Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

The Bowler found himself a golden ticket! Our first test screening review of CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY!!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with our first test screening review of Tim Burton's CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY. I really can't believe this movie is coming out soon... Tim Burton's CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY... Something I never thought I'd see. So, the powers that be held a couple test screenings up in Chicago and we got a review from one of them! What'd they think? Well, you'll have to read to find out! Hopefully we'll get some more reviews soon to get a broader idea of where this movie will fall... Keep in mind the print was unfinished, no final score, some unfinished effects. You know the drill. Enjoy the review!

I just got back from Chicago being the first audience in the world to see the upcoming “Charlie & the Chocolate Factory” and I thought I’d throw down some opinions on it.

Before the movie started a guy was walking around asking groups of two if they wanted to take ten minutes of their time after the movie to spend talking to the filmmakers about the movie. Seeing this as my chance to meet Tim Burton my brother got us two on the list of what ended up being about 29 people in the end. So, before the movie even began I was excited. As it became 6:30 we were informed that we were the second audience in the world to see the film (the first being the 14 and under crowd earlier in the day) so that our opinions would be very important after the screening (we filled out comment cards afterwards).

As it began it became very obvious that none of the music was final being that the opening credit suite was from Spider-Man 2. The film opens with a long shot of chocolate bars being made from the inside view of the Wonka factory. Being that the effects on this sequence were far from finished looking I cannot comment on the final product, only that it seems like a good introduction to the names and people involved in the film.

The first act of the movie is the most similar to the first film. In it we are introduced to all of the kids and how they got their tickets. Some of the best and funniest scenes are how we find that these kids got their tickets and what their lives are like before they end up at the factory. Each of the kids brought something new to their characters that made them stand out from the previous incarnation and make it seem like a newly-updated version of the source material as opposed to an actual remake: (Augustus is still a little chub with a chocolate bar always in his mouth, Violet is a karate-kicking champ still obsessed w/ gum, Mike TeeVee is now into violent video games and being a genius to figure out how to get his ticket, Veruca’s father still buys her way into the ticket but she seems even more annoying this time around). Charlie himself has a very similar upbringing to the original with the four grandparents living in their bed and his parents struggling, however his father now has a hilarious sidestory involving his job. What I liked a lot about the kids’ intros too was the way that they all looked like Willy Wonka w/ the makeup to make their faces seem very plastic, smooth, and flat. It makes sense in the context of the movie, but it makes you believe that they could all one day try and become just like Willy himself when they grow up. It gives you hope that they are not all going to be little brats and that they might be good little children. Soon, those hopes are dashed.

Wonka himself now has shown reason for closing the factory, which actually resides on the same road as Charlie’s house in this version, although gone are the mentions of Slugworth, simply spies trying to infiltrate his factory. Once Depp appears (about 35 minutes in) he is absolute gold. He walks the line of complete comedic genius very close to creepy Michael Jackson imposter going all the way from inviting kids to live with him to wearing purple latex gloves everywhere and being afraid of anyone touching him. This is not explained all at once, but instead through a hilarious series of flashbacks throughout the factory visit that shows the audience how Willy became such a chocolate lover and why we never find out anything about his life before the factory until now.

The factory scenes are very familiar to everyone, however they have gone the better route this time around by not just making them the same, but not changing them a lot either. They take the basic concept of the kids getting kicked out (chocolate river, teleportation, golden egg, blueberry) and kind of change and expand on them to make them feel new again. Accompanying each of these scenes is a sometimes hilarious, sometimes overly drawn out song and dance by the Oompa Loompas. These little people, whose backstory of how they came to work for Willy is also explained, dance and sing a song each pertaining to the child in question getting kicked out. Most of the time it is hard to hear what they are singing about, but a lot of the joke is in the dancing that they are doing either around the child, on the kid, or in once instance synchronized swimming.

Getting beyond the factory there is new stories involving Willy and his upbringing that are flashback-ed to during the movie itself explaining how Willy ended up being the guy that he is. Overall, I think that this version will hopefully become a classic with the kids of this generation like the original version was for the generation that is now the parents of these kids going to see this. Thankfully, there is also enough humor and plot to keep the people above 10 involved a lot in the movie, yet while not making it too scary for the young ones.

While my thoughts of this movie are obviously hampered by being a huge fan of the original w/ Gene Wilder I feel that the ways that this movie made itself completely different are what will not only set it apart from “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”, but make it a great, funny, exciting time at the movies for everyone.

Now, back to the beginning about the focus group process. I have good and bad news. The good news is almost everyone LOVED the hell out of this thing. People loved the humor, the direction, and most of all Johnny Depp. Here's the bad part. People were not too found of the Wonka backstory. They felt that having little to nothing known about him was what made him the character that he is. I'm sad to say this, but I really hope they don't change a thing. I loved it the way it is and I hope that everyone gets to see this movie. Tim Burton has taken the timeless masterpiece, went back to what made it amazing, and tweaked it just enough to make it his own.

If you happen to post this, call me ‘The Bowler’K


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • May 15, 2005, 1:38 a.m. CST

    Oooo this gives me a chocolate boner!

    by Aust1n

    With strawberries on top...

  • May 15, 2005, 1:39 a.m. CST

    Certainly looks trippy

    by Banky the Hack

    I bet this will be a must-see-stoned cult classic in just a few years.

  • May 15, 2005, 1:39 a.m. CST

    not too bad I suppose

    by blue7

    Like the sound of the TeeVee update. The embellishment of the Oompa Loompa songs don't sound half bad, either. Then again, why was a remake needed in the first place?

  • May 15, 2005, 1:40 a.m. CST

    burton begins

    by whatyoufear

    ::yawn::

  • May 15, 2005, 1:44 a.m. CST

    Here's a quote just begging to be put on the poster!

    by The Riot

    "Overall, I think that this version will hopefully become a classic with the kids of this generation like the original version was for the generation that is now the parents of these kids going to see this."

  • May 15, 2005, 1:44 a.m. CST

    Did you get to mee the filmmakers?

    by JediStryker

    That would've been the best part of this review. Anyway, I can't really imagine a way this movie could go wrong, unless it just blatantly copied the original movie scene-for-scene. I personally don't really think a remake was warranted, but there's nothing original coming out of Hollywood these days.

  • May 15, 2005, 1:45 a.m. CST

    lol The Riot

    by JediStryker

  • May 15, 2005, 1:52 a.m. CST

    About 29 people

    by kuryakin

    If you're going to say "about" why not say about 30? Anyway it's "about" 06:53 and I haven't slept. So it ALL sounds trippy

  • May 15, 2005, 1:54 a.m. CST

    Is there an Oompa Loompa orgy scene?

    by prevert

    Please please please please PLEASE!!

  • May 15, 2005, 1:56 a.m. CST

    I'll be there opening day high as kite

    by blackstormy

    I was hoping this would be worthy of my $9 and it sounds like it is. Depp is obviously one of the best actors working today, because he is so skilled plus entertaining as hell, but I suppose thats what skilled means. Anywho, is there a scene that matches the boat ride from the original in trippy-ness? Because that boat ride blew my mind as a child. Too bad acid is so hard to find these days. I wish I lived in the 70s when it was easier to find.

  • May 15, 2005, 1:58 a.m. CST

    when run-on sentences attack . . .

    by Harry Coin

    AICN contributing to the rape of the English language yet again

  • May 15, 2005, 1:58 a.m. CST

    Oh, you were being sarcastic The Riot

    by blackstormy

    that is lol, I had to read your post again to get the joke. Good work friend.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Chocolate Factory design looks cheap & tacky

    by Celsius

    I really love Tim Burton he's a visionnary and a true original but I don't understand why he let this film look the way it does. First there was Johnny Depp looking like Michael Jackson and now there's this kind of "Cat in the hat" whole look going on with the sets. Isn't everyone tired of the whole plastic & brightly colored swirly thing already ? I was hoping for something more original for the factory, it doesn't even seem to improve on the original film technically. I'll keep my fingers crossed but it's not looking good.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:06 a.m. CST

    Really surprised no-one's said the "P" word yet.

    by themikejonas

    I usually give the "reviewers" the benefit of a doubt even as others point and accuse, but this one seemed particularly green and leafy to me.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:08 a.m. CST

    I agree that Wonka should be an enigma

    by Rupee88

    just better

  • May 15, 2005, 2:11 a.m. CST

    Yeah, but are the Oompa-loompas cannibals on this one?

    by Judge Doom

    They could eat some of those kids...

  • May 15, 2005, 2:16 a.m. CST

    .

    by kuryakin

    ...and then i seen a film star and its jonny dep and he's in a film looking a bit weird and he LOOKS COOL and then this guy says a thing and everyone agreed it was really cool and we got to meet the DP and he said we were the loveliest audience and jonny wasn't there but the DP said he was happy and i seen it i seen it and i sent a email to harry and he said dont bother with english just go with your gut i know i fucking do and i said maybe thats why its so big you big interwebster

  • May 15, 2005, 2:17 a.m. CST

    Judge Doom

    by AeroB

    The Xbox game JADE EMPIRE has what you're looking for. And it's a great game

  • May 15, 2005, 2:18 a.m. CST

    reply to themikejonas

    by AshFett

    Yeah, you're right! He said he thought the movie was great... He must be full of shit! Here at AICN, we all know that if you really like or love any movie that is a new release, the studio is paying you. Because god forbid someone loves a movie.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:20 a.m. CST

    Doesn't do it for me

    by Hardman

    This review is too lackluster to be a plant but you never know, Maybe it's someone trying to be subtle, can't come outright saying it's genius because. Heck, it'll make a lot of money but won't be remembered for much else than Johnny Depp's performance. If the Oompa's were Cannibals in this version it might have given me a good reason to wanna rush and see it.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:31 a.m. CST

    Replace the Oompa Loompas. . .

    by krullboy

    with Jawas, Ugnaughts, or Ewoks, and that would be a ready made acid trip right there.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:31 a.m. CST

    No, a plant would say that

    by JediStryker

    he didn't like all the Wonka back-story stuff, but that everyone else did. He would also down-play his enjoyment of the film, but pass on that everyone else seemed to love it. He would then probably make some snippy remark about it doesn't take much to please or something, but then go on to say that he thinks that this film will probably be a big hit and that a) fans of Depp and b) fans of the original should see it. That covers just about anyone.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:43 a.m. CST

    Golden Egg?

    by Bungion Boy

    I thought we were finally going to see some squirrels. She's a bad nut, after all. Not a bad egg.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:43 a.m. CST

    According to what I have read...

    by Jimmy Jazz

    The "Flashback scenes feature Christopher Lee as Wonka's father. There is NO WAY that Burton would cut out a scene with Lee in it.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:44 a.m. CST

    huh- I'm watching BttF: and I have something to say-

    by pencil-man

    It's cool, 10Q

  • May 15, 2005, 2:45 a.m. CST

    I'd love to see a review from someone who read the books...

    by ZeroCorpse

    Does nobody read anymore? I don't CARE how this movie compares the "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". I want to know hwo true it is to the book. Seeing as Tim Burton COMPLETELY SCREWED UP PLANET OF THE APES I have low expectations for this to be anything but a creepier remake of the original movie.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:51 a.m. CST

    TB ain't no slouch, I'd vouch

    by pencil-man

    Mr. Burton does have dir4ectorial skill, just look at Batman Returns, I'd bet the script was crap, and he made it watchable. Can't explain Planet ot A tho, must be a clerical error.

  • May 15, 2005, 3:36 a.m. CST

    In a gruff British voice

    by Drworm2002

    I remember reading somewhere that the reason that Johnny Depp did this movie was because that there was no singing. Burton also said that he didn

  • May 15, 2005, 3:57 a.m. CST

    In the Corpse Bride article it was confirmed that there WOULD be

    by Monkey Butler

    nt

  • May 15, 2005, 4:14 a.m. CST

    "Overall, I think that this version will hopefully become a clas

    by DarthHomercles

    Is that English? You couldn't say, "I think kids today will respond to this film like their parents did to Gene Wilder's version a generation ago?"

  • May 15, 2005, 4:21 a.m. CST

    i always liked the idea of...

    by DiscoDougie

    both depp and marilyn manson playing wonka. depp for the more subdued moments, and then every so often he freaks out, and it's manson. would that kill kids though?

  • May 15, 2005, 5:12 a.m. CST

    chocolate boner....

    by satansteve

    its called shit

  • May 15, 2005, 5:26 a.m. CST

    TEST SCREENINGS ARE SHIT

    by RIVERO

    Why can't they let Burton decide himself what the final film should look like and let him release that? Do they not trust how he envisions this update of the classic original film? Creating a film this way is just one of many reasons why so many films suck, I hope to god Terry Gilliam's upcoming BROTHERS GRIMM isn't subject to this crap.

  • May 15, 2005, 5:32 a.m. CST

    Charlie review

    by Robert Evans

    That "soccer_mom" claims that she saw the movie in her live journal. www.livejournal.com/users/soccer_mom56

  • May 15, 2005, 5:39 a.m. CST

    BroncoFan, Thank You

    by filker-tom

    That sounds amazing. I have to check that out.

  • May 15, 2005, 5:44 a.m. CST

    Rivero

    by DarthHomercles

    EVERY movie goes through test screenings. Directors and producers don't always know what people will respond to. The pacing may be off, an idea or event that they thought was perfectly clear could be confusing, a joke they thought was funny could bomb, etc. Test screenings don't dictate the final cuts of films, but they help polish them up before they're released wide.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:11 a.m. CST

    As much as I think I'll enjoy this movie

    by John-Locke

    I doubt I'll see it until DVD, Just doesn't cry out to be seen in a theatre for some reason. I'm excited about seeing the Squirrels on the screen as that was my favourite bit from the book.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:11 a.m. CST

    What, no mention of the squirrels?!?

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    Something for everyone else to look for, caught this in last weeks Time, there's a scene in the movie with REAL squirrels sitting on stools, shelling nuts, then dropping them onto the conveyor belt. It took an animal trainer 19 weeks to teach 40 squirrels the stunt. And they must have done a good job with the effects on the Oompa Loompas, seeing that the reviewer didn't seem to notice that they were all played by the same guy.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:18 a.m. CST

    "Certainly looks trippy"

    by zabbadoo

    So, Banky the Hack. You think that's a good thing? In a kids movie? Yeah, I'll take my kids to this movie, and then afterwards we can go for ice cream sundaes and having the pot injected into our necks and taking the crack.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:21 a.m. CST

    The Squirrels should replace the Golden Egg Laying Geese

    by John-Locke

    If I remember correctly they help in making a Nutty Chocolate Bar and accidentally Kill one of the kids (Veruca I think?)

  • May 15, 2005, 6:30 a.m. CST

    Reviewer, don't give up your day job

    by Mister Man

    Whether intentional or not, that is the worst piece-of-shit review I've ever seen on this site. Frankly, it could have been made up from existing information on the Internet.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:45 a.m. CST

    oh please.

    by slanter

    this review sucks. its too broad. I just woke up and it made want to crawl back in bed because I was so bored!!! its almost as if he/she didn't see this movie. they probably showed a 10 minute chop reel without sound. And this person is basing their opinion on what they were told combined with knowledge of the old one. Either that or, this person can't construct a decent review using words. must drink coffee now, may read it later again. :6

  • May 15, 2005, 6:48 a.m. CST

    The Original Sucked!

    by Knugen

    It was a cheap and mediocre film that Roald Dahl hated. To its credit though - Gene Wilder was quite good, as expected.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:54 a.m. CST

    Test Screeners

    by TheJon

    I wonder if all the test screeners for The Matrix bitched and moaned that the film was too confused and suggested Neo start the movie off with a monologue explaining the entire premise of the movie. ...there are so many flicks that would have been 10 times better had the film makers left out the damn opening monologue and let audiences figure out the story as they went. I used to blame the film makers themselves, but I'll bet it was because of dumb ass test screeners being confused forcing studios to make changes. ...In the case of The Matrix, I don't know how they got that movie made without an opening monologue.

  • May 15, 2005, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Focus Groups suck

    by Jon E Cin

  • May 15, 2005, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Has the reviewer even read the damn book?

    by Kurg1

  • May 15, 2005, 8:40 a.m. CST

    So, it's a film about Marilyn Manson pretending to be Michael Ja

    by SalvatoreGravano

    Plus, more imbecilic exposition against the wishes of the author of the real "Charlie". "What? NOT knowing the full life story of the main character? Impossible! Unacceptable! We need a full section on his biography. Through flashbacks!"

  • May 15, 2005, 8:47 a.m. CST

    Heh......

    by Jabba the Slut

    The only thing worse than theshitty, grammatically incorrect reviews that frequent this site are the fucking ignoramis douche bags that post "hilarious" messages like PLANT or "Hulk Hogan should be in this" ha ha ha. That's funnier than Harry thinking he's a demigod in the world of entertainment....

  • May 15, 2005, 8:49 a.m. CST

    What do you get if you guzzle down sweets?

    by danowen

    ... eating a lot like an elephant eats. Ahhh, memories. Can't wait for Burton's take on things - should be excellent!

  • May 15, 2005, 9:24 a.m. CST

    Thanks Tim...

    by WONKABAR

    My car plates say WONKA. Thanks for turning the character into a Michael Jackson freak-show. Now everybody is going to think I'm gay.

  • May 15, 2005, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Tim Burton should make HR Pufnstuf and leave the classics alone

    by Ivan_Mtl

    From all that I have seen in the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory trailers, this looks like it will be another disaster along the lines of his Planet of the Apes "re-imagining." Johnny Depp (as talented as he is) is no Gene Wilder. just as Mark Wahlberg was no Charlton Heston. I have no idea why Hollywood persists in trying to remake classic films of the past, when they should leave well enough alone. Having said that, however, I would be curious to see what a Tim Burton HR Pufnstuf movie would look like - especially for his take on Witchypoo.

  • May 15, 2005, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Although with a name like ANALNATHRAX I'm sure everybody already

    by John-Locke

    Sorry, couldn't resist.

  • May 15, 2005, 9:55 a.m. CST

    Actually, my plates don't read -WONKA

    by WONKABAR

    BUT I DID try to get that a couple of years ago, it was already taken...so was W.WONKA, WONKAAA, and WONKABR if you can believe that. I even tried DELTAHS and THAT was taken. So I decided to fuck the personal plates after all...kinda glad now

  • May 15, 2005, 10:08 a.m. CST

    Good one Locke...

    by WONKABAR

    It's funny, I was originally anal-na-thrack, and got banned for some stupid reason. But when I first created the name I was really just trying to spell out the charm of making from Excalibur, not intending it look like anus. I probably should have put more thought into it before writing it but when I realised I thought it was kinda funny so I kept it. Then after I got banned I still wanted it so I mixed with ANTHRAX and...wait, like you care anyway. Why am I writing this shit at this hour...maybe I REALLY AM GAY...anal-out

  • May 15, 2005, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Oompa Loompa Oopidy PLANT

    by Itchy

    Quite obvious.

  • May 15, 2005, 11:06 a.m. CST

    May DVD reviews part 2????????

    by indiephantom

    Fuck Harry...the month's almost over and I need a good laugh.

  • May 15, 2005, 11:08 a.m. CST

    what about the book!?

    by Obscura

    sounds like they're sticking pretty much exactly to the original book. i wish people wouldnt look at this as a remake, cos its not. Willy wonka and the chocolate factory was completly different to the book. much of what this reviewer thought of as typical tim burton, is actually just how it was meant to be in the first place. Burton obviously loved roald dahl books, they have the same dark and comic way about them. Burton is the only person who could do this properly and i have faith in him (tho after planet of the apes im not sure why)

  • May 15, 2005, 11:37 a.m. CST

    "Matilda" (Danny DeVito's film of the Roald Dahl book that I cal

    by FrankDrebin

    It's aimed at kids, but it's something you can watch along with them and not get "Kangaroo Jack" spasms.

  • May 15, 2005, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Waitasecond...this is a kids' movie, right?

    by Ribbons

    I'm glad to hear that a lot of this movie worked for you. A question: how trippy is this version of the film compared to the original? Oh, and how'd the audience after the movie end up with 29 people if it was made up of groups of 2?

  • May 15, 2005, 11:42 a.m. CST

    The "mystique" of Willy Wonka

    by Ribbons

    I don't really care one way or another. However, if it was against Dahl's wishes to delve too much into the life of the character? Probably the wrong idea to stuff the movie with flashbacks.

  • May 15, 2005, 11:55 a.m. CST

    The studio actually called this a "reinvention" of the book. Th

    by FrankDrebin

    Next, they'll try to fool us with "re-telling", "re-visiting", "re-examining", "re-envisioning", "re-conceptualization", "re-jiggering" & "re-exploitation". Okay, not the last one--too honest.

  • May 15, 2005, 11:55 a.m. CST

    One problem...

    by performingmonkey

    The guy's saying that he thinks this will become a classic of this generation as the 70s movie was for that generation. This is bullshit. It won't even make it into this year's top 10 movies. Besides, the first movie is still considered great fun for kids. My little cousin (6 years old) enjoys the hell out of the movie. Obviously, Burton has gone back to the book for this one, but I still think it's too soon for the remake. And it's impossible for it to be different enough from the version starring Wilder (his performance is nothing short of iconic, which is maybe another reason why this shouldn't have been remade). It isn't as thought you can start adding action scenes or other things to get the kids interested (this is being done with The Lion The Witch And The Wardrobe).

  • May 15, 2005, 12:02 p.m. CST

    I don't know why I'm getting so worked up about it, but this mov

    by FrankDrebin

    There are dozens of Roald Dahl stories that haven't been adapted yet. Burton and/or the studio picked Willy Wonka BECAUSE it was a successful movie. You don't see them re-making "The Witches", because the movie wasn't a classic. I should be used to PR lies, but sometimes they still burn me up.

  • May 15, 2005, 1:15 p.m. CST

    FrankDrebin

    by Ribbons

    No, you're exactly right. This being "re-envisioned" has more to do with it being a movie than it being a book once, long ago. There are numerous other Dahl stories, no more or less preposterous than the plot of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," that aren't even in development. Sure they went back to the text (only because the screenwriter, John August, felt compelled to), but that doesn't change the reasons for making the movie in the first place.

  • May 15, 2005, 1:21 p.m. CST

    I think the origin of Wonka should be the same as the monsters f

    by 800Bullets

    The audience wanted to know where they came from, too. /hates focus groups...just make the damn movie.

  • he

  • May 15, 2005, 1:45 p.m. CST

    PLANT

    by Dannychico

    Vile weed!

  • May 15, 2005, 1:55 p.m. CST

    800 Bullets

    by Ribbons

    "too?" The audience DOESN'T want to know where Wonka came from. Learn some basic reading comprehension before you sneer at "Focus Groups."

  • May 15, 2005, 2:22 p.m. CST

    kuryakin -- "about"

    by Flansy

    ("If you're going to say "about" why not say about 30? Anyway it's "about" 06:53 and I haven't slept. So it ALL sounds trippy") I saw something similar in a recent "Making of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue" tv special... some excited quote that the team has been to "OVER 23 COUNTRIES!" Which is what... 25? 30? Or does Tobago only count as a half-country? And in other news: I watch quality TV.

  • May 15, 2005, 2:39 p.m. CST

    PLANT!!! Here's a legit review

    by BlackJack001

    http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8028

  • May 15, 2005, 2:51 p.m. CST

    If I find a golden ticket

    by Capt. Blackadder

    Can I pass go, collect 200 dollars, and never ever have to see this movie. Just a thought really.

  • May 15, 2005, 3:05 p.m. CST

    Golden Egg???

    by kazren

    I'm not sure what your reviewer meant when referring to the Golden Egg. There is no Golden Egg in this movie. There are squirrels testing for bad nuts, and the Bad Nut ends up going down the trash tube. My friend was able to view this movie twice already, and she said that Johnny is great in it. I can't wait. Last weekend the LA Times had not only an article but a full page ad for the movie.

  • May 15, 2005, 4:41 p.m. CST

    "If it WERE"

    by Mister Man

    Grammar, people.

  • May 15, 2005, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Wonka's father is a dentist

    by blackstormy

    I think. Isn't christopher lee a dentist in the trailer? But it makes sense, his father kept him a away from candy so now he has a factory just to spite him. They should keep in the backstory so to keep it different from the original, plus it gives Depp a chance to act in scenes outside of the factory cause I have a feeling the only interesting thing in this movie is Depp's performance.

  • May 15, 2005, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Burton, keep the backstory

    by xXMr_BoJaNgLeSXx

    Fuck those idiots who voted it out. It's nobody's fault outside of MTV that they have no attention span. Stop catering to them.

  • May 15, 2005, 5:06 p.m. CST

    This will be a gem for 2005

    by DOGSOUP

    I can't wait to see this!

  • May 15, 2005, 6:19 p.m. CST

    Even though I think this movie is going to be good, they are pro

    by iamnicksaicnsn

    even though they could have done that anyway, but it's still more money. It's true though, that there are a plethora of other Dahl books that could be made like The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar, BFG, or something. I'm incredibly overjoyed that Fantastic Mr Fox is being made, that was one of my favorite Dahl books, if not my most favorite.

  • May 15, 2005, 6:24 p.m. CST

    nicksaicnsn

    by Ribbons

    They're making "Fantastic Mr. Fox" into a movie? Really?! Holy shit! Are you sure you're not thinking of the rumors that Wes Anderson was attached to it a while back?

  • I mean it's basically EXACTLY the same. It's the first book I ever read and I had/have the old-school first edition from the 60's that my big brother gave me...the one with the pigmies in it. THAT'S really the only difference it has with the first film. And they are sure as shit not keeping it in the new one. It's not even in the book anymore. That and the little Slugworth plot. But Slugworth was in the book. He just didn't work for Wonka. That was such a minor change, I barely even noticed when I was little, and totally forgot it wasn't in the book later. It doesn't say directly how old Wonka is, but the fact that he's an OLDER gentlemen is clearly implied, as grampa Joe speak as though he's been around forever, the cane, the hat, and searching for an heir...give me a break, he's old dude, any way you slice it. And frankly, neither Depp nor Wilder look like the character as it was described. Wilder is actually closer, if he had a little grey goatee maybe. I'm sure Dahl didn't mention lipstick. One of Dahl's biggest problems with original was Wilder I believe...too young, too psycho. Hello, Depp is like that at nunber 11! You people that say this is perfect material for Burton are morons. Dahl would chocolate factory his pants after taking one look at Depp. Trust me, the fucker is spinning in his grave as we speak.

  • May 15, 2005, 7:20 p.m. CST

    BroncoFan will be in a movie....

    by BlackJack001

    It'll be called Bronco and the Gay Porn Factory.... heh

  • May 15, 2005, 7:25 p.m. CST

    that is the most obvious PLANT i have ever read here.

    by dregmobile

    a guy lucks into a test screening and just happens to be a major fan of the original? and refers to it as a timeless classic? maybe i live on another PLANeT but no one i know even likes this film. then again, i am a self-obsessed high-orbiting yuppie who wishes he lived in soho.

  • May 15, 2005, 7:36 p.m. CST

    Ignore the troll...don't even utter his worthless sporty name.

    by Oompa_Radar

  • May 15, 2005, 7:39 p.m. CST

    I'll bite.

    by Oompa_Radar

    It's worth look. Though I really can't say I've been thrilled with Burton lately, Johnny Depp films are more often than not quite good, if anything just because of his great performances (From Hell and a few others excluded). Burton and Depp work very well together, and I simply LOVE the source material. If it's bad, though, I'm going to be really PO'd...I'm getting quite sick of Hollywood digging up the corpses of wonderful films (and even TV) and turning it into predictable, worthless crap.

  • May 15, 2005, 8:01 p.m. CST

    My golden ticket.

    by Capt. Blackadder

    Gets me to the nearest exit of the movie theater.

  • May 15, 2005, 8:27 p.m. CST

    Evil White Man

    by Ribbons

    There's this bar thingee on the right side of your computer that, when you click it, moves the screen up and down. I know! Crazy, huh? Well anyway, here's the cuckoo part: you can skip ("scroll" I think they call it) down to the parts of the review you're interested in! Technology sure is fun!

  • May 15, 2005, 8:57 p.m. CST

    I can't wait 'til 'The Corpse Bride' comes out

    by Ribbons

    "...Johnny Depp's performance really stole the show!"

  • May 15, 2005, 9:22 p.m. CST

    wow

    by respectablechum

    u guys sure are mean on this site. poor reviewer

  • May 15, 2005, 9:40 p.m. CST

    That was supposed to be "sarcastic," Evil White Man

    by Ribbons

    Good comeback, by the way. Off I go to nurse my wounds...

  • May 15, 2005, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Stop talking about remakes! It's based on a damned book!

    by raw_bean

    Apologies for those who know already, but even more scorn on those who pay so little attention to what's being said that they still haven't got it. ****This film is no more a remake of the first film adaptation of ROALD DAHL'S BOOK than Peter Jackson's Lord Of The Rings was a remake of the Ralph Bakshi animated version of Tolkien's book! Ie, not at all!**** I hope Dahl's name features prominently in the beginning or end credits somewhere, it just irks me to see so many people labouring under a misconception.

  • May 15, 2005, 10:05 p.m. CST

    raw bean

    by Ribbons

    No, we got that. What I'm saying is that the only reason this particular book of Dahl's is being "adapted" (right now; again, and less faithfully) is because it was already a movie.

  • May 15, 2005, 10:15 p.m. CST

    book and film

    by m2298

    The Oompa Loompa pygmies were in the first edition of the book. Slugworth, was only referred (but not scene) to in all versions of the story. It was the '71 film that made him a charcter.

  • May 15, 2005, 10:23 p.m. CST

    Ken Loach's 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory Revolution'... th

    by workshed

    I mean really, who had the bright idea of giving a novel so quintessentially English to an American director..? How would you like it if we turned Michael Winner loose on some Poe or Twain classics. First George Lucas rapes me and now Burton, the queer, wants to stick it in my mouth. Fuck him and all his London socialite brown-nosing perfumed-ponses. May they all die in time-honoured 'Theatre of Blood' stylee!

  • May 16, 2005, 12:20 a.m. CST

    jake sucked my snake

    by geek molester

    anyone that names themselves BroncoFan deserves to be shanked by a PCP ingesting Raider fan at a Broncos game. And whats with the trailer to this movie, where are the spaceships and aliens, stop teasing me damnit i wanna see the friggin aliens!

  • May 16, 2005, 1:05 a.m. CST

    Hope this BOMBS, big time...

    by Mike Lovestein

    This film is going to be a complete piece of shit. I can't wait for it to open, just so it can bomb. This is one of those films that trendy assholes seem to pretend to like.

  • May 16, 2005, 4:22 a.m. CST

    geek molester

    by Ribbons

    Pretty sure you've got the wrong thread there.

  • May 16, 2005, 6:43 p.m. CST

    LAST!

    by xXMr_BoJaNgLeSXx

    ...Just felt like doing that.

  • May 17, 2005, 6 p.m. CST

    Johnny Depp

    by bluemancbrit

    good as he is, he's no Gene Wilder. Saw the trailer on Apple music store ages ago and disliked it instantly. Probably go and see it but already disliking Depps interpretation. Why not just go the whole hogg and cast Paul Rueubens.