I can’t really dispute any of scores. On paper this seems like a good movie. In practice it felt very flat to me. Depp’s Wonka in particular seemed very poorly defined to me. I’m all for crazy, goofy characters but I didn’t get any sense of the candy-making genius he is supposed to be.
This was also the first movie I can think of where the special effects spoiled it. The original factory was a world of make-believe and imagination precisely because it didn’t look real - a Neverland which only made sense to children. This factory was, well, a factory (albeit one making very nice chocolate).
Tom 6 September 2005, 12:29 PM
2
I’ve heard it said often that Depp’s Wonka doesn’t seem particularly involved with his factory. He did seem a bit separate from everything which does harm the impression of him as a chocolate making genius; though his indian expedition does sell it a little.
I don’t agree with you about the factory though. Although as I said, I watched the old one after the new one, the old factory looks average even compared to contemporary Doctor Who episodes, with the notable exception of the first room. Which isn’t a criticism of course, coming from me. But suggesting that people will find a more fake looking factory more convincing than a real one seems equally as flawed as the reverse.
Also: the Burton Factory contained a mountain range, a huge chocolate tunnel system, and many other rooms that we skimmed past. I wasn’t left with a very factory-ish view of it.
Sometimes the special effects can spoil a film but on this occasion, for me, they sold it. I didn’t love the movie, but I definitely found it above-average.
Jack 10 September 2005, 03:09 PM
3
I agree with you about the Buckets. The entire family was much more convincing. They were all very likeable. I’m glad to see that Charlie actually loves all his grandparents, and doesn’t just have Grandpa Jo as his obvious favourite. He tended to draw all the focus in the original - in this one while he is certainly present in more scenes in this one, I felt Grandpa George had about equal significance.
I found it quite moving when Charlie shared his birthday present. I didn’t really expect to be. Charlie really was VERY good.
Anyway there are heaps of reasons why the new Buckets are better than the old, although I can’t say that the original Grandpa Jo actor being 10 years younger is on my list.
As for the factory exterior, the original definitely felt spookier and in a state of disrepair (which I liked), although that was possibly how the characters presented it as well. No scary old man rattling tin cans at the gate. And I did see it when I was 7 so I’m not sure I can trust my younger self.
Tom 11 September 2005, 07:01 AM
4
I was being a little facetious I’ll admit, about the age thing, but I was impressed with how wasted Joe looked — it was more impressive I felt when he managed to get out of bed.
Yeah… when you’re old, the scary old man looks kind of lame, and you’re not scared so much as puzzled that some guy would be selling stuff outside a deserted factory. And knives, of all things. But that’d be scary to a kid I’m sure.
James Wong 25 June 2006, 06:07 AM
5
Old version creams the New Version - i found Johnny Depp distasteful, the dentist subplot was beyond ridiculous and Tim Burton has too much of an ego not to leave his mark on the movie. Haven’t we seen the warped house before in The nightmare before Christmas?, Beetlejuice, and that bride movie that came out last year with Helena Bonham carter and Johnny depp as voices?
Sooo disappointed in this movie. The only thing I agree with you is that the new Charlie comes off a lot better than the old one. The old Charlie was practically begging for sympathy.
But Grampa Joe and Gene Wilder made the last movie.
Anyways 4 stars to the old movie and 1 and ½ stars for the new one – and its lucky to get that as well.
Tom 26 June 2006, 03:37 AM
6
Do you have a problem with warped houses? Are you house-ist, James? You could call it ego or you could call it style. I like having a some filmmakers as distinctive as Burton wandering around.
Sometimes I feel I should have given the win to the old one. I honestly did just pick categories and add it up at the end. Unfortunately weighting the categories equally harms the older film. Wilder is undeniably magical. Not so keen on Grandpa Joe in the old movie though. I think the new one deserves more stars that 1 and a half though. I didn’t mind the dentistry at first but it soon became apparent it was a dull Father/Son plot and I didn’t like it.
Comment on this Review
If you want a pretty picture, go to Gravatar.com and get one.
Andrew
6 September 2005, 12:15 PM
I can’t really dispute any of scores. On paper this seems like a good movie. In practice it felt very flat to me. Depp’s Wonka in particular seemed very poorly defined to me. I’m all for crazy, goofy characters but I didn’t get any sense of the candy-making genius he is supposed to be.
This was also the first movie I can think of where the special effects spoiled it. The original factory was a world of make-believe and imagination precisely because it didn’t look real - a Neverland which only made sense to children. This factory was, well, a factory (albeit one making very nice chocolate).
Tom
6 September 2005, 12:29 PM
I’ve heard it said often that Depp’s Wonka doesn’t seem particularly involved with his factory. He did seem a bit separate from everything which does harm the impression of him as a chocolate making genius; though his indian expedition does sell it a little.
I don’t agree with you about the factory though. Although as I said, I watched the old one after the new one, the old factory looks average even compared to contemporary Doctor Who episodes, with the notable exception of the first room. Which isn’t a criticism of course, coming from me. But suggesting that people will find a more fake looking factory more convincing than a real one seems equally as flawed as the reverse.
Also: the Burton Factory contained a mountain range, a huge chocolate tunnel system, and many other rooms that we skimmed past. I wasn’t left with a very factory-ish view of it.
Sometimes the special effects can spoil a film but on this occasion, for me, they sold it. I didn’t love the movie, but I definitely found it above-average.
Jack
10 September 2005, 03:09 PM
I agree with you about the Buckets. The entire family was much more convincing. They were all very likeable. I’m glad to see that Charlie actually loves all his grandparents, and doesn’t just have Grandpa Jo as his obvious favourite. He tended to draw all the focus in the original - in this one while he is certainly present in more scenes in this one, I felt Grandpa George had about equal significance.
I found it quite moving when Charlie shared his birthday present. I didn’t really expect to be. Charlie really was VERY good.
Anyway there are heaps of reasons why the new Buckets are better than the old, although I can’t say that the original Grandpa Jo actor being 10 years younger is on my list.
As for the factory exterior, the original definitely felt spookier and in a state of disrepair (which I liked), although that was possibly how the characters presented it as well. No scary old man rattling tin cans at the gate. And I did see it when I was 7 so I’m not sure I can trust my younger self.
Tom
11 September 2005, 07:01 AM
I was being a little facetious I’ll admit, about the age thing, but I was impressed with how wasted Joe looked — it was more impressive I felt when he managed to get out of bed.
Yeah… when you’re old, the scary old man looks kind of lame, and you’re not scared so much as puzzled that some guy would be selling stuff outside a deserted factory. And knives, of all things. But that’d be scary to a kid I’m sure.
James Wong
25 June 2006, 06:07 AM
Old version creams the New Version - i found Johnny Depp distasteful, the dentist subplot was beyond ridiculous and Tim Burton has too much of an ego not to leave his mark on the movie. Haven’t we seen the warped house before in The nightmare before Christmas?, Beetlejuice, and that bride movie that came out last year with Helena Bonham carter and Johnny depp as voices?
Sooo disappointed in this movie. The only thing I agree with you is that the new Charlie comes off a lot better than the old one. The old Charlie was practically begging for sympathy. But Grampa Joe and Gene Wilder made the last movie.
Anyways 4 stars to the old movie and 1 and ½ stars for the new one – and its lucky to get that as well.
Tom
26 June 2006, 03:37 AM
Do you have a problem with warped houses? Are you house-ist, James? You could call it ego or you could call it style. I like having a some filmmakers as distinctive as Burton wandering around.
You mean this bride movie??
Sometimes I feel I should have given the win to the old one. I honestly did just pick categories and add it up at the end. Unfortunately weighting the categories equally harms the older film. Wilder is undeniably magical. Not so keen on Grandpa Joe in the old movie though. I think the new one deserves more stars that 1 and a half though. I didn’t mind the dentistry at first but it soon became apparent it was a dull Father/Son plot and I didn’t like it.
Comment on this Review
If you want a pretty picture, go to Gravatar.com and get one.
HTML is not allowed — instead, use:
Leave a blank line between paragraphs. More complicated formatting can be found at the Markdown homepage.