Sometimes directors are like kids in a candy store. They love the idea of playing with shiny toys so much they lose their heads. The only reason Martin Scorsese agreed to make The Aviator was so he could do the flying scenes and recreate the old Hollywood films he loves so much. Similarly, Tim Burton could not pass up the chance to create the most wonderful candy factory ever imagined. Just think of the wonderful CG effects and a budget he would have died for to make Edward Scissorhands! But when directors forget what made them famous, they fail. It's the story, stupids. And both films go down in flames (albeit spectacular flames), because the directors sacrifice the integrity of story for the glory of the image. Burton's mistake is an unfortunate attempt at remaking a movie that really didn't need remaking (a disturbing trend, after Planet of the Apes). In fact, I would argue making any studio movie out of a book that pretty clearly has a negative opinion of overconsumption is missing the point. There's a character named Mike Teevee for fudgemallow's sake. The only way to be faithful to Dahl's ideals would be to take authorship of the screenplay and not worry so much about being truthful to the book. The Charlie this film really needed was Kaufman. A book is a book, a screenplay is a screenplay and never the two should meet. For example, in a book it is perfectly fine to veer off into the stories of other characters because a reader is making a time investment significantly greater than two hours. But in a movie, the main character drives the movie. You can have one, two, five or 20 main characters, but they must all have their own story arcs and not be abandoned for large chunks of the movie. In this case, the movie is called Charlie & the Chocolate Factory, but poor Charlie ends up playing second (and often sixth) fiddle to Willie Wonka and his shenanigans. All the emotional momentum built up in the first act is let out in favour of CG trickery and a most-puzzling performance by Johnny Depp. By ignoring Charlie's plight and focusing on the back story of Wonka and the demise of each child, the scenes lack any emotional punch. What does Charlie feel about his fellow Golden Ticket winners? What does he think about Willie Wonka's behaviour? The book and the original honed in on the boy's relationship with his Grandpa Joe. In the remake, the pair are just along for the ride, to be drudged up conveniently in the third act. Now this might work if Charlie were replaced by another sympathetic character. But Depp's Wonka is just plain creepy. He seems to know the plight of each child, yet allows them to suffer, even taking pleasure in their pain. Father or no father, this is just demented. C&TCC is supposed to be a morality play for kids, not a horror show. What kind of message does a film send when such sadistic behaviour is justified on the grounds that the character didn't get candy as a kid? Many have compared Depp's portrayal as being Michael Jackson like. And for good reason. Wonka is a wild success at what he does, locks himself off in a palatial property, behaves like a child and ends up buying himself the family life he couldn't achieve. Now just imagine a film in which children are sent to Neverland with their parent's permission and come out emotionally scarred. Does that sound like a movie for kids?
