Page 1 of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Anyone off to see this at the weekend. I am going tomorrow night and cant wait. I loved the original and I think that Depp and Burton are an excellent team so should be very good.

I drew the short straw, and have to take the kids tomorrow :/

Oph oph doubidy do, the last wonka fim, done my head in too.

Couple of girls yakking on the train yesterday heard to pass comment that this may be the film that really makes her hate Depp.



I quite like the Helpdesk people in a benevolent (as opposed to malevolent) way as they do some valuable work in preventing us being inundated by every halfwit who can work a phone.

I went to see it yesterday and quite liked it. The kids were lapping it up (550 seat theatre with not a seat to spare, and not one child was mis-behaving).

It`s kinda mixed in what they want to do, with Charlie and his Grandpa taking a backseat to Wonka once he is present on the screen. And there is something about the structure of the film that feels "mandatory" rather than fun.

But it`s a good kids film, way better than Fantastic 4.

Quote:
It`s kinda mixed in what they want to do, with Charlie and his Grandpa taking a backseat to Wonka once he is present on the screen.

Interesting you should say that, because apparently that`s exactly why Roald Dahl disliked the original movie: Because it concentrated too much on Wonka! He felt very much that it should be Charlie`s story; both in the book and in the movie.

In spite of what his widow says I think Roald would have disliked the new movie too. Personally, I reckon the original is a cast iron childrens classic...no amount of hyperbole from either Burton or Depp is going to change that. Everytime I hear Burton talk about the original I`m left thinking, "Have you actually seen it?".

I like the look of the new movie, but Depp`s all wrong. Gene Wilder captured the character wonderfully. A bit scary and eerie, sparky and unknown. Depp is a great actor no question but as Wonka he just ain`t right I`m afraid!

Another remake hits the s**it. Bring on the new Wicker Man so we can destroy that too! Nicolas Cage, what a f**king joke!! If your`e going to remake films Hollywood, why not remake the crap ones that where rubbish first time around, and need remaking. Not the classics, man!

Both actors were too young at the time of taking on the role of an older person looking for a youngster to take over . To put it in context consider that Roald Dahl wanted spike milligan to play the part who was in his 50s at the time whereas johnny depp is 42 (and looks younger) and gene wilder was only 38.
The remake is at least a genuine attempt to make a film of the story by a director who liked the book so is worth judging on its own merits rather than simply taking an old script and refilming it with currently popular actors in an attempt to make a fast buck as is the usual these days. The first one on the other hand was an attempt at making a film that was effectively a product placement even if the products they tried to sell with it failed

This item was edited on Saturday, 30th July 2005, 13:04

I absolutely hated it. I didn`t mind any of the performances (and loved the casting and hair and make-up for those *strange* naughty kids!), the backstory with why Wonka became a confectioner in the first place was an interesting idea... but why oh why oh why did they have to completely ruin in the ending and the character *just* so he could go and make up with his dad? What is it with Americans and *stupid* happy endings?! The "Oh no you have to leave your family - pffft what do you want a family for anyway?" attitude when they crashlanded at the Buckets` home poisoned the film for me. "Charlie, of course I want your whole family to come, I haven`t seen my dad in 30 years and he died and I regret that more than anything." would have tied up the father subplot and also not made Wonka into a horrible spiteful man who a nice boy like Charlie would not want to spend any more time with!

Though I liked how Charlie stayed 100% good, it was funny to see the state of all the bad kids as they left the factory as that was my favourite illustration in the book, I was glad they stuck close to the book (apart from the ending of course) and I thought the very last shot of the film with Charlie`s house having sugar sprinkled on it instead of snow was great.

--

www.soundalikes.com/ (Version 2. Updated 8/4/05)

This item was edited on Saturday, 30th July 2005, 14:25

Quote:
The remake is at least a genuine attempt to make a film of the story by a director who liked the book so is worth judging on its own merits rather than simply taking an old script and refilming it with currently popular actors in an attempt to make a fast buck as is the usual these days.

Who doesn`t like the book? I think you`re being very generous here, because it seems to me that what you describe is exactly what Burton has done. Pick yer favourite popular star, nick a popular kids story, expand on it purely to serve Depp`s needs (can`t have a big star with nothing to do, can we?) , and watch the cash roll in. I think remakes of classic films suck. Regardless of how faithful the original movie was to the book, it captured it`s essence perfectly. And furthermore, it enticed generations of children into reading, and was a classic kids movie in it`s own right. That`s why it`s still loved by today`s kids.

According to internet sources Charlie just doesn`t have the role he should have in the new film. It`s all about Wonka. Why? Dahl will be spinning in his grave.

But we`re all supposed to like Depp aren`t we?

Well, I liked Pirates of the Caribbean anyway...

Roald dahls books probably did more to sell the films than the films did to sell his books.
Johnny Depp has a tendency to make films that the average fan will not have seen be it the man who cried, ed wood , dead man, fear and loathing in las vegas etc etc. He is a talented actor and not just a pretty face (hell in fear and loathing hes not exactly pretty)
As to who doesn`t like the book ? Remember the first film was made to sell chocolate bars by its financiers who very probably never read the book and just looked at the sales figures and the sweet manufacturing link
As to the consideration of whether roald dahl would like the latest film well he certainly didn`t like the original.
As to it being beloved by children of today its a staple of christmas tv schedules which is not a sign of popularity so much as bulk buying cheapness.
The first film is enjoyable but that doesn`t stop the second from being so taken on its own merits.

I was incredibly indifferent about this filum. (Ah, the oirish is comin` back to me)

The only thing I will say about this film is, DO NOT take your kids to see this film if they`re already familiar with the the original movie. Or they`ll pick it apart all the way through.

This telling is more faithful to the original story than the Gene Wilder version could ever dare to be, but most eyes will be tainted by the easy telling of the story the original gave us. Remember. The version with Gene Wilder is a grotesquely sanitised version of what actually happened in the original book

============================
Been nowhere
Done Nothing
Stole the T-shirt


My Collection