Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

[Mystical_Journey]

A Tim Burton and Johnny Depp collaboration once again (Ed Wood, Edward Sissorhands and Sleepy Hollow are three of my favourite movies). This has to be somthing special to be included with the other three films.......... Anyone looking forward to this movie with an air of excitement mixed with trepidation? Even though i am a huge fan of the original with Wilder, i think Johnny Depp will make an excellent Willy Wonka. i just think TIm Burton is off-par with films like Planet of the Apes and Big Fish, hope hes back to form with this film. We have to wait till 29th July in the UK so i guess all the reviews will come rushing in soon

[Barbizzle]

Yea, Ive been looking fowards to this movie for about a month now. I hope its good, I htink It will be. I will just have to wait and see.

[nerve]

i rarely ever expect a movie to be good. i think that is how it should be.

[bradybaker]

I, for one, loved Big Fish. I'm pretty excited for this movie...but the previews I've have left me a bit hesitant. They seem to be all style and no substance. I doubt that will be the case however.

[syzygy]

I'm with bradybaker, I was really excited about this movie until I saw the previews. Oh well, I'll see it anyway and hopefully it won't be as superficial as the previews make it out to be. Johnny Depp is good, but I must say it will be really hard to beat Gene Wilder.

[regetsref]

I hope this movie's cool, though yeah the previews were lame, only dialogue was wonka going oooh ahhh hmm and making faces. But I saw like a half hour show (commercial) on vh1and it looks pretty cool. The oompa loompas are all clones.

[Dew Dust]

It's definitely Johnny Depp's facial expressions and sarcasm that makes me like this movie. I fell in love with Johnny's ability to really carry out some crazy roles when I saw Pirates of the Caribbean. His fellow actors and actresses in that movie were unsure of his character and him at times with the character. But he never laughed about it and took the role very seriously. It shows his good acting ability in that area.

[regetsref]

Yeah hes one of the few actors I know who actually plays a different character in every movie. most actors always 'act' the same which doesnt even seem like acting to me. I'd rather see someone act like a character and not just be themselves.

[Kaniaz]

This movie will get bad ratings because Depp looks scary as Willy Wonka. It's all like "have some chocolate" with a freaky "i want to touch the little children" undertone.

[nerve]

no way it's so not like that. i saw the movie today. i think Depp was awesome. i've seen some people say something like "i wonder who the better Wonka is, Gene Wilder or Depp" but i don't think you can compare them, they're both awesome but on completely different levels...or something like that. the movie overall was just alright. it wasn't great but it wasn't too bad either i guess. there were things i liked about it and things i really didn't like...FIRSTLY the fact that it was just a remake, and not a sequel like i thought. the title was so misleading, i thought it was going to be Charlie from the first movie, retiring and doing the same thing Wonka did but no. that was dissapointing to me. the first half of the movie was great, then it just kinda sucked. i hated the ending. that's all i'll say so i don't ruin it for anyone or...whatever...i'd wait until it comes out on video unless you just REALLY want to go see it. :|

[Dew Dust]

i think Depp was awesome[/b] *excited* I can't wait to see the movie now...I mean Depp now and not a sequel like i thought. the title was so misleading, i thought it was going to be Charlie from the first movie, retiring and doing the same thing Wonka did but no[/b] I thought the same way, but my friend told me that was the original title of the book. When Gene did it, they changed the title. Don't know why

[nerve]

Originally posted by Dew Dust and not a sequel like i thought. the title was so misleading, i thought it was going to be Charlie from the first movie, retiring and doing the same thing Wonka did but no I thought the same way, but my friend told me that was the original title of the book. When Gene did it, they changed the title. Don't know why :whyme:[/b] ok, did some searches. that was in fact the original title of the book. Based Upon: The 1964 novel of the same title by Roald Dahl. This is not a direct remake of the 1971 film, Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, starring Gene Wilder, although both movies are obviously based on the same book. This film is aiming to be more faithful to the original book than Willy Wonka.[/b] i never read the book, just saw the first movie. that's why i hated the ending. oh well?

[Dew Dust]

i never read the book, just saw the first movie. that's why i hated the ending. oh well?[/b] Now I am more curious to see this movie. And thanks for doing the google and getting the infor.

[bradybaker]

I saw the movie last night, it was pretty decent. It has nothing on the original though. I wasn't impressed with Depp's performance at all. It seemed to me that he might have been the victim of some over-direction. It was, however, extremely visually impressive, as all Burton movies are. There was something about the ending that left me sour though....the ending of the original was just so much more "fantastic".

[nerve]

Originally posted by bradybaker ....the ending of the original was just so much more \"fantastic\". and it left more to the imagination :l

[justme]

I seen it, I hate it, and i already forgot half of it, i find out due to my gold fish memory i only rember good moives now, i rember the old moive (which i havent seen in at least a year) better than the new one (WHICH I SAW ONLY A FEW DAYS AGO) Ioved the old one ican still sing all the songs i think, lol, I hate movies but my mom still drags me to see them anyways, its a wats of time and money, and scince time is money its like a double negative , my favorite movie still remains as gone with the wind

[docKnubis]

Originally posted by hysteria i never read the book, just saw the first movie. that's why i hated the ending. oh well? i thought every one knew that the original book was called charlie and the chocolate factory and the oringinal movie was willy wanka and tcf o well when is the new pirates movie coming out i need to see more drunk pirates

[Dew Dust]

o well when is the new pirates movie coming out i need to see more drunk pirates [/b] LOL I hear ya. I have read somewhere that there will definitely be a part two to Pirates of the Caribbean--> "Dead Man's Chest"--Supposedly coming out in 2006. By the way, I adore your avatar docthory

[justme]

oh god antoher bad moive pirates of the carribean two? well that was OK for todays moives... i actually still rember most of it.

[Gwendolyn]

Originally posted by bradybaker I, for one, loved Big Fish. I'm pretty excited for this movie...but the previews I've have left me a bit hesitant. They seem to be all style and no substance. I doubt that will be the case however. Yeah, I was so in love with Big Fish....However, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was alright. The origional was better, however...

[pinkcheese]

The Corpse Bride previews at the beginning [ also by Burton ] looked pretty good as well. But I thought the movie was really good.

[Roller]

I havent' seen this one but I would like to. I did a bit fo reading on the net and found out some interestng stuff. It was named Willy Wonka and the Chocolate factory in the first movie because the studio was sponsored by a confectionary company that were releasing a "Willy Wonka" line of sweets. Apparently the writer Rohl Dahl despised the name change and the whole of the first movie. He wrote the story after his own childhood experiences working in a chocolate factory, and for him the whole story was much more about Charlie than Willy Wonka. He felt the movie ruined the whole point of his storey, which was meant to be a lot darker than the first movie. The second movie is meant to be written and produced according to Rohl Dahl's daughter (or son or something), who wants to try and make it a movie that her father would have liked, and would have approved of. Taking that into account, I think I'd like the second movie a lot more than the first one. Unfortunatley a lot of movies kinda lay wreckage to the meaning of the book their based on, and a lot of movie audiences dont' care for the meaning anyway.. (in my opinion).