Burton hasn't made a bad film technically... He just simply chooses the wrong projects at times.
Alice in Wonderland is the only Burton film I have ever walked away from feeling slightly disappointed, but I squarely place the blame at Linda Woolverton's script. He should never have gotten involved.
I do think
Planet of the Apes is a bad movie, even if it's not a disaster. As so often happens, it's been made out to be much worse than it is; at least it has Rick Baker's make-up and the performances of Tim Roth and Helena Bonham Carter, both very good. That was a case of him choosing the wrong project; if it was more than a "director for hire" gig, if he had anything to bring to it, we didn't see it in the finished product. Beyond that, I actually don't think he has chosen the wrong projects:
Big Fish was a surprise because it wasn't the kind of macabre high fantasy we'd expect from him, but it turned out beautifully.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? Well, apparently it's sacrilege to attempt another take on that book, but the film itself I really enjoy - Burton's sensibility fit with Doal's well.
Corpse Bride was Burton's movie, and I think it's a very good, possibly great, one.
Sweeney Todd was somewhat of a surprise, too, but I think that's a masterpiece, one of his very best movies.
Alice in Wonderland was a disappointment, but, as with
Planet of the Apes but even more, it's been blown up to seem like a terrible atrocity devoid of any positive attributes, which it's not. Mia Wasikowska, Johnny Depp, and Helena Bonham Carter were great (and Alan Rickman too, in what's basically a cameo), and there's plenty of eye candy (I don't really get the knock that it's gaudy or ugly or that sort of thing). I was disappointed because I thought - and still do think - that it missed the subversive wit and energy of the Lewis Carroll stories. Tim Burton doing
Alice in Wonderland? That sounded amazing! That sounded like the perfect marriage of director and material. And I still want to see that movie - because I don't think we got it. It feels like a piece of studio product more than a real Tim Burton movie, and I don't really know how that happened. But I kind of want to think that
is what happened, because I don't want to think as little as, "Boy, Burton really blew it there." I was disappointed in how conventional and neat it was, how tidily it fit into that framework of "oppressed and bored Victorian girl finds herself and breaks out of societal restrictions." Okay, that's a clearer story, but it didn't have the emotional pull or the overall imagination that the really good Tim Burton movies have. It also didn't have the black comic edge that the really good Tim Burton movies have. The script does deserve some blame, but what I would say to that is it should have been rewritten more (perhaps by John August).