"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory"

Reviewed by Chris Cappola
Starring Johnny Depp and Freddie Highmore. Directed by Tim Burton. (2005, WB/Village Roadshow)

'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' is a difficult film to assess. If you grew up with the flawed but memorable 1971 classic, it would hold a special spot in your childhood heart. The Gene Wilder version had its share of problems but it's a movie that children grew up on and you forgive its flaws because it was addictive and camp. Children today will probably feel the same about 'Harry Potter' when they get older. Every generation has them and 'Willy Wonka' remained a childhood classic for decades. It begs the question, was a remake necessary? If anyone is going to tamper with a classic idea, you don't have it in better hands than director Tim Burton and his posse including Johnny Depp.

The formula is the same but the execution is distinctively contrastive, which shows that Burton isn't trying to emulate the original but create a style of his own as you would expect from the talented director. He also remains faithful to the Roald Dahl book, which only works somewhat. The idea itself remains the same: reclusive chocolate maker Willy Wonka (Johnny Depp) invites five children to join him for a tour of his marvellous and secretive chocolate factory. They include: the porky Augustus Gloop (Phillip Wiegratz) who will eat anything; spoiled brat Veruca Salt (Julia Winter), the competitive Violet Beauregarde (Annasophia Robb), the full-on Mike Teevee (Jordan Fry) and of course our hero - the poor but spirited Charlie Bucket (Freddie Highmore). Its imperative that the story remains focused on how brave and likable Charlie is and how the other children will be punished for their rotten behaviour. At its core, these children are not bad but well, children. Only Veruca Salt's spoiled rich girl borders on bad behaviour but the rest behave similarly to the way kids are today. One by one and rather abruptly at times, the children meet their undoing until Charlie is left as the last one standing. But wait, it doesn't end there! Burton creates an additional arc involving Wonka coming to grips with his childhood demons involving his father, a horrendous dentist who disowned him. This subplot is unnecessary and forced taking up valuable real estate in the movie when it could have concentrated on many other ideas involving the main story.

Director Tim Burton is one of the most creative and visually influential directors of his time. His eye for the visual component is superb. But like many of his films, he relies too much on the visual and struggles with the story. 'Charlie' is rich on production design, the music score by regular cohort Danny Elfman is one of his best and the editing is just right. On a technical aspect, the film is not surprisingly perfect. If there's one quibble - it's that sometimes is playing on overload and like too much candy can get sickening. Still, Burton does an amazing job creating the look and feel of the movie that is as good as you come to expect from the revolutionary director. Many of it is Oscar deserved. The story though doesn't deserve any recognition and follows a too-obvious pattern leading to a cheesy and unconvincing ending. It's simply too neat of a package and well is too sugary from what you come to expect from Burton and Depp. Burton does a lot different to the 1971 original and even at times strays away from the novel. The introduction of a subplot involving Wonka's background is not needed and the focus is on Charlie not Wonka and they made such an effort to emphasise that but contradict themselves by adding these scenes. It rushes the process of the discovery of the golden ticket and that whole opening moves too fast. Most importantly, it does thankfully reduce the song count from the original but brings in several songs written by Dahl themselves, which are inaudible, hard to understand and cheesy and forgettable. Where's the Oompa Loompa song? It remains a classic tune but these songs here are unimaginative, non-understandable and forgettable.

A lot has been made about Johnny Depp channelling Michael Jackson as Willy Wonka, something the Oscar nominee has continuously denied. There are shades of him but it doesn't seem intentional and Depp is making an oddball character that seems individualised. The performance could have been a failure but like he did with another risky role in 'Pirates of the Caribbean', Depp makes it somehow work. It's a focused, controlled performance and he never overacts or exaggerates the role and finds a heart in the weird, eccentric character, which is translated to the audience. Gene Wilder's interpretation of the role in the original was good but a little heavy-handed at times and the character was more eccentric than he needed to be. Depp is a better fit to the role and does a very credible job with it. The rest of the cast are excellent too with Freddie Highmore as the young, puppy-eyed Charlie Bucket a standout. There is something about the kid that he can show vulnerability and a sincerity many actors could not. The four children and their parents are also excellent and it's a shame when they meet their end because they are interesting to follow. Conversely, David Kelly's Grandpa Joe is as annoying as the actor who played him in the original and Deep Roy's Oompa Loompa is a little too creepy. Why they decided to clone the role and get the actor to play every character is something that just didn't work. Helena Bonham Carter and Noah Taylor step in with small roles as the poor, unfortunate parents of Charlie who are struggling to make ends meet and are forced to eat cabbage soup every day.

'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' has been an enormous blockbuster but will it be a classic? Will it be as fondly remembered as the Gene Wilder version? Burton has made a worthy attempt to retell the story and gets great performances from his cast along with a terrific team putting the film together, but its not a classic and its existence was not really necessary. The 1971 original had numerous problems but it did the job and remains a childhood classic for all ages. This new version is slicker, well-packaged and more strongly directed as you would expect but while it has its heart in the right place, it's never going to live up to its predecessor. The original had value to it appealing to the kid in everyone. This version doesn't have the same affect and is like a light, campier 'Harry Potter'. Perhaps young children will feel the same way about this version in 20 years time?
out of 10
- Chris Cappola's Reviews

Moviemarshal.com home