Both are…interesting to say the least.
^ Agreed. 
I haven’t seen the movie in a long time, so I can’t really comment on its quality. Bur I feel like the problem with adapting Alice in Wonderland to film is that the book doesn’t really suit the medium.
Well that’s not true- it has lots of interesting imagery, so I can understand why people keep making film/ TV versions of it. But the actual story is pretty meandering, and nonsensical. Alice doesn’t have a specific goal in mind through the story, she just sort of wanders about and interacts with interesting people. So it’s very difficult to capture the spirit of the book on film whilst still making it a compelling story. Tim Burton, for example, tried to structure the story more, to add a clear, single narrative rather than a series of episodes, but that sacrificed some of the wonder and strangeness of Wonderland. I suppose the problem is that films have different expectations than books. Plus, with a book the kid can stop reading every few chapters and take a break. But a film is intended for a single sitting, so you don’t want to feel like you’re wasting the audience’s time.
If I remember correctly, I read in a book about Disney that the studio found the 1951 version of Alice slightly disappointing at the time- they felt like it didn’t come out as good as they wanted. Though to be fair, it (and Cinderella) was the first proper film they’d done in a few years, so problems are understandable.
Exactly. That’s very spot one.
No film can truly capture the book’s original spirit. But I think the animated Disney version has done it best out of all the Alice films/shows I’ve seen.
And as far as Disney movies go, Alice in Wonderland is probably one of the more faithful to it’s source material. (That isn’t saying much)