Reasons why I didn't necessarily like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Before I start let me answer your question. No I have not read Roald Dahl's book. There, you happy? Let me also begin by saying that I have no choice but to compare Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to the 1971 classic, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, so boo hoo to all the boobirds that say you can't compare the two movies. Some minor spoilers ahead
What I didn't like:
The whole flashback/father scenes
-Absolutely unnecessary. Hey, I like Sauraman, err Christopher Lee, just as much as the next LOTR nerd but his character, along with "young" Willy Wonka was completely out of place, irrelevant to the main plot involving Charlie, and totally interrupted the flow and momentum of the real story being told. Please Tim, can you actually cut these scenes from the Director's Cut version?
Johnny Depp
-Gasp! How could you say such a thing Keith?! Yes, I know I've committed causual movie fan heresy, but I think Johnny Depp was mediocre in his role as Willy Wonka. I don't think he was bad per se, but I definitely did not feel any of the Captain Jack Sparrow swagger here. He was weird, obtuse, and enigmatic for sure, but I don't think his particular portrayal captured the innovative, flamboyant, dreamer that Willy Wonka was. He seemed more like an apathetic factory owner that thought inviting a couple kids to tour it would break the monotony of everyday life, not one that was seriously looking for an heir to his chocolate empire. I never thought of Willy Wonka as a "wimp" either. I felt Johnny Depp's Wonka came off as wimpy somewhat. (The scene of him venturing into the jungles of Lompasland nonewithstanding…I liked him there, but he seemed like a totally different character)
What I felt was inferior to the 1971 film:
The kids
-Aside from Charlie, whom I thought both were equally well played in both movies, I felt all the supporting kid actors, and their parents, were inferior to the original ones. For example, I remember the Violet B. from the original was so annoying that you just wanted to slap her. The Violet in the new one was a little too "cute" and not annoying enough. Same goes for the weird mother.
The Mike TV in the old one I thought captured more the essence of the technologically dependent boy; living and breathing TV. The videogame Mike TV of the new one just seemed like a burgeoning post modern apathetic punk. I could've cared less about him and his snotty remarks.
For some reason I enjoyed the Augustus of the old one better. Maybe it was because he was naturally more fat (the kid in the new used large clothes to make him look fatter). But I'm thinking it was more the Augustus of the old one was just a nice fat kid that wanted to eat chocolate. The mean comment the new Augustus made to Charlie as they were entering the factory turned me off to him and I figured he got what was coming to him when he fell into the chocolate river. The Augustus of the old one was just a poor kid whose stomach just got the best of him.
The Veruca Salt of the new one was alright, but I still like the old one better, and especially her dad of the old one. The whole "spoiling" process was much more apparent in the old version.
The ending/moral:
-At the end of the 1971 film, before Charlie leaves somewhat sadly bemused at Wonka's finale, he returns his everlasting gobstopper, proving his unwillingness to succumb to Slugworth's greedy proposal. This act of unselfishness was all Wonka needed to see in order to deem Charlie righteous, honest, and moral enough to inherit his famed factory and empire. This triumphant end brings to light Wonka's overriding purpose to the whole Golden Ticket fiasco in the first place…to find a child worthy of the respected Willy Wonka name. In essence, Wonka the whole time was testing the children to see if any of them were fit to be his "adopted" son or daughter. Charlie was the only one to pass the "morality" test.
In Tim Burton's rendition, we get no semblance of any morality test from Mr. Wonka whatsoever. What we get is a nonsensical romp around his nonsensical factory (I don't mind the factory part). But Charlie choose his family over the factory in the end Keith! That was a good moral moment! Ah, but you forget that Wonka already had offered him the factory before any principled fortitude was shown by the young Charlie. Basically, the Tim Burton movie relegated the child factory tour to an experiment of survival of the fitest. We're given no indication that Wonka cared a rats arse about what kind of person won his "contest" and subsequently inherited the Wonka empire; rather all he cared about was that someone, anyone would inherit it. That whole family ultimatum, tear-jerking incident at the end was completely forced and did not correlate with the overriding plot at all, as it did in the first movie. The Charlie in this movie wasn't chosen because of his unselfish attitude and pure heart, but only because he was the last one standing. For shame.
Setting:
-Not to take away from Tim Burton's creative mind, but I found the more realistic setting of the 1971 film to be more endearing and believable. As outrageous as it was, you actually believed a man and place like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory could exist somewhere in the world. The settings and the effects, though limited, did enough for the viewer to transport them to another world full of lollipops and candycanes. The new movie tried too hard I thought to create an alternate reality. I know they were poor, but did the Bucket's really have to live in a 45 degree angle house? And the whole glass elevator montage seemed way over the top and saturated just to tell the audience "look how cool computer graphics are".
What I felt was superior to the 1971 film:
The Ompa-Lompas and their songs
-No doubt we all have the songs from the 1971 classics stuck in our heads for eternity, but the new version's iteration of the Ompa-Lompas and their songs is just hilarious and I think much better. I don't know how to explain it, but those hundreds of carbon copies of the funny looking Comlumbian guy dancing around and singing was just cracking me up all over the place. I almost want to get the soundtrack just so I can hear those quirky, entertaining songs again. I thought the backstory about how he came to find and employ the Ompa-Lompas was funny too.
Conclusion: 2.75 stars out of 5
-By all means go see this movie. If anything you'll laugh more than once no doubt. But don't go in expecting that you're going to see a monumental achievement in cinema. Don't go in expecting you're going to see another Oscar worthy performance from the lovable Johnny Depp. And definitely don't go in thinking after you see this film, Gene Wilder and his crazy adventures in 1971 are going to be forgotten forever.. Just my two cents...
Agree or disagree?
What I didn't like:
The whole flashback/father scenes
-Absolutely unnecessary. Hey, I like Sauraman, err Christopher Lee, just as much as the next LOTR nerd but his character, along with "young" Willy Wonka was completely out of place, irrelevant to the main plot involving Charlie, and totally interrupted the flow and momentum of the real story being told. Please Tim, can you actually cut these scenes from the Director's Cut version?
Johnny Depp
-Gasp! How could you say such a thing Keith?! Yes, I know I've committed causual movie fan heresy, but I think Johnny Depp was mediocre in his role as Willy Wonka. I don't think he was bad per se, but I definitely did not feel any of the Captain Jack Sparrow swagger here. He was weird, obtuse, and enigmatic for sure, but I don't think his particular portrayal captured the innovative, flamboyant, dreamer that Willy Wonka was. He seemed more like an apathetic factory owner that thought inviting a couple kids to tour it would break the monotony of everyday life, not one that was seriously looking for an heir to his chocolate empire. I never thought of Willy Wonka as a "wimp" either. I felt Johnny Depp's Wonka came off as wimpy somewhat. (The scene of him venturing into the jungles of Lompasland nonewithstanding…I liked him there, but he seemed like a totally different character)
What I felt was inferior to the 1971 film:
The kids
-Aside from Charlie, whom I thought both were equally well played in both movies, I felt all the supporting kid actors, and their parents, were inferior to the original ones. For example, I remember the Violet B. from the original was so annoying that you just wanted to slap her. The Violet in the new one was a little too "cute" and not annoying enough. Same goes for the weird mother.
The Mike TV in the old one I thought captured more the essence of the technologically dependent boy; living and breathing TV. The videogame Mike TV of the new one just seemed like a burgeoning post modern apathetic punk. I could've cared less about him and his snotty remarks.
For some reason I enjoyed the Augustus of the old one better. Maybe it was because he was naturally more fat (the kid in the new used large clothes to make him look fatter). But I'm thinking it was more the Augustus of the old one was just a nice fat kid that wanted to eat chocolate. The mean comment the new Augustus made to Charlie as they were entering the factory turned me off to him and I figured he got what was coming to him when he fell into the chocolate river. The Augustus of the old one was just a poor kid whose stomach just got the best of him.
The Veruca Salt of the new one was alright, but I still like the old one better, and especially her dad of the old one. The whole "spoiling" process was much more apparent in the old version.
The ending/moral:
-At the end of the 1971 film, before Charlie leaves somewhat sadly bemused at Wonka's finale, he returns his everlasting gobstopper, proving his unwillingness to succumb to Slugworth's greedy proposal. This act of unselfishness was all Wonka needed to see in order to deem Charlie righteous, honest, and moral enough to inherit his famed factory and empire. This triumphant end brings to light Wonka's overriding purpose to the whole Golden Ticket fiasco in the first place…to find a child worthy of the respected Willy Wonka name. In essence, Wonka the whole time was testing the children to see if any of them were fit to be his "adopted" son or daughter. Charlie was the only one to pass the "morality" test.
In Tim Burton's rendition, we get no semblance of any morality test from Mr. Wonka whatsoever. What we get is a nonsensical romp around his nonsensical factory (I don't mind the factory part). But Charlie choose his family over the factory in the end Keith! That was a good moral moment! Ah, but you forget that Wonka already had offered him the factory before any principled fortitude was shown by the young Charlie. Basically, the Tim Burton movie relegated the child factory tour to an experiment of survival of the fitest. We're given no indication that Wonka cared a rats arse about what kind of person won his "contest" and subsequently inherited the Wonka empire; rather all he cared about was that someone, anyone would inherit it. That whole family ultimatum, tear-jerking incident at the end was completely forced and did not correlate with the overriding plot at all, as it did in the first movie. The Charlie in this movie wasn't chosen because of his unselfish attitude and pure heart, but only because he was the last one standing. For shame.
Setting:
-Not to take away from Tim Burton's creative mind, but I found the more realistic setting of the 1971 film to be more endearing and believable. As outrageous as it was, you actually believed a man and place like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory could exist somewhere in the world. The settings and the effects, though limited, did enough for the viewer to transport them to another world full of lollipops and candycanes. The new movie tried too hard I thought to create an alternate reality. I know they were poor, but did the Bucket's really have to live in a 45 degree angle house? And the whole glass elevator montage seemed way over the top and saturated just to tell the audience "look how cool computer graphics are".
What I felt was superior to the 1971 film:
The Ompa-Lompas and their songs
-No doubt we all have the songs from the 1971 classics stuck in our heads for eternity, but the new version's iteration of the Ompa-Lompas and their songs is just hilarious and I think much better. I don't know how to explain it, but those hundreds of carbon copies of the funny looking Comlumbian guy dancing around and singing was just cracking me up all over the place. I almost want to get the soundtrack just so I can hear those quirky, entertaining songs again. I thought the backstory about how he came to find and employ the Ompa-Lompas was funny too.
Conclusion: 2.75 stars out of 5
-By all means go see this movie. If anything you'll laugh more than once no doubt. But don't go in expecting that you're going to see a monumental achievement in cinema. Don't go in expecting you're going to see another Oscar worthy performance from the lovable Johnny Depp. And definitely don't go in thinking after you see this film, Gene Wilder and his crazy adventures in 1971 are going to be forgotten forever.. Just my two cents...
Agree or disagree?
2 Comments:
I agree with some points. Charlie won the factory by default...that was lame. There was no real test regarding his morality, though you could clearly see he was the most genuine of the 5 kids. I felt the "flashbacks" were important as they told the story of Willy before the factory. And accounted for his incredible dysfunction as an adult. Whereas in the 1971 version you are simply presented with the eccentric candy mogul. I thought the reconciliation at the end was pretty lame however, and simply forced for the sake of the "happy ending". I think Depp did come off kinda wimpy as well, but very intelligent. Not as great as Captain Jack, but certainly a good fit for the movie. Because of the visuals, the imaginative sets, and sound track, I'd give the movie a 3.5 out of 5.
Yeah you're right about Charlie being the most "genuine". I just wished they pushed that as to why he was to inherit the factory, not because he won by default.
I still don't think Johnny Depp was a good fit for Wonka. I'm thinking more like a Jim Carrey or even Jack Black would've worked better. Oh well.
Post a Comment
<< Home