Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

[Maxwell]

I thin the reason he gives the factory to charlie is not because he likes child-like qualities, because charlie doe'snt have any, charlie having lived a life of poverty and misfortune is incredibly responsible to the point were he's like a little adult only completely uncorrupted because he hasn't lived long enough to be, therfore if wonka gives charlie the factory he will be givving it to somebody who is very responsible, nice, obediant, and loves candy it's basically lioke he's a blank sheet of paper responsible candy loving paper...  and not like a child because wonka doesn't like children.

[Legion]

I agree with T.F.O.  Throughout the movie Willy is scared of the children....except for Charlie.  To me, during the whole movie Willy has set up these kids from the beginning.  What I mean is that he placed the tickets in the bars that the kids would get in order to be able to set them up at his factory.  The first 4 kids where to show Charlie what happens when you become glutton, to competitive, greedy, and violent.  Finally the reason Charlie gets a ticket is because Willy sees Charlie's purity and wants him to leave his family, which for Willy, was a source of hatred toward candy and continue his work.  That’s just my thoughts on the new movie.

[Peter Ahlstrom]

I liked this movie much better than the first one. In the first one, Wonka was mean, almost evil. That turned me off.

In this movie, Wonka was weird. He felt, as Karen said to me, plastic, like his gloves. He wasn't a real person. He was not the Wonka of the book.

The Wonka of the book was NOT dark! He was a very lighthearted, go-with-the-flow kind of guy. He let the kids get themselves into trouble, but he liked kids that were good kids. And when they landed the great glass elevator in the house, and Charlie asked if his family could come along, he said "of course they can!" (And then they all went to the moon...) NOT the "can't" of this movie.

Nevertheless, this movie was enjoyable and better than the first. I can enjoy it for what it is. The oompa loompa songs were the best part.

[fuzzyoctopus]

But then we wouldn't have gotten to see Dr. Wonka's apartment in the middle of ... Siberia or wherever.

[Archon]

Before I say anything out of place, did anyone else loathe this version?

[Akeyata]

I finally saw this movie.  Wow.  It was the best movie I have ever seen in my life.  It did change the ending, but the ending THIS version chose was still consistant with the tone and point of the book.  And if you think the Wonka of the book wasn't dark, maybe you need to read it again.  THis was the truest movie-from-book I have ever seen, except perhaps Harry Potter. (because of the added ending).  

[Patrick_Gibbs]

I agree that it was a brilliant book from movie adaptation, Akeyata. I for one am getting really sick of hearing people talk about it being too dark, as opposed to the Gene Wilder version. For crying out loud, that one featured a shot of a live chicken getting it's head cut off. I love the new ending, and I left this movie feeling realy good, which is rare thing with movies anymore.

[Peter Ahlstrom]

I don't care about the Gene Wilder version. The Gene Wilder version was WAY too dark. And I don't think Willy Wonka in this version was dark. He just did not have the personality of the Willy Wonka in the book, made extremely clear when the book's "yes" was changed to a "no" in this movie. And that doesn't mean that they just changed the ending; Wonka's fundamental personality motivations were completely different.

[Patrick_Gibbs]

Um . . . I'll have to read the book again before I can really agree or disagree with you on this one, but I understand your point, and I wasn't refering to your post, but rather other reviews that I've read that call it too dark.

[Peter Ahlstrom]

Well, I also plan to read the book again...and beyond the Gene Wilder comment, I was really more responding to Ayekata's post, which seemed to be a direct response to mine earlier in the thread.

As I remember it, and I will indeed be reading the book again to verify, Wonka in the book didn't like people who were untrustworthy, like the people who stole his recipes. He didn't have any aversion to family members like the Wonka in the movie had. He certainly did give people enough rope to hang themselves, though.

As I said earlier, I liked the movie; I liked it much better than the Wilder version (well, that's not hard, since I hated that one). I just take exception to people saying it was spot-on to the book when it wasn't.

[Chimera]

Saw it on Thursday with EUOL, MsFish, Spriggan, and CtrlZed. Perhaps I need a couple more days to process before I can review it, but I'm going to anyway. My impression right now is WEIRD. Visually it was quite good--I like Tim Burton's style, the factory was cool, and there were some amazing shots. And I think Johnny Depp did a good job of creating a unique character and being consistent. But I felt very detached from Wonka, and thus from the movie. The comments about him being plastic like his gloves echoes how I felt, I think. The first half of the movie you are attached to Charlie. But from the moment we enter the factory, Wonka takes center stage and Charlie gets barely any attention. Even when he wins, it's not for any real reason except, "Gee, you weren't quite as nasty as those other kids, and since you're the only one left, I guess you win."  Charlie is an afterthought--the story has been taken over by Wonka and his family issues. This might not be true for everyone, but I have a hard time becoming emotionally attached to a detached character, especially one detached from the characters I like. So I didn't really feel Wonka's plight. I was glad he got better, but I didn't really care like some movies get me to do. And the ending felt very tacked on, like we suddenly were supposed to feel all warm and fuzzy.

So I guess the movie was supposed to be about a socially inept person trying to find an heir (or hair). Okaaay. Interesting, but not endearing.

[Patrick_Gibbs]

Ookla -

I agree with your point that it wasn't "spot on" to the book. truth be told, no book adaption ever has been. Even "The Lord of Ther Rings" made changes. I freely admit to being a complete hypocrite about keeping true to the source material, in that if I like the movie, I'm okay with the change, usually, and I don't, I'm not.  In the case of "Charlie," the family aspect was completley made up, but I loved the way it played out, so I was fine with it. On the other hand, I HATEd "The Count of Monte Cristo," because I hated the way they gave it this contrived happy ending, and in doing so took away the whole point of the story, which was supposed to be about vengeance not changing anything, and the fact that when he had accomplished everything he set out to do, he still felt empty and alone. The whole "wait . . . turns out he's YOUR son" thing, as well as the have your cake and kill it two ending with him deciding not to kill Mondego, but then doing so when he attacked him, still makes me angry just thinking about it.

Sorry if I got a  bit off topic.

[Entsuropi]

I liked the count of monte christo, but then i've never read the book.

[MsFish]

I didn't like the new family-oriented Willy-Wonka-has-a-character-arc ending.  It gave the movie a point, and Willy Wonka is not supposed to have a point.  He's just quirky.  

Other than that I thought it was a fantastic movie.  Tim Burton is the master of visual imagery.

[Fellfrosch]

So, Akeyata: the best movie you've ever seen in your life? Even without having seen it myself, I can safely say that this is a wild and meaningless exageration.

You can see why I never take movie advice from Akeyata or her husband