Dog dialogue eats expensive US movie again

Rating: 6/10 (10 February 2009)

Burton & Co. get points for trying something new. They could have made a slicker version of the '71 film. It would have made money. Everyone must have been shown that film ten times and told "Don't do that", because the new one very carefully avoided any reference to that one.
So they tried something different. The new subplots don't hurt the film and opening up the tour with flashbacks was a good idea. The Oompa trickery is cool, it was worth doing. The songs are OK, just not very memorable (a shame because the '71 version's will stick with you forever). No one seemed to understand what's funny quite as well as the underpaid kid who played VERUCA far over the top in '71 like a mini Margaret Hamilton. Of course, those who haven't seen the first version can easily rectify the mistake with a 1-euro trip to the local video rental joint.
No actor could read any part in this film and make it work, and that's probably why the cutting is so quick. There isn't a line in this dog worth hearing. So once Burton's run through all his satirical set, costume, and makeup gags-- and you can only show Veruca's teeth twice before it gets stale, go and try that in front of a club audience-- he has nothing to do but say "speed" let the actors read what all those official producers vetted and hope the graphics kids and animal trainers come up with something. What they came up with is worth looking at, but it's all empty calories.
Poor Johnny Depp. He worked hard. He came up with a good new idea for Wonka-- one that's intrinsically funny and also very clever (since the plastic surgery would have covered up Wonka's age). But he has to carry the movie-- in color tinting-- for two hours. And the poor guy is given nothing to read. The audience should come out of this movie laughing and saying "Freaky-- but wasn't that funny when Wonka said...?" Not with a confused "If I think 'Art' is bad does that mean it's good?" look.
Can you really make a slick costly movie about a poor boy who defeats four slick costly monsters? Yes but you'd better make it funny. Since there's no SLUGWORTH to set up the wrong decisions by the 4 kids their big crime appears to be just being born to tacky parents. They spent huge $$$ to make a giant seahorse-- lifted from the Esther Williams 1944 BATHING BEAUTY, by the way-- and they can't afford a joke?