| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kahlan Amnell
Queen of Spam
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Location: work...ahhhhh
Posts: 3424
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Wearing a top hat and red velvet coat, speaking in a light effeminate voice of extreme fussiness, he looks and acts like a 19th century vampire who is halfway through a sex change.
_________________
http://ctprofiles.net/799963 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DaKon
Ville Supporter
Joined: 19 Feb 2002
Posts: 2342
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:00 pm Post subject: Re: Wonka |
|
|
| Kahlan Amnell wrote: | | Krazy Karl wrote: | | totally a flaming homo!! |
 
that's not nice..... |
It is true but more like Michael Jackson
_________________
P4E @ 4.00 Ghz, LeadTech 6800GT 420mhz/1.16Ghz, 1 gb Corsair PC 4400, Creative X-fi, Raptor
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kahlan Amnell
Queen of Spam
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Location: work...ahhhhh
Posts: 3424
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I still say it is a lifestyle choice.... and couching it in those terms is kind of incendiary... eh. While I am sure people who have made that choice have heard that type of thing being said, I know some who still find it offensive that other .. how to phrase lol... strange people are being categorized to be like them.... I don't know how to explain.... bah. must sleep. hopefully this gave you the gist of where I was attempting to go... if not I will try again later 
_________________
http://ctprofiles.net/799963 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rANCOR hUNTER
Registered User
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Location: Monroe, MI Guild: VoV:TVR
Posts: 1040
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He's not playing Gene Wilder's roll. It's a whole new movie based off the original book where Willy Wonka was a whole lot more insane than Gene Wilder's character in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. And sorry to burst your bubbles but the Oompa Loompas aren't gonna be orange with green hair either.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
5th GHG E.G. Mine
Registered User
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Location: Transcending 1337.
Posts: 1426
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kahlan Amnell wrote: | | I still say it is a lifestyle choice.... and couching it in those terms is kind of incendiary... eh. While I am sure people who have made that choice have heard that type of thing being said, I know some who still find it offensive that other .. how to phrase lol... strange people are being categorized to be like them.... I don't know how to explain.... bah. must sleep. hopefully this gave you the gist of where I was attempting to go... if not I will try again later |
Translation to Krazy Karl language: Don't group the "flaming homos" with the "freaks." There seems to be a difference.
And now back to 5th's language. He's supposed to look freaky yet childish. As I've said, this IS directed by Tim Burton, even if it is based off of a children's book.
_________________
http://www.chronixradio.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ROOFCUTTER
Server Admin
Joined: 12 Aug 2001
Location: =USV=
Posts: 9271
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
He looks eccentric....and still shots can be rather harsh at times. Look more to historcial pictures and I think you will find attire and looks that resemble that.
_________________
Only in America......do they have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Violent Pacifist
Registered User
Joined: 29 Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 1776
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rANCOR hUNTER wrote: | | He's not playing Gene Wilder's roll. It's a whole new movie based off the original book where Willy Wonka was a whole lot more insane than Gene Wilder's character in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. And sorry to burst your bubbles but the Oompa Loompas aren't gonna be orange with green hair either. |
Psst.... he's no where NEAR the original character in the book.... the movie previews feature more things different than the book than the first movie did... to say it's based loosely off of the book would be a better description.
_________________
We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rebel_Rouser
Server Admin
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Location: Waldorf, MD Guild:=US-V=V$
Posts: 1917
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was actually pretty impressed with this movie. Johnny Depp did very well as Willie Wonka. Tim Burton's movies are normally good anyway (even though most are a little weird)
Who else saw it?
_________________
Longest Running Show in Broadway History 1/9/06 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bonez
Registered User
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Location: Washington
Posts: 109
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I saw it twice and may possibly see it once more. I enjoyed the movie a lot, and also enjoyed Johnny Depp and thought he did an excelent job. I haven't read the book ever (probably should) so i can't compare it to that. Even though the new one and original are quite different i still like both a lot and the small differences in them don't really bother me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chen Kenichi
Registered User
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Location: DFW
Posts: 1136
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| [HALO]Rebel_Rouser wrote: | I was actually pretty impressed with this movie. Johnny Depp did very well as Willie Wonka. Tim Burton's movies are normally good anyway (even though most are a little weird)
Who else saw it? |
I saw it.
At first I was very amused by the movie. I wasn't enthralled by the story or acting, but the movie definitely possesses a WTF element that plays to its benefit (like the faces melting). It's obvious that Tim Burton has great skill as a director with a unique style. However, I eventually found myself wishing for the movie to end.
Generally, the music was excellent. I'm very glad they assigned Danny Elfman to the task.
However, they completely dropped the ball with the oompa loompa songs. The oringal songs were short, sweet, catchy, and very memorable. Unfortunately in these "renovated" songs the words are very poorly articulated and almost inaudible alongside the blaring music. The oompa loompa music itself was nothing special and the the songs lasted too long. Utter garbage.
The acting was decent overall. I was disappointed with both of the Salt's though. The original actors completely own their faces off. I also grew tired of Wonka's social ineptitude and quirky, high-pitched voice by the end of the movie. Quite frankly, I think Depp's acting ability was squandered in this movie. Seriously, any weirdo who prefers the company of men could have played Wonka.
Now on to the storyline. The movie did make some significant ties with Dahl's book (such as the story of the oompa loompa), but the focus on Willy Wonka's own family was absolutely unnecessary. Wonka's inability to say "parents" and the flashbacks to his childhood became cumbersome quickly. Additionaly, making things infinitely worse, his dad was played by Count Dooku. The whole extension past where the original movie ends is simply dumb.
The story and dialogue also made references back to the original movie, but they seemed ill-placed and poorly done. For example, originally Willy Wonka tells Mike, "I'm a trifle deaf in this ear, speak a little louder next time." In this movie, Wonka says something like, "You're mumbling, I can't understand you." The original line is sardonic and biting, like Willy Wonka should be ;p. The new one is simply an awkward evasion.
Overall, I give this movie a D. It is saved from being a monumental failure by Danny Elfman, some of the sets (very well designed), and Tim Burton's pizzazz.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
[HALO]MasterChief
Registered User
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Location: Burninating all the people
Posts: 2292
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| [HALO]Rebel_Rouser wrote: | I was actually pretty impressed with this movie. Johnny Depp did very well as Willie Wonka. Tim Burton's movies are normally good anyway (even though most are a little weird)
Who else saw it? |
I SAW IT! 
but you know that already
overall i liked the movie. i havnt seen the original and i havnt read the book.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
v.o.c
Registered User
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: England (UK) Guild: TVR Chapter:)[sI](
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i prefered the original, as i think it is more of a childs story, although in its own right this remake is an excellent film if some what disappointing at times. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rANCOR hUNTER
Registered User
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Location: Monroe, MI Guild: VoV:TVR
Posts: 1040
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2005 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I saw it and loved it. You can't compare this to the original at all. They're 2 completely different movies. If it was a remake it would have been called Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Violent Pacifist
Registered User
Joined: 29 Dec 2001
Location: Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 1776
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2005 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rANCOR hUNTER wrote: | | I saw it and loved it. You can't compare this to the original at all. They're 2 completely different movies. If it was a remake it would have been called Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. |
Err... they're both based of the same book, so it's fairly easy to compare them to each other. The fact that they're two very different movies is kind of disturbing.
Just because Mr. Tim decided to adopt the proper title from the book (Charlie and the chocolate factory) while the original didn't does not mean that there's suddenly an invisible wall preventing comparison between the two.
_________________
We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Two-Bit
Registered User
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Location: Urth!
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
EDIT: Greatly, greatly revised
I just don't know about this one. I loved the original. The thing is, the original is like the book, it's a morality play. While the remake follows the book more closely in it's events, it's so demented. All of the kids in the original were spoiled by their parents, and their kids wouldn't listen, and were "punished".
Basically the original says "be good," the remake says "woohoo! Chocolate!"
Last edited by Two-Bit on Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
