Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Jul 17, 2005 09:43

Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory will be most successful with members of the audience who have not known and loved the 1971 version starring Gene Wilder for most of their lives. Burton offers a winningly grotesque adaptation of Roald Dahl's book, filled with visual oomph and dark humor, but he's fighting a losing battle with people ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 12

ajodasso July 17 2005, 14:46:53 UTC
Saw the Wilder version when I was younger, after reading the book. Hated it. I'm very glad this remake's been done :)

Reply

oneminutemovies July 17 2005, 15:25:16 UTC
You are the first comment I've ever had! This is so great. I have interaction! Thanks!

I read that Tim Burton intended this to be not a remake of the earlier movie, but an adaptation straight from the book. I bet that will be the way people's reactions go--those who read the book first and think of that as the real story (which I know it is) will like this movie a lot more than those, like me, who only read the book much later and whose impressions were originally formed by the 1971 movie.

Reply


taradiane July 17 2005, 16:59:46 UTC
When I heard that Tim Burton didn't like the original, it worried me a bit about what he might do with the story.

Still gonna go see it.

Reply

oneminutemovies July 17 2005, 17:20:38 UTC
You should! It's fun. The parts I especially liked were the ones that weren't in the first movie, and I also preferred the version of Charlie's family in this movie. He gets to have two parents and his mother doesn't sing that stupid "Cheer up Charlie" song, which stops the 1971 movie dead in its tracks.

Thanks for motivating me to update!

Reply


crazyred1489 July 17 2005, 23:32:11 UTC
I really like both movies. I think you just can't go into the theatre expecting a remake of the older version. You need to go in thinking you're seeing a completely different movie to enjoy it.

Reply

oneminutemovies July 18 2005, 01:52:25 UTC
I tried to forget the older version when I was watching it, but mostly it didn't work. And I did enjoy it, I just didn't feel that it was as outstanding as the other one. But it's hard to say. In thirty years we'll have a better idea of how memorable it is.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

oneminutemovies March 31 2006, 22:52:16 UTC
Thanks very much! I will do that. I completely agree about the RL journal.

Reply


redcoast September 11 2006, 03:43:25 UTC
(Finally asking ...) So, who are you and why did you friend my journal? I know somebody's been checking the f-list of this journal...

Reply

oneminutemovies September 11 2006, 12:09:49 UTC
I'm basically a lurker. I friended you because I enjoyed you and your brother's lists about the HP movies but I have been enjoying your other posts too. We commented back and forth a little bit when I friended you. Do you mean somebody's checking the f-list of my journal, or your journal? How can you tell that?

Reply

redcoast September 11 2006, 14:42:53 UTC
I'm using ljToys, a tool that allows me to tell if someone is accessing my post or not. It recorded that somebody checked your f-list, with my recent post on it, yesterday. I had kinda assumed that you weren't active because you never did anything, so I was surprised to see activity there.

You don't have to comment or anything, but you're certainly welcome to!

Reply

oneminutemovies September 11 2006, 18:25:26 UTC
Thanks! I actually quit doing movie reviews about the same time I started the livejournal but I use it to comment and look at the f-list. I should comment more but usually whatever I'm planning to say seems extraneous once I think about it. I do sometimes. ljToys sounds neat.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up