Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Rated PG, 1 hr. 46 min.
Critics' Rating: B+
Miles's Rating: A-
Brooklynne's Rating: A-
Tonight's big event was the release of the new Harry Potter book, a copy of which I pre-ordered for Brooklynne. Don't worry, we were in line shortly after midnight and Brooklynne got the 289th copy sold at our local Barnes and Noble. But only slightly less exciting was our date before hand to see the newly released remake of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The movie was much better than the original, although this version added a back-story that made Wonka more difficult to judge. Can someone who has read the book tell me if this addition comes from the original story?
So let me first say that I'm a big Tim Burton fan and that Jonny Depp won me over with his role as Don Juan... er... I mean, Jack Sparrow (did I just type that?!). Any way, the odds were in favor of a good movie and I wasn't disappointed. Charlie's poor situation was made both truly pitiful and laughable by Burton's since of the grotesque, and the director must share some dark sense of irony with the author, Dahl, because the other golden ticket winners are classic Burton characters.
But really the story is about Willie Wonka and it is hard to decide how to view him. As a kid watching the old version, I thought of Wonka as a kind of silly old man, who just wanted to teach children not to be greedy and selfish. In this movie, Wonka is kind of creepy and devious, but also innocent and naive. Should we see him as the industrialist/colonialist, or the candy-loving friend of the Umpalumpas? Viewers are aware that, in a sense, he was robbed of his childhood, while he's still the most childish character of all. Wonka has no love for the "rotten" children, but he exhibits all of their faults. This complexity makes the film more than a colorful candyland kids' movie. There's also enough visual imagery and symbolism to keep an eleventh-grade English class busy.
Plus, the revamped Umpalumpa song-and-dance numbers are great. Definitely a movie to see especially if you liked the old one, and well worth the price of admission in the theater.
I loved the book by Dahl; I read Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator (if I remember correctly, the original movie goes into some of the second book). However, I thought that the original movie was extremely creepy and dark, and wasn't true to the book with regard to tone. Whereas the book portrayed Willy Wonka as mysterious, he wasn't the freaky, maybe sinister, guy played by Gene Wilder. Whereas Charlie's situation was depressing with a gloomy financial outlook, at least in my childhood imagination/interpretation, the mood of the novel wasn't as dark and ominously shadowed as the original movie. (I particularly remember Charlie standing on the street, in front of this gate before he finds the ticket, and the scene making me feel very uneasy and spooked.) It has been years since I read the books, but I have a feeling that Tim Burton got more of his inspiration and attraction to remaking this movie from the other film than from Roald Dahl. Just my taste, but I like Captain Jack/Chocolat Johnny Depp much better than the Edward Scissorhands one. Sounds like maybe I should skip this movie...
Brooklynne said that she saw a review where thay claimed Burton was truer to the book than The original movie. But I think its safe to say he was at least influenced by the first film. Maybe the difference in your reading and the film interpretations comes more from our child vs. adult sensibilities. Maybe the movies are darker because adults see the world in a darker way, while children who create a mental movie while reading the book, might read less into Wonka as a creepy guy. Maybe?
I saw it last week. B-. Better than the first. Really just a setting for Johnny Depp to do his thing ... he does his thing well, but I would say most of the movie was a prop for him. So if this was a thumbs up or down, it would be up. I know this is an old post, but I just saw it.