Review: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

[jducoeur]

I'll keep this one relatively concise, and free from significant spoilers.

Summary -- I agree with most of the reviews: this is a good, fun movie, despite a rather peculiar interpretation of Willy Wonka by Jonny Depp.

Wonka is the one off note of the whole thing. He's -- well, peculiar and a tad unpleasant. The movie gives him more backstory than the book does, and I don't think it entirely works. Indeed, all of the moments where the movie stops feeling like Roald Dahl (and starts feeling very much like Tim Burton) are focused on this. But I think it's okay, provided you don't expect to be seeing a remake of the Gene Wilder take on the character.

The other characters are generally true to the original, and very well done. There are tweaks here and there -- the kids are updated for modern culture -- but all are interesting, including Charlie himself. And the story is, if anything, a bit more faithful to the book than the original movie was.

And, even more than in the first movie, the Oompa Loompas completely steal the show. I must have the soundtrack.

Overall: well worth seeing. A bit flawed, but still one of the better movies of the year.

Comments

[mindways]

I think you've pegged the incongruity of the film for me. I actually rather liked the portrayal of / take on Willy Wonka; I just didn't feel like it quite... fit. It felt like it was from a different story than the rest of the movie(*).

(*) = with a caveat that I'll email you, to keep this post relatively spoiler-free.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I have not yet seen the movie (but I will)...

But I have to say that, having just re-read the books recently, Wonka is a psycho little mother, and having him played at a slant is very much in keeping with my vision. Whether Depp's slant is the one I have in mind I cannot yet say.

But adding back-story and silly resolutions is not what I need in this movie. :-)

[jducoeur]

Interesting. While the book was a favorite of mine, I haven't read it in *many* years, and I may have internalized the Gene Wilder interpretation more deeply than I realize. I'll have to re-read it, and see how it compares...

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

You may not have to. Just remember it's "oh, look, another kid has died or been injured. Move along, move along, nothing to see." Plus Oompa-Loompa's as slaves, the whole anti-social tendency thing....

I hated Gene Wilder's interpretation. It was too, umm, is saccharine the right word here?

[cvirtue.livejournal.com]

He wasn't aided by the music either. "He mixes it with love and makes the world taste good."

[jducoeur]

Well, I think it's fair to say that this version of the story has much more edge to it than the first movie had, both in the portrayal of Wonka and the music. (I found the music thoroughly, nastily funny...)

[metageek.livejournal.com]

I hated Gene Wilder's interpretation. It was too, umm, is saccharine the right word here?

Really? I remember the original Willie Wonka as being a deeply creepy movie. WW himself was superficially sweet, but strange enough that, even as a kid, I found myself mistrusting him. And the Oompa-Loompas were worse--as if they were the overt manifestation of WW's schizophrenia.

[tafkad.livejournal.com]

thebeardedone and I just saw it last night. We both got a kick out of (a) Depp as Wonka and (b) the fact that Christopher Lee played his father. We were both into it.

[dmnsqrl.livejournal.com]

the question is.... is it really Depp's slant so much as Burton's? Have you read some of the things Burton said about this movie?

http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/index.php?id=31454

[jducoeur]

It's always hard to separate the actor's interpretation from the director's; not having much inside scoop, I don't really know the breakdown here. It's not really surprising that the parental plotline is Burton's. (It doesn't give too much away to say that the relationship between parents and children is thematically central to this movie.)