that it wasn't real -- because even if there had been a real Atlantis and Plato knew about it, which I doubt, the story of Atlantis as told by Plato is meant to illustrate his philosophical ideas about all kinds of topics and the "real" Atlantis (if it ever existed) did not exist just for Plato to be able to do that. So its related to fantasy, its purpose is to make the reader consciously fantasize about something.

When we treat these genres as if they were invented by Mary Shelley, H.G. Wells and Tolkien, we do ourselves a disservice. We ignore all that is there, the wealth of human ideas and experiences. Even much of the folkloric traditions of the world is written with a certain tongue-in-cheekness that makes it clear the reader is meant to enjoy a fantastical story and not really assume it all to be real. Anansi or Ysbaddaden don't have to be real for people to get a kick out of their tales.

Mary Shelley didn't invent sci-fi. But she sure as heck contributed to it.

[princesssarisa]

I've lost count of the number of older works of fiction that some people refuse to take at face value. So many literary critics, when faced with an aspect of a classic book or play that they don't like, will claim that it's really a deconstruction or a satire, or that the author didn't really want to write it that way, but reluctantly gave in to the mores of their time period. Whether it's because the work is out of step with modern values, or because the tone is inconsistent, or because certain storylines play out differently than the critic wanted them to, or, very commonly, because the work is too romantic, too optimistic, etc., and not edgy and cynical enough, the critics cry "insincere author."

We see this when people claim that Romeo and Juliet is really a satire or a deconstruction of a love story. Or when they claim that the ending of Wuthering Heights inconsistent with the rest of the book, and probably wasn't the original ending Emily Brontë wrote, or that Jane Eyre's happy ending is supposed to ring false and hollow. Or that the ending of Little Women is another false happy ending that's actually supposed to be disappointing. Or many other examples.

Now I've seen this thinking applied to Alice in Wonderland too. Namely to the sentimental poems and gentle real-world scenes that frame both of the two books: the poem "All in the golden afternoon" that opens Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and the reverie of Alice's sister that ends the book, and Through the Looking-Glass's framing poems "Child of the pure unclouded brow" and "A boat beneath a sunny sky" and its opening and closing scenes of Alice playing with her kitten.

I've now seen two people (composer Unsuk Chin in her notes on her opera adaptation, and an essay writer whose name I've forgotten) argue that these poems and scenes are tonally inconsistent with the rest of the text, and that they're much more conventionally Victorian in their sentimentality and idyllic portrait of childhood than Alice's dream adventures are in all their surrealism, humor, dark edges and cultural satire. Unsuk Chin wrote that Carroll was probably forced to give the books a conventional, sentimental framing, or else they would have been too radical for the era, and she suggested that he probably would have written very different opening and closing scenes if he had his own way. I also found an essay targeting the opening and closing poems, which suggested that they should be read as satirical, because their sentimental tone and their framing of the stories as simple, wondrous fairy tales for innocent children is so out-of-step with the books' actual tone.

That's an interesting idea that I had never considered before. I always have noticed that difference in tone between Alice's adventures and the framing poems and scenes. But I've still always assumed that the framing sentimentality was sincere on Carroll's part, and that this was part of the books' complexity. The idea that it might really be satire never crossed my mind until now.

But to be honest, I still lean toward thinking they're sincere. In the first place, Carroll's satirical poems within Alice's dreams (e.g. "How doth the little crocodile" and "You are old, Father William") are obviously satire. Gleeful, wicked satire of the popular moralizing poems of the day. Not poems so subtly satirical that most people would think they were straight examples of the sentimental Victorian verses they parody. Secondly, in 1887, Carroll wrote an article called "Alice on the Stage," in which he gave detailed descriptions of each of the book's characters and what he thought of their portrayals in a recent stage adaptation. His description of Alice herself is very similar in tone to the framing poems and the affectionate reverie of the older sister at the end of the first book. He waxes very sentimentally about her loving, gentle, courteous nature, and of the innocence, joy, and wonderment of childhood that she embodies. Again, there's a bit of a disconnect between the angel-child he describes and the character he actually wrote – is this girl, "loving as a dog and gentle as a fawn," the same one who kicked Bill the Lizard out of the chimney and who remarked "I don't think it's a pity at all" when told that the Duchess was sentenced to death? But unless he meant this article as satire too, I can't imagine after reading it that the books' openings and endings are insincere in their tenderness.

Besides, as I pointed out, commentators are always trying to explain away aspects of classic literature that they don't like by saying "It was meant as satire" or "The author was forced to write this by the mores of the time period."

Still, the idea that the sentimental poems and framing scenes might have been meant as satire, or that they might have been concessions to Victorian taste so the books wouldn't seem too radical, is worthwhile to consider. They are very different in tone from the surreal and satirical stories they frame, after all. I might personally view that difference as just a part of the books' complexity (and as reflecting the complex, enigmatic character of the man who wrote them), but it's worth exploring from every possible angle.

[raconteur-multiverse]

🔮Twisted Wonderland Theory Guess 🔮

“🤔 Is MC/Yuu is descendants of ‘Balance Keeper’? Or Alice from series ‘Alice Comedies’?”

Never thought we are going to follow MC/Yuu's journey to Episode 07 Diasomnia soon. Probably the main story will began on winter seasons. Suddenly I want to discuss about the MC/Yuu, along other Yuu from Twst comic and Twst novel. We already know a two main character that resemble as MC/Yuu (Not official yet),Enma Yuuken (Comic) and Kuroki Yuuya(Novel). Since it's school of boys, means the MC is a male, while in the game the MC gender is neutral. Can be male or female. Same like other games too.

Even MC/Yuu doesn't have a magic skills in Twisted Wonderland, MC has a unknown ability that can read predict what will happen on those students. Sort of a dimension psychic mind to see subject past and presence. Also, MC is the first person who met Mickey Mouse in the mirror. Dire Crowley did gave MC "Ghost Camera" in Prologue, a camera that is able to take a picture of anything possessing a soul. Sounds very similar how we make a moving pictures to make a animation short film in 90s. In scene old Disney "Alice in Wonderland" at “Alice Comedies”.

I did realize something of MC's ability "Time sight" of Future, Past, and presence. It is similar ability of Master Yen Sid, The Balance Keeper. Yen Sid is also can see someone's past like MC's did see Villains Past in different parallel. It could possibly MC is Yen Sid's Descendants. Why you ask? MC and Yen Sid almost similar, they're not in Heroes or Villains side. More like Tritagonist or Rebel. A person who knows which path they must follow and will seek the truth in knowledge. Plus, remember when the magic dark mirror in Prologue Can't see the colors of MC's souls due ceremony NRC? That is why MC is resemble of "Balance", between light and dark like Yen Sid. So, MC souls color is grey. Even the students see MC more like Cheeky and Blunt. No matter MC doesn't have a magic, but MC did have a secret talent That no one can have. Now let's talk about Connection MC with Grim. Grim's name is from story fairy tale. We maybe think Grim is similar with Stitch, but actually he remind me of Julius the Cat from "Alice Comedies". His mischievous, helper, and comedic is similar with Julius.

Only thing something connection to this, MC resemble as Alice and Grim as Julius. Alice met Julius the Cat in Cartoon land when Alice done visit Mr."WD" in his animation workshop. Julius always accompany Alice wherever she goes to seek new adventure she never see before. Same how Grim will always accompany MC to seek if there's a chance to return to real world while help Grim to graduate in Night Raven College with others too.

I do believe that Dire Crowley and Ambrose could it be Yen Sid "Apprentice". Both of them had same level mastery magician, Ambrose with Light Magic and Crowley with Dark Magic. While Yen Sin both light and magic, Balance Magic. I got feeling that Ambrose approach to Dire Crowley more like his "Kouhei/Junior", while Ambrose is Crowley "Senpai/Senior" (if it's true). One thing I suspicious on Crowley is, Crowley could be doing this Overblot situation is following the original Villains role story by choosing students that is already Have Villains heritage magic. Like Riddle, Leona, Azul, Jamil, Vil, Idia and Malleus when everyone is in Coffin due ceremony Dark Mirror. Grim could be part Crowley's plan too or it just Crowley himself pretend he didn't know anything. Ambrose actually knows what's going Due VDC last year in Episode 05 Pomefiore. Which means Ambrose can predict future like Merlin. For Crowley, he could be resemble "The Phantom Blot", character from "House of Mouse" and monster in "Epic Mickey". Since who else knows about "Blot" thing?

Last is connection with Mickey Mouse, we know that Mickey as iconic mascot of Disney. Funny of my thoughts that Ambrose and Crowley remind me of Mickey and Oswald the Lucky rabbit. While Grim as Julius the Cat. In Epic Mickey, Oswald feel jealous and annoying that his "father"-Loves Mickey the most, same goes to Toon people who always remember him than Oswald. Same goes Crowley is sick that people more support to RSA and Ambrose than NRC and himself.

[writingforatwistedworld]

Things that confused me in the Disney adaptation of fairy tales because I am a person who was raised on Märchen (sometimes even the originals) throughout my childhood:

Why is Cinderella falling in love with the Prince so fast? Wasn't it three nights? (Not really better but I'm taking what I can get.) Also, where are the doves? And what about the cutting of body parts? (U know, that part.)

Why is the stepmother in Snow White falling off a cliff? She danced to death. In hot shoes mind you. Also, why is the Prince kissing her? The coffin is supposed to fall to the ground and she coughs up the apple piece in her throat.

Who the heck is Hercules? (I saw this one during my childhood and back then I didn't have the slightest clue who the guy was. I learned way later about Greek mythology and oh boy, if you ask me they have sometimes better stories than Grim had.)

Didn't the little Mermaid turn into sea foam? And wtf is up with this relationship. I liked the charismatic octopus more. (Even back then I was a sucker for Ursula. Idk. Her personality sucked me in.) That relationship looked weird even to eight years old me.

Alice in wonderland? Never read that one and I was so small I got lost and didn't know what the storyline was bc it was so confusing for me. (I was, idk, four?)

Aladdin? Charming. But that was until I started to read 1000 and 1 night(s?). That book is old and you know it. In some parts there is clearly racism. (I never got to read it fully. Thankfully I got a copy at home so I should probably finish that.)

And finally: Sleeping beauty. I actually saw that for the first time not so long ago. Full on confusion. Where are the 100 years? Why is lady suddenly turning into a dragon? (I kinda saw this coming bc Malleus but still, huh?) Why is she raised in the woods? She was sitting happily her entire live in the castle. (And bc I read the original when I turned fourteen or so: that table filled with food looked very dark in my eyes.)

If you were also someone who knew the book version before the Disney one: what was weird for you when you saw the films? What did you absolutely not expect?

Anons are ofc allowed!

[the-writer-muse]

About My Side WIP

Intro

By now, most of you have probably know that that I’ve been planning a new book, and I’m happy to finally introduce it to everyone as my side WIP! It explores a lot of themes and topics that are very close to my heart. I hope to be more open about this WIP, and I’m very excited to share it!

Putting this much info about my WIP online is a huge admission and gesture of trust, but I trust you guys. I hope you’ll continue to prove that my trust is not unfounded.

Basics

Title: Pawn

Main character: Alice Lee

Age group: Middle-Grade/YA

Genre: Fairy-tale retelling of Alice In Wonderland / Alice Through the Looking Glass, fantasy

Elevator pitch: The Chronicles of Narnia meets Legendborn in this Asian Alice retelling

Synopsis:

As children, Alice Lee and her older sister Evie created Meer, an imaginary world where they would finally belong. But as the two sisters grew older, they grew apart--in both emotion and imagination.

Four years after she first abandoned the fantasy land of Meer, Alice’s life forever changes in a horrible accident that leaves her injured and Evie dead. She has no memory of what happened that night, and she fears that there’s something more to the truth. Now, one month after the incident, she still doesn't remember her past.

But her past hasn't forgotten her. When she encounters an old friend from Meer, Alice discovers that the imaginary world of her childhood is very real—and in trouble. The Red Queen and the White Queen who ruled the land all those years ago are suddenly and brutally enforcing their reign. Her old friend is part of the rebellion that fights back against them--and he suspects that Evie’s death was no accident.

Hoping to find answers about her sister’s death and her own scars, Alice soon finds herself involved in a deadly game where the Red Queen and the White Queen control the chess pieces. One wrong move will cost Alice the board and any chance at reclaiming Meer. Will she ever be more than a pawn in a game? Or will she play straight into her enemy’s hands?

Inspiration

I’ve always wanted to write a retelling, but there were so many stories to choose from. In the end, though, there was really only one I could begin with, and that was Alice in Wonderland.

Lewis Carroll's Alice consistently expresses a confusion about her own identity and a stubborn adherence to logic, despite her travels being distinctly illogical. She clings to her old self in a world where she's someone new--someone other. I often write Asian heroines, and it wasn’t too hard for me to make the connection between that and identity of the self. 

How do others define us, how do we break free of those definitions, and how do we define ourselves? Those are some of the big questions in my WIP. It’s set both in the real world and in a fantasy world, so it gives me more room to explore modern issues.

That’s not the only thing I want to do in this book, though. Alice just appeals to me as a stubborn, practical heroine who’s very set in her ways until her circumstances change completely. I found myself asking questions of the original story: What if Alice’s sister had found Wonderland first and introduced it to her? What if Alice rejected it? What if it changed, completely and irrevocably? And what if Alice was then forced to return and face her past?

This is a very personal WIP, due to the topics and questions it incorporates. Honestly, it’s a very indulgent story, but it’s one that I enjoy a lot. I hope to share more about it and my process in the future. Thank you for reading!

[bemused-writer]

Witch Hat Atelier Fairy Tale Pictures

What does one do when they have insomnia? Write more meta, of course. Since I went over the Valentine pictures for Witch Hat Atelier, I figured it would be fun to also over-analyze the fairy tale pictures! I'm just going to preface this with the warning that it's been a little bit since I've read any fairy tales so... if I get anything wrong that is why. (^^)"

I'll start with Coco here, who is very fittingly depicted as Alice from The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland. There's no doubt that Coco has landed in a mad world, one she's always dreamed of but found to be much stranger than she expected. She's curious and bold, so Alice seems like a good pick. I don't think that kid was scared of anything. 8D And she was definitely willing to investigate everything around her! Having said that, she wound up in a lot of trouble because of that, and while things turned out all right in the end, there was a lot of danger along the way. Perhaps Coco's journey will be similar.

Agott is Snow White, but she's not about to be tricked into eating that poisoned apple. If anything, she might be the one experimenting with it! Visually, Agott fits Snow White pretty well: fair skin, dark hair, etc. There's also the matter of her liking company more than she lets on (our "seven dwarves" or just the other students). Another thing about Snow White: she's very helpful and diligent. She cooks and cleans with all her might. Likewise, Agott works hard to teach her fellow students (Coco in particular) and winds up being more of a team player than she probably expected. Because of Snow White's helpful nature, I think it's fair to expect Agott to take on a similar role in terms of being someone you can rely on; I expect Coco will come to rely on her as the series goes on.

Tetia is ... Puss in Boots? I think? I can't read the Japanese there. Anyway, assuming that's what she is, I have to admit I'm not terribly familiar with the tale, so I looked it up! It seems to be a rags to riches kind of story that emphasizes working hard and passing various trials. Wikipedia also notes it emphasizes dressing well, and Tetia is certainly stylish with her desire to customize her future witch's hat.

So, the rest could certainly be applied to Tetia. She works very hard and always with others in mind and she may have been poor. We know the least about her, so it's hard to say much about how she's similar to Puss in Boots outside of her being courageous and working hard for her goals.

Olruggio's makes me laugh. XD I'm pretty sure he's supposed to be Sleeping Beauty (I think the vines are a reference to what the Prince fights to get to her?) and that's fitting enough because, well, the man really wants to get some rest. However, let's not leave it at that and let's see if we can find something a little deeper to his being Sleeping Beauty!

Well, Sleeping Beauty is induced into a magical sleep that can only be broken by true love's kiss. And she falls into this slumber because she's been cursed. As we know, things haven't been going great for Olruggio in the latest chapter and he has been "cursed" to lose his memory. A symbolic sleep, if you will, where he is unaware of what is happening around him, just like Sleeping Beauty. Likewise, this can only be broken if something jogs his memory. Whether it's a "prince" or not remains to be seen.

Qifrey is continuing the Alice in Wonderland theme to compliment Coco, which is suiting once more. He is the rabbit that so famously led Alice deeper and deeper into the mad world of Wonderland and, well, that kind of speaks for itself here. (^^)" The rabbit may not have had evil intentions, but he wasn't perfectly helpful either.

Tartah is Pinocchio, and I like this take in particular. He wants to be a "real boy." That is, he wants to make his way in witch society regardless of his impairments. Pinocchio finds joy in the end when his wish is granted after he's honest, and as we can see Tartah is an honest boy. Perhaps this means happiness is in his future and he will be permitted to study magic? That would suggest witch society itself changes, and that couldn't hurt.

Beldaruit is the Cheshire Cat from Alice in Wonderland, which means we now have a trio of madness being passed from teacher to student. The Cheshire Cat largely amused itself and had no qualms with messing with people. Yeah, I can kind of see how Beldaruit fits the bill... But the Cheshire Cat didn't really intend to cause harm either; arguably it offered advice. Beldaruit is always extending his hand to others, but it often results in the negative (Qifrey and Coco both). Will he be able to change this in the future now that he has a new student?

We don't know Suzie too well yet, but here she is portrayed as Cinderella! Hard working, stylish, and a wish fulfilled all characterize this princess, and I can see these qualities in Suzie as well. She must work hard to be an assistant at her age and she definitely has style. Will she have a wish granted? Hard to say at this point, but I'm rooting for her.

And then there are all of the Knights Moralis depicted as mermaids. This is actually quite fitting: nowadays we have a tendency to think of mermaids as positive creatures. Beautiful, alluring, all of that. But they're also dangerous and willing to lure sailors to their deaths. Likewise, the Knights Moralis should be trustworthy and they're certainly all very stylish, but as we've seen they take their methods too far and become more like vipers. Fitting indeed.

Riche and Euini share the same theme: Little Red Riding Hood with Riche as Little Red and Euini as the Wolf. This fairytale gets interpreted a lot of different ways, but straightforwardly it's about a girl trying to reach her grandmother while being hunted by a wolf. We know Riche cares deeply for her brother and wants to make him proud. We also know that she and Euini are inextricably tied together, though the hostility of the relationship in the original fairy tale is replaced by mutual care and growth. They need each other and have learned from one another. Riche takes the lead and Euini follows, sort of like Little Red and the Wolf. I'd say these two are the closest we have to a "canon" couple, so it makes sense they'd share the same fairy tale.

And that's all I got for now. (^^)

[intertwinedfcbles]

━━ ◤ ( LONG GOLDEN LOCKS, FLOWING BLUE DRESSES, ADVENTUROUS, WHIMSICAL IMAGINATION, AND SKY BLUE ) welcome, ALICE KINGSLEIGH, SHE/HER. before you move in, tell us what you remember: SLAYING THE JABBERWOCKY. excellent, now we are pleased to accept your offer to live OLD CREEK HISTORICAL DISTRICT, and your new job as LIEUTENANT at DECIMATION POLICE AND FIRE STATION is waiting for you to begin. ( TIM BURTON’S: ALICE IN WONDERLAND  AND CAITY LOTZ )

THE BASICS

NAME: Alice Kingsleigh NICKNAMES: Al, Lieutenant BIRTHDAY: May 4th, 1986 AGE: 34 PRONOUNS: She/Her LAST KNOWN MEMORY: Slaying the Jabberwocky and being given the vial of its blood to return home with. ORIGINATION: Tim Burton’s: Alice in Wonderland FACECLAIM: Caity Lotz

THE DETAILS

FAMILY: Charles Kingsleigh (Father), Helen Kingsliegh (Mother), Margaret Manchester (Sister, Married) Henry Kingsleigh (Brother) THREE FAVORITE THINGS: Lavish and over the top tea parties with cake and cucumber sandwiches. All pastel colors, she enjoys the light they bring in. Books, Alice loves books of adventure and mysteries and reads them any chance she can get, there’s always one or two on her desk. EDUCATION: High School Diploma, Bachelor’s Degree in Criminal Justice. SKILLS: Swordplay (Alice has a lot of different swordplay experience from Kendo, to Fencing, and even just some performance type stunts. Alice has a lot of knowledge on the Criminal Justice system to use as she sees fits, she’s also learned from her profession how to be inquisitive in the right areas, as well as creative which is one of her best skills. HEADCANONS: Alice is certainly known to ask the oddest questions or make up and tell the wildest tales for the fun of it. If anyone's looking for an interesting story to pass the time or get in some long winded random discussion Alice is there and she’s glad to talk oddities.Alice is a very well traveled and open minded person, she’s courageous to a fault which often leads to some very impulsive decisions.  WHAT THEY’RE PLANNING TO DO IN DECIMATION: Alice was the misfit of her family, it was always known and very well discussed. She simply could not be put into the mold her family wanted for her and though she loved them all dearly eventually when she found the moment to leave for her own adventures she did. She knows it was simply against her mother plans and broker her sister and brothers fault as they already had a missing piece from their late fathers sudden demise but she was Alice hadn’t been at home since he died, being the only one of the Kingsliegh’s who took the time to understand her. So leaving her lavish home in in the United Kingdoms Alice went to America where she eventually found herself paying her way through college on her own and joining a police academy on a whim but eventually it would be a career she excelled in and had a passion for. Criminal Justice became her passion. She found herself in DECIMATION, KANSAS eventually and this is where she’s decided to stay. Alice ‘walking dreams’ don’t bother her too much. In fact she actually enjoys them a little. The Mystery of them and the other worldly vibe of them intrigues her more than anything and considering how she generally is her enjoying the oddity is probably to be expected.

[yabookrevu]

Heartless - Marissa Meyer

Another day, another book review.

Read this one last night. As usual (because I am a disaster person), I didn’t correctly guess what story this was a retelling of. And even though it says very clearly on the back of the book (in the first line of the blurb, no less) something about Wonderland, my brain went to Snow White. No idea why (maybe something about the huntsman being sent to cut out Snow White’s heart? idk), but anyway: This book is related to Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

But there’s no Alice in this version. The main character is Catherine, the daughter of a nobleman in the (approximately Victorian-era) kingdom of Hearts. Catherine is not good at the things that are expected of her as a noblewoman, but is instead an excellent baker. She finds herself falling for the new court joker, a mysterious man named Jest. This is complicated by the fact that the king of Hearts has chosen her to be his bride.

Now, all of that is covered by the blurb on the back of the book. So let’s dive into some (spoiler-free) points about the story itself, in no particular order:

- This book is distinct from a lot of the YA books I’ve read in that it is a gentler love story. Meaning that there’s no sex. The most scandalous it gets is a couple of kisses, and even those aren’t aggressively described. So if you’re not into that element of a book for any particular reason, then this might be a better choice for you than a lot of the other ones.

- The love story is, I would say, the main plotline of this book. There are absolutely other things: friendship, monsters (one monster), court intrigue. But it seems like the budding love between Cath and Jest is the main component. Y’know, the more I read, the more I narrow down the types of stories that I like. This book nudged me closer to figuring it out, because the answer is clearly “not this.” I like a love story as much as the next person, but I have come to realize that I more enjoy a story where people are pushed together to overcome some obstacle, and they happen to fall in love during their quest. There’s not a lot of quest to this book. It’s first and foremost, a love story.

- This is a personal note. I’ve never read Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, and it’s been a very long time since I’ve watched Alice in Wonderland (it’s not one of my favorite Disney movies). There are a lot of characters in this book that you would remember from the movie version (again, can’t comment on the original book). You’ll see appearances by the Caterpillar, the Cheshire Cat, The Mad Hatter and the March Hare, along with, I’m sure, many others that I’ve forgotten. I felt like there were quite a few references that I would have had a better appreciation of if the movie were more clear in my mind. Just little callbacks sprinkled throughout that tugged on something at the back of my mind, but not strongly enough for me to remember anything about them. So, you might want to watch the movie BEFORE reading this book. It’s not the same story at all, so you’ll still go in fresh.

- There is a lot of silliness in the way the characters talk. I read the same joke at three different points throughout the book before I slowed down and really looked at it. (”Are you alright?” “No, but I’m mostly right.”) If you’re a fan of any part of the Wonderland mythos, you’ll probably have a good time reading these little exchanges.

Now, the million dollar question: Would I recommend this book? The answer is a resounding... I don’t know. This wasn’t my favorite of the books that I’ve read, simply because of the story. I probably won’t re-read it. BUT! The book was well-written and told a solid story. I will definitely be seeking out the author’s other books, which are loosely based on other fairy tales. So I would say, if you already like Alice in Wonderland, definitely give it a read. If you think you can give the story more of a chance than I did, then go for it! If, however, you’re also not a fan of Alice in Wonderland, maybe skip this one and look for other books by the same author. It was a good book. Just not my cup of tea. ;)

Heartless, Marissa Meyer, $11.99, 449 Pages

[justgottafinishthischapter]

Retelling Fairytales

Fairytales are among the oldest stories, the tale of Cinderella dating all the way back to the 1st century with the tale of Rhodopis, a Greek slave girl who married the Pharaoh of Egypt. Disney’s entire empire is built around retelling these imaginative stories, and they’ve been told and reworked many times. They have ranged from sugar-coated fantasies to dark horrors. So, what should you keep in mind when adapting a fairytale?

Does the story contain magic? Most fairytales do have magic, but other retellings ground the story in the real world, stripping away the magic to turn the story into a historical fiction, often being told as the “origin” of the fairytale itself. A great example of this being Ever After (1998) starring Drew Berrymore. This retelling of Cinderella replaces the magical Fairygodmother with Leonardo Da Vinci making sure Danielle can get to the ball, and the dress and shoes belonged to her mother as she pursues Prince Henry II of France.

Disney is also an Adaptation If you’re writing a retelling of Beauty and the Beast, and the only version you’ve ever heard is the Disney version, you’ll be surprised to quickly learn that depending on the version, the antagonist is actually either Beauty’s sisters, or the evil fairy. Rapunzel doesn’t have a magical flower in most versions, and the Snow Queen is barely recognizable, as it doesn’t keep any of the protagonists, barely any of the plot, and turned the primary antagonist into the protagonist’s sister.

How many versions have you read? It’s a good idea to read other versions of a fairytale because it might just inspire you. Of Beast and Beauty by Stacey Jay is a science-fiction retelling of Beauty and the Beast where this time, Beast is a prisoner of the blind queen Beauty, and the story also has threads of fantasy and royal intrigue that makes the story compelling. Likewise, there are versions of Little Red Riding Hood where she’s a little girl, a hunter, an assassin, a sexy pin-up with an axe, a werewolf, and an anime school girl.

Does the story run on Fairytale Logic or Real Logic? Akin to the first point, but not quite, Fairytale Logic means that true love’s kiss will break any spell, that talking animals are a common sight, and if a girl falls asleep in the woods and nobody’s around to see it, a creep will make a pass at her. Fairytales also offer a lot more wiggle room for suspension of disbelief, and you can get away with more crazy or nonsensical ideas that wouldn’t work in a realistic setting.

If you’re doing a fairytale with royalty, have you done your research? What is the primary export of their kingdom? Where do they fall in the line of succession? Do people usually marry for love or political advantage? What kingdoms are they aligned with? What kingdoms do they have a sordid history with? Can girls inherit the throne? How did the family come into power? In a more historical fiction setting, what period are you setting the story in? If there is magic, does the royal family have magic? If not, how do they keep control when magic-users could easily stage a coup and overthrow them? What about dragons and other monsters? How does the royal family protect themselves and their people from harm? What’s their climate like?

How much do you know about Medieval History? George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire is largely inspired by the Wars of the Roses, a succession crisis which launched a civil war following the death of King Edward III in 1377. If you don’t know that England was ruled by Frenchmen for most of the medieval period, that Spain was once governed by Muslims, or that a Frankish king was crowned Roman Emperor on Christmas Day more than 300 years after the Fall of Rome, you probably should do more independant research on the period. It might just inspire you.

What are the laws, rules, and limitations of magic? Magic can make a story difficult to balance, and knowing how yours works is important. There are two schools of magic: soft magic systems and hard magic systems. Most fairytales rely on soft magic that’s barely explained, while hard magic systems have very clearly defined rules as to what magic can and cannot do. In Sleeping Beauty, the three good fairies say that their magic can only do good, which is somewhat hard, but other than that one limitation, the rest of their magic is fairly soft. Elsa meanwhile has rather hard magic. She can only control snow and ice and nothing else, though her magic is pretty flexible too, as she somehow made a dress out of sleet.

What troublesome ideas are present in the original that need to be reexamined by a modern audience? This is seen a lot in feminist retellings of fairytales. Prince Charming as a creepy polygamist that macks on unconscious women, Sleeping Beauty’s.... basic entire library of older versions, most of which involve... trigger situations. The general tendency for fairytale princesses to fall in love at first sight and marry the first guy that gives them any attention. 

How can you reexamine or twist the plot to an interesting new angle? Versions where the magic mirror pits the queen and snow white against each other for its own agenda. Where Rapunzel cuts her own hair and uses it to escape her tower. Where the wolf is after Little Red Riding Hijab. Where the little mermaid more drastically changes species in the pursuit of love. Where Alice’s entire journey into Wonderland is a drug-induced hallucination, or even the slipping of her sanity into a crippling case of schizophrenia. How can you turn the story on its head and make the viewer see it in a new light?

[amandaklwrites]

Book Review: Unbirthday (Twisted Tales #10) by Liz Braswell

Genre: YA Fantasy, Retelling

Rating: 5/5

Book Review:

I LOVED THIS BOOK!

Okay, I will say this is not the most perfect book I have ever read. But I was overwhelmed (in a good way) by my love for this book that I didn’t think too hard on anything to complain about. So, this review will mostly be me talking about how much I love this book (sorry, not sorry).

Everyone who knows me knows that Alice in Wonderland is probably my favorite story of all time, and Walt’s Disney animated Alice in Wonderland movie is one of my favorite movies of all time. It was such an important part of my childhood and growing up, and it’s still super important to me.

So, when I found out this Twisted Tales series was coming out with a new one, and the Disney story was Alice in Wonderland, I KNEW I had to read it! I’ve read all the others with my friend as we have done book club during this quarantine time together (via messaging), but this one I read on my own and I loved it.

It’s very different than the original Disney movie, but that’s because it is more of a continuation—like, what would happen to Alice if this was years later and she went back. I thought the whole story was so original and interesting, but it felt like the original story at the same time. I felt like I was going back home, along with Alice. Even Alice, though a teenager in this story, felt the same, just with some new qualities. The new ideas were so unique and awesome, and I thought it was rather perfect what she came up with. So, I enjoyed it just as much as the original tale.

I loved the twists she played with the Lewis Carroll book as well (some characters that existed in the story, but Disney had not included), so that was SO COOL! And I loved how the ending tied together (I won’t say how, but if you are a fan of Wonderland at all, you’ll get what I mean)—I had actually cried.

There are some things that don’t make this book utter perfection, but I enjoyed this book so much that I couldn’t even focus on them that much. So, sorry, but this review was just gushing over this book. It was fun, it felt familiar, and it was just a damn joy overall. I loved it.

If you love Alice in Wonderland, check out this “retelling!”

[corvichor]

I may be a little (very) late to the party, but in regards to Ava’s Demon - while I’ve seen much discussion on which character is which fairy tale, I haven’t really seen anyone equate the characters with the fairy tales from the Titan Tales book? (Nevermind. I was being stupid and using ‘fairy tales’ rather than ‘titan tales’ in my search phrase.) SO. Here it is. 

The Little Merling

The Little Merling (The Little Mermaid) is, fairly obviously, Gil, what with his connection to Nevy and the sea (and also his homoerotic dream). I’m somewhat certain that the Sea Witch in this case will end up being Nevy, while the Prince (for the moment) is either Odin (who is an Actual Prince, apparently) or Olai (who, being Odin’s brother, is also probably an Actual Prince). I’m not very certain about the casting of the Prince (I suspect that it may end up being a character we haven’t seen yet), but we do have a rather limited cast, so Odin/Olai it is, for the time being. The reason I named Olai at all is because there seems to be some very obvious hinting at a relationship between Ava and Odin, so depending on which version of the fairy tale you follow, it could go down in two ways. Also, what struck me most about the Odin in Gil’s dream were his rings - which bear much resemblance to the rings we see on another Arrow’s hands.

Happy Ending - Odin is eventually substituted for Olai, once Gil and Olai meet, and then they live happily every after. The end. 

Probably the more likely ending - Odin (The Prince) and Ava (The Other Girl) get together, and Gil (The Merling), turns to sea foam (or a “monster of failure”). Of our current characters, he and Maggie are currently the most likely to fail their pacts. The more obvious choice would be Maggie, considering that she currently has a pact, but Gil (whose pact may or may not end up revolving around Paradise - which probably doesn’t exist), feels like another likely option for a failed pact (and also the failure I would personally prefer to see).

Beauty and the Titan

Beauty and the Titan (Beauty and the Beast), through process of elimination, is Maggie (seeing as she is literally in possession of a rose). The Beast in this case would be Maggie, with her desire for love and affection (and also Odin’s equating of her to a monster (and her visceral reaction to it) in Chapter Two). The casting of the other characters is currently unclear. Seeing as the original Beauty and the Beast was influenced by the Greek myth Eros and Psyche, and I have seen some relating of Eros and Psyche to the Star Host, the cast of characters for Maggie’s fairy tale may still be incomplete, so I’ll leave my speculation here for now. 

I have also seen speculation of Maggie’s fairy tale potentially being Snow White, with the seven flowers for the seven dwarfs, but several very central aspects of Snow White’s fairy tale do not line up with Maggie’s story. Her appearance - skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood, hair as black as ebony (or the night, depending on which version you read), apples, and a death-like sleep. While Maggie has been depicted with apples in official art, she has yet to appear with apples in the actual story, nor has sleep been a major theme. I am personally of the opinion that if Snow White does happen to be a fairy tale referenced in Ava’s Demon, Snow White may be Magpie Arrow instead, or another one of the Arrow siblings. I have no evidence to support this, but I’d like it to be true. 

The Wolf and the Fox

The Wolf and the Fox is Odin. He has often been symbolised as a fox, and his story seems to mesh with that of the Fox in the fairy tale rather well. It might be worth noting, at this point, that the title of this fairy tale has not been changed by TITAN, whereas the title of every other fairy tale has. This may have to do with the fact that the other three hosts so far have been raised in TITAN’s ideology, where Odin has not. It may have a deeper meaning. It may also simply be that the title bears no changing. It is unclear, at this point. Moving on - the Wolf in this fairy tale is Olai. The relationship between the Wolf and the Fox in the fairy tale mirrors the relationship between Olai and Odin in the story. Odin (the Fox) is the weaker of the two, relating to Odin’s standing in his own family, wherein he is ranked below his own younger sisters. Odin’s mission, assigned to him by Olai (the Wolf), is to retrieve a Vessel. This is the first ‘errand’ we’ve seen so far, but according to the fairy tale, Olai will fail where Odin succeeds. Perhaps Olai will fail to enlist the help of the Vessels, after Odin has brought them to Aedinfell. Perhaps some event will happen in the story wherein Odin succeeds his brother as head of the family. Only time will tell.

A Follower’s Adventures in Titanland

A Follower’s Adventures in TItanland (Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (and Through the Looking Glass)) is Ava, which has been officially confirmed through the Ava in Wonderland AU. I won’t cast the characters, seeing as there is already an official list. The imagery present in Alice in Wonderland - the whimsical, fantastical madness - is reflected in Ava’s own mindscape, in the bizarrely childish drawers and toys. There have also been several visual references to Alice in Wonderland in the story, most notably the references to Alice meeting the Caterpillar, referenced in Ava’s meetings with Wrathia in her mindscape, and also her encounter with Odin after the Limbo Lenses fiasco in Chapter Eight.

Alice’s ‘Drink me’ bottles are also reflected in Wrathia’s potions - catalysts of change. While Alice merely changed shape and size, Ava changed entirely, in a release of bottled rage. The constant theme of Alice not being Right, not fitting in - being too big or too small - is also reflected in Ava’s story, being an outcast and a loner. While there is an official character list for the Ava in Wonderland AU, their functions change within the story itself - Odin changes from the White Rabbit (when Ava follows him onto the ship at the start of the story) to the Caterpillar (in the scene depicted above) to the March Hare (the Mad Hatter’s companion, wherein he shares food with Maggie (who according to the official cast, is the Mad Hatter)). Ava herself changes from Alice to the Red Queen during her rampage as Wrava, where she beheaded several guards. 

None of the analysis here is very in-depth, considering that I am probably not the only person who has done this, and also the fact that I am not in the mood for writing entire essays on this speculation, but - here it is, nevertheless. 

[etherealellaelf]

Disney Remakes: they’re not all bad.

I submit that some of the disney live action remakes are, regrettably, a bit off. But not all of them. A lot of them are really good. Here’s why.

-Lion King did really put me off with the lack of expressions. I’m not sure if I have much to say about it, lol I’ll have to see it and let you know. Honestly though I don’t think I can because I love the original Lion King so flipping much, it’s a masterful movie and part of its mastery is the beautiful hand drawn animation and its expressive characters. I can’t think I can watch a bunch of real lions just talking. Who knows? I’ll keep you posted.

-Alice in Wonderland, one of the first of them, had some really good feminist moments. I love the Hatter and Alice’s love for each other, I guess he’s like the only human in Wonderland so it makes sense. But I get some weird ideas because the denizens of Wonderland are supposed to mirror the characters in Alice’s real life, and since the only redhead in Alice’s life is Hamish, that weirdo who asks her to marry him and he’s a total jerk.... and the Hatter is a redhead too.... idk it’s weird. Also it’s weird if he represents her dad because number one he’s dead and number two it’s incest, but the Hatter does say a few things that her dad said at the beginning....hmmm... fishy. However I feel like I can rest assured because this might just be the case of “Johnny Depp came to shoot today in a homemade cosplay and nobody can stop him because he’s just a mad genius”, in which case why do they keep letting him do that??? I don’t mind the hatter’s design, but can you imagine Just Plain Old Johnny Depp In All His Sexy Glory as a mad hatter? It would have been fine. They had to give him a gap between his teeth, CGI enlarged eyes, crazy red hair, white and pink makeup... oh well, whatever, it’s fine. I like how Underland looks a bit more like Narnia than like a Tim Burton land; I honestly don’t know if they gave him complete creative control when it came to the CGI set design. It might’ve been cool to see that.

-Cinderella was wonderful, I thought. I really love how Cinderella and the Prince interacted a lot more, falling in love over a long period of time. In fact, I feel like it was a spiritual remake of Ella Enchanted(which, in my opinion, Disney really botched up because the book was just so amazing), so they did really good in my book. My brother, however, hates that at the end she just twirls in her tower and doesn’t do anything to save herself, when in the original she tried to escape. He thinks it’s really unfeminist and he doesn’t want his daughter to act like that. I agree on that mark, but I’ll let everyone watch it. Also they threw a little bit of the Beauty and the Beast original fairy tale in there when her dad, a merchant, asks what she wants and Cinderella asks for the branch that brushes his arm or whatever; similar to a single rose, when her sisters ask for riches. I also liked the handling of Lady Tremaine; it really humanized her and I felt for her. The stepsisters were silly as per the usual. The King went from a bumbling psychopath(the cartoon) to a very melancholy, concerned father, and I cried at his death scene. Bravo, Kenneth Branagh, bravo.

-I really like all of Beauty and the Beast, although I do think that they made Lumiere & friends a little bit too important in this movie. I needed more moments between Belle and the Beast that were in the animation! Evermore was breathtaking though, let’s be honest. Although let’s be honest, I REALLY REALLY wanted to see a shirtless Dan Stevens emerge from a wall of rose petals because that sounds absolutely magical and super HOT. I’m so mad they had to redo it. Also I like the subtle crush Lefou has on Gaston; I’ve always wondered if he liked him. I do wish that Josh Gad had toned it down with his fabulousness though, because although I love fabulousness I wonder if it was slightly offensive. I really liked Gaston, and I feel like he could have gone a little bigger and with more bravado, could have been from slightly comedic to VERY comedic, but I think that’s alright. He did a great job. And as for everyone complaining about the villagers being really nasty and openly evil towards Belle, I actually liked it. It’s clear in the cartoon that the villagers whisper behind Belle’s back, but I feel like she just has a small smidgeon of an idea that they think she’s weird. In this, they freaking ATTACK her. They’re like ‘We can’t have smart bicc’s in our town! Get out me town!” It is a bit on the nose sometimes but I think it works because it helps Beast and her relate to feeling like outsiders. I do think the Beast knowing how to read kind of gave them something in common as well, but I disliked how he scoffed at her favorite book, Romeo and Juliet. I wish he had been more understanding like, “There’s this poor girl whose library is like, seven books, and amongst those seven books, one of which is probably the freaking bible because they belong to a pastor, her favorite is basically a romance. She’s not well read; I’m going to show her the classics.” Which back then was probably, like, idk, Voltaire? Too soon? Eh I’m not sure when it takes place. I do wish he’d gifted the library to her though, that was a nice gift for her in the previous movie. (Here’s the thing; the Beauty and the Beast cartoon is basically a perfect movie and I don’t think anything can live up to it, but this one was good too. It wasn’t better, but nothing can be better than that movie. Except maybe the Princess Bride or the first Pirates of the Caribbean or the stage production of Phantom of the Opera. No, not even then.)

-Dumbo? I haven’t seen it yet, I’ll have to and update this.

-Okay so Aladdin is really good. I entered the film with the meme cringe in my mind, totally expecting it to look weird and bad, but honestly Will Smith was such a great actor! And I actually freaking cried so many times because number one: the genie was aladdin’s father figure that he never had! He taught him how to date! Number two: the genie got his true love as well, and you see her and their kids at the beginning of the movie! SPOILERS btw. Sorry. Also Number three: they picked Will Smith to play the genie because he’s HITCH of course! The matchmaker extraordinaire! (I just love Will Smith. I wish he would run for president; it wouldn’t be the first time we had an actor in the white house. Just kidding, I don’t want to burden him that way, and there are really smart candidates this year to choose from. I just am urging everyone to go vote, and no more harambe crap!!!!) Also Jasmine had a nice new empowering role in this movie. I just sort of wish Jafar had been more menacing and villainous. But his actor was fine, just a bit soft-spoken.

-Lady and the Tramp- I started it on Disney+, I need to finish it. I’m halfway there. 

-Christopher Robin is a gift; it’s both simple and complex. It has a lot of nice metaphors and I could feel my heart hurting for much of the film. Seriously good aesthetics as well, Director of Photography!!! 

-The Jungle Book is a really good remake! So much excitement, and I could totally see Bill Murray in Baloo. (I think it’s equal in terms of story to the movie Mowgli, although Mowgli had that nasty little surprise at the end, I’m still hurt about it.)(also in comparing, the CGI is similarly good, but Mowgli wanted to do a really ambitious face capture thingy and I’m not sure if it worked,(uncanny) but it was interesting! It was also a lot darker. I think they’re both good.) Ben Kingsley was superb, of course, as Bagheera, as always, and he has a really fatherly voice(I thought Christian Bale did well as Bagheera as well, but he was more of an action figure in that movie, less of a father/teacher figure). And John Favreau, as always, went the extra mile to bring the action, the writing, and the moral through, and made it super good for children at the same time!(the same cannot be said about Mowgli, as there were some violence/action things that go beyond ‘peril’, hence it’s PG-13 rating) My one discrepancy was the voice of Kaa. Scarlet did fine, but I always thought of Kaa as a boy. I think they could have found a slithery voice actor for Kaa. Benedict Cumberbatch did really well as Smaug, hissing and growling, and he could have done well. I also think that Tom Hiddleston could have done a great job; he has a really gentle and pliant voice that can turn menacing in the matter of seconds, and if it’s about the snake being sexy as Scarlet Johanssen(haha what??), I think that Hiddles can bring it.(I’m not quite sure what I’m talking about at this point so I’ll shut up now.) I do feel like Mowgli started shooting way before The Jungle Book was even a glimmer in John Favreau’s eye, and that kind of makes me want to root for Mowgli because I’m sure that different movie houses have people working in both, probably swapping stories with their friends, and I’m sure it wasn’t an exact copy, but I can totally see Bill Murray in Baloo’s face and that can’t be by accident. Just saying. Not calling Disney out or anything, but I’m sure they can take it, they have like a trillion dollars. Anyway. Still a good one.

-Haven’t seen Pete’s Dragon.

-101 Dalmations, I know this shouldn’t count but it just does. I loved watching this as a child. I’m so happy they didn’t make the dogs talk? Haha it usually works when they do, but it gave a lot of room for Doctor House and Mister Weasley to interact. Also Glenn Close is great. I think this movie’s a good example of a career woman who decides to get domesticated and her sista is like, “Girl, you can’t do this! We have to be strong women! You have to come back to work!” But Anita is all, “Girl, respect my decisions! Feminism isn’t forcing your girl to be exactly like you, it’s giving me the respect to make my own decisions. If I want to have a baby with my husband, that’s fine. I want to be a mom!” I feel like the “new” 101 dalmatians remake they’re gonna make, will have a different opinion. Similar to wicked and maleficent, it’s going to humanize Cruella, but I just hope that they’re nice to Anita. She’s such a smol soft bird and if she wants 2 billion dogs and one baby, that’s fine... ugh, that’s gotta be like so much dog poop in her house... anita what are you doing...

-Maleficent. Obviously I love it. I love how those arguing fairies are super incompetent at raising Aurora because they’re too busy fighting, so Maleficent has to swoop in and rescue the princess. I like how Maleficent is a fae and it’s so sad how there’s like this rape metaphor when Stefan cuts off her wings, and that would be reason to curse his baby, especially because they were in love and he betrayed her! Stole her wings! Married someone else! T^T Maleficent, you poor misunderstood fairy! I love her motherly relationship with Aurora. I love that she’s the one who kisses her forehead to wake her up because Philip met her just that day. However, I don’t like how they just shove Philip out of the way, because Sleeping Beauty is honestly so romantic, and I love how they dance together and everything. I also like the raven boi. I ship him and Maleficent so hard and I hope he doesn’t die in the sequel, I haven’t seen it yet.

-So technically the Parent Trap is a remake. It’s awesome. It gave my childhood so much romance and prank ideas. It’s much better than its predecessor, especially because the mom in the old one is, like, urged to look prettier by her butler(wtf?!?! YOu’re FIrEd?!?). I’m so glad we’ve come so far.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. Are the remakes better? In some cases they are. I think Cinderella is better than its predecessor. I think the original Alice is very good, as a nonsense movie, and I feel like the remake is equally good, but they’re different movies with different motives and plots. The original Beauty and the Beast is my favorite and it’s perfect, so the new one isn’t better, but it is really great and I love it, too. Anyway, that’s all.

[dukereviewsxtra]

Duke Reviews Xtra: Alice In Wonderland (1985) Part 1

Hello, I'm Andrew Leduc And Welcome To Duke Reviews Xtra As We Continue Our Look At The Movies Of Disney...

And On The Next 3 Shows We'll Be Looking At 2 Of My Favorite Adaptations Of The Alice In Wonderland Story, Starting With The 1985 Version Which Was Made By Irwin Allen, Who Created Both Land Of The Giants And Of Course, Lost In Space...

Let's Start With Part 1...

The Movie Starts With Alice (Played By Jenny From Oliver And Company) Helping Her Mother Set The Table For Tea Time, But Despite Asking Her Mother If She Could Join Them For Tea, She Unfortunately Tells Alice No...

This Leads Alice To Go Outside And Talk With Her Sister (Who Is Actually Played By The Actress Plays Alice's Real Life Sister)..

I Know, This Is My 2nd Favorite Version Of The Tale And Even I Didn't Know That...

But Gets Bored Reading A Book With No Pictures, Which Leads Her Sister To Tell Her That Understand More When She Grows Up, Despite Alice Thinking She's Already Grown Up As She's Seven And A Half...

Playing With Her Cat, Dinah, Alice Spots The White Rabbit (Played By Hoagie From Pete's Dragon) And Follows Him To A Rabbit Hole That She Falls Down...

Ok, She Doesn't Fall Like That, But Close Enough..

Eventually Landing, Alice Follows The Rabbit To A Door Which Opens To Another Door And Another And Another Until It Finally Opens To A Hall Of Doors Which Leads To The Scene We All Know...

With Alice Finding A Tiny Door She's Too Big For So She Drinks A Bottle Marked Drink Me Which Her Shrink But She Leaves The Key On The Table Which Leads To Her Eating A Cake Marked Eat Me Which Causes Her To Grow Too Big So She Starts To Cry...

But Unlike The Animated Version, The White Rabbit Appears As She Cries And Accidentally Scares Him Into Dropping His Fan And Gloves Which She Uses To Shrink Again To A Size Small Enough To Fit Through A Crack That Leads Her Outside Into A River Of Her Own Tears...

While Swimming, Alice Briefly Meets The Dodo Bird (Played By Mrs. Gogan From Pete's Dragon) The Lory Bird (Played By Cosmo Brown From Singin' In The Rain) And The Mouse (Played By Mr. Jefferson) Who Takes Us Into Our First Song As He Tells Alice Why He Hates Dogs And Cats...

Leaving Shortly After That Song, Alice Catches Up With The White Rabbit Only To Lead Us To The Scene Where He Mistakes Her For His Housemaid And Sends Her Off To His House To Get A New Fan And Glove Set For Him...

Only To Find Another Bottle Marked Drink Me Which Causes Her To Grow Once Again...

But Unlike The Animated Version, The Dodo Doesn't Show Up, But Instead The Rabbit's Butler Named Pat The Pig (Played By Donald Trump's Number One Supporter, Scott Baio, Who I Think Fits The Role Perfectly With His New Status) Shows Up..

As We Get The Scene With Bill The Lizard Who Goes To Pull Alice Out Of The Chimney Only To Get Kicked Out Of The Chimney By Alice...

This Leads To Pat And The Rabbit To Throw Berries That Turn Into Cakes That Allow Alice To Shrink To Normal Size Again As She Gets Away From The Rabbit And Pat Who Are Still Throwing Berries At Her..

Eventually Losing Them, Alice Soon Meets The Caterpillar (Played By The Candy Man Himself, Sammy Davis Jr.) Who Takes Us Into Our Next Song Called You Are Old Father William...

But Like The Animated Version, Alice Insults The Caterpillar By Saying That 3 Inches High Is Such A Wretched Height And He Disappears Instead Of Becoming A Butterfly...

Walking Toward A House That Is Visited By A Delivery Man For The Queen Of Hearts Who Gives A Frog Footmen With A Familiar Voice An Invitation From The Queen For The Duchess (Who We'll Meet In A Few Minutes) To Play Croquet...

And By Familiar Voice I Think You May Recognize The Voice Actor For Playing This Guy...

That's Right, It's Robert Axelrod Otherwise Known As Lord Zedd (He Also Voiced Finster Too But He's Most Remembered For Zedd RIP)

Visiting The House, The Frog Footman Tells Alice That It's Useless Ringing The Bell On The Outside As He's On The Outside Too, But Going Inside Anyway, Alice Meets The Duchess (Played By Benita Bizzare) And Her Maid (Played By Imogene Coca) Who Take Us Into The Next Song...

But Finding The House To Be Too Violent, Alice Takes The Duchess' Baby Away Only For It To Become A Pig..

After This, She Meets The Cheshire Cat (Played By Kojak) Who Leads Us Into Our Next Song After Telling Her That She Won't Be Able To Leave Wonderland...

Thinking That He's A Bad Cat, Alice Attempts To Leave But Before She Does, The Cheshire Cat Points Alice To The Mad Hatter (Played By Anthony Newley) And The March Hare (Played By Roddy McDowell Who Would Later Play The Batman Villain, Jervis Tetch Otherwise Known As The Mad Hatter On Batman The Animated Series) Before He Disappears...

Walking Along The Road, Alice Finds The Mad Hatter And The March Hare Having Tea With The Doormouse (Played By Arte Johnson) And Sits Down To Join Them...

As A Little Tea Time Entertainment, The Mad Hatter Leads Us Into Our Next Song Because He Doesn't Like Alice's Version Of Twinkle Twinkle Little Star...

Eventually Upset By All The Rudeness At The Tea Party, Alice Continues Her Search For The White Rabbit As She Meets A Fawn In The Woods Which Leads To Our Next Song...

Finding A Doorway In The Woods, Alice Opens It And Finds Herself At A Beautiful Rose Garden Where She Meets Some Cards Who Are Painting The Roses Red, Only To Be Confronted By The Queen (Played By Jayne Meadows) And King (Played By Robert Morley) Of Hearts...

Who Arrives With Not Only The White Rabbit But A Whole Entourage Of People And Cards....

Introducing Herself To The Queen, She Asks Alice What's Going On Here Only For Alice To Tell Her That She Doesn't Know Much Of Anything As She's Only Been There For A Few Seconds Which Leads The Queen To Yell Off With Her Head.,.

But The King Defends Alice Believing That There's No Reason To Behead Her When She Doesn't Know Much Of Anything, Which Leads To Our Next Song...

Sparring Alice's Head For Now, The Queen Invites Her To Play A Game Of Croquet, Which Unlike The Disney Version Doesn't End With Alice Getting Her Head Nearly Chopped Off...

But Is Instead Just A Game Of Croquet With Flamingos...

With The Queen Pointing Alice In The Direction Of The Mock Turtle, Alice Goes Down The Path The Queen Suggested And Instead Runs Into The Gryphon (Played By Sid Caeser) Who Takes Alice To Meet The Mock Turtle (Played By Ringo Starr) Who Sings The Next And Probably Favorite Song From Part 1 Of This Movie..

Hearing Someone Yell That The Trial Is Beginning, Alice And The Gryphon Leave The Mock Turtle And Return To The Queen's Garden Where The Knave Of Hearts Is On Trial For Stealing One Of The Queen's Tarts, Despite There Being No Proof That He Did...

Bringing In The First Witness Or Should I Say Witnesses As They Bring In The Mad Hatter, The March Hare And The Doormouse, We Get Our Last Song For This Movie...

They Also Bring In The Duchess' Cook As A Witness As Well But Eventually Alice Argues The Ways Of The Queen's Court Which Leads Her To Grow As The Queen And Alice Continue To Argue...

Having Enough Of Alice's BS, The Queen Shouts Off With Her Head And Has Her Guards Chase Giant Alice But She's Not Afraid Of Them As They're Nothing But A Pack Of Cards...

Returning To Her Original Size As She Runs, Alice Eventually Trips And Falls Which Leads Her To Find Herself Back Home...

Now, This Is Where Things Get Interesting...

Entering Her House, She Finds Nobody There But Hearing And Seeing Her Cat Dinah On The Other Side Of The Mirror, Along With Her Parents Who Can't See Or Hear Alice But Their Own Reflections, Alice Can't Figure Out How To Get Through The Mirror...

So, She Sits In The Chair And Reads A Poem Called Jabberwocky Which Is About A Scary Monster But Getting Very Scared As She Reads It The Room Becomes Dark And The Jabberwocky Appears In The House...

You Know, I Once Saw A Video By James Rolfe (The Angry Video Game Nerd) And He Said That This Scene Scared Him As A Child To The Point He Was In Tears...

Saying That You Spend The Last Half Hour Looking At These Actors In Goofy Costumes Where This Thing Is Huge And Scary Compared To Alice...

Of Course, He Also Said That No Other Scene With The Jabberwocky Tops This Scene In Part 1 Which I Kindly Disagree With As There Are 2 That Could Possibly Be Scary...

To Be Continued...

Tomorrow...