The Hot Blog

I liked it, but not as much as the first one (and I'm not even a big fan of the original).

Taken as just a kids flick, this is pretty damn good, but from the director and star of EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, this is a big disapointment.

I liked it, but not as much as the first one (and I'm not even a big fan of the original).

Taken as just a kids flick, this is pretty damn good, but from the director and star of EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, this is a big disapointment.

The funny thing is, I remember that the first one really didn't make much of a splash during its original theatrical release in the '70s. In my circle of acquaintances, the only people who really seemed jazzed by it were the stoners. You know, the same folks who thought "Fantasia" was the greatest head movie ever made. Go figure.

For better or worse it will be endlessly compared to the first one. Wilder vs Depp, Burtons direction, the new Oompa loompa's. All will be discussed.

This one blew away the first one. Tim Burton is one of the top five working directors today. Hands down.

Amazing movie, visually breathtaking and surprisingly funny. Burton is a visionary. Johnny Depp continues to be the most fascinating actor working today. While so many critics are taken with their Michael Jackson comparisons to Depp's performance (and I get where they see the comparisons) I think this shows more about the cynicism of critics than it does about Depp's performance.

AUSTRALIA HAS TO WAIT TILL SEPTEMBER!!!

It's annoying because Sin City, a movie I was desperate to see, finally got released here this week and now we have to wait another 2 months for another movie I desperately wanna see.

However, Sin City wasn't as excellent as I assumed it would be. Hmm... forshadowing perhaps?

Anyone I so it with love it. I will not be suprise if it has POTC type legs (I feel sorry for the Bad New Bears because I hear it good overall with great preformance from Greg and Billybob,but it not going to make much money next to this.)

But I personally think Batman is better.

$20.8 million for Charlie on Friday. $10.8 million for Wedding Crashers. $6.5 million for Fantastic Four.

Well, looks like the "slump" angle is over with a likely 100M for just the top 2 (60M+ for Charlie 30M+ for Crashers). Fantastic Four is suffering a pretty ugly drop, though, 60+%, which'll probably give them something.

The problem with some cynical critics and some adult audiences is that they can't see through a child's eye and wonder at the film's many pleasures. CATCF is for children and for adults who are still children at heart, but the film comes with a bite and edginess/humor that is quite wonderful and demented.

Saying this is the best movie of the summer is like saying one kids is the smartest kid in summer school.

I think this is the second best film of the summer behind BATMAN BEGINS and agree with Dave about people not letting go of the original. The 2 films are great companions....this newest one fills in gaps left out of the old one. There's room for both and CatCF isn't *really* a remake...it's it's own thing.

The only thing more annoying than people judging this film against the original is the idiot media's attempt to say Depp is mimicking Michal Jackson. He doesn't looks like him, he doesn't act like him...what gives? Sure, he lures kids into his huge castle...but Wonka's intentions are not MJ's I'm pretty sure. Oh, and that Jesus Juice river in Wonka's factory was rather odd...

I did find a lot of Michael Jackson mannerisms in Depp's portrayal. It is okay since who else would you base it on today? Depp has a thing for basing performances on real live people.

Angelus, does that mean that you dislike summer movies? And find them beneath you? Clarify please.

Well, Jeff, what movies have been great this summer? Any? You giving me Batman and Cinderella Man? Ok. But saying Charlie is the best doesn't take much of a stretch.

No, I thought Cinderella Man was lame. If that's what you're saying you might as well extend your statement out to the whole year, which has been pretty weak if you ask me.

Well my statement was for the summer. That was the point considering the Fall/Winter season is reserved for quality. But thanks for trying to put words into my mouth.

Hey, don't get angry. I'm agreeing with you that there have been few really good movies so far this year.

This summer has been piss poor for quality but what summer has ever had quality? But whats surprising is most of the big movies have been just average. I don't think we're going to be seeing an Oscar noms for any summer movie.

It doesn't take much to be the best movie in a summer like this. Batman remains the best to me by far-- I found it absolutely exhilarating.

But there's lots to like in CatCC. It's a pleasure to look at, and the kids were all good. Depp had a lot of nice moments, but was a bit too much of a caricature for my taste. The movie's main flaw is that Burton has never, ever figured out pacing.

It won't last like Pirates or Nemo, but I suspect it'll still be the summer favorite of many people.

Burton hit a home run. Now how did they mess up Planet of the Apes with him? Did he need Depp for the lead?

I was in a sold out show--the entire Saturday was sold out and multiple chains (I checked) were sold out for daytime shows. I bet it tops 60M easily. I was with a little sis of a friend and at 15 she loved it--not all of her friends did though.

In IMAX no typical disturbances and the teens behaved and no phones went off. no talk.

Tim Burton is back on a good old groove IMUHO, I thought he lost his way for awhile.

I loved the book and I have read it ten times since being a kid, and I loved the first movie too. But, as Dave said already, I loved this one differently.

Without spoilers the early scenes of the movie were just beautiful in fact I lost a steamy tear because I miss my great old grandparents being around. That bit was captured perfectly. Charlies dork look and short trousers etc isn't really poverty but you can see they were trying to emphasize what happens when you can't afford a good dentist (althought it is free to children in the UK so minor plot inaccurracy). I bring it up becasue some critics don;t think the biting poverty was captured well enough. I think it was pretty socially obvious.

I didn;t like Depp as Wonka at all at first, it felt forced...I didn;t really see Michael J so much. But then he got into it, although I think the cold sort of haughty disdain Wilder may have packed that better, Depp still was good. Like freaky Valley boy crossed with a London Goth.

The choreography, sets, costumes/make up were fantastic. That Oompah loompa dude was fantastic, hysterically funny--great span of time in the musical numbers. Metallica will probably sue, they have become so good at it.

So middle third great, but some aspects of the ending I didn't like, I think i preferred the method of the ending in the first movie.

Great movie, I think this and Batman the two best summer movies.

I only have one lament, rather than complaint. I think in an updated version, one would think that a worldwide search/contest, that having 2 USA kids, and 2 UK kids win(although odd they would refer to dollars when everything else in the picture was British) that at least ONE would be hispanic or African American, I mean come on. I've met all five of those kids in my life from every community--they all exist pretty much on every continent someplace, don't they: the fat kid who can't stop eating(Gluttony), the spoiled rich brat, the unpleasant competitor/motor mouthed brat, the TV/gamer-addict know it all and the humble nice kid who is afraid to dream anything better will happen to him.

It's not a complaint, but I was just surprised, as all of those kids could stay true to the character of the book and be a little more pigmented at the same time. Everybody frickin likes chocolate worldwide Suzy (Figgis), including folks from the southern hemisphere. Chocolate came from SOuthern Hemisphere enit?

I loved it at any rate. And I just love Christopher Lee. He is always fantastic, and always creepy.

And the Oompa Loompa dude, Deep (pronounced Dee-up?) Roy--he should win an award. He was in some hysterically bad Sci fi like Alien from LA.

weighty tome over. very good. knocked it out of the park grand slam style.

too bad you have to wait so long Camel.

and Planet fo the apes...I just think, like Lost in Space the movie would have been better off as a low-to-medium budget where effects don't get in the way of common sense and story. Planet of the apes I seriously disliked. The remakes of the early 70s sci-fi creepy stuff suck(most of them) becasue most of them have lost the menace that made them so compelling amd memorable.

As far as the summer thing goes...I think this is a damn-good summer. Much more variety for all. yeah okay, some tepid movies, but there always are aren't there? I disagree that Autumn is the best. There's the Oscar campaigning, but I think in every quarter so far, excellent.

Maybe I see too many movies,on the order of 70-100 per year at the higher end when I had to go to alot of festivals, so you notice a bad year becasue by July's end there's serious BURN OUT. I'm not getting that, but then I love going to the movies anyway.

Yo BrotherhoodOfTheLastSkeleton-san, Lota bought Lost Skeleton and Bubba Hotep so you can rest now chum. Ka-ching. Sad news though Lost Skeleton is only around 6,600 in rank on the top-selling DVDs on Amazon's list. But Ho-tep is ~2000.

i think this summer has been very good IMUHO.

This summer has been good? I can name 4 good movies. 4. That means its good?

You can name 4 good movies in your opnion Panda Bear but I know my parents can name a few, my brothers in their 20s-30s, little kids can name a few, and they all would name different movies as being "good". I think different groups of folks seem happy since spring, in my personal experience.

I am not saying it's great and there have been disappointments, but by this time in 2002 and 2003 I wasn't so happy.

I am all ears Lota. Have them tell you and you can post the lists. I am eager to hear what people of all age groups consider good this summer.

Four good ones this summer?
Batman Begins
Cinderella Man
Charlie
and I'll throw Wedding Crashers in there

No movie this summer will be happy when Oscar noms get announced next year. At least all the movies that have been released til now.

I believe the "dollars" will be replaced with "pounds" for UK release--the very few times it's mentioned you don't see the mouth of the person talking, which to me suggests a loop is likely. Also notice that when Charlie picks up the "dollar bill," it's neither a dollar bill nor a pound note, but something with "National Currency" on it.

Thanks Lota.

I think the only movie so far that had aspirations for the big 5 (Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, Screenplay) was Cinderella Man and while it may get a screenplay nod I think it will have to reserve itself for a few techs and that's it.

However, the other Summer films like Star Wars, War of the Worlds and Charlie will probably get a couple of nods and that should make the producers happy considering, as a i said, they aren't gunning for those big awards. However if any can do it I think maybe Batman Begins could possibly (POSSIBLY, but i doubt it) snag a big nomination. Just maybe...

Technical awards are like the bastard stepchild. They really only mean something to the people getting them. Which is sad since they play a big part in any movie.

With that said, I think we can expect Star Wars to clean up those awards.

Panda, one thing that struck me about Burton's "Planet of the Apes" is that Mark Wahlberg is the type of actor he might at best have cast in a bully role, but never in the lead. I had the curious gut feeling throughout that Burton just didn't want him there, was only filming Wahlberg because he had to, whereas whenever he focused on Helena Bonham Carter, Tim Roth or the unexpectedly moving Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (until then typecast in Asian villain roles), sparks flew.

I haven't seen "Charlie" yet because I promised my mother I would save that one for when she gets into town (I haven't made time to watch anything with her in ages, I'm a dreadful son I suppose), but both of us already noted the Michael Jackson resemblance — though it's really more a question of the shared reclusiveness, strangeness and paleness that these figures share. Depp and Burton may have been thinking of Jackson, who knows ... though the movie image I remember as most clearly and seemingly deliberately evoking Jackson was the titular character in "Powder," incidentally a knockoff of Burton's "Scissorhands," and perhaps not so incidentally written and directed by convicted child molester Victor Salva. (Not to open up that particular jug o'nightcrawlers, but I'm far from the first to notice the parallels.)

You're name does equal your posts. I credit you.

Burtons Apes had to had interference from the studio. It didn't seem like it was his baby. Very generic. Not very Burtonish.

Tim B's best movie is still Pee Wee's Big Adventure.

LWB: Speaking of Victor Salva, did "Jeepers Creepers" have the biggest opening weekend ever recorded for a movie directed by a convicted child molester?

I believe JC2 had a bigger opening.

Is the black market included in that because I'm sure some sick f%$&!s have sent and made money on some videos. The bastards.

Let's not forget that Mr. Salva, while convicted, has also served his time.

Jeff: Yes, but, funnily enough, the kid he molested probably is still a very seriously messed up adult. Indeed, when "Powder" hit theaters, the victim came out and said as much. Sometimes, the more you know, the less you forgive.

He's a kid toucher. He gets no slack from me and shouldn't be working with kids. Once a kid toucher always a kid toucher.

JC2 is disgusting. It's like gay porn, and you know it's directed by a convicted child molester. The male characters are continually shirtless, and the camera just lingers on them. It would have been an awful movie anyway, but that made it all the worse.

Well I wasn't about to make 50 cell phone calls but...I think this is s summary of what one red-blooded american family likes and frequents the movies 1-2x per week. in very large metro areas, they are at the advantage in that they can even see the very limited releases and special sneak previews on occasion:

The kiddies (under 14..a small sample size):
March of the Penguins[completely knocked them out]
Fantastic Four[12y olds & older]
Sith[12 y olds and older]
Charlie and the Choc factory[all loved it]
Madagascar[some loved some thought was boring]
only the boys liked Herbie--it was the cars they thought "lindsay" was a guy when someone asked them if they liked Lindsay after flick.

the 20s-40s (a larger sample size)
Sith
Rize
The beat my heart skipped
March of the penguins
Batman B
Mr & Mrs Smith [divergence...some of us didn't love but merely thought ok]
Sin CIty[again same sort of divergence as for Smith]
My summer of love
Me & You & Everyone we know [half thought good; half hated bitterly]

The old folks(also known as parents)
Batman Begins
Mr & Mrs Smith (THEY LOVED IT...I told them they're nuts. They can't wait to buy it.)
March of the Penguins
Sith
They haven't seen Charlie yet but will eat it up.

And since they saw Enron and Mad Hot ballroom tech in the summer I'd include them, except I think they were released a long time ago weren't they.

There is no accounting for taste in anyone, but that's the "good" list of mostly yankee movies.

Da Family: Universally disliked Bewitched, kicking and screaming, longest yard, WOTW wasn't well liked and most of the horror these last few months.

You can see that everyone loved Sith & Penguins.

More than 4 movies that are good..."good" can apply to stupid movies too if people are entertained enough.

Sorry--the above is to answer PANDA BEAR

oops all us 20s-40s loved Charlie too.

Telling me that old folks and younger folks loved Mr and Mrs SMith? Enjoyed? Some. Loved? Please. But its all subjective and if Lota's family loved it, it must be oscar worthy.

you asked me what my family thought was "good" not what they thought was Oscar worthy Panda (PANDA RECAP: "I am eager to hear what people of all age groups consider good this summer".)

The Oscar-worthy question is a different question altogether.

And it, IMUHO, is a question I can't answer since Lota (& most fam members) think many Oscar winners suck. Good movies don't get many Noms, by and large: the likely 5 Best Picture noms will be hamburger not prime New York Strip. If a NY strip gets a nom it doesn't win.

Lota's version of the oscars would be a different landscape.

I don't think any summer movie will get any oscars next year, king kong is coming and i bet it will sweep with the technical oscars.
this summer was lame and boring

OK, Dave, are you ready? Here's an Oscar prediction that, in all likelihood, will be proven just a daffy as your "Phantom of the Opera" mash note. But I don't care:

Matt Dillon will be nominated for "Crash." Don't know yet if it'll be Best Actor or Best Supporting Actor, but it'll happen.

And while I'm at it, here's another: Terrence Howard, Best Actor nominee for "Hustle & Flow." Yes, he's that good.

Ryan Philippe has a better chance than Matt Dillon. He's not even the best acting brother. That mantle is reserved for Kevin.

I thought the Oompa Loompa songs were great too.

Was anyone else reminded of Fleetwood Mac's "Tusks" during the Augustus Gloop number?

Burton's best since Ed Wood for sure.

I don't think any guys from Crash will be getting nominated. I doubt any of the women will either but I'd predict that a woman from the cast would get nominated over one of the guys.

And I think all the actors from Crash will be campaigning in the Supporting catagories except for Don Cheadle.

Chocolate Factory for Best Original Song?

Crash will probably get some Indie Spirit awards but nobody will remember it by Oscar time...and rightfully so, in my opinion.

crash will crash and burn. and be forgotten. no way any of those guys get a nom.

King Kong will have to compete with Star Wars for those tech awards. Star Wars has sentimentality on its side.

I didn't think it was possible but this new version of Wonka was even better than the old version. I did not think it could happen. Burton deserves a lot of credit. After he struck out with the last remake, he still took chances.

Not much Charlie discussion on the Charlie thread

Yes MAtt I did notice the money thing and the coin that Granpa Joe held up was out of focus too, I suppose for international audiences. It was much too big and the wrong color to be a pound coin.

AT any rate, I suppose for visuals and many other things there will be alot of nominations/awards, as everything else was so well done.

It's not just for kids, and Dave did a very good review of it. Y'all go see it.

This movie will have some legs. I know a lot of people that were wary of seeing this. Good reviews and good word of mouth should really help it.

I wasn't that taken with this. Maybe I'm Gene Wilder biased which is a definately a possibility.

Why specifically were you not so taken with it Blustealer?

I am just wondering, as a big fan of Gene Wilder too.

I thought Depp was a great update, a goofy Goth with Papa issues, even though at first in the movie it was a little hard to get used to.

Maybe I am just so biased with regard to the first original Wonka. Gene Wilder. It's like I have grown up with him. I'll have to see it again and let Depp work me over. I thought it was a very good movie. I can see it in time making me like it even more.

Dave, thanks for pointing out the "little" but beautiful things you noticed upon your second viewing. I'm going back today for another look. This is really another film, not to be compared to Gene Wilder's this or that. I think a person can love two versions of the same story and there is much to love about this one and I commend Burton and Depp once again on a fantastic collaboration. No other film this year so far has such a visual feast.

Are we looking at an Oscar movie here? Or is it to much for kids?

An oscar movie and suitable children aren't mutually exclusive. I would be shocked if Choc didn't get many nominations for many things--have you seen it?

It looked great and engaging (cinematography, editing, direction), the acting was great for everybody, the sound/score was fab, the songs were inventive and hilarious, special effects, and I can't see it failing to get a best Pic nom.

Saw it Sunday night with my wife and 2 friends, all of us in our 30s. We all unanimously hated it. Found it to be soulless and mean-spirited. While the words of the songs may have been more faithful to Dahl's book, the movie completely fails to convey the spirit of his work. Rent the original!

Shane - I'm curious to know specifically what you found meanspirited about the new film that wasn't in the old film.

Shane,
You obviously didn't see the same movie all saw. Anyone to say that Charlie was mean spirited wasn't watching the film. Maybe you are anti Wonka. That is more than acceptable. But at least state your biasness. Because you sound like a plant from a rival movie who didn't get his desserts.

instead of writing up my thoughts, this guy read my mind and did it for me...

What's Wrong with Tim Burton's Wonka?
http://home.att.net/~tom.brodhead/burton.htm

may the backlash begin.

the Dahl estate approved Burton--he was the first choice on their list it says in the British press from what I looked up just now. Also, "Signing Burton will cap a long campaign to get the film under way with the blessing of the Dahl estate, which was reluctant to make a deal because the author didn't like the first screen adaptation - 1971's Gene Wilder flick Willy Wonka And The Chocolate Factory." that from IMDB which doesn't have a great news section, but I know that the Dahl estate was supposedly happier this time around.

I thought that Brodhead review was mean-spirited if anything else as it criticized not deviations from the book as much as what he Himself didn;t like so he should retitle his essay.

It will be interesting to see what the reaction to Charlie is in the UK, where Roald Dahl books per capita are even more popular than here in the USA.

I absolutely loved the first movie and grew up on its endless rerun int he 70s-80s and I fail to see any meanspiritedness anywhere.

Saying its mean spirited may be the the lamest comment ever on this blog.

And that is saying a lot.

Hmmm....you loved Pirates of the C. I did not. I thought it was horribly overrated as was Depp in it...one of his worst, mugging and irritating performances ever. And....I like Depp quite a bit, when he's good. But I thought he wasn't funny in Pirates or particularly good except for clever make-up. Forget the Keith Richards accent...ugh!!! I'm in the minority, of course, but it doesn't bother me. Depp's perf in Neverland was much more and his accent there was a rich deep part of his performance accentuating rather than annoying. This Charlie is far more visually clever but overstuffed and bloated, unlike the original, whatever it's faults may be. A much more likeable film in many ways, if hardly a masterpiece either. I think any would be critic who considers this or Pirates of the Caribbean a best picture of the year sort of thing--somewhat looney tunes....solly to say. But I can almost agree that Depp is the closest thing we have to an Alec Guinness here, if not in Pirates.

Soulless, garish, charmless, at once oozing with treacly sentimentality and brutally cynical, Burton's Charlie is a schematic and fragmentary movie that is so in love with its own self-reflexivity and pseudo-sophisticated nods at everything from Kubrick to the Beatles that it can't bother to care about its characters or to establish anything even remotely like wonder. And boorishly, blithely racist to boot (the "dot-head" chocolate drop in the Pondicherry palace is a sight gag that chokes, as is the crass throwaway segment with the two queer dogwalkers). The fact of Wonka's backstory is not a problem; it's the presentation of it as throwaway pop irony (not so much a backstory as a reference to the tradition of unconvincing backstories about neglected childhoods) that is so disturbing.

Are you an Armond White fan?

I'm a fan of good filmmaking and rigorous discussions of craft. Mr. White has discovered that a little vitriol gets people talking, even if their first reaction is rage. (Their second reaction is usually more interesting than appeasing some imagined consensus--at least it may have some fire behind it). To paraphrase Shaw, an Englishman thinks he is being moral when he is merely feeling uncomfortable. Perhaps we can say that an American filmgoer feels he has enjoyed a film if he has merely been made comfortable by it. We should ask for more.

I only asked because the vitriolic style felt the same. Also I don't think he's a Burton fan.

He really hates Burton. How can one hate Tim Burton?

Tim Burton's "Ed Wood" is one of the best movies ANYONE has ever made about making movies. No kidding. I'd put it right up there with "Day for Night" and "Good Mornng, Babylon."

How can anyone say the new version isn't faithful to the original book and then say the original was better.

If that's your major selling point then your argument is null and void right there.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)