Bet you it's gonna be another 'origin story' that Hollywood has a hard-on for, and Wonka's real name will probably be something like William St James the 3rd then during the obligatory traumatic childhood prologue some kid at school will call him a wanker and he'll mishear it thinking "Wonka? I like it! My new name will be Willy Wonka!"
We say that, and literally they show the Hughmpa Loompa playing the flute that Wonka uses in the original movie. I guess even Wonka can't come up with the idea of a flute; he has to use the one that the Oompa Loompa uses to...summon...himself? To force himself to start dancing?
You can also tell that whoever wrote this never read, or watched the material, because the floating moment happened with the two main characters because they were testing a prototype drink in the original so the floating drink/candy/chocolate was never a prototype?
@@send_a_ravenThere’s currently a joke on Tik Tok where people are dressing up as cringe cosplayers and mouthing along to the “scratch that, reverse it” in that really cringe animated way that cosplayers act
Whoa boy, that was some Twitch streamer-level acting there from the main character. It was as though he was trying to be excited and animated without waking the neighbors.
God, that delivery on "Scratch that, reverse it" is just so fucking bad.......... I think what's going on is that it's a clever line from the original, but it's good enough to basically just stand on its own. Like Wonka just casually says something wrong and he's like "Wait, scratch that... Reverse it." and then he just moves on in a completely casual tone because the line is meant to show he's weird, but Wonka himself is taking it seriously so he just says it like any other weird thing that comes out of his mouth. And that's part of what makes the contrast work so well, right? That he's completely deadpan and sincere about this really fantastical stuff because it's crazy enough to speak for itself. With this movie it's like they WANT you to know it's fantastical with every fiber of their being. Like they're way too desperate. So he's just doing this really fake put-on 'whimsical' voice like "Oh yeah, I'm from this crazy place and it's all amazing! So quiet up and listen down!" but then he keeps going like it's not even a mistake and it's just part of the bit. So in the same whimsical fake voice he's just like "Scratch that. Reverse it." and it just doesn't work at all. There's no contrast here, it just feels like he's trying way too hard, but it's not in a performative way? It just feels like he's trying to fake a voice but he doesn't understand how to deliver the punchline with it. I'm going to obsess over this so hard because it's just so fucking bad!
Jerma985 would have unironically been a better Willy Wonka. Timmy looks like a quirky LA white boy, Jerma looks like there’s actual malice in his eyes, as Willy Wonka should.
@@dracocrusherWhat’s bad is that he lampshades himself saying it backwards at all. Willy Wonka would just say it and move on. No self-aware trying to be hip crap
I'm bothered by this recent trend in movie titles. Wonka, Diana, Cruella, Lightyear, Hook, Scoob. It's so uninspired. Edit: Not Hook (1991), I meant Pan (2015)
I think the problem is that "gritty" realistic versions of super hero movies became popular in the 00s and studios are still trying to apply that realism to more 80s style fantasy movies. they do not mesh and it's a disaster every time.
@@tereza1959 Ok fair But also right now most sites are doing better than Twitter I'm pretty sure technically Myspace is doing better than Twitter by just remaining static
2:48 Wonka facing cartels does help put into context how he can witness children on his property drowning in chocolate, undergoing inflation, having their bodies shredded into analog signals, etc, and have no emotional response.
The original book and both the Wilder and Deep movies had a playful old school fairy tale edge to them. There was an air of childish, yet funny, danger to the Wonka character and his inventive factory that made it a modern classic. This looks horrendously sanitized in comparison as if they were actively avoiding having a main character doing anything truly mischievous. Which is bad if you're adapting Roald Dahl of all authors.
@@Kevbotoconnell that's funny, but I wouldn't say psycho. The kid's bad habits and behaviors get them into danger and yea, he doesn't try to stop them, but the parents do very little to help too as they're the ones who allowed their kids to be spoiled and to undermine the warnings of an adult. They don't show the kids are alive at the end of the movie though, which does make it seem like they may have been dead by the end 🤷🤪
What made the original book and 1971 film work was a good balance of childlike wonder and bleek cynicism. The real world was cold, unforgiving, and illogical in stupid ways. This turns what would otherwise be a normal kid like Charlie into a perfect hero because life keeps beating him down. This also makes the transition into the chocolate factory all the more impactful, while still not entirely abandon the rules set up previously. This trailer certainly doesn't give off that impression.
@@Fluffy6555because it's going for wonder and whimsy without any of the cynicism. Which is unfortunate cuz I think Mr. Chalamet would be better at playing that then he is at doing this whimsical happy candy man version of the character
Well to be fair it is a younger version of wonka so maybe later in the film some events happen that’s turns him into that kind of person but probably not
I got that feeling as well honestly. I remember once being a teenage girl and ngl if I saw this trailer back then I know I’d be interested in it for mainly only one reason. 😅
If you are going to make an origin story for Willy Wonka I feel it would have to be a lot darker considering the guy seems to enjoy watching children die in his factory.
They're going to make Wonka too much of a good guy. Classic Hollywood mistake. Take an iconic character who happens to be portrayed whimsically (but NOT WITHOUT MISCHIEF) and give them an origin story that makes them out to be some angelic whimsy machine. I can already tell that the makers of this movie don't understand the Wonka character or what made him so endearing. Willy Wonka had an air of whimsy to him, yes, but WHIMSY DOESN'T MEAN THE SAME AS INNOCENCE OR WHOLESOMENESS! Willy Wonka was a closet psychopath who got a sick kick out of watching naughty children get brutally deformed and killed in his factory when they misbehaved. That kind of a guy would not have been some doe-eyed little goody-two-shoes looking to save the day, he would have been a smarmy self-obsessed creative genius with a near sociopathic disregard for the well-being of others, especially compared to the pursuit of his own ambitions. A young Willy Wonka would have been like Patrick Bateman if he were a candy magician.
i'm dead........this is so true.........we only liked him bc he was charismatic like.......he knew only rich spoiled kids would get the tickets and purposely tried to challenge their morals with life-or-death outcomes.........my guy was not sane lol
The book version was a “good” guy, but he wasn’t so whimsical and cheerful either. He was an eccentric recluse who acted like a weirdo, but not a cartoon character.
Superjail seems like the most '''wholesome''' adaptation of Wonka characitures given that Warden exhibits to remind the audience all the flaws of his narcissism, I agree fully knowing I watched this trailed and had deep seated fear over 'Oh god they're starting to sanitize even the books I grew up with-' 😅
We don’t know if they were really killed or deformed or not, at least not in the Gene Wilder version, because another thing that was so great about his version of the character was that you could never tell when he was bullshitting or not. Is it genuine disregard or is it just him knowing that they were never in any real danger to begin with? But yes, the point seemed like it was very consciously trying to subvert this whimsical angelic goody-toe-shoes image that this new one seems to be fully embracing.
Indeed. Most books are lucky enough to get even one adaptation, and some never get any at all. Then again, given how scattershot Hollywood is when it comes to quality adaptations, maybe that’s for the best.
@@vincent207 I dunno'... I'd MUCH rather have hacks like Hollywood (who tend to be good on the making it pretty part) work with something that was well written rather than constantly rolling with the half-baked scripts they whip out of their underpaid writers... A great example: Star Wars would probably still be going strong with a new movie or two every single year if they had just turned the quite a few already proven stories of the Extended Universe in to movies and shows like the fans had been asking for since the beginning. Instead, they attempted to roll their own and largely fell straight on to their stupid faces... Now guess what they're doing _after_ they ate half their foot? They're bringing in Extended Universe stories!! If only they'd have listened to the fans from the beginning...
Probably cuz the original Peter Pan play isn't very good. I recently read it for the first time and it's...fine? It's basically Missed Opportunity: The Play.
What's killing it for me is Wonka's eyes. They're constantly very dull and tired and it feels uncanny against the chipper attitude they're going for. Same with the rest of his face but mainly the eyes
I originally thought people were just unfairly giving Timothee a hard time about this trailer because he's only played aloof, quiet, or otherwise serious roles for his whole career. But his delivery at 5:50 is just painful. Can't completely blame him because it's likely how he was directed to act, but it's clear he's not the right guy for the job
@@mischr13 Normally he plays the same character in everything, which is mumbling sad boy. I honestly think people just like him because he's attractive.
1:17 Why couldn't we get a movie about that? A movie about a whacky teenager going on adventures in a fantasy world learning and "perfecting his craft." But no, this seems like a story of how he became an entrepreneur in boring, grey England. How exciting
I wish there was a Willy Wonka movie where Wonka goes bankrupt because he invites Nick Avocado, who proceeds to eat all of the chocolate in the entire factory. When Wonka yells at Nick the response is “IT’S YOUR FAULT!”
They're not gonna mention 2005's Willy Wonka's dentist dad who put braces on Willy as a child and forbid him from eating candy which led him to rebell and start making candy to prove to his dad he can amount to great things? Which is a backstory I always wanted to know more about?? Well I'm not seeing this movie.
Roald Dahl hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory because he thought that Willy Wonka's character was explored too much instead of being mysterious. If the 2005 movie had him rolling in his grave, this one will have him cause an earthquake.
No. The 2005 movie was made to replace the Gene Wilder one, with the help of the Dahl estate. Dahl absolutely hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. You're mostly right, I just wanted to make that distinction, hehe
I prefer the 2005 version. I love tim burtons style and Johnny Depps performance is amazing. You may not like his interpretation of Wonka but Depp played it so well. Plus I actually like that they made him socially awkward. Gene wilder’s Wonka performance is iconic but the original is just .. too 70s for me😂
@@cartilagehead Man wasn't alive to see that, so there's no way to know if he would have approved of it :T Also note that I mentioned it was made with the help of the Dahl estate.
Something I noticed was that the shot of Rowan Atkinson as the priest, running away from the giraffe, takes place in St. Paul's Cathedral. You can tell, because the shot contains an art piece that currently hangs in the cathedral, commemorating WW1, and was only put up about a decade ago. Even though the film is supposed to take place in a sort of Victorian/Edwardian period. IMO, doesn't bode well for the care put into the film if such a glaring and easily resolved error was left in the trailer, but that could be an overreaction.
The wonka movie is supposed to be a prequel to the 71 movie, so its plausible it takes place after WW2, or during the inter war years, considering the age of Wonka in that movie. Even the book takes place during the space race, so it could be that it happens post WW1.
5:30 suddenly an announcer gets introduced out of nowhere and Adum starts talking to him like he's silently been there the whole time. The lore of YMS reactions is deeper than I thought, I had no idea that could happen.
For me, it looks cringe, but Paul king is directing and I remember the paddington trailers being cringe when they came out, so I’m gonna hope that it’s just a shit trailer. Although Tim Cham is definitely miss cast
I saw a tweet when this trailer came out saying “Why are they trying to make the actor who’s a sentient stick and poke tattoo play a character that’s light hearted and whimsical?”
Yeah it's like he could only interpret the Gene Wilder performance as "benzo high". There's a weird drowsiness or half-heartedness to him in the trailer
I'm so over this formula of rebooting or an origin story and then just having the title be one word. Like Pan. I feel like we get so many of these. Also I kinda liked wonkas past being shrouded in mystery because it makes his zaniness more interesting. idk this looks like such a nothing movie to me
On the one hand, this is from the director of the first two Paddington films and both of them were surprise treats. But on the other hand, I'm not really feeling Timothee's performance so far. It's like he's trying way too hard to be quirky.
So here’s my wild interpretation of what I think this story is going to do. So far I’ve been pretty much on the nose with all these remakes and even new movies based on little clues. Wonka is literally going to be Forrest Gump. He grows up poor, his momma teaches him everything and he loves her dearly, and he travels the world doing fantastical things accumulating in him sitting on a park bench telling someone “Mama always said life is like a box of chocolates.”
Lmao. Nothing like taking a character that feels magic and otherworldly and making him so mundane. I wonder if they'll give him mommy issues too. Classic Hollywood
I've read the comments under the trailer when it came out and I thought I was going crazy. All the comments were so positive despite the trailer looking like hot garbage
I genuinely feel that Timothée Chalamet is a very good actor, very talented and able to perform a variety of diverse roles in general; Paul Atreides in Dune is a good example of this, also The King where he portrayed the Shakespearean Henry V in a very subdued, nuanced take on the character (it was based on Shakespeare's play, after all). So I believe if one is appraising Chalamet in good faith, he should get credit where credit is due, for objectively compelling performances by a young, developing actor. It's important to be be cognizant of the fact that he's only 27, still developing his methods and honing his craft, so I cut him some slack for that. That being said, based on the trailer anyway, Wonka just ain't it for Timothée, he doesn't appear to be capturing the magic that such a character deserves to be portrayed as having. Even among the top echelon of A-list actors in Hollywood, most of them have at least one or two outlier performances in their careers that were complete duds, and not commensurate with the otherwise high caliber that is typical of their past performances and acting pedigree. Examples: Forest Whitaker- Battlefield Earth (lmao), Marlon Brando- The Island of Dr. Moreau, Cate Blanchett- Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Jesse Eisenberg- Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Natalie Portman- Star Wars Prequel Trilogy, Al Pacino- Jack and Jill, Ian McKellan- Cats, etc. I could go on and on. Anyway, yes it certainly appears that given the cringe and goofiness/ amateur feeling from the trailer alone, this is going to be one of Chalamet's career duds. But that's ok, I don't demand perfection from Hollywood's stars and when a bad performance like this drops, it is what it is and life goes on; and on the plus side, there's a real chance that it will be unintentionally bad in the hilarious kind of way like The Room, and therefore will still serve it's purpose, in a perverse sense, of entertaining us, the audience.
The thing that really bothers me about it is that, from what I recall about the other movies, Wonka didn't really release those wacky, physics defying candies? It's just normal chocolate and then once they go into the factory they discover all of that craziness. Why would they be amazed by all of that if chocolate-that-makes-you-fly has been on the market for 40 years? It's so dumb.
One of the things that made the original wonka character interesting was the mystery around him. Having an origin story is kind of a slap in the face to that.
Ok so one: wonka is meant to be british. Two: Johnny depp pulled off the quirky whimsical wonka better than anyone ever could. Three: the tim Burton movie GAVE WONKA A BACKSTORY
Timothy looks like he's acting like a character instead of becoming the character (if that makes any sense). It's as if he's a robot that was programmed to do facial expressions and shut down after the camera stops rolling.
Yeah it's called bad acting/miscast. Maybe it's just a bad trailer but yeah he doesn't actually come across as whimsical or quirky at all. It's like a kids movie where the adults talk to the puppets in baby voice
"no daydreaming" uuuuuuugh, one of these? This looks terrible and I like the Paddington movies! This just screams "Dolittle." Also, if you wanted to remove the "slave allegory" from the Oompa Loompas, make them sentient candy-creations.
"Weren't the original Oompa-Loompas problematic in the first movie?" Oh, that's nothing. In the first printing of the book, the oompa-loompas were just African pygmies. That was changed on reprints because people pointed out that it gave the whole thing colonialist undertones and Mr. Dahl was like, "Oh, don't want that in my whimsical story about a magic chocolate maker. Better fix that."
I hope this movie doesn’t romanticize Wonka. From the trailer it seems to portray Wonka as a scrappy underdog. If his rise to the top portrays him as a pure hearted hero I’ll absolutely despise it. I want this film to be a origin of Gene Wilder psychotic and cynical Wonka. I want to see Timothy’s Wonka do whatever it take take to get to the top. I want to see he cheat, steal, and lie just to get to the top with no care for his victims. Make Wonka a antihero type character.
In the book, Wonka is immensely suspicious. He's explicitly not attractive and he's a smart aleck and kind of rude. What makes him interesting, aside from his mystery, is how he's all of these things AND still values what Charlie does to a point. He is VERY much a morally grey character. People seemed to have missed that whole point.
It must be weird to work in the film industry today. Instead of being able to pool creativity from many people into a great film that will age gracefully, they have to work to copy the great films that were created before them and watch as they fail to do so
1:39 in case anyone's wondering, this is a thing in British English called r-intrusion. Because Wonka ends with a vowel and the next word starts with a vowel we would bridge them together with an "r" sound. Hence "Wonker"
Timothee as Wonka reminds me of The Onceler from Lorax...It's very hard to live up to an actor who's already given a great performance when you make something like an "unnecessary" prequel. Wilder is magical naturally, I don't know how but it is. It's not even nostalgia speaking because I didn't even like the movie that much as a kid, Gene Wilder's Wonka was something that grew on me as an adult and I'm completely enchanted by him.
A few weeks ago I went with my family to the theater to go see Barbie. This trailer played while we were waiting for it to start and my initial thought was "why?" And people were saying the remake with Johnny Depp was bad 💀
It's just way too saccharine. Previous adaptations, and the OG story, are (to varying degrees) whimsical and fun but never without that underlying current of danger that sort of borders on the maniacal. This performance, and this movie, don't seem to have that "is this guy a genius or is he just a psycho" element that gives the whole thing tension and makes it work.
In the original book, the Oompa Loompas were pygmies. In the 1971 film they were little people painted orange, in the 2005 version they were multiple versions of one little person. 2023 we get Hugh Grant 😂😅
I have seen Chalamet only in Dune so far, and I didn't buy his performance at all. Apparently the main characters in Dune were supposed to be kinda unfeeling, but even in the moments were he was supposed to convey some emotion I just felt he was more concerned with looking like a model than acting.
This comes off as the "unnecessary Burtonesque energy" of remake Wonka in performance while wanting to look like the older, more subtle "classic" Wonka that Gene Wilder portrayed; and that's a bad combination in a vacuum, but in actual performance it's apparently something you just want to reject the whole time, is the trailer is indicative of the entire film. On top of that, they're just going nuts with the references and callbacks; the most egregious being the "hover chocolate" or whatever. In the Wilder film, at least, it was an experimental _cola_ that made the drinker float unfortunately until they burped to alleviate the effect. But in this _origin_ story, we've got an unestablished, young Wonka with floating *chocolate* he just unleashes on people - which makes no sense as an origin story. Edit: Just watched a short comparing the three versions and the Burton Wonka had a "lol trauma haha" moment where Wonka addresses the parents and gets hung up on "papa," so either the new one is trying to tie in with the Burton version more than we know, or that's just some kind of reference to the OG book version? I dunno, haven't ever read it, too depressed. Still annoying 😒😅
This is another example of the Boba Fett effect. The point of Wonka is that he's a mysterious side character. Charlie was the main character. Wonka's origin doesn't matter.
The one-word name title really tops it all off in the way of clinical modern marketing tactics that don't really help anything but that's simply the way things are done now so we have to do it. *~WONKA~*
prepare for the 2030 remake of 'Wonka', with Giancarlo Esposito playing it rough as Wonka vs the meth cartel. I mean, chocolate cartel. also, is it weird that there's so much focus on the shops, when the majority of the original story took place in a factory?
I forget who said this, but someone pointed out how great the original film was at making a clear distinction between the world outside the chocolate factory and the world within it. Like the real world there was very grounded, so it made the factory world seem even more magical. But in this one, the "magic" is everywhere. So what's the point? Just thought that was an interesting observation.
I think it was Mike from RedLetterMedia during their review of Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory. It was a great observation that really pointed out why the original works so well compared to the 2005 version.
I saw this being filmed in my hometown on my way to work and there was a literal sea of 13 year old girls surrounding mr timothy, so I expect this will very much be the target audience for this twinkfest
Literally just watched an interview with Gene Wilder from Conan before this was posted. Honestly, it's a great interview, and Gene being so cool will help you forget this exists. It was jarring the timing actually
To me the first movies greatest strength is that you are unsure if Wonka is even telling the truth. Yes there's clearly a lot of wacky things going on, but it seems really sinister. There's no confirming whether or not the kids actually are okay. It's almost like babies first mascot horror. You don't know if those men really came from loompa land or if Wonka painted a bunch of people with dwarfism for a one time show. It's like you and the parents are supposed to be skeptical of what's even happening here and why.
For somebody who grew up with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005), I honestly would’ve loved it if Wonka was actually played by Freddie Highmore, the original Charlie and now the masterful chocolatier. Although I do know that maybe Freddie’s a bit too old, and he usually is more into dramas. Still a great actor
That would be awesome! Just curious, what’s your opinion on the Gene Wilder Wonka movie? (Cuz I really enjoy both Wilder and Depp, watched the hell out of both movies as a kid)
1:34 that "scratch that, reverse it" reading rivals Harrison Ford's infamous "part time" from Indiana Jones 4 as the worst line reading possible. This guy makes Johnny Depp look like Gene Wilder.
What makes me sad is Timothée Chalamet is actually a good actor. Better than Tom Holland for sure. One of his friend should've told him to not accept this.
Really hoping they give an origin story or explanation for the spooky tunnel with the chicken getting its head cut off. That'd make this go from a 1/10 to an 11.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is absolutely better than Wonka. Why did they make that movie a musical, anyway. Only ones who sang were the oompa loompas
Seeing Timothée and Johnny Depp’s performances really makes you appreciate how well Gene Wilder did in the original. It’s clearly not easy to avoid making a fool of yourself in this role
The Wonk Mind Virus. First you think maybe you wanna make some candy, then you think maybe you wanna give children Everlasting Pubertystoppers. It's an understandable progression.
Bet you it's gonna be another 'origin story' that Hollywood has a hard-on for, and Wonka's real name will probably be something like William St James the 3rd then during the obligatory traumatic childhood prologue some kid at school will call him a wanker and he'll mishear it thinking "Wonka? I like it! My new name will be Willy Wonka!"
And how he got his frizzy hair once from an explosion of making candy! This writes itself!
We say that, and literally they show the Hughmpa Loompa playing the flute that Wonka uses in the original movie. I guess even Wonka can't come up with the idea of a flute; he has to use the one that the Oompa Loompa uses to...summon...himself? To force himself to start dancing?
@@ShadowRubberDuckI can bet you we are going to see a little slugworth in this movie
He'll probably get his hat because the wind blew it to him or it fell off a truck or something, rather than him just deciding to buy a hat
You can also tell that whoever wrote this never read, or watched the material, because the floating moment happened with the two main characters because they were testing a prototype drink in the original so the floating drink/candy/chocolate was never a prototype?
timothy pretending to be a quirky character does not look good in this trailer
the acting is on par with a tiktok cosplayer trying to do a bad impression of some quirky anime guy
I'm not sure if I was 10 I'd find this good or zeiny or even convincing
Flashback to the brief tiktok or vine (idk) trend of sexy willy wonka. would like that back instead, please.
@@send_a_ravenThere’s currently a joke on Tik Tok where people are dressing up as cringe cosplayers and mouthing along to the “scratch that, reverse it” in that really cringe animated way that cosplayers act
YEEEEES
Didn't the Johnny Depp version already give him a backstory lmao why do we need another one
The burton version had fucking christopher lee as wonka's dad, they'll never top that if they did it for this one
This is allegedly a prequel to the 71 version, but he does not feel like Gene Wilder at all, and does not make sense in context of that movie.
@@Multienderguy37 Yet he wears the Johnny Depp outfit.
@@sonicwave779 The oompa loompa has the same design as 71.
@@Multienderguy37 Bizzare.
Whoa boy, that was some Twitch streamer-level acting there from the main character. It was as though he was trying to be excited and animated without waking the neighbors.
😂 💀
God, that delivery on "Scratch that, reverse it" is just so fucking bad..........
I think what's going on is that it's a clever line from the original, but it's good enough to basically just stand on its own. Like Wonka just casually says something wrong and he's like "Wait, scratch that... Reverse it." and then he just moves on in a completely casual tone because the line is meant to show he's weird, but Wonka himself is taking it seriously so he just says it like any other weird thing that comes out of his mouth. And that's part of what makes the contrast work so well, right? That he's completely deadpan and sincere about this really fantastical stuff because it's crazy enough to speak for itself.
With this movie it's like they WANT you to know it's fantastical with every fiber of their being. Like they're way too desperate. So he's just doing this really fake put-on 'whimsical' voice like "Oh yeah, I'm from this crazy place and it's all amazing! So quiet up and listen down!" but then he keeps going like it's not even a mistake and it's just part of the bit. So in the same whimsical fake voice he's just like "Scratch that. Reverse it." and it just doesn't work at all. There's no contrast here, it just feels like he's trying way too hard, but it's not in a performative way? It just feels like he's trying to fake a voice but he doesn't understand how to deliver the punchline with it.
I'm going to obsess over this so hard because it's just so fucking bad!
Jerma985 would have unironically been a better Willy Wonka. Timmy looks like a quirky LA white boy, Jerma looks like there’s actual malice in his eyes, as Willy Wonka should.
@@dracocrusherWhat’s bad is that he lampshades himself saying it backwards at all. Willy Wonka would just say it and move on. No self-aware trying to be hip crap
Haha @@dracocrusher but we NEEED to know the origin of that line in painful detail, it's what the fans want! They'll clap!
I'm bothered by this recent trend in movie titles. Wonka, Diana, Cruella, Lightyear, Hook, Scoob. It's so uninspired.
Edit: Not Hook (1991), I meant Pan (2015)
It's the thermidorian reaction to late 90s early 2000s "The Sequel: The Movie: The Game" titles
Morbius
Hook is a 90s movie and it is amazing, idc.
how did Hook get included with that list lol
I think the problem is that "gritty" realistic versions of super hero movies became popular in the 00s and studios are still trying to apply that realism to more 80s style fantasy movies. they do not mesh and it's a disaster every time.
Imagine getting Rowan Atkinson to be in your Wonka movie and NOT casting him as the lead 🙄🙄🙄
He would've been a perfect Wonka 😞
Oh God you're right!
he's an old ass bitch tho. The lead is supposed to be young
That could totally work
Too old
Why are we still just making every character a Tumblr sexy man?
Tumblr doesn't even exist anymore😭
@@Katyamuffinoh yeah toooootally mmhmm been dead since 2019 tooooootally😂🎉
@@Katyamuffin tumblr is doing better than twitter 💀
@@Katyamuffin The culture has long outsized the website
@@tereza1959 Ok fair
But also right now most sites are doing better than Twitter
I'm pretty sure technically Myspace is doing better than Twitter by just remaining static
2:48 Wonka facing cartels does help put into context how he can witness children on his property drowning in chocolate, undergoing inflation, having their bodies shredded into analog signals, etc, and have no emotional response.
That's what you came up with...
Wonka probably saw some brutal revenge beheadings on his Oompa loompas.
I'd be very alright with Wonka as a Gilles de Rais-esque psychopath with literal rooms full of bodies becoming canon.
wont you take me to
funky towwnn
I . . . don't think that needs context.
The original book and both the Wilder and Deep movies had a playful old school fairy tale edge to them. There was an air of childish, yet funny, danger to the Wonka character and his inventive factory that made it a modern classic. This looks horrendously sanitized in comparison as if they were actively avoiding having a main character doing anything truly mischievous. Which is bad if you're adapting Roald Dahl of all authors.
Maybe the wilder. But the depp one was so bad and cynical.
It was like he actively hated the kids
@@dimsumboy22bro the gene wilder one was a psychopath
Wilder was a better Willy Wonka than Johnny Depp by far.
I guess they wanted to "ground" this movie or whatever but as a result the film looks so generic
@@Kevbotoconnell that's funny, but I wouldn't say psycho. The kid's bad habits and behaviors get them into danger and yea, he doesn't try to stop them, but the parents do very little to help too as they're the ones who allowed their kids to be spoiled and to undermine the warnings of an adult. They don't show the kids are alive at the end of the movie though, which does make it seem like they may have been dead by the end 🤷🤪
What made the original book and 1971 film work was a good balance of childlike wonder and bleek cynicism. The real world was cold, unforgiving, and illogical in stupid ways. This turns what would otherwise be a normal kid like Charlie into a perfect hero because life keeps beating him down. This also makes the transition into the chocolate factory all the more impactful, while still not entirely abandon the rules set up previously. This trailer certainly doesn't give off that impression.
Why not?
@@Fluffy6555because it's going for wonder and whimsy without any of the cynicism. Which is unfortunate cuz I think Mr. Chalamet would be better at playing that then he is at doing this whimsical happy candy man version of the character
Well to be fair it is a younger version of wonka so maybe later in the film some events happen that’s turns him into that kind of person but probably not
The 2005 film was more accurate to the book. Roald Dahl disliked the origional movie because it was too happy lol. 2005 is better imo
everyone child
Are they trying to market this to teenage girls? Timothee chamalet + the vintage quirkiness makes me think so
It’s a crappy copy of the good parts of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory from 2005
i dont think teenage girls would appreciate being lumped in with this nonsense
Oh no, i hope they're not trying to replicate the Onceler
I got that feeling as well honestly. I remember once being a teenage girl and ngl if I saw this trailer back then I know I’d be interested in it for mainly only one reason. 😅
@@Duskool AHAHHHAHAHA YES
"I used to think my life was a sour patch"
"Now i realized it was a fking laffy taffy"
If you are going to make an origin story for Willy Wonka I feel it would have to be a lot darker considering the guy seems to enjoy watching children die in his factory.
+++++
I mean this version DOES have a chocolate cartel.... 🤣
This is such slander, not ONE child dies, they're just horribly mutilated.
@@PlatinumAltariaslander is spoken! In print it's libel
@@PlatinumAltariaThe kids die on-stage in the broadway musical for some reason…like, what in the tonal shift??
They're going to make Wonka too much of a good guy. Classic Hollywood mistake. Take an iconic character who happens to be portrayed whimsically (but NOT WITHOUT MISCHIEF) and give them an origin story that makes them out to be some angelic whimsy machine. I can already tell that the makers of this movie don't understand the Wonka character or what made him so endearing. Willy Wonka had an air of whimsy to him, yes, but WHIMSY DOESN'T MEAN THE SAME AS INNOCENCE OR WHOLESOMENESS! Willy Wonka was a closet psychopath who got a sick kick out of watching naughty children get brutally deformed and killed in his factory when they misbehaved. That kind of a guy would not have been some doe-eyed little goody-two-shoes looking to save the day, he would have been a smarmy self-obsessed creative genius with a near sociopathic disregard for the well-being of others, especially compared to the pursuit of his own ambitions. A young Willy Wonka would have been like Patrick Bateman if he were a candy magician.
i'm dead........this is so true.........we only liked him bc he was charismatic like.......he knew only rich spoiled kids would get the tickets and purposely tried to challenge their morals with life-or-death outcomes.........my guy was not sane lol
The book version was a “good” guy, but he wasn’t so whimsical and cheerful either. He was an eccentric recluse who acted like a weirdo, but not a cartoon character.
Isn’t that the whole point of Willy Wonka? The dichotomy of him being dangerous yet also charming? Also kind of like the factory and the candy itself?
Superjail seems like the most '''wholesome''' adaptation of Wonka characitures given that Warden exhibits to remind the audience all the flaws of his narcissism, I agree fully knowing I watched this trailed and had deep seated fear over 'Oh god they're starting to sanitize even the books I grew up with-'
😅
We don’t know if they were really killed or deformed or not, at least not in the Gene Wilder version, because another thing that was so great about his version of the character was that you could never tell when he was bullshitting or not. Is it genuine disregard or is it just him knowing that they were never in any real danger to begin with? But yes, the point seemed like it was very consciously trying to subvert this whimsical angelic goody-toe-shoes image that this new one seems to be fully embracing.
The obsession with remaking this movie over and over again to diminishing returns reminds me of Peter Pan. They love making Peter Pan movies.
Indeed. Most books are lucky enough to get even one adaptation, and some never get any at all. Then again, given how scattershot Hollywood is when it comes to quality adaptations, maybe that’s for the best.
@@vincent207 I dunno'... I'd MUCH rather have hacks like Hollywood (who tend to be good on the making it pretty part) work with something that was well written rather than constantly rolling with the half-baked scripts they whip out of their underpaid writers...
A great example: Star Wars would probably still be going strong with a new movie or two every single year if they had just turned the quite a few already proven stories of the Extended Universe in to movies and shows like the fans had been asking for since the beginning. Instead, they attempted to roll their own and largely fell straight on to their stupid faces... Now guess what they're doing _after_ they ate half their foot? They're bringing in Extended Universe stories!! If only they'd have listened to the fans from the beginning...
Probably cuz the original Peter Pan play isn't very good. I recently read it for the first time and it's...fine? It's basically Missed Opportunity: The Play.
Robin Hood is another one we get every couple decades. Gotta keep making it darker each time and remove any whimsy and fun it once had.
The obsession with adding shit to diminishing returns also reminds me of Toy Story.
What's killing it for me is Wonka's eyes. They're constantly very dull and tired and it feels uncanny against the chipper attitude they're going for. Same with the rest of his face but mainly the eyes
Like the opposite of Gene Wilder
His acting makes it look like Wonka may have killed a man in Nicaragua for funsies.
I originally thought people were just unfairly giving Timothee a hard time about this trailer because he's only played aloof, quiet, or otherwise serious roles for his whole career. But his delivery at 5:50 is just painful. Can't completely blame him because it's likely how he was directed to act, but it's clear he's not the right guy for the job
his heart is not in it at all, you can tell. normally he's a decent actor
@@mischr13
Normally he plays the same character in everything, which is mumbling sad boy. I honestly think people just like him because he's attractive.
1:17 Why couldn't we get a movie about that? A movie about a whacky teenager going on adventures in a fantasy world learning and "perfecting his craft." But no, this seems like a story of how he became an entrepreneur in boring, grey England. How exciting
Because then they'd actually have to think of a real interesting story. With this one the story writes itself.
And it's not even cool edgy steampunk England, this is pastel hungergames England.
@@b1nary_f1naryit’s hilarious because it’s literally the first second of the trailer, and they just gloss over it as if it was nothing important
Batman: League of Shadows
That’s a perfectly good YA Batman book waiting to happen
I would’ve liked to see a Robert Sheehan version of Wonka
I wish there was a Willy Wonka movie where Wonka goes bankrupt because he invites Nick Avocado, who proceeds to eat all of the chocolate in the entire factory. When Wonka yells at Nick the response is “IT’S YOUR FAULT!”
“wwWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”
Nick: *tries chocolate*
Nick: diabetes EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Nick doesn't like sweets tho he always points that out
Lmao wtf
I died laughing at your comment. My god I would pay to see that.
They're not gonna mention 2005's Willy Wonka's dentist dad who put braces on Willy as a child and forbid him from eating candy which led him to rebell and start making candy to prove to his dad he can amount to great things? Which is a backstory I always wanted to know more about?? Well I'm not seeing this movie.
What else is there to see
He’s in the end credits scene where after Wonka is in his office you hear his dads voice say
“Lollipops…” and then he ignites his lightsaber
I hated that part of the Depp Wonka movie
Hopefully not because giving Willy Wonka daddy issues didn't really work for most people
everyone child forev
Roald Dahl hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory because he thought that Willy Wonka's character was explored too much instead of being mysterious. If the 2005 movie had him rolling in his grave, this one will have him cause an earthquake.
No. The 2005 movie was made to replace the Gene Wilder one, with the help of the Dahl estate. Dahl absolutely hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
You're mostly right, I just wanted to make that distinction, hehe
Half true, he hated the 1971 movie cause of that, then the 2005 adaptation fixed it, kinda, but I still prefer the original.
I prefer the 2005 version. I love tim burtons style and Johnny Depps performance is amazing. You may not like his interpretation of Wonka but Depp played it so well. Plus I actually like that they made him socially awkward. Gene wilder’s Wonka performance is iconic but the original is just .. too 70s for me😂
@@Itariatanwas giving him a childhood flashback with a bad dentist dad, like the 2005 movie did, Dahl’s idea too?
@@cartilagehead Man wasn't alive to see that, so there's no way to know if he would have approved of it :T Also note that I mentioned it was made with the help of the Dahl estate.
Can’t wait for Wonka portrayed with all the enthusiasm of someone who pre-gamed and is starting to sober up.
Something I noticed was that the shot of Rowan Atkinson as the priest, running away from the giraffe, takes place in St. Paul's Cathedral. You can tell, because the shot contains an art piece that currently hangs in the cathedral, commemorating WW1, and was only put up about a decade ago. Even though the film is supposed to take place in a sort of Victorian/Edwardian period. IMO, doesn't bode well for the care put into the film if such a glaring and easily resolved error was left in the trailer, but that could be an overreaction.
Do you mean those weird looking crosses on either side of Rowan as he’s running down the hall at 6:19?
@@themac6356 yes, exactly
The wonka movie is supposed to be a prequel to the 71 movie, so its plausible it takes place after WW2, or during the inter war years, considering the age of Wonka in that movie. Even the book takes place during the space race, so it could be that it happens post WW1.
@@Multienderguy37"and was only put up a decade ago". Did you even read that comment?
@@folx2733 My bad, I must have missed that. I was referring to the part of the comment that said it was during the Edwardian/ Victorian era.
5:30 suddenly an announcer gets introduced out of nowhere and Adum starts talking to him like he's silently been there the whole time.
The lore of YMS reactions is deeper than I thought, I had no idea that could happen.
It's his boyfriend who doesn't use facecams in case you weren't making a joke
you can kinda hear him before that point too, like the end of a couple sentences he's saying
no for real like i only watch the youtube videos so i had no context otherwise, and this is the first time i’ve heard another person in the room lol
@@poofballoon How could that comment have been a joke?
@@HOTD108_ it could be read as sarcasm
Someone in the chat mentioned how it would be neat to have Rowan Atkinson as Wonka and I can agree
With Tony Robinson playing all the oompa loompas
I wasn't expecting a Wonka prequel movie to be like the chocolate version of Atlas Shrugged.
For me, it looks cringe, but Paul king is directing and I remember the paddington trailers being cringe when they came out, so I’m gonna hope that it’s just a shit trailer. Although Tim Cham is definitely miss cast
timothee as wonka is why casting directors are necessary lol
Not every good thing in the world started with a dream.
I saw someone comment Daniel Radcliffe would make a great Wonka and now I’m even more upset bc that would have been awesome
That's a great pick!
Lmaoo can you imagine
Daniel Radcliffe as Willy would have been awesome.
Their epic reimagining of Pure Imagination for this trailer is so yuck
If it becomes another slow, over-engineered rendition of a vintage song I’m gonna lose it
@@electricfishfanit already was in 2017 for a brief time with Ready Player One
So shrill it hurt my ears
I saw a tweet when this trailer came out saying “Why are they trying to make the actor who’s a sentient stick and poke tattoo play a character that’s light hearted and whimsical?”
Yeah it's like he could only interpret the Gene Wilder performance as "benzo high". There's a weird drowsiness or half-heartedness to him in the trailer
I'm so over this formula of rebooting or an origin story and then just having the title be one word. Like Pan. I feel like we get so many of these. Also I kinda liked wonkas past being shrouded in mystery because it makes his zaniness more interesting. idk this looks like such a nothing movie to me
Safe, legal, cool, and good!
The content has received interaction!
On the one hand, this is from the director of the first two Paddington films and both of them were surprise treats. But on the other hand, I'm not really feeling Timothee's performance so far. It's like he's trying way too hard to be quirky.
Really loved the part when Wonka turned to the camera and said “It’s Wonkin time” and Wonked on everyone.
This movie is projected to make 1 wonkillion dollars
he starting WANKING IT in front of EVERYONE
Wanked on everyone
@@Script-007this is what we do. We Wonka time this shit
Who up wonking they willy rn?
So here’s my wild interpretation of what I think this story is going to do. So far I’ve been pretty much on the nose with all these remakes and even new movies based on little clues. Wonka is literally going to be Forrest Gump. He grows up poor, his momma teaches him everything and he loves her dearly, and he travels the world doing fantastical things accumulating in him sitting on a park bench telling someone “Mama always said life is like a box of chocolates.”
Lmao. Nothing like taking a character that feels magic and otherworldly and making him so mundane. I wonder if they'll give him mommy issues too. Classic Hollywood
I've read the comments under the trailer when it came out and I thought I was going crazy. All the comments were so positive despite the trailer looking like hot garbage
"It's a lot like life" - Depeche Mode
It's a movie for children, kids don't care about creative artistry lol
I genuinely feel that Timothée Chalamet is a very good actor, very talented and able to perform a variety of diverse roles in general; Paul Atreides in Dune is a good example of this, also The King where he portrayed the Shakespearean Henry V in a very subdued, nuanced take on the character (it was based on Shakespeare's play, after all). So I believe if one is appraising Chalamet in good faith, he should get credit where credit is due, for objectively compelling performances by a young, developing actor. It's important to be be cognizant of the fact that he's only 27, still developing his methods and honing his craft, so I cut him some slack for that.
That being said, based on the trailer anyway, Wonka just ain't it for Timothée, he doesn't appear to be capturing the magic that such a character deserves to be portrayed as having. Even among the top echelon of A-list actors in Hollywood, most of them have at least one or two outlier performances in their careers that were complete duds, and not commensurate with the otherwise high caliber that is typical of their past performances and acting pedigree. Examples: Forest Whitaker- Battlefield Earth (lmao), Marlon Brando- The Island of Dr. Moreau, Cate Blanchett- Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Jesse Eisenberg- Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Natalie Portman- Star Wars Prequel Trilogy, Al Pacino- Jack and Jill, Ian McKellan- Cats, etc. I could go on and on.
Anyway, yes it certainly appears that given the cringe and goofiness/ amateur feeling from the trailer alone, this is going to be one of Chalamet's career duds. But that's ok, I don't demand perfection from Hollywood's stars and when a bad performance like this drops, it is what it is and life goes on; and on the plus side, there's a real chance that it will be unintentionally bad in the hilarious kind of way like The Room, and therefore will still serve it's purpose, in a perverse sense, of entertaining us, the audience.
The thing that really bothers me about it is that, from what I recall about the other movies, Wonka didn't really release those wacky, physics defying candies? It's just normal chocolate and then once they go into the factory they discover all of that craziness. Why would they be amazed by all of that if chocolate-that-makes-you-fly has been on the market for 40 years? It's so dumb.
I want people to know that the cinematographer for this film also did the cinematography for Oldboy (the original)
Everybody’s got bills to pay, man.
He also did the cinemtography for Obi Wan, I think he just does better when a director has a vision and not a product that needs to be made on time
@@alexanderfreeman3406 I wouldn't say that. The cinematography, based on the trailer, looks pretty good.
WHAT
@@jamesquinonez3914I mean I didn’t think Obi-wan was shot that bad it’s just that everything in the shot was so…worthless
One of the things that made the original wonka character interesting was the mystery around him. Having an origin story is kind of a slap in the face to that.
Ok so one: wonka is meant to be british. Two: Johnny depp pulled off the quirky whimsical wonka better than anyone ever could. Three: the tim Burton movie GAVE WONKA A BACKSTORY
"Should've kept with making bear movies instead of making twink movies" almost made me spit on my computer screen.
Timothy looks like he's acting like a character instead of becoming the character (if that makes any sense). It's as if he's a robot that was programmed to do facial expressions and shut down after the camera stops rolling.
Yeah it's called bad acting/miscast. Maybe it's just a bad trailer but yeah he doesn't actually come across as whimsical or quirky at all. It's like a kids movie where the adults talk to the puppets in baby voice
"no daydreaming"
uuuuuuugh, one of these? This looks terrible and I like the Paddington movies! This just screams "Dolittle."
Also, if you wanted to remove the "slave allegory" from the Oompa Loompas, make them sentient candy-creations.
Then they would still be slaves. Just candy robo slaves, so I guess you only remove the racist colonial aspect
finally that long awaited snowpiercer prequel
this is the first time I saw a movie and said "tom holland should've been in this"
Lol dang so true
Yeah it's insane to me, he just feels like Paul atreides pretending to have human emotions
I mean. If you're going for Tumblr sexyman.
For this in particular, them lazily cutting down the existing IP's movie title down to one word is symptomatic of what the movie is likely to be
"Weren't the original Oompa-Loompas problematic in the first movie?"
Oh, that's nothing. In the first printing of the book, the oompa-loompas were just African pygmies. That was changed on reprints because people pointed out that it gave the whole thing colonialist undertones and Mr. Dahl was like, "Oh, don't want that in my whimsical story about a magic chocolate maker. Better fix that."
Damn can't believe the 71 film made oompa loompas woke :/
I hope this movie doesn’t romanticize Wonka. From the trailer it seems to portray Wonka as a scrappy underdog. If his rise to the top portrays him as a pure hearted hero I’ll absolutely despise it. I want this film to be a origin of Gene Wilder psychotic and cynical Wonka. I want to see Timothy’s Wonka do whatever it take take to get to the top. I want to see he cheat, steal, and lie just to get to the top with no care for his victims. Make Wonka a antihero type character.
In the book, Wonka is immensely suspicious. He's explicitly not attractive and he's a smart aleck and kind of rude. What makes him interesting, aside from his mystery, is how he's all of these things AND still values what Charlie does to a point. He is VERY much a morally grey character. People seemed to have missed that whole point.
It does seem to me to be a romantized view. Everything seems off about this movie lol
Did you see the movie? They did exactly what you said
It must be weird to work in the film industry today. Instead of being able to pool creativity from many people into a great film that will age gracefully, they have to work to copy the great films that were created before them and watch as they fail to do so
1:39 in case anyone's wondering, this is a thing in British English called r-intrusion. Because Wonka ends with a vowel and the next word starts with a vowel we would bridge them together with an "r" sound. Hence "Wonker"
That being said, most English accents don't put the R here, she's doing a particularly strong affectation, presumably for American audiences.
Timothee Chalamet's performance is like Daniel Thrasher doing Willy Wonka in a sketch, but only the part before the sketch goes off the rails.
lmao thats what i was thinking
This is so accurate lol
so quiet 🤫 up ⬆️ and listen 👂 down 👇 nope 🚫 scratch that 🙅🏻 reverse it 🔄
If I’m correct I think in one or some of the original drafts of the book, the oompa loompas were described as ‘african pymies’
Hugh Grant's face on the Oompa Loompa sent me to the moon and back, why on earth would they do that
Hugh Grant is a marketable actor.
I AM INTERACTING WITH THE CONTENT
The animation of the floating chocolate leaving the jar has a striking similarity to the sensor stuff that was being sucked up in the movie Twister 😅
Timothee as Wonka reminds me of The Onceler from Lorax...It's very hard to live up to an actor who's already given a great performance when you make something like an "unnecessary" prequel. Wilder is magical naturally, I don't know how but it is. It's not even nostalgia speaking because I didn't even like the movie that much as a kid, Gene Wilder's Wonka was something that grew on me as an adult and I'm completely enchanted by him.
Get Wonk
Go Bronk
A few weeks ago I went with my family to the theater to go see Barbie. This trailer played while we were waiting for it to start and my initial thought was "why?" And people were saying the remake with Johnny Depp was bad 💀
It's just way too saccharine. Previous adaptations, and the OG story, are (to varying degrees) whimsical and fun but never without that underlying current of danger that sort of borders on the maniacal. This performance, and this movie, don't seem to have that "is this guy a genius or is he just a psycho" element that gives the whole thing tension and makes it work.
I just want to get the horror adaptation of this franchise already.
That bear movies/twink movies joke flew under the radar
In the original book, the Oompa Loompas were pygmies. In the 1971 film they were little people painted orange, in the 2005 version they were multiple versions of one little person. 2023 we get Hugh Grant 😂😅
I have seen Chalamet only in Dune so far, and I didn't buy his performance at all. Apparently the main characters in Dune were supposed to be kinda unfeeling, but even in the moments were he was supposed to convey some emotion I just felt he was more concerned with looking like a model than acting.
The manufactured whimsy is off the charts in this
This comes off as the "unnecessary Burtonesque energy" of remake Wonka in performance while wanting to look like the older, more subtle "classic" Wonka that Gene Wilder portrayed; and that's a bad combination in a vacuum, but in actual performance it's apparently something you just want to reject the whole time, is the trailer is indicative of the entire film. On top of that, they're just going nuts with the references and callbacks; the most egregious being the "hover chocolate" or whatever. In the Wilder film, at least, it was an experimental _cola_ that made the drinker float unfortunately until they burped to alleviate the effect. But in this _origin_ story, we've got an unestablished, young Wonka with floating *chocolate* he just unleashes on people - which makes no sense as an origin story.
Edit: Just watched a short comparing the three versions and the Burton Wonka had a "lol trauma haha" moment where Wonka addresses the parents and gets hung up on "papa," so either the new one is trying to tie in with the Burton version more than we know, or that's just some kind of reference to the OG book version? I dunno, haven't ever read it, too depressed. Still annoying 😒😅
This is another example of the Boba Fett effect. The point of Wonka is that he's a mysterious side character. Charlie was the main character. Wonka's origin doesn't matter.
The one-word name title really tops it all off in the way of clinical modern marketing tactics that don't really help anything but that's simply the way things are done now so we have to do it. *~WONKA~*
prepare for the 2030 remake of 'Wonka', with Giancarlo Esposito playing it rough as Wonka vs the meth cartel. I mean, chocolate cartel.
also, is it weird that there's so much focus on the shops, when the majority of the original story took place in a factory?
3:25 im flabbergasted at how badly this needed to be said im so grateful to you for thinking of this just immediately
I forget who said this, but someone pointed out how great the original film was at making a clear distinction between the world outside the chocolate factory and the world within it. Like the real world there was very grounded, so it made the factory world seem even more magical. But in this one, the "magic" is everywhere. So what's the point? Just thought that was an interesting observation.
I think it was Mike from RedLetterMedia during their review of Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory. It was a great observation that really pointed out why the original works so well compared to the 2005 version.
I guess Christmas is now on December 15th according to the trailer.
ugh as a Timothée enjoyer this is giving some next-level cognitive dissonance
I saw this being filmed in my hometown on my way to work and there was a literal sea of 13 year old girls surrounding mr timothy, so I expect this will very much be the target audience for this twinkfest
They should have made it like Clockwork Orange and make Wonka like a psycho obsessed with candy.
I’m gonna say it. Willy Wonks as a character requires some of the best acting there is to pull off. Anything below stellar is disastrous
Literally just watched an interview with Gene Wilder from Conan before this was posted.
Honestly, it's a great interview, and Gene being so cool will help you forget this exists.
It was jarring the timing actually
Timmy has the infamous fur glow going on. Thanks jon
From his performance it's easy to see that he didn't audition
Wonka sounds like a slur. Maybe the origin is similar to Cruella where he hears it used and says 'Wonka? I kinda like that'
To me the first movies greatest strength is that you are unsure if Wonka is even telling the truth. Yes there's clearly a lot of wacky things going on, but it seems really sinister. There's no confirming whether or not the kids actually are okay. It's almost like babies first mascot horror. You don't know if those men really came from loompa land or if Wonka painted a bunch of people with dwarfism for a one time show. It's like you and the parents are supposed to be skeptical of what's even happening here and why.
For somebody who grew up with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005), I honestly would’ve loved it if Wonka was actually played by Freddie Highmore, the original Charlie and now the masterful chocolatier. Although I do know that maybe Freddie’s a bit too old, and he usually is more into dramas. Still a great actor
He's a surgeon now, isn't he?
That would be awesome! Just curious, what’s your opinion on the Gene Wilder Wonka movie? (Cuz I really enjoy both Wilder and Depp, watched the hell out of both movies as a kid)
@@Harrison1875he is. He is a surgeon
Or he can play the dad, who is a dentist, or in this case a teeth surgeon.
@@Harrison1875 I literally never knew the surgeon guy played Charlie too 💀
Why did the liquid being poured into the thing have to be CG? Is actual liquid not good enough?
This is the point where I was like, "This is stupid, he should be running the chocolate cartel, not going against it."
"Very Bullshit, and Very Sad" Truly, the best description of this trailer and possibly this movie...
1:34 that "scratch that, reverse it" reading rivals Harrison Ford's infamous "part time" from Indiana Jones 4 as the worst line reading possible. This guy makes Johnny Depp look like Gene Wilder.
2023’s Wonka will revolutionize the “Chocolate Factory” genre by having the most incel Willy Wonka to date
I’ve been waiting patiently for this reaction ever since I originally saw the trailer lol
Hollywood just said "Fuck You" to Roald Dahl works with that idea
What makes me sad is Timothée Chalamet is actually a good actor. Better than Tom Holland for sure. One of his friend should've told him to not accept this.
That or his parents or his agent.
Apparently they didn’t have him even audition…lesson learned
Really hoping they give an origin story or explanation for the spooky tunnel with the chicken getting its head cut off. That'd make this go from a 1/10 to an 11.
Glad to be vindicated in my love for the Johnny Depp version now. 😅 We had it so good that we got his and the Gene Wilder versions years ago.
They very obviously only cast Timothee Chalamet because Johnny Depp was Willy Wonka one time. This is a direct result of that crap.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is absolutely better than Wonka. Why did they make that movie a musical, anyway. Only ones who sang were the oompa loompas
@@ItariatanEven in the book
Seeing Timothée and Johnny Depp’s performances really makes you appreciate how well Gene Wilder did in the original. It’s clearly not easy to avoid making a fool of yourself in this role
What are you talking about? Johnny Depp was great as Willy Wonka, people remember him waaaay more than the other one
@tereza1959 Because hes Johnny Depp. He is more recognisable then Gene Wilder.
That said. Gene Wilders character has waay more depth.
I swear, Keegan Michael-Key is in everything
except that which is good
Hes like nicholas cage but without talent
He's so ubiquitous these days I now roll my eyes whenever I see him.
When you said it was Wonk, I thought you were just saying another word in a French accent. In which case I agree, it is total Wonk.
The Wonk Mind Virus. First you think maybe you wanna make some candy, then you think maybe you wanna give children Everlasting Pubertystoppers. It's an understandable progression.
@@jakemitchell9853 I was thinking wank.
The first movie to make one billion wonkollars
I knew those last thirty seconds would kill Adum and Adum did not disappoint haha