there's only one thing WONKA is missing (review) 

Add all your others nods this film made to the Gene Wilder adaptation, because there are so, so many! 1) Use the code TREE for 40% off World Anvil with the link worldanvil.com/?c=mltt Or else try it out for free!!

To have had WONKA more dark, would be to repeat what's already been done in two other versions, this more...naive virginal Wonka suites the story they were telling, properly He is only sneaky in the original, because the Parents & kids won't stick to the rules.

No shame in randomly crying in the movies. You never know what it'll make you think of or remember. I once cried watching TMNT Out of the Shadows lmao!! "they love each other so much!"

what made me tear up is the realization is the older you get you lose the magic of the world and you see the dark underbelly which is what gene wilder version shows

Yeah I kinda expected that it would be just like Mario movie with people saying that it will suck hard but turning out to be a genuinely enjoyable and charming movie over all with some flaws here and there. I personally can’t wait to watch this movie cause it looks so good and it looks so promising as an enjoyable kids film for kids.

You are on the money with what you are saying and I thought exactly the same thing first time watching it. I have to say in regards to Timothees performance seeming somewhat flat is kind of a bit of a double edged sword. This young, soft, naive Wonka before his success had that innocent charm that made that ticket moment what it was. Because we knew his innocent character we cared about how he felt. If they had of made him closer to Gene so soon it most likely wouldn't have hit the same because he was hardened by life at that point.

I'd argue that for as much as Noodle wants parental figure, and their ages or how much things are inferred with her, Noodle is actually very much the older sister to Charlie's younger brother. Which is an interesting dynamic and honestly i wish they leaned in with that more.

changes I would make to "fix" wonka. 1. the couple he gets together is Charlie's parents. 2. Oompa chocolate beans can.make vast amounts despite their size. 3. His mother telling him.of the fantastical places he'd travel too. 4. Noodle and crew returns to join him at factory. 5. Wonka made Deal to never make chocolate again , keeps his word by having the oompa loompa make it instead. 5. Cartel trying to figure out his recipes. 6. Wonka tries their watered down chocolate and calling them out on it.

I'm glad to hear it's good. This is a movie I actually thought could be good, because 1) it's covering a new part of Wonka's life instead of being a remake of the previous 2 movies, and 2) because they made it look like it would be a fun musical instead of cutting out all the music like the Mulan remake or trying to promote the movie with the phrase "girl boss" (which signals "1-dimensional strong female blah blah blah bad writing" to me). More like the Barbie movie than the awful Mulan remake, essentially. Not every movie needs to be all dark and brooding.

I just watched this movie yesterday and I have to say that it is so much fun! I’m gonna go in depth into parts of the movies and characters that could be considered as SPOILERS. This is long and very unorganized I don’t expect anyone to read this but wanted to put spoiler warning just in case. I love the human/animal connection that is prevalent throughout the film. Noodle singing about her family while petting the giraffe, Abigail, is heartwarming. Especially since it creates a symbol of Giraffes representing motherhood. So, Noodle singing in that scene can be interpreted as her seeing her mother in Abigail. For her, it’s her only chance to speak to her mom. Milk also symbolizes motherhood. Which further strengthens what Abigail represents. Wonka is the one to milk Abigail which causes the transformation of a plot device to an important theme that shows the character’s motivations. It mirrors the end when Wonka leads Noodle to her mother. A huge part of Wonka’s character is his motivations. Which are built upon a yearning for his mother. Every chocolate he makes alludes to continuing her work. That means only using giraffe’s milk for the chocolate. Something that is a constant in his life, something that isn’t a drastic change. Specifically, every giraffe he encounters and milk feels like his mother is there. As he continues her work, he is keeping motherhood alive. This mirrors Wonka unwrapping the bar for his mother’s secret. A reminder of her lies over the chocolate. It’s the only thing he has left from his mother: chocolate she made using giraffe milk. Something that helps him move on as he shares it with his “new” family. The search and need for their (noodle and wonka) mothers is the foundation on why they work as a duo; it creates the trope of a found family. I think the other four were added because the filmmakers wanted it to look like a whole family. Traditionally, two people can’t represent that (they totally can). I almost want to say the duo/friendship would be less confusing and awkward if noodle was slightly older. At the same time, it can be perceived as a brother/sister relationship that is strong because of the absence of their true family, something they both want and need. Another idea could be Wonka acting like an imaginary friend type. Not actually but how he is presented to Noodle. He takes her away from her horrible life into a magical land where she is safe and happy. The latter works when viewing Noodle as a mixture of Annie, Dorthy, and Alice. A lot of scenes present her like those characters while Wonka resembles the mad hatter. The visual imagery is both gorgeous and impactful. A great example is seeing the wrapped chocolate bar made by Wonka’s mom. We see it in a first person pov shot and it’s (i think) in his hand. Wonka caresses the wrapper as if it’s an old picture of his mother. It fits well with both the film and Wonka as a character. The constant need to continue his mother's work is great motivation for what and why he is trying to achieve. Another example is the flamingos. In that scene, where they comment on them, you see the balloons they use to escape in the far right corner. It’s a ripple effect of a whimsical influence for the flamingos. Wonka replies to Noodle when she asks why they don’t fly away with “Maybe they haven’t realized they can” (loosely quoted). The balloons are tied to prevent them from flying away, through Wonka cutting them, they fly away. The flamingos follow suit, realizing there is nothing tying them down. The fact that we keep seeing the flamingos through the film is a reminder of that influence. It is their devotion to Wonka’s influence that keeps them around to help. Looking up what flamingos symbolize, we get balance and potential which seems to work well into the overall plot and what it’s supposed to represent. The imagery is strong because flamingos are also very distinguishable compared to most birds; they’re pink, large, and are interesting enough to be found in zoos. Smaller that made the film good: The songs were absolutely impactful and enticing. The endearment of the movie comes mainly from the songs. Everyone’s performance was A+ material.Even small and quick delivery was effective and worked to make my friend and me lose our minds with laughter. There was no moment where my eyes weren’t glued to the screen. The narrative is never dragged on or slows down. Now, onto critiques. I can fully understand the problem with the casting of Chalamet. But, my reasons are a bit different than yours, which are still valid. Its hard to not see him as Timothee Chalamet instead of Wonka. A good example by what I mean is the decision to not cast Harry Styles as Elvis for the biopic. It’s hard to separate him from his name. It would be hard to see him as Elvis because his level of fame and impact is very similar to Elvis (don’t fight me on this, music icons continue to happen even if it doesn’t affect you). The movie wouldn’t work because almost everyone would be like “That’s just Harry Styles.” Something that takes you out of the watching experience. That being said, people who know next to nothing about Chalamet wouldn’t have this problem. But, my history with Chalamet goes deep after watching CMBYN. I have been following his career, even some crappy movies he had been in. That being said, Chalamet mainly starred in indie like dramas that mainly have commercial success. I’m not saying he's this unknown actor, more that he’s only recently jumped into blockbuster roles with Dune and Now Wonka. Dune is a bit of a different blockbuster because he still holds the traits that he is known for playing. Because of his roles and being very well known, it’s hard to not see him on screen. Moments in the film, I said “That's just Timothee Chalemet.” That being said, I’m glad that he is straying away from being typecast and showing his acting range. He’s never really done something like Wonka. He’s been in weird, comedic roles (Don’t look up is the best example i can think of). But films like Beautiful Boy shows this impactful performance where he’s able to stray away from just being seen as himself. I think that works because he’s nothing like most of the roles he plays. So, I mean this when I say, the mannerisms, facial expressions, and line delivery in Wonka is just him. That might be why it takes me out of the film at points. But, having watched many interviews and clips of him, a lot of the mannerism is sort of how he actually acts. In the scene when he first shows the chocolate briefcase to noodle, I turned to my friend and said “That’s just Timothee Chalamet.” Thankfully, it didn’t take me out of the movie too much though. It actually made it that much more fun. I was happy to see him in that role, but was a little disappointed with the lack of peaches in the film. A problem I tried to look over is the common tropes they would use. I’m the first to say that common tropes are not a bad thing. If you use them right and differently it makes a refreshing and memorable film. In my opinion, a good story can make a cliche not a cliche But they didn’t do anything to make those tropes different. I was absolutely seething when Noodle threw a book against a wall, only for it to open and reveal the book they were looking for. (I don't remember exactly what the book was.) It was too on the mark and predictable. They could’ve done something with that to match the tone of the movie. Make her throw the book and have her expect that to happen, only for the book to be in plain sight. Not that great of an example and probably a cliche in itself but it shows they could have done more with that scene. I cannot believe they unironically said “When do we start 😏” TWICE I absolutely agree that the rest of the people in debt needed more development. There were so many times when they could have done this. Perhaps another scene where they talk through the window or during the scrub scrub song. I needed something extra so I can care and feel connected to them. Overall, I enjoyed and immersed myself in every part of the film. It was handled with care and love. It did so without banking off either of its predecessors. I almost want to say that it isn’t entirely a prequel to Gene's Wonka. There is no way he wouldn't still have Noodle in his life somehow after these events. I want to rewatch it again a few more times but right now. I give it 4/5

Your review is really making me want to go see Wonka. I was originally planning on skipping it but on my next day off I’m definitely gonna go out with my friends and watch it.

I always love listening to your view of films, you always bring things out that I didn’t think about or necessary see. I totally agree with you it does feel as tho Timothy was used because they knew his face would bring people to see it, and I think that’s a shame because wonka is such a compelling and interesting character in himself and the past movies have done enough for you to want a back story with out the face of Timothy. Although I do really think he’s a good actor. The relationship between wonka and noodle I really enjoyed, I don’t think you see enough of that kind of platonic relationship between a man and woman and it’s very neutral so I really did like there relationship but I do think the chemist was a little off but I don’t know why. And I liked that wonka leans more to a nice character rather than the more complex character in the 2 other films I felt like it showed the ideal view we can have as kids maturing into adult hood. If they do a 2 I would like to see the characters development into the reclusive character that we know too, I like that they have given that space to do that

I like the video of strolling around town. Very clever!

I love your whole walking concept for the video. Never seen so much green before in a suburb

I love all your videos, but I'm still hoping to see more Stand By Me character analysis, particularly Chris Chambers!💜

I liked it except for 3 major issues. 1. where'd he get the chocolate he was making, to sell thousands he would've needed thousands. 2. No way they found the "mom" after learning her name in 20 min.

I literally just came out of the cinema watching it and I see you have uploaded this 😂

It is an amazing movie. And it is a prequel that honestly fits Willy Wonka as a character and really makes sense. I liked all the nods and references to the Gene Wilder film. It felt like a love letter to the ones who worked on the original movie 5 decades ago. And the music in this movie is wonderful. It was a great movie without a doubt and I am happy with what I saw

I had absolutely no intention of seeing this movie. I grew up loving the Gene Wilder version and was sorely disappointed by the Johnny Depp version. I’m glad they at least went for a different angle instead of another straight up book adaptation. After listening to your review, I am curious to give it a watch!

Most people heard about this and immediately thought of the 'Doctor Doolittle' remake with Robert Downey Jr., and said 'Yeah, no thanks, we've had enough of that, thank you'. And quite frankly, why does Willy Wonka need a cinematic origin film? The little backstory bits we got in the Tim Burton remake were more than enough to give us insight as to why he is the way that he is. It didn't need a kind of 'chocolate mafia' and a 'church of chocoholics' or whatever kind of excessive silliness. Frankly, I don't Wonka needs excessively silly villains; Wonka, himself, is eccentric enough, and that's the fun of his character, that he's so wacky and nonsensical compared to literally everyone else, and part of the fun is seeing how the normal people react to his Wonka-themed nonsense. You also keep comparing the movie with the Paddington movies, but... 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' isn't 'Paddington', and it never can be. They are two fundamentally different IPs [and that is also taking the Gene Wilder version into account] Paddington is an inhumanly nice and polite Brazilian bear in a small British town, while Willy Wonka is an extremely eccentric candy-making prodigy and businessman. These two just don't cross over in tone, very well. Even the Gene Wilder Wonka had his memorably sinister (and iconic) eccentric moments, while Paddington can never conceivably have those. Quite frankly; it sounds like this version of Wonka was neutered, either because they really wanted an 'emotional core', or because the director just isn't the right pick for a Willy Wonka film. As someone who never had any love for the Gene Wilder version, really respects the Tim Burton version, and sees this movie as spiritually the same as the Dr. Doolittle remake [and taking into consideration the other observations I've made]; what incentive have I to see it? How will I really like it?

I don't think you're too critical. I was recapping the story to my son and I said that the 75 version has a really long Act I but it end up paying off in the end. You know who all the kids are and their flaws before they enter the factory. This film didn't establish the side characters well enough and so their involvement seemed very rushed and their importance to the plot wasa bit confusing. My only other negativity was how Boggis, Bunce and Bean, the three chocolatiers, were very much moustache twirling villains and didn't land well for me. Apart from that I thought the rest of the movie was near perfect. I loved the whimsical feel and optimism of Willy Wonka

Is this movie supposed to be like Chocolat?

Haven't seen the movie yet, but I found you comparing it to Paddington to be comparing apples to oranges. I was more interested in hearing how it might have been as a backstory to the adult Wonka we know from the Wilder and Depp movies, not how it wasn't as good as a movie about a bear.

I loved that movie! The colors, the songs, the fantasy! The happy endings! Do I still have criticisms? Yes, of course. It made me really uncomfortable when the white Mrs and her white henchman tried to practically *enslave* only the black girl out of all the others. When the black girl out of all the others was the only one (besides Wonka) who got beaten on-screen. I assume the police chief was supposed to turn brown from consuming so much chocolate, but isn't it brown-face nonetheless? I think there were just some insensitive details. And I had my doubts too about Chalamet's performance and his character via the script. If they call it Wonka, I must ask myself, would this Wonka be able to turn into the Wonka from the book? They could call it anything else and Chalamet's "Wonka" would still fit. It's still a fun movie lol these are nitpicks

As someone in the very small minority who never liked the Gene Wilder movie (I watched it a couple of times and not as a kid), I'm not super excited to see this. I do really like Chalamet though. I kinda did enjoy the Depp movie though. I like the weirdness of Burton, contrived as it is at this point. But turning children's stories into something a bit dark has always fascinated me. Maybe Daul's story was dark originally...I never read it. So idk. Not even sure what my point is. I guess I'm just a bit dumbfounded at the love for the original, though I respect it.

So here for the musk slander, love your vids

After hearing all this I'm looking forward to seeing this movie

"It's a blast! Def go watch it!" "Am I beeing to critical?" 😄 well, no. You made me go watch it.

I went with an open mind Im a huge Gene fan & a little of me wonders if TC is trying to be the new Johnny D ( first wonka next Edward Scissor hand remakes :( I esp loathe that idea Johnny is Edward imho) Im also not Hugh G biggest fans but LOVED his performance here Perfecto! & TC was brilliant the whole movie was superb The back drop the cinematography excellent & he hasn't got a bad voice either the cameos were great too (Ghosts/ horrible histories) Noodles character did not shine but i think if they gave her the onscreen moments to show how she was the brains it would have downplayed Wonka (TC) "genius" which would downplay Wonka i wonder if there is a sequel in hand and the characters are developed more? ( maybe Noodle betrays him & thus making him bitter & reclusive??) did find a tear when he sang pure imagination

I loved it definitely gonna see it again

SPOILER: Magic is missing

I really enjoyed it the film and your commentary. Hugh Grant has really come into his own since he stopped being the romantic interest and started playing the baddies!

first!! also I love your videos bro

Also wait are you writing a book? Just got to the sponsor section.

Johnny Depp was truly iconic as Willy Wonka, I don't know why people forget so easily!

- Criticizes movie for 18 minutes - “Easily a 9/10” ???

was not going to see this movie until this review, I assumed it was another useless reboot.

I just wanna know why there always have to be these bombastic, corny musical numbers.

TC has cold dead shark eyes and he scares me.

Diversity casting

The firlm was missing a decent script, songs, and performers. Chalamet is not a singer. The casting was awful.

i heard paul king was discussing about possibilities for a sequel

i wonder why this movie released 8 days earlier in uk than USA