A mysterious illiterate orphan with terrible money management skills arrives to the big city, where he proceeds to sneak around the sewage system and pop up to feed strangers chocolate.
Yep, that is one way of looking at Wonka, the prequel, the movie meant as a companion piece to the 1971 version. And it might be more along the lines of Dahl’s writing with its underlying darkness, but for the undeniable fact that it isn’t how Wonka plays. Onscreen, Wonka is pure cinematic delight. A tour-de-force of such cinematic joy and joie de vivre that it’ll melt even the most crust-hearted viewers like …well, chocolate. Chalamet, a man/boy beautiful enough to rock an almost-unibrow is cast perfectly as a whimsical young magician chocolatier with an outsized dream. He sings, he dances, he charms. He wins you over completely, just as he ultimately wins out the city with his chocolate delights. The rest of the cast is perfectly amusing too, including Grant’s hilariously pitch-perfect (almost is that taking away jobs from actors of diminutive stature?) Oompa-Loompa. (Side note: I’m confused about the accents. Most of the cast speaks with English ones. Wonka, despite his British mother, doesn’t. Neither does Key. Both actors surely could manage, so the question remains: why didn’t they? For that nice uniform quality and basic logistics.) Anyway … The movie sets are truly masterful. Masterpiece each and every one. The movie is meant to be a spectacle in the best possible way—a feast for the sense the way chocolate is, and it is genuinely spectacular. It makes you feel childlike wander while possessing adult-like appreciation. A real feat. All in all, Wonka is a thing of beauty. Come with him, and you’ll be in the world of pure imagination!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
December 2023
Categories |