posted
The trailers so far are giving me the impression that I am not going to like the way Depp is playing Wonka. Why must they remake good classic movies? Do they not realize that the imitations rarely live up to the originals?
posted
Something about Depp's behavior in the TV clip goves me the feeling that he's still exploring the concept of adults that never grow up.
Having read Peter Pan recently, I'm starting to think that the "neverland concept" as originally intended by Barrie may not have been to suggest that a permanent childhood is desirable, after all, Wendy did grow up and became responsible. Peter remained cruel.
I wonder if Barrie inadvertently helped bring about the ill's of a society that worships childlike (and irresponsible) behavior, the Micheal Jacksons of the world and so forth, when if fact he was offering a warning against it.
Barrie's childhood was rather tragic. I'm guessing that the point of Peter Pan was that children need to be allowed to be children so that they CAN grow up. Today we put children through so much pressure and exposure to adult themes that it's no wonder they spend their adulthood trying to recapture their youth. After all, they never really had one.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The new film is _not_ intended to be a remake of the Wilder film. It's a new adaptation of the Dahl book, plus some stuff Burton's added to the story (like Christopher Lee as Willy Wonka's dentist father).
posted
If it weren't a Tim Burton thing, I would think the TV spot dreadfully cheesy. But knowing Tim Burton, this is the point, and I find it quite amusing.
Not amusing enough to go see it in theatres, but there's still time for me to be convinced.
Posts: 3636 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, I'd like to see a more faithful film version of the book, but with Gene Wilder still playing Wonka. Depp just doesn't have the total unpredictability and insane scariness Wilder could get across so well.
And Glenn, YES! I think it's more the countless adaptations that have twisted around the warning type intentions of Barrie though (at least in the last 50 years or so), rather than misinterpretations of his book. Every time I see an adaptation of Peter Pan, it drives me crazy, because it always makes Peter out to be likable and caring, and everything's just wrong! All the incredible, intricate weavings of symbolism and character get entirely lost. And no one reads the book anymore because they all think they know the story. (Sorry for the long rant, but it's in my top 5 favourite books list. I'm very protective of them.)
Posts: 624 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Golden egg-laying geese were in the book. When the eggs were weighed and found lacking, they went down the chute. Such was the fate of Veruca.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
At least the latest one was nice and close enough. [edit: Peter Pan]
And as for Depp, I think he'll be different, of course, but very good because Gene Wilder (though an Acting God) is a little too open, honest and readable. Depp can pull off a Wonka that is not entirely "there".... well, I haven't read the chocolate factory book so maybe I'm out of my place in defending him.
I've been meaning to read it... I love all those old strange books (Peter and Wendy is one of my top fav's).
Posts: 3636 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Golden egg-laying geese were in the book. When the eggs were weighed and found lacking, they went down the chute. Such was the fate of Veruca.
No, that was the first movie version. In the book, Veruca got dragged down the trash chute by squirrels. Supposedly, this was too hard to film the first time around, so they resorted to using the scale instead.
Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic about this film. Depp's good at playing quirky, sympathetic people who don't fit into the world at large... which is certainly a tenable reading of Wonka.
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, I never considered Willy Wonka (from my beloved books) as insane at all. Not once. Sure he was a little unhinged, but it I wouldn't call him scary or insane.
To make a Firefly comparison , I would say he's a bit like River; unhinged and merciless but means well to those who are good.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd like to see a more faithful film version of the book, but with Gene Wilder still playing Wonka.
Wilder is probably the right age now anyway. After all, Wonka is retiring. And the rumors and legends have been around long enough that he shouldn't be too young.
quote: At least the latest one was nice and close enough. [edit: Peter Pan]
I realized that there are so many little tidbits that taken bit by bit don't add up to so many of the movies. Next to the recent movie, I have a recollection of a record I listened to back in the '60s that was closer to the book. I guess the new movie was close enough to the record that I was trying to reconcile those two with everything else. That's why I had to go back to the original.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Means well, yes. But his conception of what doing well is isn't necessarily what other people's conception is (the great glass elevator!). He's crazy in that he doesn't think like other people.
He's scary because he's merciless and because of that unpredicatability. You can't get his measure, or know what might be around the corner.
River's a good analogy, but I think he's a more callous River.
Edit: I really like Wonka. I was so cross to see him all sugar-coated and nice. He has his nice bits, sure. But that's not all of him, and there's a lot more dark/ambiguity in the real Wonka.
posted
The books are well worth reading. For all its darkness, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" (the book) is actually very sweet and heartwarming in the scenes involving Charlie and his family.
And Wonka doesn't chew Charlie out in the book (then again, in the book Charlie doesn't give into temptation. Nor does he slip his sick, 80-something grandpa cigarettes. Nor does he back-sass in school. Hmmm. The movie Charlie is like...a totally different character!) Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of the saddest of the books to me was "The Witches." it broke my heart from start to finish. it as also very frightening. I thought the movie was excellent, though. "The Child is no longer a Child. The Child is a MOUSE." I believe this is the most autobiographical of the books he wrote.
And let us not forget that Dahl wrote "The Landlady." Creepiest story, aside from "The Lottery," ever.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: At least the latest one was nice and close enough. [edit: Peter Pan]
"Finding Neverland" or the recent "Peter Pan" from a couple years ago? I don't remember the Peter Pan well enough to comment, but there was a lot of...not false, exactly, but very misleading things about Barrie in Finding Neverland.
Anyway, as to Wonka, he is kind of like River, you're right! Outwardly, at least. I'd say River probably wishes she were predictable though, to herself at any rate. I think Wonka really enjoys and even plays up how no one knows what he'll do next.
Teshi, you really must read the books. Some of Dahl's other books are even better. All fairly violent in ways, not necessarily good moral lessons in all of them, but really fantastic, clever, creative writing. He was hands-down my favourite author through most of my childhood. Boy and Going Solo are about his own life, and might be my favourites. You can see where a lot of his themes and characters come from.
Posts: 624 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oops, I missed a critical word: re. I'll have to re-read the books. They were my favourite books until I was about seven. I have read all of Dahl's children's work, and some of his adult's work.
When I read them as a younger person, and my parents read them to me, I never considered them violent, although it took me a while to come around to the Witches, which I now love. What a great story, very daring. I see what you mean though. Interestingly, I don't see them as dark at all.
Or perhaps I have a dark soul, because this is what I grew up on and I'm a lover of all Dahl's books. I never like the happyfied endings that some of the movies like to tack on. Especially Matilda. I'm afraid Matilda the movie I found awful especially the end.
posted
For some reason I'd like to see a film version of The Fantastic Mr. Fox...maybe done by Aardman.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Puffy Treat, which ones don't have good moral lessons. I never thought of them in those terms at all, and I don't think R.D. did. They're just great, thrilling stories.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was actually me that mentioned the moral lessons thing. Let's see...I'm trying to remember them all; it's been a while! It's more just the excessive violence and violence as the solution to everything (BtL actually pointed that out to me, and I realized he was right). Bad guys and problems are often taken care of by simply getting rid of them rather than dealing with them. I do agree though, they are great, thrilling stories! Something about his writing just grabs you, if you know what I mean, and the characters become exceptionally real. It's a rare author that can do that to me.
Posts: 624 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
I have absolutely no idea what your remark is in reference to. I didn't say _anything_ about morals.
If you meant my remark about the ending of the book version of "The Witches" being depressing, I didn't mean I thought that was a bad thing! Just that I don't read it often as a result.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
You sorted it out. It was Astaril's comment. Sorry Puffy Treat and Astaril. I have no idea why I did that.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if your idiocy consists of bashing your head against a brick wall fairly often like your post seems to indicate, then it's obvious why you're mixed up. That sort of thing leads to brain damage, you know... Posts: 624 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excellent work. Well, if your misery likes company, you can lend it my number. I picked my topic today for an essay due a week ago Tuesday. What class is yours for? Maybe I can pick something for you!
posted
AW, I loved the movie version of Matilda. I only wish they made more children's book movies that good.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope this new version is just as creepy or worse than the original Gene Wilder version. So when my kids see it they will develop nightmares and emotional baggage like I did when I first saw it at the tender age of 6 years old.
Posts: 527 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You mean like when I watched "The Other" with my grandmother when I was ten, and couldn't sleep for weeks?
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alien and Gremlins were the only two that gave me nightmares as a kid. I think this new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory might have though, just going by the circus music from the trailer. I wonder what makes circus music so inherently creepy...
Myr: That's what I figured, but I wasn't sure. Yeah, I can't remember it too well, but I think I recall walking away fairly pleased.
Posts: 624 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Carnival music is always creepy, even in a movie when it's just because the characters are visiting an innocent carnival or faire. Of course, that's rarely, if ever, the case.
I remember ET really scared me as a kid, but by the end (so my mom tells me) I would start screaming bloody murder as they said their goodbyes. I still can't handle goodbyes in movies
The Wicked Witch of the West used to scare the poop out of me.
The talking toilet in Look Who's Talking Two. I'm talking hard-core nightmares and not being able to go to the bathroom with the door closed or flushing for a month.
The tar pit creature in TNG also scared the bejebus out of me. As did Odd Job. And the twins from the Shinning. Oh and those tall creepy guys with the cattle prods in Stargate!
Posts: 3636 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Why must they remake good classic movies? Do they not realize that the imitations rarely live up to the originals?"
The same reason they make any movie -- they think that it will make money.
If you go and see it, even with disdain, you are encouraging them to do it more, whether you think it's a good idea or not.
Posts: 751 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
, I would say he's a bit like River; unhinged and merciless but means well to those who are good.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
<---- me at my idiocy.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
