Under the Hard Chocolate Shell, a sweet and gooey center

Rating: 9/10 (26 July 2005)

This movie stands up very well to my fond memories of both the book and the Gene Wilder movie of my childhood. At the center is a story with real heart, about the happiness that comes from a loving family.
The opening visuals were so beautiful and wonderful and so very Roald Dahl that I knew I was going to be in for a treat. Has there been a better-looking movie all year? It was breathtaking, each set piece a glittering jewel. Burton's aesthetic sensibilities are so very well-matched to the source material.
I might as well get my only major complaint out of the way first--I did NOT like Danny Elfman's songs or the way they were performed. I missed the lovely, clear brainworm of "Oompa Loompa Doobity Doo, I've got another Riddle for You" from the Wilder version. The Elfman Oompa Loompa songs were wonderfully-well choreographed, but I had a hard time picking out the lyrics and the sound was muddy, but worse than that, these aren't songs a young kid can sing-along to--they were clearly aimed at adults and teens, and I think that's a very bad deficiency. The Oompa Loompa songs should be totally accessible to 6-8 year olds. So--that, I hated.
Elfman's incidental music, though--that definitely enhanced the movie.
But everything else, I liked. I didn't mind Willie Wonka's backstory, and gee, I just smile and smile every time I see good old Christopher Lee up there on screen. Has any geezerish actor this side of Alec Guiness had a better run in his dotage than Lee? Lee and Alan Rickman are the only actors working today who can sound properly menacing without any hint of insanity to it.
As for Depp's performance, I loved it. I roared with laughter when he reacted to the idea of Augustus Gloop-flavored chocolate.
Although I am NOT a fangirl, if my feet were held to the fire, I would have to admit that Depp is the most interesting and versatile American actor working in film today. I have other favorites--in particular my beloved Adrien Brody--who I think that in time might be on that same level, but few are there right now. There are a lot of actors who can play serious roles, or portray people with mental illness, handicaps, etc. convincingly, but if you can play a freak or weirdo or madman or villainous type, OR a romantic lead, AND do comedy well (both physical and verbal) then in my book, you've really got the total package as an actor (and it doesn't hurt to be handsome with big, dark, flashing eyes, either). Not that many guys who are that good-looking and thought of as sex symbols will take the pratfall and the little song and dance and seltzer down the pants. I admire him tremendously for that.
I'm a big believer in the old saw, "Dying is easy--COMEDY is hard". I really do respect and admire Johnny's ability to portray all these different interesting and oddball characters, and to make an audience simultaneously wierded-out and tickled. These fine talents are showcased in this movie. Roald Dahl wrote this novel long before Michael Jackson was a gleam in some Motown executive's eye. I think we should try and get past the obvious comparison, and look at Depp's interpretation in a less tabloid way.
But, if you must--then I have to say I raised a parental eyebrow over the sheep room scene. I mean, these Oompa Loompas are worse than Smurfs. At least there was one Smurfette. But these guys, unless they are like Gimli's dwarfs and the women look exactly like the men, don't have much of an outlet.