The W
Views: 100664109
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.11.07 1525
The 7 - Movies & TV - Charlie & The Chocolate Factory (Spoilers?)
This thread has 3 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1199 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (29 total)
Stephanie
Landjager
Level: 63

Posts: 877/946
EXP: 1995886
For next: 101277

Since: 2.1.02
From: Madison, WI

Since last post: 549 days
Last activity: 19 days
#1 Posted on 3.7.05 1950.14
Reposted on: 3.7.12 1950.25
Wow - I just saw a promo package for this film on HBO, and it looks awful. A few thoughts:

1) Depp seems to be channeling Gene Wilder through a dippy filter, as if he'd been lobotomized upon entering the soundstage; copying the antics of famous people worked well for Captain Jack Sparrow, but not for Willy Wonka. He's just not as captivating as Gene Wilder was in the role - Gene may have seemed silly at times, but you could always see the wheels turning, the chess game being played.

2) The boy they cast as Charlie seems fine, but the other children and the rest of the adults seem to have been picked to make the worst impression possible - and that includes the new Grandpa Joe, who looks to be 120 years old.

3) The sets look good, though not as bright as the 1971 sets. Instead of the numerous midgets with their own theme of the 1971 version, we have endless CGI copies of Deep Roy singing new songs for each person killed. (Nice to see Mr. Sin getting some work, though.)

4) For a story that was supposed to be closer to Dahl's book than the 1971 version, it seems much closer to the film than the book. (The squirrels are an interesting change - I kind of wish Sid was there.)

5) I didn't realize what Tim Burton looked like these days - I'm amazed he didn't get ejected from the studio lot as a panhandler.

I may go see it once to see the special effects, but this film doesn't look like it will replace the classic 1971 version.

Steph
Promote this thread!
Oliver
Scrapple
Level: 127

Posts: 1377/4951
EXP: 23463103
For next: 263528

Since: 20.6.02
From: #YEG

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
#2 Posted on 4.7.05 0855.27
Reposted on: 4.7.12 0855.29
I haven't seen the original movie yet; but I'm still half and half on seeing this one. Johnny Depp seems little too weird for my tastes in this one, I'm afraid.

I think I'll wait for the general concensus of the board before seeign it. (Hey, I did it for Batman Begins and Star Wars III and I wasn't disappointed)
Ticamo
Boerewors
Level: 40

Posts: 287/348
EXP: 435810
For next: 5503

Since: 19.7.02
From: Trenton, NJ, USA

Since last post: 2823 days
Last activity: 2122 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 4.7.05 0912.54
Reposted on: 4.7.12 0913.09
I watched that too and I just think it looks like one big acid trip. I want to see if they do any justice to the original film. What's funny is that Gene Wilder's Wonka was an odd, but charming kinda fellow. Depp's Wonka is just a screwball, with a chicks haircut. But then again, this is a Tim Burton production.

I'm not pleased with the Oompa Loopas though. There are a ton of little people 'out there', looking for work. They could have called Vern Troyer...

Grandpa Joe does look more like Great Grandpa Joe though.

It'll be interesting though.
Stilton
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 619/793
EXP: 1401529
For next: 84408

Since: 7.2.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 3212 days
Last activity: 3212 days
#4 Posted on 4.7.05 0925.13
Reposted on: 4.7.12 0925.23
I'm pretty psyched to see this movie. I've always loved the book, and the original film with Gene Wilder, but when it comes to adaptations from books, no film version is ever perfect, so I'm willing to give this new one a chance. I've also read in numerous places that Roald Dahl himself was not a big fan of the original film, in fact he hated it*, so that tells you that no one version is going to please everyone. (*No surprise here, since many writers have a famous history of hating the film versions of their books; Anthony Burgess, I understand, hated Kubrik's version of A Clockwork Orange.)

I've also been a fan of Johnny Depp since Edward Scissorhands (sorry, I was never into Jump Street), and have found most of his collaborations with Tim Butorn to be pretty good--Ed Wood was brilliant, Sleepy Hollow was so-so. You can't win 'em all.

Plus, I don't get the feeling, from what little I've seen, that Depp is trying to copy Wilder's Wonka. I also get the feeling that what little they're showing us (childish antics and expressions) is hiding the bulk of the character that Depp has created.

And hey, if Grampa Jow looks 120 years old, well, then that just makes him seem a little more like Quentin Blake's illustrations from the book to me.
messenoir
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 344/449
EXP: 649177
For next: 10992

Since: 20.2.02
From: Columbia, MO

Since last post: 574 days
Last activity: 440 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on 4.7.05 1815.06
Reposted on: 4.7.12 1815.48
Eh. To me it's another example of people feeling the need to create some sort of edgy, creepy movie where one doesn't really need to exist. I like Depp, but sometimes he gets way too pretentious for me.
Texas Kelly
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 692/1500
EXP: 3984596
For next: 21483

Since: 3.1.02
From: FOREST HILLS CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE

Since last post: 77 days
Last activity: 1 hour
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on 4.7.05 1952.53
Reposted on: 4.7.12 1953.16
    Originally posted by Ticamo
    I want to see if they do any justice to the original film.

Which, of course, isn't the point, since Depp & Burton have said on many occasions that it's adapted straight from the original source (the book) without any consideration granted to the work of Wilder & Co. (Which, in its own right, was an entertaining film, but always bothered me a little bit because they made it more about Wonka than about Charlie.)

Nevertheless, I'll check out the trailer for this one sometime after RAW and clue in my thoughts then.

BTW, Stilton, I read in one interview that Roald Dahl's heirs have seen the new film, and doth approve. Take that for what it's worth...

(edited by Texas Kelly on 4.7.05 2053)
tarnish
Frankfurter
Level: 60

Posts: 544/859
EXP: 1719237
For next: 53551

Since: 13.2.02
From: Back in the Heart of Hali

Since last post: 529 days
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#7 Posted on 5.7.05 1146.51
Reposted on: 5.7.12 1150.47
    Originally posted by messenoir
    Eh. To me it's another example of people feeling the need to create some sort of edgy, creepy movie where one doesn't really need to exist. I like Depp, but sometimes he gets way too pretentious for me.


Considering that the book was edgy and creepy, I've got no problem with them that sort of movie out of it. Most of Dahl's other children's works, like The BFG, The Twits, The Witches, and especially Roald Dahl's Revolting Rhymes, are edgier and creepier still, but CatCF still has plenty of darkness to it.

In many ways, it was Dahl's penchant for "edgy and creepy" as well as "gross, disgusting, and certainly not Politically Correct" that I think draws the kids into his stories and keeps them reading right to the end.

It worked on me, anyway :)
whatever
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 653/1741
EXP: 4961201
For next: 31669

Since: 12.2.02
From: Cleveland, Ohio

Since last post: 18 days
Last activity: 26 min.
#8 Posted on 5.7.05 1226.43
Reposted on: 5.7.12 1227.06
    Originally posted by tarnish
    Most of Dahl's other children's works, like The BFG, The Twits, The Witches, and especially Roald Dahl's Revolting Rhymes, are edgier and creepier still, but CatCF still has plenty of darkness to it.

    In many ways, it was Dahl's penchant for "edgy and creepy" as well as "gross, disgusting, and certainly not Politically Correct" that I think draws the kids into his stories and keeps them reading right to the end.

    It worked on me, anyway :)

Likewise. "James and the Giant Peach" and "Danny, the Champion of the World" were my two favorites.
Wpob
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 476/1745
EXP: 4825471
For next: 167399

Since: 21.11.02
From: Williston Park, NY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#9 Posted on 5.7.05 1437.23
Reposted on: 5.7.12 1437.42
Count me among the ones who are pumped to see this. I do not get to "grown up" movies much anymore (4 kids) but I will make a point to see this one. I think Johnny Depp is one of the top 5 actors alive today and love that he takes chances with roles and always puts forward a great effort. The rest of the movie may suck, but he is always entertaining.
Stilton
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 620/793
EXP: 1401529
For next: 84408

Since: 7.2.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 3212 days
Last activity: 3212 days
#10 Posted on 5.7.05 1552.23
Reposted on: 5.7.12 1559.01
As far as I can remember, and maybe I should read them all again, but for my money, albeit short, the creepiest of Dahl's children's stories was "George's Marvellous Medicine".

Here's a quote from the Random House website: "George's Grandma is a grizzly, grumpy, selfish old woman with pale brown teeth and a small puckered up mouth like a dog's bottom. Four times a day she takes a large spoonful of medicine, but it doesn't seem to do her any good. She's always just as poisonous after she's taken it as she was before. When George is left to look after her one morning, it's just the chance he needs . . ."

Then, George goes around the house looking for all kinds of crazy ingredients to make a new medicine for his grandmother, so he can make her "disappear"....

SO, if there's some creepiness at all to be found in the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, I think it's well placed.
geemoney
Scrapple
Level: 113

Posts: 1586/3794
EXP: 15352766
For next: 465843

Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 52 min.
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 5.7.05 1704.14
Reposted on: 5.7.12 1706.01
    Originally posted by Stilton
    As far as I can remember, and maybe I should read them all again, but for my money, albeit short, the creepiest of Dahl's children's stories was "George's Marvellous Medicine".

    Here's a quote from the Random House website: "George's Grandma is a grizzly, grumpy, selfish old woman with pale brown teeth and a small puckered up mouth like a dog's bottom. Four times a day she takes a large spoonful of medicine, but it doesn't seem to do her any good. She's always just as poisonous after she's taken it as she was before. When George is left to look after her one morning, it's just the chance he needs . . ."

    Then, George goes around the house looking for all kinds of crazy ingredients to make a new medicine for his grandmother, so he can make her "disappear"....

    SO, if there's some creepiness at all to be found in the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, I think it's well placed.

Interestingly, I was subbing as a teaching assistant in one of the last days of school in the Elementary a few weeks back. All the kids were doing was watching a movie, so I looked at the bookcase for something to read. I remembered reading "George's Marvelous Medicine" when I was a kid, so I read it again.

It's pretty much about a kid who is verbally abused by his grandmother, going around the house trying to find stuff (including things that would kill real humans) to put in his "new" medicine to give to his grandmother to shut her up. Of course, since this is a children's book, grandma just gets 20 feet taller instead.

EDIT: Wow, now let me post on topic- in just the ads I've seen, I have little interest in seeing the new "Chocolate Factory," but that's because I'm comparing it in my head to the Gene Wilder version. Since this is supposed to be different, maybe I should give it a chance.

(edited by geemoney on 5.7.05 1805)
pieman
As young as
he feels
Level: 111

Posts: 1949/3590
EXP: 14788883
For next: 79523

Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on 6.7.05 0737.00
Reposted on: 6.7.12 0737.58
    Originally posted by tarnish
    Most of Dahl's other children's works, like The BFG, The Twits, The Witches, and especially Roald Dahl's Revolting Rhymes, are edgier and creepier still, but CatCF still has plenty of darkness to it.


We just finished reading Charlie to the kids last night. They have seen the original movie numerous times and we all thought the Wilder Wonka flick stayed pretty close to the book. We have also read them The BFG, the Twits and George's Marvelous Medicine. They enjoyed them all and we didn't find them as dark as others seem to have. I think it all depends on what perspective you bring to the story. Our kids are still pretty young, so they don't get the connection that George could be trying to kill his grandmother. They just find it amusing.
tarnish
Frankfurter
Level: 60

Posts: 545/859
EXP: 1719237
For next: 53551

Since: 13.2.02
From: Back in the Heart of Hali

Since last post: 529 days
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#13 Posted on 6.7.05 0955.18
Reposted on: 6.7.12 0955.53
    Originally posted by pieman
    We just finished reading Charlie to the kids last night. They have seen the original movie numerous times and we all thought the Wilder Wonka flick stayed pretty close to the book. We have also read them The BFG, the Twits and George's Marvelous Medicine. They enjoyed them all and we didn't find them as dark as others seem to have. I think it all depends on what perspective you bring to the story. Our kids are still pretty young, so they don't get the connection that George could be trying to kill his grandmother. They just find it amusing.


I didn't mean to suggest that kids understand the dark aspects of Dahl's work--I don't think kids generally "get" dark until they're older.

I know I never thought of Dahl's books as "dark". But now that I have gone back and re-read them, I have trouble seeing them through the same gloss that I did when I was 8. I mean, in the first couple chapters of The BFG you read about Giants that reach into bedroom windows, snatch little children, and eat them. And they've got names like Bloodbottler, Bonecruncher, and Fleshlumper.

It's similar with the Lemony Snicket books, I think. I can't help but find them depressing from page 1, but kids eat it up. Makes me wonder about the "sanitizing" of the Grimm fairytales over the years and whether that was more about the kids or the adults that had to read the stories to them :)
pieman
As young as
he feels
Level: 111

Posts: 1952/3590
EXP: 14788883
For next: 79523

Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 6.7.05 1120.59
Reposted on: 6.7.12 1124.07
    Originally posted by tarnish
    I didn't mean to suggest that kids understand the dark aspects of Dahl's work--I don't think kids generally "get" dark until they're older.


Oh, I didn't mean to suggest that's what you were saying. I think we are saying the same thing. It gets darker when you look at it through your older eyes.
Teppan-Yaki
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 970/1083
EXP: 2398353
For next: 63511

Since: 28.6.02

Since last post: 965 days
Last activity: 936 days
#15 Posted on 11.7.05 2033.55
Reposted on: 11.7.12 2034.08
    Originally posted by Texas Kelly
    BTW, Stilton, I read in one interview that Roald Dahl's heirs have seen the new film, and doth approve. Take that for what it's worth...


That's a good thing; FWIW, I saw in the latest Entertainment Weekly that Wilder is anti-remake, saying the movie's being released for entertainment dollars.

Maybe so, but this the only "remake" this summer that I'm stoked to see (and I don't consider Batman Begins a remake).
JoshMann
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1663/2159
EXP: 6361478
For next: 31321

Since: 17.11.03
From: Tallahassee, FL

Since last post: 2320 days
Last activity: 2318 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on 12.7.05 1239.40
Reposted on: 12.7.12 1239.55
    Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
      Originally posted by Texas Kelly
      BTW, Stilton, I read in one interview that Roald Dahl's heirs have seen the new film, and doth approve. Take that for what it's worth...


    That's a good thing; FWIW, I saw in the latest Entertainment Weekly that Wilder is anti-remake, saying the movie's being released for entertainment dollars.

    Maybe so, but this the only "remake" this summer that I'm stoked to see (and I don't consider Batman Begins a remake).


Depp's response while talking to a reporter from the AP:


    AP: Gene Wilder has said “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” was only remade to make money and that Hollywood has no business messing with a classic film. What’s your take on this?

    Depp: Somebody sent me an article where Gene Wilder said, “Why would they remake Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory?” We didn’t remake “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” we remade (the book) “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” It’s based on the same book they based theirs on. Making a statement that they only made this film because of the money is a really odd statement to make from a guy who has been in the business as long as he has ... all movies were made because somebody somewhere wanted a return on their dollar that they spent. Ultimately it’s a business. If you can dance around in there and avoid the sharp edges, and understand the game, but not play the game, then you’re OK. Of course it is a dirty business, but that doesn’t mean that it’s all about money for me. My intentions are as pure as they can be.



(edited by Blanket Jackson on 12.7.05 1340)
cranlsn
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 707/1208
EXP: 2857059
For next: 12699

Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 16 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#17 Posted on 12.7.05 1321.43
Reposted on: 12.7.12 1321.54
    Originally posted by Blanket Jackson
      Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
        Originally posted by Texas Kelly
        BTW, Stilton, I read in one interview that Roald Dahl's heirs have seen the new film, and doth approve. Take that for what it's worth...


      That's a good thing; FWIW, I saw in the latest Entertainment Weekly that Wilder is anti-remake, saying the movie's being released for entertainment dollars.

      Maybe so, but this the only "remake" this summer that I'm stoked to see (and I don't consider Batman Begins a remake).


    Depp's response while talking to a reporter from the AP:


      AP: Gene Wilder has said “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” was only remade to make money and that Hollywood has no business messing with a classic film. What’s your take on this?

      Depp: Somebody sent me an article where Gene Wilder said, “Why would they remake Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory?” We didn’t remake “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,” we remade (the book) “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” It’s based on the same book they based theirs on. Making a statement that they only made this film because of the money is a really odd statement to make from a guy who has been in the business as long as he has ... all movies were made because somebody somewhere wanted a return on their dollar that they spent. Ultimately it’s a business. If you can dance around in there and avoid the sharp edges, and understand the game, but not play the game, then you’re OK. Of course it is a dirty business, but that doesn’t mean that it’s all about money for me. My intentions are as pure as they can be.



    (edited by Blanket Jackson on 12.7.05 1340)


In the "real" world, Depp's gotten a little foppish and weird for my tastes...but that being said I've enjoyed him in just about every movie he's done.

I'm looking forward to seeing this...probably twice, because I sometimes wonder about content for my kids when Burton's involved.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple
Level: 114

Posts: 1089/3844
EXP: 16206006
For next: 103611

Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 480 days
Last activity: 440 days
#18 Posted on 12.7.05 1837.55
Reposted on: 12.7.12 1839.18
Yeah, it is funny to hear Gene Wilder say that, since the original was financed by the Quaker Oats Company. They planned to cash in by selling Wonka candies of all kinds, the remanants of which are still made by Nestlé today. In fact, the planned crown jewel of the candies was to be the Wonka Bar itself. Unfortunately for them, their chocolate formula was a little off and all the bars had to be recalled (because they were melting in stores).

Like Depp says, it's always a business. It always has been a business.
SchippeWreck
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 769/2665
EXP: 8976435
For next: 12384

Since: 26.3.03
From: Glendale, CA

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 39 min.
#19 Posted on 12.7.05 1846.09
Reposted on: 12.7.12 1846.10
    Originally posted by Teppan-Yaki
      Originally posted by Texas Kelly
      BTW, Stilton, I read in one interview that Roald Dahl's heirs have seen the new film, and doth approve. Take that for what it's worth...


    That's a good thing; FWIW, I saw in the latest Entertainment Weekly that Wilder is anti-remake, saying the movie's being released for entertainment dollars.

    Maybe so, but this the only "remake" this summer that I'm stoked to see (and I don't consider Batman Begins a remake).

Gene has seemingly done a 180, at least as when it comes to Johnny Depp. Found this on IMDB:

Wilder Retracts Depp Criticism
Movie funnyman Gene Wilder has hailed Johnny Depp as a "magical" choice to play Willy Wonka in upcoming film Charlie And The Chocolate Factory - weeks after attacking Depp's casting in the movie remake. Wilder, who played Wonka in the original 1971 Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, recently accused director Tim Burton of remaking the Roald Dahl fantasy for "pointless" financial gain. And despite complaining Depp would not be able to improve upon his portrayal of Wonka, Wilder has now declared Depp is the perfect choice for the film. He says, "If I were going to cast the movie, I would cast Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka because I think he is wonderful. Mysterious - always - and magical."
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc
Level: 95

Posts: 1941/2472
EXP: 8421486
For next: 247152

Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#20 Posted on 12.7.05 2049.40
Reposted on: 12.7.12 2050.00
    Originally posted by Mr. Boffo
    Yeah, it is funny to hear Gene Wilder say that, since the original was financed by the Quaker Oats Company. They planned to cash in by selling Wonka candies of all kinds, the remanants of which are still made by Nestlé today. In fact, the planned crown jewel of the candies was to be the Wonka Bar itself. Unfortunately for them, their chocolate formula was a little off and all the bars had to be recalled (because they were melting in stores).

    Like Depp says, it's always a business. It always has been a business.


The chocolate bars still suck.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Capt. jack's Beast Of Burden
Next thread: RIP Jimmy Doohan
Previous thread: FANTASTIC FOUR... almost, but not quite good enough.
(1199 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Related threads: Charlie And The Chocolate Factory Trailer - Depp to play Willy Wonka - Tim Burton Does Willy Wonka.....oh yeah. - More...
The 7 - Movies & TV - Charlie & The Chocolate Factory (Spoilers?)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.314 seconds.