Massive disappointment.

Rating: 3/10 (4 August 2005)

About 30 minutes into the film the Oompa-Loompa's sing for the first time. Anyhope this film deserves to be mentioned in even the same breath to the 1971 original goes out of the window. One particular Oompa-Loompa sequence, just after Violet Beauregarde has been turned into a giant blueberry, is so bad it is actually probably the worst thing I have ever seen in a film that I have paid to see. But its not just the Oompa-Loompa's that will leave anyone with a genuine love for such a classic story cold.
Depps fans won't like to admit it, but his performance is completely wrong. His pale skin, unclear motives and childish behaviour (giggling, for example) bring to mind a rather more famous man child of recent times. In fact, Depp would only have had to burst into 'Black Or White' and I would have been convinced this was Michael Jackson and the Chocolate Factory. Where is the slightly eccentric uncle with a secret past that Wilder played so perfectly in the original? Instead we are given an incredible inept attempt to explain Wonka's past which removes any sort of interest the viewer might have in the character by explaining away the myth (although Christopher Lee's turn as Wilbur Wonka is brilliant).
The script on the whole is awful, falling on clichés and uninspired, dull dialogue and focusing too much on Wonka. This is meant to be a film about Charlie NOT Willy, hence the CHARLIE in the title (it's ironic that 1971's Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory manages to focus on Charlie more. Its also far to Americanised - if Charlie must be offered dollars at every opportunity, told to 'clean his pants' and we hear 'jerk' bandied around Willy nilly then set the film in America... don't create some strange hybrid Eng-America where your too lazy or stupid to localise the script properly.
The acting (apart from the two mentioned earlier) is mostly unremarkable, though special mention must go to the kids who all manage to be terrible, especially Julia Winter whose acting is stilted and unconvincing. No wonder, as a whole, the children spend so little time on screen. Also why has Violet Beauregarde suddenly become a karate expert? I'm all for updating the ideas to fit in with the modern world (Mike Teevee's obsession switch from TV to Videogames is a good example of this) but don't do it at the expense of the story.
Good points? There are some - the whole world is wonderfully realised, exciting and imaginative and some of the special effects are genuinely special and Burton's trademark direction is there helping to create a film that is, at least, a visual treat. In fact, its only because of him that the film has managed to score as high as a 3.
Yes it REALLY is that bad.