JGuy Grungeman

You can post old ones, new ones, etc. I think it would be cool to read everyone's full on reviews. One rule: keep it to at least one paragraph, three lines.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

OK, as a long time fan of the book, a longer time fan of the movie, and a guy who actually worked on a Wonka website for a while, I think I can write a fairly good review about this movie. Not to be pretentious by saying all of that, but I've seen the movie over 20 times as well, so I'll describe this movie as well as possible.

When talking about the Tim Burton version, how can the original not be brought up? It's very common for people to state that the original's better. And because of the total change in Willy Wonka's character to a mad genius with a kind heart and a little bit of *******-ness to a creepy child in the form of a pale-skinned and flat-out rude adult, many would say that it's a bad movie. But let's not forget something: this is not a remake of the 1971 movie, but a slight re-imagining of the book. I say "slight" because the movie is actually closer to the book. I'd know. I've read the book like 20 times as a kid, and I still have all of the major and minor plot points memorized 12 years later.

FIrst, let's talk about the acting. The acting was the best part of the movie. The child actors from this version were mostly better than the ones from the original. I loved Annasophia Robb's rendition of Violet Beauregarde, changing her from a gum-obsessed brat who shouts at her parents to a competitor. Annasophia Robb was quite convincing, being a little girl. Annasophia Robb is usually the highlight of movies she's in, even lesser quality movies. I also liked Jordan Fry's version of Mike Teavee. Instead of a kid with a lot of guns who does nothing but watch TV, the movie envisions Mike as a grump little techno-geek, and Jordan Fry was the perfect choice for him His facial expressions were nothing short of perfect. I also felt that Augustus Gloop's new actor, Philip Weigratz, was a better Augustus, since he had more development and facial expressions to work with. However, that may be partially due to the fact that he just got more overall screen time. As for Freddie Highmore, I don't think he showed as much emotion as Peter Ostrum, and he should've done a better job being a professional actor compared to the original Charlie, Peter Ostrum, who never did another movie. He grew up a doctor.

But the one cast member that everyone either loves or hates is Johnny Depp's role at Willy Wonka. The reason why he's hated is because that is not the Wonka that's true to the story. But, come on, can we really trounce on a Johnny Depp role for so long? It may not have been the real Wonka, but Johnny Depp wasn't just some guy pretending to be a 40 year old kid. He really was a 40 year old kid, so the role was still great.

And I'll say this: Droopy McCool played the Oompa-Loompas. Approved.

Now, as for the rest of the movie, the scenery was vastly improved on from the original. There was a lot more scenery to work with, and it looked a lot more convincing. All it was missing was nothing. Of course, Tim Burton movies are usually built on scenery that helps to tell stories. Although, I will complain about the Cinematography. Most of it was really good, but the boat riding scene was nothing compared to that episode of Fear Factor from the original. The camera switched positions really quickly, making for a clunky and confusing boat ride that didn't even try for the quality of the cart scene in Temple of Doom, let alone the original.

Another fantastic thing about the new one was the Oompa-Loompas. Besides the fact that they are all played by the underrated Deep Roy, who's notable for other Tim Burton movies and Droopy McCool, the musical numbers in the movie involving the Oompa-Loompas (which took lyrics from the book instead of the "oompa loompa doobity doo" lyrics) were just bordering on brilliant compared to the rest of the film.

Overall, I'd say the film mostly lives up to the truity of the book, since a lot of the same dialogue is used. The only "real" difference is the change in some characters. I liked it. Both this and the original are two of my favorites, but the original is better.

85.

OK, you can talk about mine or post another review. You're call.

__________________
I'm a pretty nice troll if you ask me.

Frownland

Sorry, but this isn't much different from the Latest Film and TV Shows threads. Your and everyone else's in depth reviews are highly appreciated there, though.

http://www.musicbanter.com/media/266...have-seen.html

http://www.musicbanter.com/media/363...-watching.html

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.