Charlie and the Wonderful Factory --- let's BOogie!

© WB

Title:
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (A)
PH Release Date:
August 3, 2005
Actors:
Johnny Depp, Freddie Highmore, David Kelly, Helene Bonham Carter, Deep Roy, Noah Taylor, Christopher Lee
Director:
Tim Burton
Based on the book:
“Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” by Roald Dahl
Screenplay:
John August
Editor / Music:
Chris Lebenzon / Danny Elfman
Design / Photography:
Alex Mcdowell / Philippe Rousselot
Producer:
Brad Grey et al.
Studio:
Warner Bros. Pictures



© WB

"Improvisation is parlor trick, anyone can do it.... Chewing gum is really gross, chewing gum I hate the most"


Despite my terribly busy schedule and laborious deadlines, I took some time off to see this movie. I have been waiting to catch sight of Johnny back on the big screen and having Freddie Highmore (Finding Neverland) as his companion is considerably a bonus. Not to mention the man behind the lens has a reputation of his own: that of a slick, bizarre and artistic type of director. Did the producers make the right choice of giving an edgy character like Willy to Tim Burton (Batman, Sleepy Hollow)? Or was it the perfect option for this adaptation of the 1971 Gene Wilder-top-billed-classic?

The story is based from the book by Dahl who wrote the screenplay for the first movie: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. The film adopts the original name from the book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which some people, including me, may perceive as a twist in the focus of the story. Instead of Willy Wonka being the center of attention, it will be Charlie Buckett to which story will revolve.


© WB

During the first half hour of the movie, the story seems to follow the trail of my supposition with it focusing almost the entire time on Charlie and his family. However, when Willy Wonka began to appear, everything changed, and quite honestly, it seemed that Charlie’s character was a bit shrugged off. Despite the film’s failure to fully maximize on the emotional attachment of the audience to the boy that they superbly made on the beginning, it still stands out as one of the most quirky and enjoyable flick in movie history.

If one will see this film without any idea as to what he’s getting himself into; his immediate assumption will be he’s seeing a Potter flick. Not a bad guess since the movie exudes the same atmosphere like that of Rowling’s book but this one, in a really, really weird way is more affective. I honestly cannot believe I’m ever gonna say anything like that from a Tim Burton film but I was on the verge of crying for poor Charlie, for God knows how many times. If not for the smooth antics it pokes out one at a time, I would have forgotten that I’m watching a Burton movie. That was of course, all in the beginning, when Willy was still out of sight, but after he appeared, I think you know what happened. It was a ticket to idiosyncrasy for Tim and oh do I think he enjoyed it!


© WB

I have not seen the original movie (or seen the book), and I am begging anyone who has copy to please lend me on A.S.A.P. A lot of people consider that one a classic, especially since Gene Wilder is in it. But he’s not the reason why I wanna see the original. I wanna compare the song and dance numbers from this movie from that one, and of course, weigh Depp against the old Willy. Heard some tracks from the old ones and I just didn’t find it as good.

The movie’s screenplay follows a pretty predictable pattern. Despite my lack of prior knowledge about its storyline, somehow I already knew what was going to happen from the get-go. I do not take it against the writer since it was based from a children’s book (I assume) and the fact he was able to make Willy Wonka as refreshing as one can possibly imagine already deserves a SOVA from me. The lines were spot-on, jest-oriented but ingested with no-nonsense outlooks and insights about life. In fact, I think the subject matter may seem sugarcoated in the beginning, but if you try to look deeper, it’s anything but sweet. It’s bitter, real and made to hit any American parents’ most unused spot.


© WB

The visuals were so Tim Burton from start to finish. Despite the bright colors, somehow the darkness still radiates from it. Tim manages to depict a quirky yet believable ambiance, something one cannot possibly find in The Cat in The Hat. The timing was perfect for me, not a single misstep. The delivery and the flow of conversation plus his dead right shots were more than a film enthusiast or a simple moviegoer can ask for.

Musically, this movie rocks! Danny Elfman melodically wrote his name on my list. The songs were great. Some of them were based from the original while others sounded completely different. Some people may not agree, but the fact that he was able to mix and use different kinds of music for each Oompa-Loompa scenes was really impressive. From U2 to Queens, you’ll hear it all here! And the lyrics may seem stupid, and principally written to humor you, there’s more to it than one would initially realize.


© WB

It’s predecessor’s design is said to be one of the most memorable from earlier cinema, something that I cannot attest or protest to since I have not seen it, but if it was that good, I can say that this version’s would put up a good fight. I’ve never seen a much more colorful non-animated movie. And it was not just about putting all the bright colors to make it glow, the look harmonizes with the whole feel of the movie which makes it more enjoyable and convincing. Plus, the good cinematography caught them all just right. And the fine editing managed to compress them all without looking rushed.

I was shocked how some people reacted negatively to Johnny Depp’s performance. I think he did everything just right. I guess people were just expecting him to be nasty but nice ala Gene, but c’mon, Tim and Johnny together and you’re looking for decorum? This is the tamest they can possible get! And it will not be Johnny if he boxed himself merely on Gene’s performance and not allowing himself to let go and create the character on his own. I loved his performance and I’m sure a lot of people did as well. Was it his best? Arguably. Was it as eccentric as Michael Jackson? Hardly!


© WB

Freddie Highmore is the new “it” boy in Hollywood. Not because he starred in that completely idiotic movie about a stupid alien but because he simply gets the role all child actors would hope for. It may not be a franchise like Harry Potter (whose star is considerably old), but it’s a movie where he acts side-by-side with great actors not to mention working with Weird Burton. Definitely more than a boy his age would ask for. I just hope he'll continuously give superb performances and for him not to be the next Haley. Let’s cross our fingers shall we?

David Kelly and the rest of the oldies gave great performances. Helena was also good. And of course, the worth mentioning of them all, the face that occupied almost an entire ship. The man in red, blue, yellow and a lot more. The one nobody will indeed miss, Deep Roy. Yup, he portrayed the Oompa-Loompas, and man was he good at it. He may be intimidating, but he’s really funny at the same time. Believe me, just one look and you’ll flinch to laugh.


© WB

This film may be about a poor boy, an eccentric man and a gigantic chocolate factory that all falls under a predictable pattern, but there’s no possible way that one can compare it to a pointless candy. Filled with great humor, visuals and insights this movie will surely cater to any cotton candy enthusiast or the popcorn junkie, but I’m afraid the enthusiasts will need a little guidance for some visuals and dialogues, but nonetheless it will surely be enjoyed by all.

How did it end? Find out for yourself, besides, the best kind of prize is a surprise! Consider it one. Whoa! What an entry short and sweet!

Grading Sheet:
Story – 18%
Screenplay – 17%
Direction / Execution – 18%
Acting – 20%
Technical Aspect – 18%
Total: 91% = A