 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.14.231.16
Saw it tonight at the AMC Forum 30Woah, this one is hard to pin down. You have Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory running in the back of your head while watching it, so it's odd seeing familiar scenes with semi-familiar characters doing things differently. The easiest way to do this is a scorecard:
Positives:
More filled out story
Oompa-Loompas are even more creepy and strange
The chocolate factory is as nuts as the first movie, but even more so
The actors were pretty good, played slightly different than the original movie, but in a mostly good way
The TV scene is now outstanding, very nice movie references in thereNegatives:
More fleshed out story removes some of the mystery and craziness
The oompa-loompa songs were rather uneven
Some of the scenes seemed kind of clunky
My favorite scene from the first, the invention room, is very slimmed down
The slick new effects sometimes detract from the strangeness of the originalDraw:
Wilder vs. Depp - Very differently played, but both good
The end of the new one is more complete, but there was nothing really wrong with the end of the originalThe audience, very mixed adults and kids, seemed to love it. It's really very funny, with the twisted humor of the original. I wish I had read the book before, to compare, but I've read the sequel and this version of the movie seemed to capture Dahl's off-kilter humor very well. If you liked the first one you'll probably like this one.
Overall: 80/100 on my patented absolute scale, which is about what I'd give the original
/*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/
Follow Ups:
I saw this yesterday afternoon.A good friend of mine has a problem with classics being remade. It generally does not bother me and I try to enjoy the new film for what it offers -- even if very little. This was a case where the impression of the original was so strong and memorable that the comparison was inevitable and problematic.
I'm a big fan of the original and even occasionally listen to the soundtrack on LP. The score and songs were truly classic material. The new movie came up with its own songs, but nothing too memorable or moving.
I considered the new movie conceptually flawed in a few ways and thought it was a shame to put such a dark twist on a movie for kids. Some of the actors were decently cast, though I didn't feel there was enough differentiation between Veruka Salt and Violet Beauregarde. The movie was not without humor and entertainment value though.
Still, I thought it was a shame and thought "Why bother?" Tim Burton must have signed on to the sure money maker to have a sure money maker for himself. I've never been much of a fan of his.
For me:original: 4 stars and a true classic
new film: 2 1/2 stars and forgettableDepp was certainly interesting, but the character didn't create the kind of joy and wonder that Gene Wilder did. No comparison there either.
I agree with your thoughts on the TV scene. They were smart enough to retain the stark "whiteness" of the original. I loved the movie references, although I think much of the audience was too young to "get" it.Songs are always tricky in movies. Again, They were wise enough to keep the songs short. I was 50/50 on the songs, but didn't think they were too bad.
I would like to add that the film seemed very well paced, well cast, and was great fun. It's hard not to do a scene for scene comparison while watching however.
John
8
----------
This space available.
I agree, I felt it was like Michael Mackson making candy.
I thought the part showing the old house with everybody laying around eating chocolate was cool.
Wilder's hammy style works well in some films (i.e., The Producers, Silver Streak, etc.), but in Roald Dahl's dark fantasy his zaniness blunts the impact of the disturbed Wonka character (as envisioned and very effectively conveyed by Tim Burton & Depp, Wonka's child-like character obviously grew up in a dysfunctional household himself with an obsessive father, which made his inability to relate to his "guests" as an adult that much more poignant). Of course your mileage will vary, but you probably drive an SUV too! ;^)AuPh
6 minute animated, Vincent, with voice by Vincent Price, to get into Burton's dark kid side."Vincent Malloy is seven years old, / He's always polite and does what he's told. / For a boy his age he's considerate and nice, / But he wants to be just like Vincent Price. / He doesn't mind living with his sister, dog and cat, / Though he'd rather share a home with spiders and bats..."
...Selick´s "The Nightmare Before Christmas": a round program, while I find it hard to decide which one I enjoyed most!Regards
BF
We had the same programme...great dark & creepy stuff!!
...with Depp reminding you of Michael Jackson? Ebert seened quite troubled by the apparent resemblance.
Cetaele (aka Bob)
I noticed the same thing. It didnt take but a couple lines.
Depp is swimming in the MJ waters, consciously or not.
Those two deserve each other. Creepy. And to think Winona Ride-her dated that putz.
No, it actually didn't occour to me. He's pale 'cause he's been cooped up in his chocolate factory for years. He acts like a big kid 'cause he never had a chance to grow up, not because he likes kids. And when the children approach him (or anyone for that matter) he looks horrified and backs off. The character is a certified agorophobe and anthrophobe.I'm not sure where Ebert's head is on this one, usually he's a halfway decent movie critic. I think he's been watching too much garbage TV like a certain character in the movie, and maybe eating too much chocolate like a different character...
/*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
