Why was it so bad, and why didn't I see it coming?

Rating: 1/10 (18 November 2005)

The fault in this film involves a mix of three individuals: 1. Tim Burton, director 2. Danny Elfman, original musical score composer (And this shouldn't surprise many of you out there...) 3. Deep Roy, THE Oompa Loompa
Burton's characters and depictions are dark. Not evil, per se, but just really dark. Edward Scissorhands is a great example of this. Its not an excellent movie, but you must admit that it was a VERY well told story, and thats the directors job. Facilitate the telling of a story, and make sure its done well. All of the characters lived and THRIVED in fantasy. And he (Burton) brought something to the table for them. He made them enjoyable. He made us BELIEVE the fantasy.
So, Tim Burton is obviously a talented director. Why am I listing him as a cause for failure in "Charlie"? One silly little reason. HE is probably the ONLY reason the other two persons listed had anything to do with the film at all.
Danny Elfman is an incredibly talented composer. That goes without question. But he is NOT talented for THIS type of film, simply put. He works on projects such as "The Simpsons", just about anything Pee Wee, "Weird Science", and many others. Now I will give him this much credit. He also worked with Burton in Batman and Beetlejuice. These movies, while not famous solely for their score, were scored well all the same. But there is a limit that exists for the man that can give us the theme for The Simpsons. Batman and Beetlejuice were not too different from what "Charlie" was supposed to be. So what was up with the different getups for the Oompa Loompa(s)? A rock star? Come on.
And someone please try to justify Deep Roy! Tim Burton, in his every-so-often lapse of wisdom, cast ONE MAN as THE Oompa Loompa for the film. That way, he was SURE to focus most of his attention on the sequences in which Roy is featured, instead of the rest of the film. And so much work went into the dancing sequences... But he can't dance! This guy hasn't done anything of note for the last twenty years except ride on Burton's coattails. His performance in "Charlie" was forced, bland, and dry. In and of itself, it is probably is the large reason why I dislike this film.)
I gave it a 1 out of 10. Not because I'm being bitter, but because, honestly, the bad points drug down Depp's struggling but still joyful performance, the delightful selection of "children" (well cast, I believe), and anything else of merit that this film had to offer, and I honestly feel that a 1 is all it deserves.
Please read my post on the comment board for "greater detail."