Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
In defense of the original
27 August 2005
While Tim Burton has claimed that his remake is closer to the book, it is purely superficial. Mel Stuart did add some original songs, changed the title, and swapped the nut room for the room with the golden geese, but the integrity and heart is intact. (granted that Burton did add his own subplot about wonka's childhood) Roald Dahl's books are not simply dark fantasies or absurdist romps, but are moreover sensitive and warm in a rather odd way. Dahl's conception of Willy Wonka is more reflected by Gene Wilder, who grounds himself in both worlds of fantasy and reality and moreover is warm, caring and somewhat aloof. This is something that Depp couldn't channel in his interpretation, and actually helps to cause Burton's film a breakdown. There is a quality to the original that cannot be reproduced. It is a far simpler film that doesn't try to be high and mighty. The acting is superb, the effects are simple nearly seamless, and the screenplay is dead on. This film has attained the status of a classic without trying very hard, and will not be forgotten. It needs no on screen antecedents, and I feel that the remake was made more or less to cash in on Burton's swiftly declining originality, and the fruits of the box office. Simply put, the original is far more genuine.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Either you'll love it or leave it
5 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Carnival of Souls is one of my all time favorite horror films. It follows no one else in its camera work, writing, acting, or set design. If you are looking for a John Water's romp, or an Ed Wood epic, stay away from this movie. Yeah, its not perfect, but if you enjoy psychological horror films, check it out. Truly, this was the first horror film that burned itself in my mind. The remarkable thing is that it contains no big special effects, no gore or gross outs, and minimal violence. The heroin of the film is at times cold and distant, and at others compels us to have empathy and fear. Not only is she polarized between two worlds, but the film in itself is. By the way, avoid the colorized version like the plague. Why Fox home video and Mike Nelson thought it was a good idea, I have no clue. So remember,if you're the kind of person who thought Darkness Falls or the remake of The Haunting was great horror, don't see this film. For the rest of you, see it now.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Chaney Does it Again
22 July 2005
I have seen this film many times, and I find myself being drawn into it the more I watch it. Yeah, many of the performances are overdone, and Rupert Julian was a hack of a director, but you will NEVER forget Chaney's performance. In a film of big dramatics, Chaney brings nuance, rhythm, and subtleties to his performance like no one else. ...And by the way, Chaney did not direct the Bal Masque sequence. Whoever posted that is gravely mistaken. However, according to Scott McQueen, Chaney did have a hand in some of the unmasking scene, and one brief insert shot. All I can say is, get the Milestone/Photoplay edition of the film. The quality of it is a revelation, and one of the best restorations of a silent film I have ever seen. If only Turner would release more of the Chaney films in their holdings, especially some of the Browning films. Oh, well maybe someday.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed