展开全部.
mr nihil**m g**e it a7:
not bad.
wally s.g**e it a9:
a true family film,technically masterfull,brilliantly directed,and depp once prooves himself an excellent actor.the art direction,fantastic.the score,superb.and the fun never stops.
ca ent g**e it a5:
it was a decent movie,but if your like me,and h**e watched the original,th** comes nowhere even close.the oompa loompas were horrible,johnny depp,didnt do a bad job,but h** character(willy wonka)was annoying,silly,and sometimes boring.the one cool thing about th** movie,was that we got to see into wonka's past and how he became a chocolate maker.the young kid,playing charlie,did an excellent job,but overall,th** movie was a huge letdown.alot of the humor fell short,and gene wilder ** a much better fit for willy wonka,both as an actor and in the script.th** was definately a remake of sorts,mainly aimed towards the younger audience.i was hoping it was like the original,but with tim burton's amazing talent.but it wasnt.
dv8 g**e it a3:
oh my god.i hate tim burton's v**ions of,well,just about everything.i realize that th** movie stays closer to the book than willy wonka does,but all the symbol**m,all the mystery about willy wonka are completely obviated,and the movie withers as it becomes sentimental and preachy.
marcela d.g**e it a9:
was a good movie.the actors were well chosen.it certainly got me laughing.i think it was better and funnier than the old one.
tom h g**e it a7:
first off i did not like the first one all that much.second th** movie would h**e gotton a much better score from everybody if it had tried to be less child like and just stick to the adult references.
filmgirl g**e it a3:
what a d**appointment!what's with those stupid oompaloompas?what's with johnny depp?he ** one creepy dude.m**s th** one,trust me!spiro a.g**e it a2:
if you love tim burton flicks and h**en't read the book or seen the wilder movie,you will probably like or even love th** movie.if you've read the dahl book,seen the original movie with wilder,and or d**like burton flicks(as i do),you will probably be d**appointed or outright d**gusted.burton's perverse rendition ** a d**jointed freak show that relies on qui**ness and cinematography over character development and plot.the movie does nothing to d**tingu**h itself and pales in compar**on to the original.it also assininely changes important storylines from the book and the wilder flick to it's detriment.the movie left me thinking,"hmmmm.some of the lines were funny,the sets were neat,and some of the acting was okay,but overall th** really **s".i g**e a 2 rating only because of the qui**ness and cinematography(both burton staples).if you d**like burton,love wilder,and/or dahl,th** movie will p**s you off and le**e you puzzled and empty.otherw**e,rent it and it may amuse you.
captan s.g**e it a4:
one of the least inspiring movies of the last few years.uncolorful,not charming and definitely not funny.johnny depp has to be one of the worst picks for th** character,but honestly,why mess with"willy wonka"to begin with?gene wilder was amazing in the roll,charming and funny,but th** ain't"willy wonka and the chocolate factory",mores the pity!lifeless,uninspiring and bland!i give th** one a 4 for the effects,but there's not much else to be excited about.do yourselves a f**or,go buy the original and let th** one die a slow death.th** review'll s**e 2 hrs.of your life that you will never get back!tim d.g**e it an8:
i went to se th** with low expectations,h**ing heard and read very mixed reviews by critics and friends,and wound up laughing all the way through.it's not a remake of the earlier film-it's an different take,equally valid.johnny depp does great work and the film's sense of humor ** sly and goofy.** it perfect?no.but it's plenty good enough,and it left me smiling.
mr.pie g**e it a10:
th** moovie was pretty damn awesome.
george a.g**e it a5:
johnny depp amazing as always however i think that he's version of willy wonka ** ott.my f**ourite scene in the old film ** where he pretends to fall over and does a forward roll which **en't in the film instead it's replaced by a very tacky song that lets u know wat the rest of the film ** going to be like.a d**sapointing film and should only be seen by those who h**en't read the book or seen the original film.
kumar r.g**e it a9:
tim burton has done a great job in adapting roald dahl's classic book."wily wonka and the chocolate factory"** not a concern here.th** ** not a remake of the movie.it's an adaptation of the book.johnny depp and freddie highmore play a wonderful wily wonka and charlie respectively.a must see for all.
dan h.g**e it a5:
enchanting until the singing starts.depp brilliant again.
eric s.g**e it a3:
not a very good rendetion.too off base from the orginal.too tim burtoney for th** show.
blake t.g**e it a2:
if you h**e always wanted to see jack sparrow try to do willy wonka,th** ** the movie for you.otherw**e,you'd be better off spending you money at the dent**t.
lala poloza g**e it a10:
pros:stunnningly original,great acting done by depp,dark humor.cons:some things from the original were taken out.overview:one of the best most orignila comedies in years.gets us thinking,where would the world be without tim burton.
mike g.g**e it a9:
with a lot of pressure to live up to,burton's version of"charlie"stakes out its own ground and soars on its own merits.th** **n't the hippy-trippy early 70s colorful world of willy wonka,but instead a postmodern dark version of the tale,and probably far closer to what dahl initially intended.the film works,entertaining as well as le**ing you a little unsettled.
rev.gomez g**e it a7:
not a great movie,but not horrible.it was entertaining enough.i just need to post in response to the resident genius 'pooch'.okay,willy wonka and the chocolate factory probably should h**e been left pr**tine.the idea here was to make it similar to the book.and,th** ** for you pooch,the book was titled charlie and the chocolate factory.get a clue!scott j g**e it a9:
hey geniuses,the ones bashing the film as a"remake of a classic,"or as one person put it,g**e it a"new name"and"tried to make it a little darker,"here's a newsflash:th** was originally a book.the name **n't new,it's the original title of the book,the 'classic' diz-nee film changed the title,and actually made dahl's story sappy and less dark.burton's film **n't perfect,but he comes close to getting it right while the diz-nee film got most of it wrong.the new music ain't great,but it's a lot better than the syrupy show-tunes wedged into the diz-nee film.
trent s.g**e it a4:
could h**e done without the musical numbers.
tonya t.g**e it a10:
i loved th** movie!tim burton ** my f**orite director and th** was wonderfully creepy and fun!shane j.g**e it a3:
it just didn't h**e the same fun factor as the first one.also,depp seemed like he was just trying way to hard to be wierd.the movie was just not as good as the orginal.
[anonymous]g**e it a9:
depp and burton h**e done it again.th** ** a magical tale that will live on forever.pure magic.
pooch g**e it a2:
th** movie was possibly the worst idea to come out of tim burtons hatfull of worst ideas.remaking the classic movie,willy wonka and the chocolate facotry,and giving it a new name,trying to knock it off as being different,what a horrible idea.they tried to make it a little darker by including wonka's childhood,but that ended up **ing a big one.it was a bad idea to make th** movie.period.the classic movie has now been ruined for me,since i h**e seen these new cheap knock-offs for oompa loompas.the oompa loompas used to be my f**orite part,and now i just want to slice my wr**ts open everytime i hear their name mentioned.the music **ed too.
katherine b g**e it a2:
th** movie ** still horrendous.i would call it"scum,"but i'm too nice of a person.in my earlier review,i pointed out positive aspects of the movie.well,really,i pointed out aspects of the movie that weren't as devastatingly horrible as depp's performance.the oompa loompas are bad,the writing ** bad,the acting ** bad,and the aesthetic elements are only enough to entertain those who aren't yet old enough to understand that movies aren't all about pretty pictures and sing alongs.the only reason i give it a 2 now ** to appease nick r.and i do*think about[my]score*.
bman g**e it a3:
depp aint no gene wilder.what a pile of tripe.
crystal s.g**e it a10:
i loved th** movie.tim burton ** the best no matter whta people think.the movie was not a remake or a sequel.it was what tim thought it should be so he expressed it how he saw it,u go tim burton.work ur magic!malcom m.g**e it a4:
not as good as they say.quite d**sapointing really,coming from burton,and depp's character lacks,well,'depth'.what can i say?most might find it sweet,yes,to some extend.colorful,oh yes,that comes with the territory.but in all th** kiddy delight and muse,the approach tim took felt creepy and pretty d**turbing,than anything.i mean,c'mon,no matter how bad and spoilt or rotten a kid's attitude,he or she shouldn't be pun**hed to the extend that mr burton deemed justifiable to teach these kids a lesson.coz,as it turns out,the lesson was extreme and for life!and heck,the kid's were still rotten,and worst off.maybe he's right,i dunno,but it was...