Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Charlie's Chocolates

This weekend some cousins of mine took care of the beautiful Jella for a couple of hours so that JellaMama and I could go on a date! Naturally, we went to the dollar theater where we took in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. It has received so many reviews covering the entire spectrum, so let me put all of those to rest. We all know that my movie reviews are the most reliable anyway.

It was fabulous. Notice I used the word fabulous. Normally, I don't like that word, and I especially don't like it when men use it. I won't explain why. Hopefully I don't need to. Just know that that word is... strange. But it does describe the Charlie movie perfectly. Whether you like the old one or not, which I did, I urge you to see this version. I laughed so hard that I almost lost control of my bowels (much like Daltongirl) at times. It was visually stunning--so stunning that if the rest of the movie sucked I would recommend it just for the visuals. The colors made it beautiful, and the music that the oompa loompas (who are also hilarious) sing was very imaginative.

Many didn't like it because of Johnny Depp's character. I loved the character, although I can see why folks would take issue with him. He was extremely weird, and many of his mannerisms could be seen as annoying. I, however, didn't find them as such. I thought he was hilarious as well. Plus, this version contained something that the old version completely missed--a message. The family (not any particular family--I'm using The Family in that generic way that the Church does) was the central theme in the movie, and in the end, it's all that matters. I loved this film, as did my wife. May you love it too!

P.S. Because of strong demands and potential death threats, there are many new pictures of Jella in her digital photo album. Enjoy. They are the last 26 or so in her album.


daltongirl said...

I too loved the movie, and agree with you, especially on the issue of the visuals.

The only thing I didn't like was the fact that Hollywood always has to throw in some huge dilemna, which is what they assume makes people go to movies and enjoy them. The original book was so delightful, and they could have done everything they did and still had a "fabulous" hit without making up the psycho story around Edward Scissorhands and Saruman.

I believe we are all intelligent enough to get the Family First message by simply watching the story as Dahl originally told it.

That said, I love Gene Wilder, think he was wonderful in the role, but the old movie couldn't hold a candle to this one--and the plot device of the candy stealing in the 70s version was way too much--so I prefer this one even with my single complaint.

Savvymom said...

See, I hate Gene Wilder, so I thought this one was just all around wonderful. It would've been great if everything about the movie was bad for that reason. NO GENE WILDER. YAY

Cicada said...

Johnny Depp is so good, and I think that he did an excellent job in this movie. I didn't mind Edward Scissorhands and Sauruman, but that may come from the fact that I never saw the original (gasp!). So I had nothing to compare it to---I just thought that was the story.

Limon said...

I have to agree with daltongirl on this one. That scene where Edward shows up to a house in the middle of nowhere, and Saruman fails to recognize him, though he had planty of pictures around, is just too out there. Thumbs down on that one. Johnny Depp in this movie? Awkward. So awkward I couldn't stop laughing.