« Box Office Finals... | Main | Guerilla Ad »
July 19, 2005
On Willy Wonka and Michael Jackson
When I saw the image of Willy Wonka in advertising, I was one of the first to yeall, “Michael Jackson!” It angered people at Warner Bros, but it was an easy call.
And then I saw the movie.
Simply put, outside of the skin tone, the proximity to children in this film, and a poor relationship with his father, Johnny Depp’s Willy Wonka has NOTHING to do with Michael Jackson. I don’t care if you are a vainglorious idiot who judges things from the first 30 minutes of a film (or writes a whole column based on a trailer) or as venerable and institution as Roger Ebert… the argument is lazy and reflects little more than the inability to get out of one’s head.
One of my specific targets when revisiting the film the second time was a check of Depp’s Jacksonisms. But there were virtually none.
Wonka’s sartorial style is not like Jackson’s, except that both are flamboyant. But saying they are the same would be like saying that Michael Jackson, Elton John, and Madonna have the same style. Jackson doesn’t wear hats, top or other. Jackson wears one ornate glove, not a very symbolic and character specific pair of purple surgical gloves. Jackson wears overdone military-style stuff while Wonka wears the Brit period stuff that has appeared in most of Burton’s films somewhere or another. Wonka is into protective goggles, which speaks to many of his style choices... protection... which is not what Jackson's style embraces.
Johnny Depp’s voice as Wonka is nothing like Michael Jackson’s. It is a flat American accent, perhaps from Philadelphia or Cleveland. He does not whisper. He does not speak in a high register.
Wonka has no Jackson speech patterns or physical ticks. He is not handled by the Oompa Loompas like Jackson is by his crowd of supporters. He does not perform for the kids or anyone else.
But most importantly, Wonka is not a grown up child. He is a successful (albeit, very strange) man who is looking for a successor who still has the childlike passion – not wonder - that made him the greatest chocolatier in the world. Charlie is smart, strong and willing to do the hard work, knowing that there is more than the surface things to deal with.
Wonka’s factory is not his youthful dream, but an organic, creative expression of doing things the way he sees as perfect, not the way society tells him to do things. Jackson, on the other hand, recreated zoos and Disneyland, desperate to be like everyone else.
Wonka is accepted by the world, but he is missing the love of someone who really knows him.
Think about Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean and his version of Keith Richards… his had the style and tone and intent and swagger of Richards down. If Wonka was a take on Michael Jackson, none of that is present. Wonka is MJ’s nightmare… he doesn’t like kids, he is happy to see kids get their comeuppance for bad behavior, he didn’t have to work under his father’s thumb for most of his life, he has no siblings, he has no pets, his relationship with the Oompa Loompas is symbiotic and respectful, not sycophantic or abusive, etc, etc, etc.
Time will put all of this in perspective in time. The light skin – which by the way, is shared by The Gloops, Violet Beauregard and Veruca Salt in many shots – is what it is. But is not built of self-hatred, which is the only explanation for Jackson's presumed self- mutilation of his face.
Perhaps the most interesting Wonka-ism is the blue contact lenses, which are not supposed to be reality, since we clearly see that young Willy has brown eyes. I didn’t notice, though I intended to, whether Wonka drops the blue lenses in the final scenes of the film, as he lets down his guard.
But this is one of those cultural moments where we all convinced ourselves of something before we really knew what we were talking about and then found ourselves unable to give up the ghost. Come on, y’all. Say “I was wrong” now so you don’t have to do it in a year or two.
Posted by poland at July 19, 2005 06:54 AM
Comments
Totally agree. The only time I ever thought of a connection between WW and MJ was when I read one of the first comparisons.
Watching the film, I honestly didn't think of MJ once.
All a matter of opinion, I spose, by I just don't see it at all.
Posted by: Scott Weinberg at July 19, 2005 10:52 AM
purely on the movie? ur right. his look in the ads? he does look like mj.
Posted by: bicycle bob ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 19, 2005 03:16 PM
I agree with you David...it's just lazy to jump on the Wonka/MJ bandwagon. I don't even think he looks like MJ in the film but his portrayl has nothing to do with the King of Pop.
Posted by: Don at July 19, 2005 03:19 PM
I guess we'll never know who Depp based it on. He usually does base some aspect of character on someone or something. Most actors don't give away their acting choices though. It is against policy.
Posted by: BluStealer at July 19, 2005 03:23 PM
He has said he based it on several kids show hosts that he remembered from when he was a kid himself.
...or so I think that's what I read.
Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 19, 2005 03:26 PM
I don't know whether to believe him. He is an actor after all. Then again everyone still buys he based his Captain Jack on Keith Richards.
Posted by: BluStealer at July 19, 2005 03:31 PM
After this effort, is there any doubt he is the best working actor in Hollywood today? Has he ever played even a variation of the same role?
Posted by: Terence D at July 19, 2005 03:54 PM
Just a coincidence but Finding Neverland also got the Michael Jackson stigma attached to it.
Posted by: Kernan at July 19, 2005 04:48 PM
I'll disagree to a point -- mainly because Depp's mannerisms (on several occasions) were very childish/childlike; he did seem to be an adult who to some degree related to things on a kid's level.
There's not a one-to-one correlation, but to me Depp was closer to Jackson than Howard Hughes (a name I've heard he apparently used as some inspiration).
Posted by: Telemachos at July 19, 2005 05:42 PM
I lean towards the Hughes comparisons. That was the first thing I thought of.
Posted by: Bruce at July 19, 2005 06:28 PM
See, I thought FINDING NEVERLAND was very MJ-esque...but just because there were so many parallels in the story. I didn't think Depp was similar to MJ...but the film just had alot of similarities...that I somehow can't remember right this second.
And Terence- I agree that Depp is one of, if not THE best, actor going today. He's never the same twice. Reminds me of what Val Kilmer could've done before he fell in love with himself and started cranking out crap.
Posted by: don at July 19, 2005 06:35 PM
TeleMachos, can you be specific about any of his mannerisms? I'm not baiting... I just didn't see "child." I saw "goofball."
And I don't get the Hughes thing, outside of being agoraphobic. But the accent is very, very specific... I just don't know from where. It ain't MJ.
Posted by: David Poland at July 19, 2005 06:40 PM
Dave, off the top of my head, one instance is when James Fox is talking about nut-shelling and asks Wonka if he uses a specific machine; and Wonka's response is a (IMHO) very childish "You're really weird". Not exactly what an adult would say, regardless of whether they were reclusive or not.
Wonka's increasingly agitated reactions to Mike Teevee's "modern science" attitude also were in the same vein.
I *don't* think Depp was channeling MJ, nor that he was necessarily intending a comparison. However, I also think it's practically inevitable that *some* comparisons will be drawn; and that, to some degree, such comparisons are reasonable. Though the 1971 film is far inferior to this one (and I'm not much of a fan of it), at this point I prefer Wilder's portrayal to Depp's.
Posted by: Telemachos at July 19, 2005 06:58 PM
Excerpt from a Depp interview:
Johnny Depp has hit back at claims that his colourful portrayal of Willy Wonka in the eagerly anticipated Charlie & The Chocolate Factory movie is in anyway based on controversial pop star Michael Jackson.
"It never entered my mind," Depp said. "Michael Jackson loves children but Willy Wonka doesn't."
Instead, the Donnie Brasco star says that his interpretation of Wonka was informed by TV hosts from his childhood, such as Captain Kangaroo, Mr Rogers and Uncle Al.
"There were memories I have as a little kid watching children's shows and children show hosts. I distinctly remember thinking their speech pattern was strange."
Posted by: Sandy at July 19, 2005 07:54 PM
Telemachos...you are a mumbler. I can't understand a word you're saying.
I'm going out on a limb here and I'm going to say that Depp *gasp* created this Willy Wonka interpretation ALL ON HIS OWN. I know, I know...that's crazy.
I definitely sensed some flavor of 70's kid show hosts seeping in, but I think this one is all his own.
Posted by: don at July 19, 2005 08:13 PM
Dave, you obviously have spent some thought in your review of CATCF, which I appreciate very much. The endless MJ comparisons in other reviews prove that most critics and people making such accusations look at the surface without truly evaluating Depp's performance against the character WW in the book.
Posted by: Jerri at July 19, 2005 08:16 PM
Johnny is what you would call an original. I don't think hes basing this and any role on anything totally specific.
Posted by: LesterFreed at July 19, 2005 08:38 PM
It is really sad about Val Kilmer. He was well on his way to becoming one of the top actors. Seems like his personal life took over his professional life. He is still young so he should have many more roles in him. He can overcome his issues.
Posted by: Terence D at July 19, 2005 08:49 PM
I really like actors who can change from one movie to another and don't rely on one thing to make them a star. Depp could have coasted on his unreal looks forever. Lets be real here.
He is dreamy.
Posted by: BluStealer at July 19, 2005 09:12 PM
Don't give up on Val. He has way too much talent and ego to give up on now.
Posted by: Mark at July 19, 2005 10:38 PM
When I saw the film I was very intentionally looking for MJ similarities. But frankly, outside of the wardrobe (which is pretty similar to the original) I don't think there is any real fuel for that fire.
I thought the film was okay, with the exception of the Squirell scene which was fantastic.
Posted by: Joe E at July 19, 2005 10:43 PM
At least one critic thought he was playing Brian Jones, suggesting that he will in time work his way through all of the Stones. I've actually heard more far-fetched theories.
Posted by: TheBrotherhoodOfTheLostSkeletonOfCadavra at July 19, 2005 10:48 PM
What was his Cry Baby role? Mick Jagger?
Posted by: Angelus21 at July 19, 2005 10:50 PM
I think Charlie Watts was his ED WOOD template.
Posted by: Don at July 20, 2005 02:17 AM
It's pretty much an obvious conclusion that there is going to be parallels between Depp/Finding Neverland and Michael Jackson. Considering MJ thinks of himself as Peter Pan in Neverland and JM Barrie's personal life was so similar.
I doubt though Depp went "hmm, let me channel Michael".
Posted by: KamikazeCamel at July 20, 2005 12:08 PM
This one is especially charming. How's that Typekey doing?
Posted by: jeffmcm at July 12, 2006 02:08 PM
Almost a year-long gap between posts. People will look back and wonder why that is.
Posted by: Blackcloud at July 12, 2006 03:48 PM
Memory Lane.
Posted by: jeffmcm at July 12, 2006 03:50 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)