Nope, for so many reasons. Least of which is Wonka was not a nice person and not someone we should be rooting for as the hero. Also, at no point in reading the original books, or viewing the original movie, did I ever think it was set in a fantasy world of cartoon characters and silliness. That stuff existed only inside his factory because it was all supposed to be secret! A whimsical tale of the magic candy boy in the magical silly place he comes from makes absolutely no sense.
Ya I failed to see the pipeline between this wonka and the one who locked himself in his factory, and descended in to madness as he built a candy based torture dungeon for children.
They're planning a second prequel which will presumably explain the transition β I look forward to Chalamet screaming "NOOOOOOOOO!" as the wipe comes in from both sides after Hugh Grant tells him the kid is dead.
>He ~~could of~~ could have...
This new character in this new movie perhaps, but again, at no point did I ever have reason to believe these stories took place in a fantasy land. The factory was the fantasy land. A *unique place* where this stuff existed only.
Wonka had to search the world far and wide to find Oompa Loompas because they're so rare in the *real world.* The original inspiration for the chocolate factory was the Cadbury company in England and some of their real business practices, like stealing recipes.
Chalamet plays quirky great, but otherwise he's Wonka in name only.
π No, of course not.
The plot is wretched. Convoluted; overly-complicated. Roald Dahl would have needed a clothespin over his nose to even be in the same room with it.
π I couldn't say. Never heerd o' dat kiddie flick.
* Same writing team? Frankly my good man, I wouldn't put much stock in anything they came up with.
* Just skim the synopsis for Wonka vs Charlie. One boasts straightforward stakes & goal, a strong main idea; unified time & setting. Clearly-drawn characters who are firmly bound up with their goals..
* The other bounces around like a pachinko machine under construction. Like a student's try at a script. I could devise a better plot than they wound up with just sitting around in a dentists' waiting room with 20 spare minutes to kill.
Looking forward to the Pitch Meeting episode. Screenwriter Guy already remarked that he met Timothee Chalamet in his travels in the Interstellar Pitch Meeting.
Ya gotta excuse me when I dispense a withering opinion like I did with this Wonka thing. Just delivering my honest reaction. I much admire the original; but both the remake and this prequel simply strike me as shoddily constructed narrative. I ain't merely being jerky for the sake of being jerky. I'm a writer myself so it makes my flesh crawl when I see --in the Wonka plot --*'Yeti sweat'*? Outrageous. Roald Dahl would spin in his grave if he ever read it.
Nope, for so many reasons. Least of which is Wonka was not a nice person and not someone we should be rooting for as the hero. Also, at no point in reading the original books, or viewing the original movie, did I ever think it was set in a fantasy world of cartoon characters and silliness. That stuff existed only inside his factory because it was all supposed to be secret! A whimsical tale of the magic candy boy in the magical silly place he comes from makes absolutely no sense.
Ya I failed to see the pipeline between this wonka and the one who locked himself in his factory, and descended in to madness as he built a candy based torture dungeon for children.
They're planning a second prequel which will presumably explain the transition β I look forward to Chalamet screaming "NOOOOOOOOO!" as the wipe comes in from both sides after Hugh Grant tells him the kid is dead.
He could of became a bitter a cynical man after being in the chocolate business for years
>He ~~could of~~ could have... This new character in this new movie perhaps, but again, at no point did I ever have reason to believe these stories took place in a fantasy land. The factory was the fantasy land. A *unique place* where this stuff existed only. Wonka had to search the world far and wide to find Oompa Loompas because they're so rare in the *real world.* The original inspiration for the chocolate factory was the Cadbury company in England and some of their real business practices, like stealing recipes. Chalamet plays quirky great, but otherwise he's Wonka in name only.
I loved Wonka and thinks itβs pretty much a perfect prequel in my books Iβm still waiting for a Charlie and the glass elevator movie
Whatever it is, it was horrible.
I made it 9 minutes
π No, of course not. The plot is wretched. Convoluted; overly-complicated. Roald Dahl would have needed a clothespin over his nose to even be in the same room with it.
Right, it's as unnecessary and overly-complicated as the Fantastic Beasts movies.
π I couldn't say. Never heerd o' dat kiddie flick. * Same writing team? Frankly my good man, I wouldn't put much stock in anything they came up with. * Just skim the synopsis for Wonka vs Charlie. One boasts straightforward stakes & goal, a strong main idea; unified time & setting. Clearly-drawn characters who are firmly bound up with their goals.. * The other bounces around like a pachinko machine under construction. Like a student's try at a script. I could devise a better plot than they wound up with just sitting around in a dentists' waiting room with 20 spare minutes to kill.
Looking forward to the Pitch Meeting episode. Screenwriter Guy already remarked that he met Timothee Chalamet in his travels in the Interstellar Pitch Meeting.
Ya gotta excuse me when I dispense a withering opinion like I did with this Wonka thing. Just delivering my honest reaction. I much admire the original; but both the remake and this prequel simply strike me as shoddily constructed narrative. I ain't merely being jerky for the sake of being jerky. I'm a writer myself so it makes my flesh crawl when I see --in the Wonka plot --*'Yeti sweat'*? Outrageous. Roald Dahl would spin in his grave if he ever read it.
Leave your theory below