BookBlog: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, A Review

Main
Search This Site

« back to Freaky Deaky Cover Art
» forward to Gigglechick, Live at the Improv

Discussion Archives

blindness
bridge of birds
a canticle for leibowitz
charlie and the chocolate factory
chronicle of a death foretold
a confederacy of dunces
confessions of an ugly stepsister
coraline
the curious incident of the dog in the night-time
descent into hell
the diamond age
don quixote
fight club
the five people you meet in heaven
fried green tomatoes at the whistle stop cafe
the ghost writer
good in bed
harry potter and the sorcerer's stone
a home at the end of the world
house of leaves
if on a winter's night a traveler
invisible monsters
the kite runner
life of pi
memoirs of a geisha
middlesex
mysterious skin
noir
norwegian wood
one for the money
the poisonwood bible
revenge
the secret life of bees
shopgirl
the solitaire mystery
the stupidest angel
thumbsucker
the time traveler's wife
troll
veronika decides to die
watch your mouth
a wrinkle in time

Monthly Archives

August 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002

July 19, 2005

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, A Review

I haven't seen Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory yet and keep wanting to find the time to go, but I guess The Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ) didn't like it:

The star of the movie, though, remains Johnny Depp. And he soon becomes its biggest problem.

Say it isn't so!

This part of the review was a little confusing:

Add Depp's strangeness to it, and some overdone horrors (Veruca Salt is attacked by vicious squirrels, and thrown down an incinerator shaft) and it's easy to imagine little ones crying out for "Herbie: Fully Loaded" halfway through.

Um, in Roald Dahl's version, Veruca Salt is attacked by vicious squirrels and is thrown down an incinerator shaft. That's why there's a chapter called "The Nut Room." Or maybe this reviewer is in the same situation as me and also can't find his copy of the book.

Trackback Excerpt: Like any parent with deferred-parenting skills might do, I took my kids to see Charlie and the chocolate factory. Having seen the original 1971 version, I have to admit I was eager to see how a great kids story would......
[Read More]

comments

It pisses me off to read these movie reviews. READ the book people. THEN review the movie.

DUH.

Hi:

I'm not sure whether your site allows open comments. I have never commented before, but often visit to see what you're reading and what you have to say.

Dahl is one of my favorite childhood authors. I went to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on opening night, then came home and read a few reviews. Many (and maybe most) compared the movie to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory starring Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, never mentioning that both movies are based on Roald Dahl's book! Hello!! Even more frustrating are reviews like the one you mentioned that critizise the new movie for not staying true to the original, thinking the original starred Gene Wilder, when this movie remains more true to the book than the earlier film.

If you liked the book, go see the movie. It is wonderful. Frankly, I think Dahl would be pleased with both films, but I prefer the newer version. The characters and story remain true to what Dahl wrote. I found Tim Burton's embellishments appropriate and madly funny. You will love the Oompa Loompas.

The new film far surpassed my expectations, although (mild spoiler ahead) I really disliked the ending. It's clear both films made changes because the original book doesn't have much character growth or much of a narrative arc, but I was rolling my eyes for most of the final five minutes.

Still, the stunning visuals, inspired casting, and near-flawless performance of Depp helped me forgive the screenwriter's finale.

hmmm, i'm in the same boat as Mary.
i haven't seen the movie yet. i want to soon though!!!

so far, i have only read two reviews about the new movie. the first review was in my local paper...and it was a bad review. they mostly said that johnny depp made the movie suck. (right...sarcasm right there) the second review...well, more of a concensus, was from RottenTomatoes.com. they gave it an 83% rating, which is really good! (i'm ususally comfortable with RT's ratings).

but alas, i must see for myself.

I've been hearing mostly good things about the movie and though I haven't read the book (yet) I'm planning on watching the movie this Saturday.

Agreed Jayme,

The new movie is much more faithful to the book then the orignal movie... But somehow Johnny's character ddn't do it for me, don't get me wrong, I love him, but I think he added a bit of a twist in the wrong direction to wonkas character.. anyways, go see it for yourself!

---
Public Domain Books: Online
http://www.PDBooksOnline.com