Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

[MZ3Boy84]

Well, I just got done watching this entertaining yet strangely rediculous movie and I noticed something. In the cast and credits, all of the actors are listed except for one... the kid who play Willy Wonka as a child (the kid with braces). The kid looks familiar but I can't find a name or any info.

Why would they leave anyone out and who is he?

[Commador Pike]

Who Cares Movie SUCKED>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[MZ3Boy84]

I care lol. My friend thinks its the kid who played Charlie Bucket but with makeup. I disagree.

[Commador Pike]

Original Movie better, funner movie, New movie is more true to the book I guess, Still sucked Though LOL.

[Oli]

http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0003684/
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) Played by Johnny Depp / Blair Dunlop (as Little Willy Wonka)

IMDB

[Commador Pike]

Seen the Kid before, if I could remember,been in a few thing don't know the name of him.

[MZ3Boy84]

Thanks Oli.

Yeah the movie could have been A LOT better. I think Johnny Depp, although a great actor, played a role which really did not fit his range.

[Commador Pike]

Depp does his best in everything he does, even if the Movie and Role SUCK, IE: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Plays alot parts for litlle or no money if he believes in the Movie and the Part

[Oli]

I agree: he was sadly under-used in that movie.
(But he more than made up for it Pirates of the Caribbean!)

[Commador Pike]

Should have been a goofball role for: Jim Carrey or Will Ferrell

[MZ3Boy84]

I agree: he was sadly under-used in that movie.
(But he more than made up for it Pirates of the Caribbean!)

I agree. You can't really blame Depp for the role he played... blame the writers and director instead.

[MZ3Boy84]

Should have been a goofball role for: Jim Carrey or Will Ferrell

Will Ferrell is just annoying. I have yet to laugh even once to any of his comedy.

[Commador Pike]

Pirates Great role for him but,

Best Acting : Ed Wood

[shorty_37]

Pirates Great role for him but,

Best Acting : Ed Wood

Yeah didn't he look cute in the angora sweaters...:D

But my favorite role for him to date is in Fear and Loathing He played Hunters S Thompson brilliantly!

[lucifers angel]

Johnny depp, should not have played will wonka, he totally spolit it, (and the movie sucked ass) not has good as the original

[codanblad]

Will Ferrell is just annoying. I have yet to laugh even once to any of his comedy.

have you seen old school or zoolander?

[codanblad]

Johnny depp, should not have played will wonka, he totally spolit it, (and the movie sucked ass) not has good as the original

i thought he did an ok job, wonka's meant to be bizarre. he couldn't have had a taller order either, gene wylder's wonka was masterful.

jim carey could have been great, i thought he was excellent in lemony snicket, as well as near everything else i've seen him in. will ferrell should never star in a movie, his hilarity has a negative correlation with his screen time. old school and zoolander are his best movies, though i do like anchorman.

[grimace]

Johnny depp, should not have played will wonka, he totally spolit it, (and the movie sucked ass) not has good as the original

wonka should be a little uglier and a little chubby. i think chris farley would have been good.

[codanblad]

wonka should be a little uglier and a little chubby. i think chris farley would have been good.

i disagree, he should be bizarre looking bizarrely behaved, and definitely capable enough to look after his weight. if you're an overweight person who owns the world's greatest candy store, you're gonna hit morbid obesity so fast you'll cause a black hole.

[MZ3Boy84]

have you seen old school or zoolander?

Yes, both were annoying.

[shorty_37]

wonka should be a little uglier and a little chubby. i think chris farley would have been good.

Nooooooo Way Depp did a good job.

Leave Chris Farley at his best Motivational Speaker from SNL those have me in tears.

[codanblad]

Yes, both were annoying.

have you considered a sense of humour being a requirement for finding people funny? i'm messing with you, but damn man, ur missing out. i would liken your situation to a man who dislikes boobs.

[Tiassa]

Should have been a goofball role for: Jim Carrey or Will Ferrell

And you think the movie sucked as it was?

The thing about Depp is that, with Burton at the helm, he brought out the dark side of Willy Wonka. If you watch the original 1971 film, with Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, there are only a couple clues about what's wrong with him. One is his casual, almost sociopathic regard for disaster. Sure, nobody actually died, but the prospect didn't seem to bother him. Nor did the necessary suffering involved with helping the victims of various disasters. And in a scene in his office near the end of his movie, everything is partial. A single half of everything.

Burton and his writers exploited the evil-dentist theme to explain Wonka's dark side, which is a bit of a trope, but I can't recall if it was ever mentioned in either of the books by Roald Dahl. It may even have been a tribute to Dahl himself, who despite writing some incredible stories for young readers, was thoroughly misanthropic.

Depp could carry the darkness for Burton, without which the film would have been, at best, a simple rehash of the Mel Stuart film. With Carrey or Ferrell? I shudder to think. I've never thought Carrey particularly funny, but even some of his early fans from the In Living Color days have turned on him since Liar Liar, a film for which he got something like $40 million, but completely sucked. And those aren't quick to forgive him for the disaster otherwise known as The Truman Show. The bright spot of Carrey's career was the Lemony Snicket film, which is nearly psychotic from start to finish. Carrey actually fits well into that scheme. And Will Ferrell is only funny because he overplays everything, goes—to borrow a phrase—"full retard". I was excited, for instance, to hear that someone had undertaken Land of the Lost, but that enthusiasm deflated quickly when I found out it was Ferrell. There was a bright ray of hope when it was rumored that Ben Stiller would play Chaka, but that didn't happen. Unfortunately, nothing about the trailers I've seen have suggested the film will be any different.

I mean, how do you overplay the role of hired goon in a Mike Myers film? And yet he did.

Giving Wonka a straight goofball portrayal would have defeated the purpose of (A) making the new film at all, and (B) having Burton direct it. And as one who grew up and adored Gene Wilder's portrayal of Willy Wonka, I must admit that I was impressed by the Burton effort. Depp was the only actor who could have pulled it off.

[Challenger78]

I loved the dark, almost film noirish edge to this film, it was well done with wonka.

[superstring01]

Depp was the only actor who could have pulled it off.

To say the least. And I'm not even a Depp fan (I think that I've liked only a handful of his movies: Edward Scizzorhands, Blow, A Nightmare On Elm Street & Charlie And The Chocolate Factory)

And as you say--more or less--Burton was the only director who could pull off a respectable remake, and as those things go, this was one of the better ones of the last 20 or so years.

~String

PS: I am a bit stoked about Depp's roll as the Mad Hatter in Alice In Wonerland, coming out soon. I hope it's as dark as his other works.

[Challenger78]

PS: I am a bit stoked about Depp's roll as the Mad Hatter in Alice In Wonerland, coming out soon. I hope it's as dark as his other works.

Oh This is going to be Fun!.

[superstring01]

Oh This is going to be Fun!.

Yeah. And the best part is, it's a Tim Burton production too!

~String

[MZ3Boy84]

have you considered a sense of humour being a requirement for finding people funny? i'm messing with you, but damn man, ur missing out. i would liken your situation to a man who dislikes boobs.

Well, ya hit the nail on the head. I AM a man that dislikes boobs lol. :D

[takandjive]

Well, ya hit the nail on the head. I AM a man that dislikes boobs lol. :D

That's okay. I like them enough for the both of us.

You'd be SO dreamy if we were both fundamentalist Christians. *Doe-eyed.*

[MZ3Boy84]

That's okay. I like them enough for the both of us.

You'd be SO dreamy if we were both fundamentalist Christians. *Doe-eyed.*

lol!!!

[takandjive]

Well, seriously. You like men. I like sex with men who are bad boys and frivolous sex with tittering 20-something girls with little peach and plum breasts. We could just never have sex and I could don those really long skirts because they're "modest." You could wear plaid. We'd change when we went out shamefully cruising. I think this is marriage the way the Good Lord intended, and I know a LOT about these things, MZ.

In all seriousness, I found Burton's version of the movie outstanding. A lot of it was a lot more true to Dahl's darkness. I think people were disturbed that Depp's portrayal was so good. I think the character spoke to a very true part of him, much as it did to Wilder. I also think that it might have been okay to have Ashton Kutcher in this role, seeing he didn't totally ruin the American version of "The Butterfly Effect."

[superstring01]

Wha...? What did I miss and why didn't I get the memo!!!

~String

[takandjive]

Oh, some crazy woman gave me an abortion magazine yesterday and I've been all hopped up on fundamentalism since.

And I really like Tim Burton.

[Repo Man]

Will Ferrell is just annoying. I have yet to laugh even once to any of his comedy.

I've always enjoyed his Jeopardy skits on SNL, but mostly because of Darell Hammond's Sean Connery. His "The Landlord" (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/74/the-landlord-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay) skit is very funny, but he's playing the straight man for the little girl. I turned off Talladega Nights about halfway through. Don't think I've seen any of his other films.

[superstring01]

I've always enjoyed his Jeopardy skits on SNL, but mostly because of Darell Hammond's Sean Connery. His "The Landlord" (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/74/the-landlord-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay) skit is very funny, but he's playing the straight man for the little girl. I turned off Talladega Nights about halfway through. Don't think I've seen any of his other films.

Ferrell's ONLY funny stuff was on SNL.

Like MZ3, I find nothing that he's done on the big screen even remotely funny.

~String

[superstring01]

Oh, some crazy woman gave me an abortion magazine yesterday and I've been all hopped up on fundamentalism since.

And I really like Tim Burton.

Wow. Well, that must be some magazine!

~String

[EmmZ]

And you think the movie sucked as it was?

The thing about Depp is that, with Burton at the helm, he brought out the dark side of Willy Wonka. If you watch the original 1971 film, with Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, there are only a couple clues about what's wrong with him. One is his casual, almost sociopathic regard for disaster. Sure, nobody actually died, but the prospect didn't seem to bother him. Nor did the necessary suffering involved with helping the victims of various disasters. And in a scene in his office near the end of his movie, everything is partial. A single half of everything.

Burton and his writers exploited the evil-dentist theme to explain Wonka's dark side, which is a bit of a trope, but I can't recall if it was ever mentioned in either of the books by Roald Dahl. It may even have been a tribute to Dahl himself, who despite writing some incredible stories for young readers, was thoroughly misanthropic.

Depp could carry the darkness for Burton, without which the film would have been, at best, a simple rehash of the Mel Stuart film. With Carrey or Ferrell? I shudder to think. I've never thought Carrey particularly funny, but even some of his early fans from the In Living Color days have turned on him since Liar Liar, a film for which he got something like $40 million, but completely sucked. And those aren't quick to forgive him for the disaster otherwise known as The Truman Show. The bright spot of Carrey's career was the Lemony Snicket film, which is nearly psychotic from start to finish. Carrey actually fits well into that scheme. And Will Ferrell is only funny because he overplays everything, goes—to borrow a phrase—"full retard". I was excited, for instance, to hear that someone had undertaken Land of the Lost, but that enthusiasm deflated quickly when I found out it was Ferrell. There was a bright ray of hope when it was rumored that Ben Stiller would play Chaka, but that didn't happen. Unfortunately, nothing about the trailers I've seen have suggested the film will be any different.

I mean, how do you overplay the role of hired goon in a Mike Myers film? And yet he did.

Giving Wonka a straight goofball portrayal would have defeated the purpose of (A) making the new film at all, and (B) having Burton direct it. And as one who grew up and adored Gene Wilder's portrayal of Willy Wonka, I must admit that I was impressed by the Burton effort. Depp was the only actor who could have pulled it off.

In some ways I thought Depp's portrayal was a commentary to Wilder's unspoken psychopathy. A much more direct look into Wilder's flippant nonchalance. I am not so sure Depp is the only man for the job. I think different actors could bring something new to the role. John Tuturro, for example, may have brought a less stable, slightly manic aspect. Tommy Lee Jones may have brought a dead pan quality only he can do. Or for that matter another director may have been interesting. Imagine Del Toro's [Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth] take on it.

[superstring01]

Imagine Del Toro's [Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth] take on it.

Okay. Del Toro might have done well by it. And even been a pretty good director. BUT NOBODY ELSE!

~String

[takandjive]

Wow. Well, that must be some magazine!

~String

She did say it would lead me to God.

So that means you have to do everything I say.

See, I even make the tremendous leaps of logic! YAY!

What about Tarantino directing it?

[EmmZ]

Okay. Del Toro might have done well by it. And even been a pretty good director. BUT NOBODY ELSE!

~String

Hayao Miyazaki [Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle] could also bring a very fantastical aspect to a very fantastical story.

[Tiassa]

I am not so sure Depp is the only man for the job. I think different actors could bring something new to the role. John Tuturro, for example, may have brought a less stable, slightly manic aspect. Tommy Lee Jones may have brought a dead pan quality only he can do. Or for that matter another director may have been interesting. Imagine Del Toro's [Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth] take on it

In truth, none of those actors ring my bell in this context. I will pause for a moment on Tommy Lee Jones, though, and wonder, "Why not invoke John Malkovich?"

Which leads me to another thought: I admit that I would really like to see Alan Rickman in costume, reciting the tunnel poem (http://www.garnersclassics.com/qwonka.htm):

There's no earthly way of knowing
Which direction we are going.
There's no knowing where we're rowing,
Or which way the river's flowing.
Is it raining?
Is it snowing?
Is a hurricane a-blowing?

Not a speck of light is showing,
So the danger must be growing.
Are the fires of hell a-glowing?
Is the grisly reaper mowing?
Yes! The danger must be growing
For the rowers keep on rowing.
And they're certainly not showing
Any signs that they are slowing!

I would also note that part of the difference between Wilder's pretense of nonchalance and Depp's intensity may have to do with a rewrite of the 1971 script. Thomas M. Broadhead (http://home.att.net/~tom.brodhead/wonka.htm) notes that Roald Dahl wrote the original screenplay, but the studio didn't like it. David Seltzer, who would go on to write screenplays for The Omen, Lucas, and Punchline among others (and is currently developing J.J. Abrams' untitled earthquake flick), tweaked the characterization of Willy Wonka compared to the novel and Dahl's screenplay.

Wonka's darkness seems to originate here, and while it is not necessarily part of Dahl's characterization, it certainly became a prominent part of Willy Wonka lore.

But Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is ultimately a children's story. And kids in 1971 could not have endured a genuinely scary Wonka. By 2005, though, kids were much more accustomed to the idea of psychopaths. Indeed, it sometimes seems as if they are expected.

• • •


I am a bit stoked about Depp's roll as the Mad Hatter in Alice In Wonerland, coming out soon. I hope it's as dark as his other works.

Maybe a bit more American McGhee than Disney? Sounds good to me.
____________________

Notes:

"Quotes from Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory". Garner's Movie Classics. GarnersClassics.com. Accessed June 7, 2009. http://www.garnersclassics.com/qwonka.htm

Broadhead, Thomas M. "Quotations and Literary Allusions spoken by Willy Wonka in the 1971 film, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". July 3, 2005. Home.ATT.net. Accessed June 7, 2009. http://home.att.net/~tom.brodhead/wonka.htm

[Orleander]

Should have been a goofball role for: Jim Carrey or Will Ferrell

no, they over act. Depp played it restrained and quirky. He didn't ham it up.

[superstring01]

Maybe a bit more American McGhee than Disney? Sounds good to me.

Never played the game. In fact, it took a Wiki search to figure out what you were talking about. I'm video game illiterate. The last video game I played was the original Final Fantasy for Nintendo. I poked around in Super Mario Brothers back in the lat 80's, early 90's. Beat The Legend of Zelda a few times (I know where every expansion heart is located, even to this day). But that's about it. I just couldn't get in to them.

~String

[takandjive]

But Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is ultimately a children's story. And kids in 1971 could not have endured a genuinely scary Wonka. By 2005, though, kids were much more accustomed to the idea of psychopaths. Indeed, it sometimes seems as if they are expected.

Oh, mister, I disagree. Dahl's pretty brutal in his books and the adults are usually psychotic.

[Tiassa]

Oh, mister, I disagree. Dahl's pretty brutal in his books and the adults are usually psychotic

Well, James and the Giant Peach? Yeah, I'll agree. But no, especially after the Oompa-Loompa revisions, Wonka was, in the book, happy and socially stunted in a charming way that kids liked. And even in Giant Peach, there is a comedic aspect to the old spinsters. Cinematically, they're comedy tools if you translate straight from page to screen. A performance like Depp's would have scared the holy living fuck out of the most part of my peers. Generation X has broad boundaries, but even at the latest of those boundaries, we were still wrapped in a certain kind of innocence that many of us have come to resent. You've heard the cliché, "Mom and apple pie"? Yeah, that was our world. We're the front end of the warm-fuzzy, feelgood psychology where there's not supposed to be any losers. Generation Y, on the other hand, has been raised on a steady diet of perversion and neurosis that I would actually approve of were it not so commercialized and therefore hollow. Gen X is pretty sensitive about the idea of being sheltered. We learned to fling it about as an insult. Go back and watch Eartha Kitt as Catwoman, or Cesar Romero as Joker in Batman. Or Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor. That's as dark as villains got in our day. If you've seen the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica, compare the complexity of James Callis with the absolutely flaming neurosis of John Colicos in the original series. And pay attention to the Biblical correlations, and Commander Adama's (Lorne Greene) pious approach to everything. And then remember that the show was originally to be called Adam's Ark.

Seriously, though ... the young audience in 1971 would be incomprehensible to young audiences now.

I cannot stress the difference strongly enough.

[EmmZ]

Think of the things that scared us as kids and compare it to what frightens the children of today. The Moomins (all of 'em, they're all evil), The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, General Woundwort in Watership Down. These are the characters I found truly terrifying as a kid. Would these still hold up today as truly terrifying?

[codanblad]

But Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is ultimately a children's story. And kids in 1971 could not have endured a genuinely scary Wonka. By 2005, though, kids were much more accustomed to the idea of psychopaths. Indeed, it sometimes seems as if they are expected.

i'd vote the old chocolate factory movie scarier, and i didn't think depp's wonka was scary in any scenes, just odd. wylder's river scene, his indifference to the plight and presumably death of the children, his rage at charlie at the end all had me pretty worried.

i think scaring the shit out of kids is part of a lot of successful kids movies, and i do agree that with recent years its become more intense. harry potter and lemony snicket are two examples of movies i thought a lot scarier than movies of the 90s i was raised on. pan's labyrinth is probably the best example (just kidding)

[superstring01]

But no, especially after the Oompa-Loompa revisions, Wonka was, in the book, happy and socially stunted in a charming way that kids liked.

Weren't they like black slaves or something? [guess I could just wiki it and see]

~String

[takandjive]

They were black pygmies from Loompaland.