You're missing the point here. The context, whatever it is, has been cynically designed and manipulated by the filmmakers to induce a bare-shoulder look for their minor lead actress. I'm not an Alice purist exactly, but I have a great fondness for the source material and this change is drastic and unwelcome from my POV. Ugh. Keep your sexy Alice and give me the real thing. Should we sexualize Dorothy, too? How about the little girl in Miyazaki's Spirited Away? These are underage children here. I don't want to see Alice's bare shoulder and upper breastular region. It departs from the material in a pandering and solicitous fashion, which I find cheap and tasteless. And again, I want to be clear I'm no prude. I'm all for female nudity in film; I gave an infamous speech/stand-up routine on the subject in Austin, 2001, which I won't go into here for reasons of modesty and family-friendliness. The bottom line for me is that this is supposed to be children's literature, not sultry, PG-13-rated turn-on material. That stuff has its place, and it is not in the timeless classic Alice in Wonderland. IMO! Seldon's second paragraph above is an absurd straw man. The obvious difference is that the White Rabbit, Queen of Hearts and all the rest were created by a Victorian man of, and in, that era. Spaghetti straps and a low bustline were not so devised. The values and imagery should follow accordingly. This BTW is another issue I had with Sleepy Hollow, which was modernistic and anachronistic, and therefore unconvincing. I'm liking this Burton's Alice thing less and less.