The Candy Man Can
...'cause he mixes it with love and makes the world taste good...
We saw Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory last night. It was pretty good, I thought. I'll confess that I LOVED Roald Dahl books as a kid and probably read all of them EXCEPT the Chocolate Factory & Great Glass Elevator books. I don't know why, I just never did. Maybe for the same reason I never watched Star Wars--I just didn't.
However, I did watch and love the 1971/Gene Wilder version, which of course is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, PLUS it's a musical, PLUS it's very, very seventies. Apparently Tim Burton is NOT a fan of the 1971 version, and he adamantly insists his movie be called a remake of Roald Dahl's book, not a remake of the old movie. I also read that Gene Wilder is not a fan of Tim Burton's remake (because "he's only doing it for the money"). Come on guys, can't we all just get along?
In one article I read that he thought a lot of sentimental people would be mad at him for making a new and different version of the movie--nostalgia makes people do crazy things. I guess he has a point. But this version is pretty different from the 1971, so maybe I shouldn't make comparisons. Oh, well. At the risk of offending Timmy, I'll go ahead.
I liked this new version, as I like I think all Tim Burton and/or Johnny Depp movies I've seen. I've even started to appreciate Helena Bonham Carter (Charlie's mom), who used to bug me, but I can see her visual appeal to the Timster--she has a very interesting face. I don't want that to sound like an insult--I think she's pretty, but also her features are very pronounced.
This new one is I guess a little "darker" than the other--or maybe I never saw the "dark" sides of Gene Wilder's? I don't know. It's been probably 4 years or so since I watched the original. I guess those orange-and-green Oompa-Loompas were pretty scary (and I never liked the "Oompa-Loompa, doompety doo" song).
Anyway. Plus this new one sort of focuses more on why Willy Wonka is so weird (although his flashbacks of an overbearing dentist father are not true to the original book, apparently--Tim Burton just thought some childhood emotional scarring would explain some of Wonka's strangeness--imagine, not being allowed to eat candy when your one true dream is to become a chocolatier! The horror).
The kids were good in this one, I thought, although I always liked the original Violet Beauregard with her classic '70's TV earnestness (and obnoxiousness). I like the visual effects T.B. used on the kids' and parents' faces--sort of makes them look airbrushed. The new Violet's mom is played by the actress who plays the stepmom in the remake of The Parent Trap--I don't know her name, but I think she's hilarious and also has a very interesting face with exaggerated features, which adds to her character a lot. Augustus Gloop and his mom were pretty funny (although I do love their originals too, with the dad eating the microphone and "Augustus! Save some rroom for later!") Mike TV was appropriately freakish, and his combover dad was appropriately pathetic. Veruca Salt is squirrely and good (instead of a golden goose, she has an encounter with lots and lots of squirrels, which is what happens in the book--only at this point of the movie did I realize her squirreliness). And I think Freddie Highmore is adorable, and his grandpa was good too.
The Oompa-Loompas--I'm still deciding. They were all played by the same actor, Deep Roy, who apparently did every one of the 150 Oompa-Loompas parts himself--he wasn't just digitalized. The whole flashback to how Willy Wonka finds the Oompa-Loompas (in Loompaland, of course) is a little weird. But their songs and dances in this version are pretty cool--nowhere NEAR as obnoxious as "Oompa-Loompa doompety doo, I've got another puzzle for you."
OK, I'll stop spoiling, if I am. I'll just say one thing about Johnny Depp's interpretation: I've always liked Johnny Depp, and I think he does a good job. I think the dentures, the bob with short bangs, and the purple Latex-y dentist-esque gloves (the comparison is just too obvious) are a little strange. But I guess that's the idea. He did grow on me, and maybe the idea isn't to like him at first.
"I've got a golden ticket (it's ours, Charlie!)"--"Cheer up, Charlie...no need to frown..."--"I want the world. I want the WHOLE world."--"Come with me, and you'll be in a world of pure imagination..."
Sorry, had to re-visit my memories of the '70s movie soundtrack. I don't see how Tim Burton doesn't like it. It's just so kitschy and great. But he has a point--nostalgia can brainwash you. I'm easily brainwashed.
18 comments:
Nice review - now I'm excited to go - loved the pix too!
I forgot to mention the 2001: A Space Odyssey allusion (in the Mike TV scene, of course), involving a Wonka Bar replacing the monolith in the monkey scene, which I thought was pretty funny. I wouldn't have gotten the reference had I not watched 2001 like 4 times for a science fiction lit & film class at BYU (one of my fave classes, BTW, although I never would have considered myself a science fiction person).
I saw it this weekend and really loved it. I love the old one, too, though and I also missed the songs.
I have mixed feelings about seeing this movie I really loved the old one and Tim Burton can sometimes be strange I never saw the nightmare before christmans or whatever it was called. But i will probably go see this one sometime this summer.
We're off tonight for FHE - I'll give a verdict tomorrow - in between chapters of HPATHBP!!
I was just about to do a Willy Wonka blog meeself, thanks for saving me the effort.
I really loved the first one, really loved this new one, and never read the book--just like you. I kept wondering why, exactly, Johhnny Depp played it the way he did (the voice, especially)but it was fine. I think he could have done it in his normal voice and it would have been fine too and slightly less reminiscent of Michael Jackson but I guess it was all part of TB's vision. The Corpse Bride! Looks good.
Eliza, now that your movies are all free do you think you have lower expectations at the theater? Are you easier to please now that you don't have to pay? Just curious.
I saw on your blog that you planned to see the movie after I'd already posted my review. Had I only known, I would have allowed you the pleasure of reviewing it yourself. You should still review; I'd like to read it.
Side note: I hate the fact that I am OCD about comma splices now. Blogging should be casual; however, for me, I obsessively insert semicolons where any self-respecting blogger would use a comma.
The creepy J. Depp voice--I was generally not a fan except in moments like "Papa?" and "That's the puppet hospital and burn center."
Definitely lower expectations at the theater with the free tickets. Since we have no kids and/or life, we pretty much see every movie that comes out, where before we saw maybe one every other month or so--and that only at Sandy Movies 9, since prices are so proposterous otherwise.
I'm pretty sure that once my free tickets are up, we'll be going back to the old Movies 9 routine. There just aren't that many great movies this year! Million Dollar Baby, Fever Pitch, and Batman Begins are the only ones I would have been happy to pay full price for.
It's so ridiculous how much people pay for movies. For me, it's all about winning free tickets and renting DVDs at the public library. That's the only way I'll do it.
How did you get free tix?
This past March I won a contest on KSL Radio. I guessed the winners of the Academy Awards and I won free movie tickets for a year. I didn't guess all the winners or anything, but I guessed enough to win the tickets! Which was exciting because I never win anything.
I missed a lot of categories like best sound mixing. The ones that you know are just arbitrary with some Academy voters. "Hmmm, best sound mixing. The Aviator or Ray? Guess I'll have to do eenie, meenie, minie, mo."
I liked the movie - and you should all read the book - read all of Roald Dahl's books to your kids or encourage them to read them. I wish I'd known how cool he was sooner. When I did a long-term sub assignment in a 5th grade class like 10 years ago I had to read them "James and the Giant Peach." I believe the J.K. Rowling was influenced by Roald Dahl - there's something British and dark and other-worldly and fantastic and abandoned kids making a go of it - try it, you'll like it.
I liked the Michael Jackon look and the dentures and the voice and all the little references to current pop culture and Charlie and the grandpa and the mom and dad - and the grandma who liked grapes! (Those are not all in the book, but he captured the essence much more than the 70's version.)
And I loved Deep Roy and his dancing and singing - seemed like a big roadshow in the sky!
My comma-riddled post must have been torture to read. Never lower your standards of usage and punctuation--even for blogging.
Kacy, just so you know, I was NOT trying to say anything about YOUR comma splicing. I would NEVER do that...absolutely never... When I forget about my obsessiveness, then there are lots of comma splices. And I don't notice them in other people's posts. Just my own.
Comma splices are a force to be reckoned with - I know - I had a teacher who would fail a paper containing one! (He did that because at the time you couldn't get into a UC school without passing the Subject A Exam - and if you had a comma splice, you failed the Subject A Exam - it was drilled into me well - I tend to notice them all the time - and there are a lot of them - but I'm not obsessive about it. And I splice away these days - kind of my own private rebellion!!
What kind of a word is "splice," anyway.
maybe a combo of split and slice???
I think you're right Bonny. Heather Meier, who collects old aprons, kept seeing the word "pinny" refering to old aprons and couldn't figure it out - nor could I - so I said it to your dad and he said, "Pinafore" and I think he was right and Heather was elated to have solved the mystery.
Interesting. I've seen the word "pinny" too and never really thought about it.
According to the OED (oed.com), "splice" is "of doubtful origin"--it probably comes from the verb "splissen" (Dutch? Old English? dunno) and "perhaps related to split." Interestingly, though, in most uses of the verb and the noun, it means "to join together"--whether ropes on a ship, "two pieces of timber," bones in surgery, a torn piece of film, two companies merging, or two people in marriage.
Which is funny, because I assumed it meant the opposite--splitting or slicing one thing into two, not joining two things into one. But I guess in the case of a comma splice, it's joining two independent clauses together.
I swear I only spent like 5 minutes looking this up. Back to the real world...
If the OED says it, it must be true!! Keeping language accurate is what it's all about!!
Post a Comment