Ok, I saw "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". My initial reaction...it sucked. I had a hard time not compairing it to the 70's version, which happens to be one of my favoite movies and the movie I've probably watched more times in my life than any other. As I think about it, there were many things I enjoyed about the new version as well.
Random thoughts:
~The new version includes more from the book than the old; things like the dad character that screwed the covers on toothpaste for a living, the squirrels and Charlie seeing what became of the children as they walk out of the factory while he's in the glass elevator.
~I liked the backstory for the oompa loompas and loved that Wonkas father was a dentist.
~I'm having trouble deciding whether or not I liked Johnny Depps Wonka. He certainly took him in a different direction, which is great. Some of the lines were great, unfortunatly the best ones were in the previews. As much as I love Johnny Depp, he just can't touch Gene Wilders performance.
~I liked the bigger emphasis on Mike Teevee and how he'd become pre-maturely cynical from violent video games. It was touched on a little in the origional, but the point was brought across stronger in this one.
~My favorite part has to be the animatronic puppets and the whole introduction of Wonka scene in general.
~The movie seemed rushed. I couldn't believe it was two hours. It seemed like they tried to fit a lot in in too little time. I guess that's what happens when you try to be more faithful to a book.
~The performances of the children were far better in the origional than in this one. The same goes for the parents. The only exception being Freddie Highmore. If we could transport Freddie Highmore into the origional movie it would be perfect. I never really dug Peter Ostrum.
~It was a great looking movie.
~I have to say, the best part of the experience was seeing the preview for "The Corpses Bride". IT LOOKS FUCKING AMAZING!
Other movies I've watched recently:
Casino: Yes, I know you're thinking, "You haven't seen Casino before now!?". No, and there's probably lots of other major movies I have yet to see. But I'm working on it. Anyways, yeah, Casino, fan-fucking-tastic. Only Scorcese can make a three hour movie that never looses my interest at any time. Well....except maybe Gangs of New York...and I've yet to see The Aviator.
Closer: Holy fuck, what an airtight script. It never misses a beat. I don't think I've ever seen such a great performance from Julia Roberts either. Anyone who thinks she has no range has to see this movie. It's her most subtle performance ever. I went out and bought the movie after I finished watching the rental.
Constatine: It never really kept my interest. I have to admit my mind started to wander while I watched it and I'm not sure if that's my ADD or the movie just didn't do it for me. Some of the visuals were excellent. Th dialogue made me want to kill myself. And Keanu....while nice to look at is...well...Keanu. I do *heart* Rachael Weitz. The story was pretty cool. But, I dunno, it wasn't enough.
Random thoughts:
~The new version includes more from the book than the old; things like the dad character that screwed the covers on toothpaste for a living, the squirrels and Charlie seeing what became of the children as they walk out of the factory while he's in the glass elevator.
~I liked the backstory for the oompa loompas and loved that Wonkas father was a dentist.
~I'm having trouble deciding whether or not I liked Johnny Depps Wonka. He certainly took him in a different direction, which is great. Some of the lines were great, unfortunatly the best ones were in the previews. As much as I love Johnny Depp, he just can't touch Gene Wilders performance.
~I liked the bigger emphasis on Mike Teevee and how he'd become pre-maturely cynical from violent video games. It was touched on a little in the origional, but the point was brought across stronger in this one.
~My favorite part has to be the animatronic puppets and the whole introduction of Wonka scene in general.
~The movie seemed rushed. I couldn't believe it was two hours. It seemed like they tried to fit a lot in in too little time. I guess that's what happens when you try to be more faithful to a book.
~The performances of the children were far better in the origional than in this one. The same goes for the parents. The only exception being Freddie Highmore. If we could transport Freddie Highmore into the origional movie it would be perfect. I never really dug Peter Ostrum.
~It was a great looking movie.
~I have to say, the best part of the experience was seeing the preview for "The Corpses Bride". IT LOOKS FUCKING AMAZING!
Other movies I've watched recently:
Casino: Yes, I know you're thinking, "You haven't seen Casino before now!?". No, and there's probably lots of other major movies I have yet to see. But I'm working on it. Anyways, yeah, Casino, fan-fucking-tastic. Only Scorcese can make a three hour movie that never looses my interest at any time. Well....except maybe Gangs of New York...and I've yet to see The Aviator.
Closer: Holy fuck, what an airtight script. It never misses a beat. I don't think I've ever seen such a great performance from Julia Roberts either. Anyone who thinks she has no range has to see this movie. It's her most subtle performance ever. I went out and bought the movie after I finished watching the rental.
Constatine: It never really kept my interest. I have to admit my mind started to wander while I watched it and I'm not sure if that's my ADD or the movie just didn't do it for me. Some of the visuals were excellent. Th dialogue made me want to kill myself. And Keanu....while nice to look at is...well...Keanu. I do *heart* Rachael Weitz. The story was pretty cool. But, I dunno, it wasn't enough.