Charlie and the Chocolate Factory at DVinfo.net

Yi Fong Yu · July 17th, 2005, 08:54 PM

it was quite the surprise. i expected planet of the apes but got a better film (imho) than the original willy wonka. johnny depp is magnificent (as usual). the only bad parts were the kids... none of them really stood out. what'dya'll think?

Imran Zaidi · July 19th, 2005, 10:21 AM

I was very skeptical and scared of it just plain stinking, but I was very pleasantly surprised. The casting of the kids was amazing, I thought, but you're right, their personalities didn't have a chance to really shine through as much as in the previous movie.

Depp's performance was spectacular, but I'm not sure I like how the Wonka character was written for this film. I'll have to dig the book back up to remember what the original intention was - but I must say, this was much closer to the book than the original film.

From what I understand, Roald Dahl hated the first film...

On a production note, did you find the Oompa Loompa lyrics hard to understand? I did and I was at a pretty good theater. The music was so loud and boisterous you lost their message - this is the one main thing that really bothered me. The whole point of the story is in what the Oompa Loompas say.

Yi Fong Yu · July 19th, 2005, 01:07 PM

i never understood lyrics for music anyway, so i'm the wrong guy to ask.

i was amazed that danny elfman scored the theatrical songs as well! =).

i loved how all the oompa loompas were the same guy! =). that was awesome.

Joshua Provost · July 19th, 2005, 01:11 PM

Yes, pleasantly surprised. I have always loved the original film, even though I don't generally like musicals. This one was even better.

Couldn't hear the oompa loompa lyrics very well, either. The real star of the film is Deep Roy, he was the best.

I noticed some major technical problems in the print I saw. Lots of mismatched color, grain, and lighting between shots. Even one shot when the kids rush into the first candy shop that had major weirdness in the shadows. Looked like big, blocky DV artifacts, blue blocks against the blackness of the shadows. Major weirdness.

Yi Fong Yu · July 19th, 2005, 01:26 PM

didya see it DLP? perhaps it has more to do with technology than the film? i would've noticed things like that. perhaps it was the print? i coulda sworn it was brand spanking new.

BTW my fav part is him walking into the glass =).

Charles Papert · July 19th, 2005, 03:23 PM

Hard to say what I would think if I had never seen the original but since I have (and love it), I thought this one was weaker in nearly every way. I'm a big Johnny Depp fan but I thought he missed the mark with this characterization by as much as he hit it with "Pirates". Didn't care for most of the kids over the ones in the original, wasn't wowed by the spectacle, and ultimately felt that the old one, while mawkish at times, had a lot more soul. I never cared for the burping gas scene, but I understood that we had to get through that to get the payoff of Charlie returning the everlasting gobstopper to a dismissive Wonka in his office, the true turning point of the film. In this one (even though more true to the book), I found the last act unsatisfying, and the addition of Wonka's relationship with his father ultimately did not touch me the way it was intended.

The chocolate river looked a lot better, though!

Imran Zaidi · July 19th, 2005, 03:49 PM

I think you hit it on the head about the 'soul' issue. The old one had a certain soul that wasn't in this one. I think Gene Wilder had a LOT to do with that.

Charles Papert · July 19th, 2005, 05:27 PM

Hee hee--I just re-read my post to make sure I didn't give up an spoilers; looks like I did OK with the current film but might possibly ruin the ending of the old film! Do you need to run a spoiler header when discussing a 35 yr old film...???!

Yi Fong Yu · July 19th, 2005, 09:05 PM

while the old film has a place in my heart too i felt that depp went for the role and totally made it his willy wonka. i think the film had its own "soul" the way that modern audiences would grasp the modern "soul", in the empty confines of digital technology. it is perpetrated by the digital cloning of the midget character throughout the film. i think that's what made it soul-less (the lack of real individualized oompa loompas).

having said that, i felt that this new readaption of the book feels so much more natural than the original. i liked how willy explained where he got the oompa loompas. i also liked the whole globalization economics point of view in the film. a true update in every sense of the world. when charlie's dad is laid off from the toothpaste factory, he goes back to work by fixing the machine that replaced him =). these little bits and pieces made the film less of a theatrical stage and opened up the world quite a bit. the original was held together by the child actor playing charlie and gene wilder going from one sert piece to the next. beyond that, charlie+chocolate factory was superior in every way, imho.

danny elfman created a very impressive soundtrack.

Ethan Cooper · July 20th, 2005, 12:59 AM

I was just wrapping up a lenghty response to this thread when my dog unplugged my computer. I'll take that as a sign from the almighty that I should stop trying to impress people who I'll never meet and just keep it simple.

I much preferred Wilder's Wanka. He seemed as if he understood what normal was and chose not to be; scoffing at those who were normal with little quips. Depp's Wanka seemed just to be out of touch with reality. This to me made him less endearing and engaging. I just didn't like Wanka as a person in the new film. There was nothing in the new Wanka that came remotely close to the scene in the origional where Wilder drives Charlie away and Charlie returns the gobstopper. Just try to picture Depp's Wanka in this scene and you can see where the character falls short.

The Oompa Loompa's in the new version were just as souless. The musical numbers could not be understood and reminded me of those old Pentium commercials with the guys in their brightly colored suits dancing around.
If they wanted to give the movie a modern touch, they could have explained that Wanka had brought back only one Oompa Loompa and cloned him.

I thought that the strength of the new movie was the family scenes. Those were delightful and fun and I thought very well acted all around. I cought myself almost laughing out loud when I realized that Charlie's mother was Marla Singer.

Thats about all I can remember from what I said before my dog pulled the plug.

Jeff Patnaude · July 20th, 2005, 07:23 AM

We have the original on DVD, and our 3 year old watches it constantly (so then we do to).
There's just a certain charm to the older version. Charlie doesn't have perfect hair, and looks nothing like a hollywood child. Gene Wilder was just wonderful in the role of Willy Wonka. Who can forget Agustas Gloop (ha!).
By the way, the dvd has recent interviews with the actors. It's hillarious to see them how they've grown- but managed to look the same over the many years. A Balding Mike TV! HA!

I'm curious to seee the new version, and it may be closer to the book but I'm having resevations.

J Patnaude

Christopher C. Murphy · July 20th, 2005, 09:49 AM

I thought the family scenes were great and the visuals were nice too. However, I actually fell asleep during the musical numbers...literally during one of them I fell asleep and my girlfriend woke me up!

Depp was good, but I think they put to much focus on certain things that didn't need attention. The musical numbers stuck out like a sore thumb...not Burton's strong point. Overall, it will work for all the kids going to see it. But, I would have liked it more if they didn't have those lame musical pieces...or at least if the music were better and that weird looking guy wasn't everywhere.

Brian Handler · July 20th, 2005, 10:50 AM

Were going to see the movie during work on friday as one of our "creative fieldtrips"...pretty much getting paid to go to a movie.

Anyways, I've read everyones thoughts so I am going to go into the movie very critcaly and disect it. What parts do you feel are lacking and are their points where visual/audio problems occur?

Thanks!

Imran Zaidi · July 20th, 2005, 11:31 AM

One thing I want to point out about the whole sub-plot that the old movie brought in about Slugworth and the gobstopper and the return of it to Willy Wonka by Charlie - it was a fabrication for the movie that never existed in the book. It's part of the reason Dahl hated the first movie.

Soul aside, the newer movie is much more in the spirit of the book than the original, but I still am not sure that Depp was Wonka. He played the particular version of wonka that was written for this movie extremely well, but was it really Wonka? I don't really think so.

Ethan Cooper · July 20th, 2005, 04:58 PM

The most glaring visual problem was in the scene in Japan when the kids were waiting to get into the candy store. There was terrible artifacting in the darks. It was so bad and so obvious that I had wondered if it was intentional. My fiance leaned over to me right after that scene ended and wispered "that looked like video". I'm wondering if what she was talking about was the blocky, almost DVish artifacting. Anyone else notice this?

July 17th, 2005, 08:54 PM	#1
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	Charlie and the Chocolate Factory it was quite the surprise. i expected planet of the apes but got a better film (imho) than the original willy wonka. johnny depp is magnificent (as usual). the only bad parts were the kids... none of them really stood out. what'dya'll think? __________________ bow wow wow

July 19th, 2005, 01:07 PM	#3
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	i never understood lyrics for music anyway, so i'm the wrong guy to ask. i was amazed that danny elfman scored the theatrical songs as well! =). i loved how all the oompa loompas were the same guy! =). that was awesome. __________________ bow wow wow

July 19th, 2005, 01:11 PM	#4
Joshua Provost Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 493	Yes, pleasantly surprised. I have always loved the original film, even though I don't generally like musicals. This one was even better. Couldn't hear the oompa loompa lyrics very well, either. The real star of the film is Deep Roy, he was the best. I noticed some major technical problems in the print I saw. Lots of mismatched color, grain, and lighting between shots. Even one shot when the kids rush into the first candy shop that had major weirdness in the shadows. Looked like big, blocky DV artifacts, blue blocks against the blackness of the shadows. Major weirdness. __________________ Owner/Operator, 727 Records Co-Founder, Matter of Chance Productions Blogger, Try Avoidance

July 19th, 2005, 01:26 PM	#5
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	didya see it DLP? perhaps it has more to do with technology than the film? i would've noticed things like that. perhaps it was the print? i coulda sworn it was brand spanking new. BTW my fav part is him walking into the glass =). __________________ bow wow wow

July 19th, 2005, 03:23 PM	#6
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Hard to say what I would think if I had never seen the original but since I have (and love it), I thought this one was weaker in nearly every way. I'm a big Johnny Depp fan but I thought he missed the mark with this characterization by as much as he hit it with "Pirates". Didn't care for most of the kids over the ones in the original, wasn't wowed by the spectacle, and ultimately felt that the old one, while mawkish at times, had a lot more soul. I never cared for the burping gas scene, but I understood that we had to get through that to get the payoff of Charlie returning the everlasting gobstopper to a dismissive Wonka in his office, the true turning point of the film. In this one (even though more true to the book), I found the last act unsatisfying, and the addition of Wonka's relationship with his father ultimately did not touch me the way it was intended. The chocolate river looked a lot better, though! __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

July 19th, 2005, 10:21 AM	#2
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	I was very skeptical and scared of it just plain stinking, but I was very pleasantly surprised. The casting of the kids was amazing, I thought, but you're right, their personalities didn't have a chance to really shine through as much as in the previous movie. Depp's performance was spectacular, but I'm not sure I like how the Wonka character was written for this film. I'll have to dig the book back up to remember what the original intention was - but I must say, this was much closer to the book than the original film. From what I understand, Roald Dahl hated the first film... On a production note, did you find the Oompa Loompa lyrics hard to understand? I did and I was at a pretty good theater. The music was so loud and boisterous you lost their message - this is the one main thing that really bothered me. The whole point of the story is in what the Oompa Loompas say.

July 19th, 2005, 03:49 PM	#7
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	I think you hit it on the head about the 'soul' issue. The old one had a certain soul that wasn't in this one. I think Gene Wilder had a LOT to do with that.

July 19th, 2005, 05:27 PM	#8
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Hee hee--I just re-read my post to make sure I didn't give up an spoilers; looks like I did OK with the current film but might possibly ruin the ending of the old film! Do you need to run a spoiler header when discussing a 35 yr old film...???! __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

July 19th, 2005, 09:05 PM	#9
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	while the old film has a place in my heart too i felt that depp went for the role and totally made it his willy wonka. i think the film had its own "soul" the way that modern audiences would grasp the modern "soul", in the empty confines of digital technology. it is perpetrated by the digital cloning of the midget character throughout the film. i think that's what made it soul-less (the lack of real individualized oompa loompas). having said that, i felt that this new readaption of the book feels so much more natural than the original. i liked how willy explained where he got the oompa loompas. i also liked the whole globalization economics point of view in the film. a true update in every sense of the world. when charlie's dad is laid off from the toothpaste factory, he goes back to work by fixing the machine that replaced him =). these little bits and pieces made the film less of a theatrical stage and opened up the world quite a bit. the original was held together by the child actor playing charlie and gene wilder going from one sert piece to the next. beyond that, charlie+chocolate factory was superior in every way, imho. danny elfman created a very impressive soundtrack. __________________ bow wow wow

July 20th, 2005, 12:59 AM	#10
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	My Thoughts I was just wrapping up a lenghty response to this thread when my dog unplugged my computer. I'll take that as a sign from the almighty that I should stop trying to impress people who I'll never meet and just keep it simple. I much preferred Wilder's Wanka. He seemed as if he understood what normal was and chose not to be; scoffing at those who were normal with little quips. Depp's Wanka seemed just to be out of touch with reality. This to me made him less endearing and engaging. I just didn't like Wanka as a person in the new film. There was nothing in the new Wanka that came remotely close to the scene in the origional where Wilder drives Charlie away and Charlie returns the gobstopper. Just try to picture Depp's Wanka in this scene and you can see where the character falls short. The Oompa Loompa's in the new version were just as souless. The musical numbers could not be understood and reminded me of those old Pentium commercials with the guys in their brightly colored suits dancing around. If they wanted to give the movie a modern touch, they could have explained that Wanka had brought back only one Oompa Loompa and cloned him. I thought that the strength of the new movie was the family scenes. Those were delightful and fun and I thought very well acted all around. I cought myself almost laughing out loud when I realized that Charlie's mother was Marla Singer. Thats about all I can remember from what I said before my dog pulled the plug.

July 20th, 2005, 07:23 AM	#11
Jeff Patnaude Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Duluth, Georgia Posts: 248	We have the original on DVD, and our 3 year old watches it constantly (so then we do to). There's just a certain charm to the older version. Charlie doesn't have perfect hair, and looks nothing like a hollywood child. Gene Wilder was just wonderful in the role of Willy Wonka. Who can forget Agustas Gloop (ha!). By the way, the dvd has recent interviews with the actors. It's hillarious to see them how they've grown- but managed to look the same over the many years. A Balding Mike TV! HA! I'm curious to seee the new version, and it may be closer to the book but I'm having resevations. J Patnaude

July 20th, 2005, 09:49 AM	#12
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	I thought the family scenes were great and the visuals were nice too. However, I actually fell asleep during the musical numbers...literally during one of them I fell asleep and my girlfriend woke me up! Depp was good, but I think they put to much focus on certain things that didn't need attention. The musical numbers stuck out like a sore thumb...not Burton's strong point. Overall, it will work for all the kids going to see it. But, I would have liked it more if they didn't have those lame musical pieces...or at least if the music were better and that weird looking guy wasn't everywhere. __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

July 20th, 2005, 10:50 AM	#13
Brian Handler Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Muncie Indiana Posts: 118	Were going to see the movie during work on friday as one of our "creative fieldtrips"...pretty much getting paid to go to a movie. Anyways, I've read everyones thoughts so I am going to go into the movie very critcaly and disect it. What parts do you feel are lacking and are their points where visual/audio problems occur? Thanks! __________________ Email me for projects in Ohio or Indiana. Lighting > Everything.

July 20th, 2005, 11:31 AM	#14
Imran Zaidi Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,315	One thing I want to point out about the whole sub-plot that the old movie brought in about Slugworth and the gobstopper and the return of it to Willy Wonka by Charlie - it was a fabrication for the movie that never existed in the book. It's part of the reason Dahl hated the first movie. Soul aside, the newer movie is much more in the spirit of the book than the original, but I still am not sure that Depp was Wonka. He played the particular version of wonka that was written for this movie extremely well, but was it really Wonka? I don't really think so.

July 20th, 2005, 04:58 PM	#15
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	visual/audio problems The most glaring visual problem was in the scene in Japan when the kids were waiting to get into the candy store. There was terrible artifacting in the darks. It was so bad and so obvious that I had wondered if it was intentional. My fiance leaned over to me right after that scene ended and wispered "that looked like video". I'm wondering if what she was talking about was the blocky, almost DVish artifacting. Anyone else notice this?