So... anyone seen Charlie and the Chocolate Factory?

Books, movies, television and everything else
User avatar
Wiccy of the Fraternity
Membre Retiré
Membre Retiré
Posts: 3272
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 6:39 pm
Location: Powys, Cymru (Wales)

Post by Wiccy of the Fraternity »

Reginald de Curry wrote:All right, Wiccy, stop hinting for birthday gifts.
No! :P

I am one of th 0.002% oif people with my disability to make it to the age of 30, so I am not shutting up about this one, lol.

As for Mandy... I mean Marilyn Manson playing Willie Wonka, the guy has proven a few times that he can't act :(
Swallow your soul!
User avatar
Jason of the Fraternity
Master of Illusion
Master of Illusion
Posts: 1484
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:12 pm
Location: Chicagoland area
Contact:

Re: So... anyone seen Charlie and the Chocolate Factory?

Post by Jason of the Fraternity »

Brandi wrote:It's rather warped (but has fine Tim Burton visuals).
I'm not sure if Depp's creepy manchild Wonka works for me, but I rather liked the new Oompa-Loompas and their musical numbers.
Johnny Depp's portrayl, while good, didn't quite work for me either. I was expecting there to be a little more sinister edge to him than what was presented (although there were some nicely done moments). Tim Burton, however, did not disappoint with his ideas and visuals. I was very impressed with the look and feel of each of the themes. Plus, he seemed to stay more true to the original story by Dahl (excluding his extra backstory) than the first movie did.

In fact, I believe that the lyrics of the Oompa-Loompa songs in this movie are directly from the book (or at least much closer to Dahl's original wordings).
Wiccy of the Fraternity wrote:I mean Marilyn Manson playing Willie Wonka, the guy has proven a few times that he can't act
I was thinking something of the same thing, Wiccy. I think that Marilyn Manson could look the part of a disturbed chocolatér, but his overall performance would probably be lacking. The part of Willie Wonka does require more than just a weird guy in a suit, which I don't know if Marilyn would have been able to pull off very well.
[i]Pandemonium did not reign, it poured![/i]
User avatar
Jason of the Fraternity
Master of Illusion
Master of Illusion
Posts: 1484
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:12 pm
Location: Chicagoland area
Contact:

Post by Jason of the Fraternity »

Brandi wrote:It's not the boat ride this time, which is actually rather pretty, but a freaky animatronic puppet display (which sings a song that I thinking I'm going to have to SCRAPE OUT OF MY BRAIN WITH A GODDAMN ICEPICK)...
In an interview, Danny Elfman mentioned that he was both pleased and disturbed by how well the song came out. :twisted:

David of the Frat wrote:I loved the puppet thing! It was great. I laughed so hard at that, just how everyone wants that "It's a Small World" ride at Disneyland to wrap up.
Me too! My wife and I were laughing so hard during this moment that several parents around us started glaring. What? Like we are going to scar their children by laughing at that...? :roll: I also loved the scene where Wonka and the group are traveling through the factory in the glass elevator and they pass through the Puppet Hospital.

Willie Wonka: It is a rather recent addition...
[i]Pandemonium did not reign, it poured![/i]
User avatar
Ivana_Boritsi
Arch-villain
Arch-villain
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:48 pm

Post by Ivana_Boritsi »

All I'm saying is that the original Ocean's 11 is a bad movie. Notbecause it is offensive. But because it fails to deliever what a movie is supposed to deliever. Does that make sense? I really think it simply fails on the basic level of a movie. Just like any movie that we see nowadays that is thrown together or pulled together poorly.

Now, taste is completely subjective, so no one is wrong for liking the movie.

By the way, I am all for Hollywood remakes of movies...provided they are done well in a new and fresh way. Many people hate the idea of remakes on general principle. "The original was so good!"

But the history of humanity is filled with "remakes." Greek myths were told time and time again. The Legend of King Arthur was retold countless times. There are no less than 5 "real" version leading up to the version most people are familiar with.

I think that many people tend to idealize the "original" of something, when objectively speaking a remake can often times tell the same story but do it better.

Anyhow, I loved Charile and the Chocolate Factory though it definately does not unseat the original from its throne. The ending of the new movie is too weak.
Now I know, now I can divine. The reign of man is over, and He has come....

-Guy De Maupassant
User avatar
Jason of the Fraternity
Master of Illusion
Master of Illusion
Posts: 1484
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 7:12 pm
Location: Chicagoland area
Contact:

Post by Jason of the Fraternity »

Ivana_Boritsi wrote:All I'm saying is that the original Ocean's 11 is a bad movie.
Um, seeing how nobody's even brought up Ocean's 11 during this discussion, I think that you might have meant this comment for another thread. However, you make a good point about original movies and remarks, Ivana. Many people seem to have the tendency to like the original movies over remarks simply due to them being the original.

Sequels, on the other hand... :wink:
Ivana_Boritsi wrote:Anyhow, I loved Charlie and the Chocolate Factory though it definately does not unseat the original from its throne. The ending of the new movie is too weak.
I would have to agree that the ending of the new movie does seem to be rather weak, but the ending of the original movie (much like the book) seemed to ended much too abruptly for my tastes. I liked how Burton tried to tie things up more with his version. However, the last ten minutes didn't seem to have the same flow that the rest of the movie did.
[i]Pandemonium did not reign, it poured![/i]
User avatar
Jester of the FoS
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:19 am
Location: A Canadian from Canadia

Post by Jester of the FoS »

I laughed consistently through the movie, sometimes my GF and I were howling while people around were silent. Especially at the 2001 references (a movie I forced her to watch) and the Fly line.
I really, really enjoyed it and Deppe but for entirely different reasons than I enjoy the original and Wilder. It's apples and oranges, creepy-weird v. creepy-scary.
And the oompa loompa songs, oh man...

I did miss the chant during the boat ride. That ruled.
User avatar
JinnTolser
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 523
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:43 am
Location: Franklin Park, IL

Post by JinnTolser »

I had heard somewhere that Johnny Depp volunteered to step aside if Marilyn Manson wanted the part. Just as well that he didn't, as I think we get enough of the Manson-as-Wonka in his video for "Dopehat."
User avatar
ScS of the Fraternity
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:46 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by ScS of the Fraternity »

Saw it last night - and it was amazing!

Tim Burton did his signiture stuff, Johny Depp reconfirmed his status as the greatest actor of our age, and Danny Elfman did his typically wonderful job on the music - and apparently some of the umpalumpa vocals as well.

If you need a reason to see this movie, I have two words:
Burning Puppets.
Evil Reigns!!!!
Post Reply