I was pretty surprised I liked it as much as I did. I thought Depp and the boy did well, and the sets were wonderful. I'll try to jot down more later, but right now I need to drown a bag of kitties.

Ciao

Have you seen the original Batman Sexy celebrity?

I'm glad you liked it. :)

It took me awhile to get used to Depp's make up though, but it grew on me by the end. I guess it gave him that subtle edge he wanted. But, he did remind me of....


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...003_AMELIE.jpg http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...MPO/503574.jpg

They could be twins...or at least brother and sister. :p

I'd say blasphemy if Depp weren't so damn beautiful.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory... never seen it yet, but I hope it will be good. And many people said it's a remake of the 1971 version.

both films are similar, but there are enough differences where i wouldn't consider it a remake

Sorry. Just didn't like it. Johnny Depp is no Gene Wilder.

and you would be right..

I liked viewing him as nothing more than a crazy guy who has a bad ass chocolate factory and a bunch of singing midget slaves


hahahahahahahahahhah

I liked viewing him as nothing more than a crazy guy who has a bad ass chocolate factory and a bunch of singing midget slaves

hahahhahahahah

Can't wait to see this one. :yup:

Charlie and the Chocolate Chocolate Factory isn't a remake. It's a total opposite. It's based on the book on the same name.

Plus, you can't obviously compare Depp to Wilder. Impossible.

I have not seen this movie but, you know, i'm having a change of heart due to the way some people are putting it.:D They are not circus freak, singing migets, they are just people of abnormal size.:D



P.S- Similar to Gwen Stefani, but with migets as your slaves instead of Asians.:D And the look alike too!;)

-TheButcher

Saw this this afternoon and I really liked it.
It's got that Elfman aesthetic of creepy sterility.
Depp is terrific and I disagree with the comparisons to Jacko - I think he created a character based on the script here and while they're both pale with dark hair, I think the similarity ends there. He still looks like Audrey Tatou to me, though.
Freddy Highmore is so adorable, I want to eat him with a little silver spoon.
The supporting cast was fantastic, even the kids. I can't quite figure out who Helena Bonham Carter was reminding me of... it's bothering me. :/

ROFL yeah that's the coolest part of this movie and its predecessor




cant wait to see it

Depp is ****ing bitchin'

Yeah. He gives you the total feel of someone who hasn't been out in a long time...

I. Loved. It.

First of all, let me say that this film is nothing like the original, there were so many things that were not in this film that were in the original, which made the film seem very short. Through out the whole film you know what is going to happen and when you don't see it you kind of feel let down, but then the film goes on after the ending of the original and you get new material on the screen.

This film has BURTONS style written all over it, the opening score, the Buckette's house, evening the references to his other films are in here. (Peewee, Edward). It's always a treat to see a Burton film because his sense of style is always "twisted" and unique.

The music other then Elfman's score was sung by the Oompa Loompas and they were short and only happened after a child was disposed of. Of course it was funny to see that little guy sing and do the little dances, but I still say that the original Oompa Loompas were great and should never have changed. I never read the book, but in the movie it shows the back story to the Oompa Loompas, living in some kind of jungle, it was neat to see that.

In saying that, this film, unlike the original which centered on Charlie, deals more with Wonka. Going to the jungle or Loompa Island and finding the Oompa Loompas, hell even going as far back as to show Willy as a child and his father the great Mr. Lee, or as someone said in the audience. "Holy Sh*t, it's Dooku". As stated before this film is full of references to other movies and one is 2001: AOS, in the TV room (the big white room) it has 2001 on the screen and I know that I was the only one in that theater that knew what it was.

So Depp as Wonka eh, well this is the part that scares me, he was freaky. Not like the original Wonka at all. He sounds like a child, looks pale and acts like a child. Depp was quoted as saying that the inspiration was a game show host locked up for 20 years and then finally let out and I believe it. He was great, had the right funny/scary/weird sense and look to him. Of course Wonka and Depps performance is the most weird part of this film, that doesn't take apart from the fact that the film itself is weird, it goes up there with any Lynch or Cronenberg film as being F'd up. Not in an I don't understand way, in a this is F'd up way.

Which film do I prefer, hard to say cause the original is a classic and I never read the book, but as good as the film is there were some parts that I could of done without. Mainly one being Burton showing the other children leaving the factory. Agustus is covered in Chocolate, Violette is still blue, and I won't tell you about the other two, but what I liked about the original is that you never knew what happened to them, if those Oompa Loompas really did take care of those kids or if there were something darker going on in that factory. All in all, the kids did the job of acting like kids and the parents did the job of acting like parents, so nothing special there.

Depp's performance, the sets, comparing to the original and Burton behind the camera are the reasons to see this film, but if you loved a lot of things about the original....like Slugsworth, the floating/burping, Wonkas office, then you'll end up being disappointed because they are not present in Burtons film.

8/10

You my words. Those oompa loompas(I won't even capitilize them now) were the worst ide I've ever seen.

no where near as good as the original.