Just saw a great review
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a fable about the spiritual path. The boy Charlie is the spiritual seeker. The Enchanted Factory is the goal (holiness). Willy Wonka is the master who instructs and tests the disciple, and the stages of the visit are the initiatory tests, which eliminate the wicked children (seekers without sincerity, with hidden motives other than spiritual fulfillment). Ultimately, Charlie's election is not due to obedience or impeccable conduct along the way (Willy Wonka shows him the number of mistakes he made during the visit). In the end, what leads the boy to success is his intention, regarding whether or not to return the "Everlasting Gobstopper", a small object that is a symbolic find because, like intention or faith, it is something small but infinite, and it brings extraordinary results (the "key to the kingdom",the inheritance of the Factory, the election).
Regarding the differences between the 1971 Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory and Tim Burton's 2005 remake, besides the suppression of the symbolic elements of the spiritual journey, there is also a psychoanalytic addition of "explaining" Wonka's motivations by paternal conflicts. The original Wonka's motivation was purely spiritual. Finding a spiritual heir, his successor in the chain of saints. As Shaykh Nazim says, the heart of the Shaykh is always looking for those who seek the Path. Wonka's second motivation, derived from the first, is solidarity with the weakest: to make Charlie his successor to take care of his "flock", the Oompa Loompas, who represent believers who, even without spiritual aptitude, are virtuous (and obedience, perhaps the most beautiful of virtues, is the main quality of the Oompa Loompas), they need guidance and support (by the way, every novice disciple is an Oompa Loompa). Wonka is explicit in the film about this, telling Grandpa Joe that he needed a successor to TAKE CARE of the Oompa Loompas.
>Adaptation was so shit that Roald Dahl himself banned a sequel
Reminds me of people bent out of shape Wizard of Oz, also a musical, wasn't exactly the same as the book.
Its like stephen king with the shining. Who the frick cares if the author gets mad they changed some stuff when in both cases the movies are ultimately way more well known
Except it wasn’t shit, nearly everything about this adaptation is timeless from the music to the characters. Dahl had a melty because they didn’t consider his script. I will never understand why Cinemaphile dunks on King for having the same behavior but suck this guy’s wiener for being a gay tbh
Did they ever mention the bugs that Charlotte catches in her web and like their screams or anything like that? I feel like in a world of talking animals, with one that subsists off of other animals by her very nature, that this subject would be mentioned.
This movie has the most accurate depiction of artifical intelligence in movies.
Johnny Depp Wonka >>> Chalamet gay Wonka.
not even close
Chalamet was fricking boring.
You are a gay.
you are gay
I made a thread.
2 days before yesterday.
You know what was two days before yesterday? Make a thread and you're gay day. You're gay. Fricking homosexual
Just saw a great review
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a fable about the spiritual path. The boy Charlie is the spiritual seeker. The Enchanted Factory is the goal (holiness). Willy Wonka is the master who instructs and tests the disciple, and the stages of the visit are the initiatory tests, which eliminate the wicked children (seekers without sincerity, with hidden motives other than spiritual fulfillment). Ultimately, Charlie's election is not due to obedience or impeccable conduct along the way (Willy Wonka shows him the number of mistakes he made during the visit). In the end, what leads the boy to success is his intention, regarding whether or not to return the "Everlasting Gobstopper", a small object that is a symbolic find because, like intention or faith, it is something small but infinite, and it brings extraordinary results (the "key to the kingdom",the inheritance of the Factory, the election).
Regarding the differences between the 1971 Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory and Tim Burton's 2005 remake, besides the suppression of the symbolic elements of the spiritual journey, there is also a psychoanalytic addition of "explaining" Wonka's motivations by paternal conflicts. The original Wonka's motivation was purely spiritual. Finding a spiritual heir, his successor in the chain of saints. As Shaykh Nazim says, the heart of the Shaykh is always looking for those who seek the Path. Wonka's second motivation, derived from the first, is solidarity with the weakest: to make Charlie his successor to take care of his "flock", the Oompa Loompas, who represent believers who, even without spiritual aptitude, are virtuous (and obedience, perhaps the most beautiful of virtues, is the main quality of the Oompa Loompas), they need guidance and support (by the way, every novice disciple is an Oompa Loompa). Wonka is explicit in the film about this, telling Grandpa Joe that he needed a successor to TAKE CARE of the Oompa Loompas.
Not bad!
>Adaptation was so shit that Roald Dahl himself banned a sequel
>All remakes are shit
Wow, such kino
a bad adaptation but still a great film
>Adaptation was so shit that Roald Dahl himself banned a sequel
Reminds me of people bent out of shape Wizard of Oz, also a musical, wasn't exactly the same as the book.
How old are you?
six, I like reruns
Its like stephen king with the shining. Who the frick cares if the author gets mad they changed some stuff when in both cases the movies are ultimately way more well known
glass elevator is pretty out there and would be very different anyway
Except it wasn’t shit, nearly everything about this adaptation is timeless from the music to the characters. Dahl had a melty because they didn’t consider his script. I will never understand why Cinemaphile dunks on King for having the same behavior but suck this guy’s wiener for being a gay tbh
Yeah it's amazing how authors b***h and moan when their book nobody ever read gets turned into a movie beloved by many
Did they ever mention the bugs that Charlotte catches in her web and like their screams or anything like that? I feel like in a world of talking animals, with one that subsists off of other animals by her very nature, that this subject would be mentioned.
This and Hocus Pocus are part of the
>we played them on TV 24/7 therefore they're iconic
pantheon of boomer slop
>boomer slop
slow down with zapping that cynicism gun
The new movie was so goddamn homosexual I couldn't believe it.
Thank god.
My boomer dad hates this movie.
is you're dad fat and/or a selfish/greedy piece of shit?
I don't the get appeal of the story. Like overall.
Is the movie just for people who hate children?
I mean if you were ever around kids you get why Wonka hates them
my parents and friend's parents used to say willy wonka as a euphemism for your doodle, which is childish Australian slang for penis
Imagine a timeline when the two removed kids are canon. Unironically their sections are the most brilliant part by Dahl