I loved both of the movies. To me they were almost two seperate movies. I do have to say that I missed the singing that the original had. The squirells were great, but Depp looked and sounded a little too much like Michael Jackson for my taste. I am still torn as to which one I like better.

I second everything Jason said.

I couldn't stop watching Depp. Wow. Amazing character work.

Loved the choreography on the musical numbers. What a hoot!

I think the second one edges out the first one slightly.

I just got a copy of the new movie (shhhh, don't tell anyone LOL), so I'm gonna watch it tonight and see which one I like better.

My wife and I finally saw the remake yesterday. I have to say that we were tremendously disappointed. Last year, when I first heard of the plans to remake it, I was appalled. When I then heard that Tim Burton was going to direct and Johnny Depp star, I thought--"well, maybe they can pull it off". No such luck.

First, it had none of the sparkling wit of the original. Consider Depp's frequent response to kids who are annoying him: "you're weird!". Compare that to Gene Wilder's response when being accused of spouting nonsense: "a little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men."

Next, it had none of the joyous scenes of the original. Remember your surprise and pleasure the first time you saw that moment when the frail and mysterous Mr. Wonka hobbled out of the factory to greet the ticket holders, then fell forward into a flip and landed on his feet, all smiles? Remember the sense of wonder and pleasure when the guests first entered the entirely edible landscape? Remember the happy excitement of zero-G gymnastics after the fizzy lifting drinks? There was none of that sort of joy in this film. I know Burton specializes in dark, but this film desperately needed at least a few moments of innocent happiness. I didn't see any. There was no room for it, with all of the self-conscious kitsch and heavy-handed ironizing. Irony is the opiate of the masses, and Hollywood its pharmacy.

Next, Depp was simply awful. I know he's a good actor, but here he was witless, static and absolutely lacking in any of Gene Wilder's child-like wonder and energy. Wilder acted like a world-weary middle-aged man who still has a child inside him. Depp acted exactly like a loopy 15 year-old, overmedicated on Ritalin. I groaned when he delivered his lame "Papa?" line, or said "m'kay?"; just two of many such groaners.

Also, Danny Elfman proved that--most of the time--he's a monumentally inept lyricist. Sure, a couple of the old songs he did as Oingo Boingo were clever, but his Oompa Loompa songs' lyrics were as inane as anything he did for Nightmare Before Christmas, and that's saying something. I'm actually glad that the lyrics were somewhat unintelligible, as they were so weak. Compare those songs to the great, memorable ones from the original--not just the Oompa Loompa songs (which were brief and very clever), but such truly great movie songs as "Pure Imagination" and "The Candyman". Leslie Bricusse and Anthony Newley knew how to write songs for movies; Elfman simply doesn't. At least the Oompa Loompa(s) didn't rap, as I was afraid they were going to.

Finally, there was no sense of tension or climax in the film. Agustus falling in the river? Boring and perfunctory. The out-of-control boat ride? Everyone looked so jaded, we couldn't care less. Veruca being slowly, tediously dragged towards the garbage chute by squirrels? Not one gram of tension. (And then her father slowly walking over to it? Deathly dull.) No fizzy lifting drink tension, no Slugworth conspiracy tension, no tension of Wonka acting as if Charlie has forfeited the grand prize--really, no tension at all. Just flashy digital effects, and Johnny Depp's vapid and ditzy performance. The pacing was clumsy and slow; the editor(s) must've been asleep at the console much of the time. A totally anticlimactic climax.

And what was the sense in Charlie finding the $10 bill, and immediately after hearing that the final ticket has been found, going to the candy store and buying a bar? That made no sense at all. In the original, he had learned that it was a *hoax* before that, establishing a pretext for him trying to win it one last time. There's just no sense in a desperately poor boy who is willing to give up his golden ticket to support his family doing something so wasteful, selfish and illogical.

There were a very few things I liked about the remake. The Bucket house was more interesting this time. Young Willie's dental headgear was appropriately Burtonian, as were some of the other set pieces. It's always good to see Christopher Lee (one of the great icons of our time) get work, and I love Missy Pyle. The *idea* of the nut-sorting squirrels was good, and the glass elevator was pretty slick. And Freddie Highmore was almost as good a Charlie as Peter Ostrum. Almost.

Otherwise, I just can't think of much good to say about the film. No--I'll go further: I really, really hated this film. Not just because it was a totally unnecessary remake of a classic film, in an industry so devoid of originality that all it can do is rape the icons of our childhood. Not just because Tim Burton wasted millions on making a vastly inferior product when he could've put it into a much more original project. And not just because the remake will pander to a generation who thinks that the it is the "real" (or only) version of the film. I really hate this film because it's polluted my mind with false images.

As soon as we got back from the theater, we put on the DVD of the original and watched it, to try to exorcize the remake from our memories. I hope it worked. Until I'm certain it did, I'm going to be humming "Pure Imagination".

QFT