- cross-posted to:
- movies@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
Why are so many reboots just the name of the character like it’s some high art documentary
Wonka
Logan
Joker
Picard
Air
Lightyear
Another entry in “films no one, absolutely no one, asked for”. Warner Bros just keeps tripping over itself. And up against the Chicken Run sequel for the same weekend.
* Ears perk up *
A Chicken Run sequel, you say? Well, I know what I’m doing this December!
THE CHICKENS ARE ORGANIZING MRS. TWEEDY
Chicken Run is a Netflix film though.
Streaming releases are still competition. Pay out the wazoo on tickets/drinks/snacks to go to the theater VS a home premier as part of an ongoing subscription, bits from your own pantry, and readily paused for bathroom breaks or otherwise. Loads of people avoid the theater since the movie will show up on X service in a few weeks. Wild times.
Am I right in remembering this Wonka is with Timothy Chalemet?
You’re absolutely correct. This version of Wonka is played by Timothy Chalemet.
For real, who seriously had the thought “you know what, we need another adaptation of that one book from decades ago. We could try adapting some of that guy’s other work, but why bother? I know we tried the goofy, fun spin and the dark, gritty spin, but I’m sure we missed an angle on that one kid’s book.”
More importantly how did the guy who had that thought not get kicked out of the pitch meeting immediately?
I don’t disagree but
We could try adapting some of that guy’s other work, but why bother?
In recent memory Matilda, The Witches , and The BFG have all had unnecessary reboots. I’ll bet a James and the Giant Peach is next.
If anything, it’s time to leave his material alone now. there are enough new children’s books and stories written all the time, surely they deserve a shot?
not get kicked out of the pitch meeting immediately?
Rehashing old successful movies is tight.
Wow wow wow.
So you’ve got a new movie for me?
Yes sir, I do. But I thought this time we’d do an old movie instead of a new movie because old movies usually make more money.
Oh, remaking old movies for money is tight. It’s also literally the only thing we do here.
That’s right. So I think we should really go back this time and pull out something the audience wants to see. Something with tons of nostalgia for adults, but also something the younger audience will care a lot about.
I don’t think we have the money to remake Star Wars again so soon.
Nah, I thought we’d just do another Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
What?
This reads like something screenrant pitch meeting would do, I can even hear that dude’s voice!
Wait, what book is this an adaptation of? This isn’t from either Charlie and the Chocolate Factory or The Great Glass Elevator as far as I’m aware.
Is there a Charlie Cinematic Universe now? lol
Can’t wait for phase 3
Nah
Well I’m usually a cold hearted cynic, but I’m glad to see more musicals in theatre. RRR really showed the appetite for competent dancing in film, and I’ll die happy if I live to see anyone half as talented as Gene Kelly.
Step one, more musicals
Step two, better musicals
Step three ???
Step four CULTURAL PROFIT
Jesus can we ever get anything new? Charlie and the Chocolate Factory already got a fucking reboot two decades ago. We don’t need a third one
This is a prequel so it’s a new side of the story. My bigger problem with this is that it just looks really bad. The performance falls really flat and feels desperate to invoke whimsy, but it’s failing badly at it.
I’m hoping for a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie universe, purely for the inevitable, gritty spin-off, OOMPA
“Call me Oompa Loompa one more time, motherfucker, I DARE YOU…”
I think if they were to make a Oompa-Loompa spinoff it’d end up being like the Minions, yet even more annoying somehow
No it would probably get dark like everything legally has to be now
Good lord has it been that long?
Almost. It was 2005. And it was a good movie too, imo. Doesn’t need fixing like the original did.
Woah Woah Woah. The original was a masterpiece. When you skip the cheer up charlie song.
I found charlie and the chocolate factory OK.
this looks pretty bad. hopefully i’m proven wrong.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/otNh9bTjXWg
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Why is this guy being cast in everything? Aren’t there any other actors?
They need to replace Johnny Depp… Coming soon! Edward Scissorhands: The Musical!
At least it isn’t Depp!
The Depp one was decent, he’s pretty good at playing bizarre character actors. Tim looks like he’s over his head in this one…
I actually agree, the film itself wasn’t bad, it’s just Depp that’s unbearable…
I think the only thing I’ve seen Chalemet in was Little Women, and he was quite off putting in that, so as far as I’m concerned he’s a perfect fit lol
Any interest that I have in this is entirely due to Paul King and his work on the Paddington films. It could be good as a result.
Meanwhile, of course, The Great Glass Elevator is sitting resentfully in the lobby, tapping it toe.
Uh. Timothee looks…kinda terrible in this?
It feels like he’s desperately trying to be whimsical but is awkward and unnatural at it so his performance feels super fake. If you’re going to make a Wonka movie then Wonka’s performance matters more than anything else.
YES! The “look at how eccentric and whimsical I am!” mannerism is rubbing me off the wrong way.
For the studio it’s good enough for young folks who have never experienced anything of quality or substance.
Same thought, reaaaaally bad casting here. Not the right energy at all.
What got me was the accent he is using. It seems to keep switching all depending on the dialogue he is giving, which I found kind of distracting but maybe it’ll be better in the actual film? Who knows, I do think he is a talented actor and I really loved the first two Paddington movies so maybe this will turn out.
Agreed re: accent.
I think he’s talented too, but limited. He’s got a bit of dead eyes here and I’m not hopeful for his performance.
Paul King is the reason why I’m even remotely curious about this movie!
Gene wilder was a bit dead eyed as Wonka.
Intentionally, though lol.
Why are they making this?
do bees be?
we haven’t had a creative idea in years and this is cheaper than paying writers
Hmmmm
I’m thinking maybe for money. Yeah that’s probably it. They seem to really like money and want more.
What’s the last original thing that has really had an impact on pop culture? There is never anything new. Just the same ideas on repeat.
As long as suckers keep paying for recycled toilet paper, they’ll keep selling it. Mainstream is the bottom rung of everything.
Whoa, unexpected Alan Johnson.
Johnson is here, Johnson is here!
Another totally unnecessary movie about old characters. The good thing is that expectation are so low about it than almost anything can be good
I’ve already seen enough. Chalamet’s performance is bad and a Wonka movie can’t be good without a good Wonka performance.
