De gustibus non est disputandum and all that, but I am often puzzled by friends’ excitement about a forthcoming film, an excitement usually born of films of which the new one is a sequel. So it was that, based on the number of excited friends who asked me if I had seen Wonka, I viewed the new film about the Roald Dahl character of “Chocolate Factory” fame.
I must confess that, though I have a vague recollection of generally enjoying the 1971 film starring Gene Wilder, I had decided reservations about it, as indeed I have about much of Dahl’s work. It seems to me to have a dark edginess to it which, even as an adult, I find disturbing, while I certainly question its suitability for children. Or am I being too protective? In any case, I have to confess I did not even view the later film starring Johnny Depp. However, spurred on by my friends’ excitement, I decided to sample the new film in the series.
In fact, Wonka is that episode familiar today in many series films, a prequel attempting to show the origins of the original story. Thus, it introduces viewers to a young Willie Wonka arriving in a city with the ambition to open up his own chocolate store. The mythological city, with its fanciful mix of Gothic and Classical architecture, is where a decidedly naïve Willie is certainly not ready for what lies ahead. He rapidly (and generously) gives away most of his money, then rents a room in a highly questionable establishment, failing to read the small print in the contract. Thus, he finds himself a virtual prisoner in a laundry run by a grim proprietor, Mrs. Scrubitt.
Further challenges arise as Wonka is unaware that in the city where he hopes to fulfill his dream, a “Chocolate Cartel” has taken control of all chocolate production, aided by a corrupt police officer and an equally corrupt priest (which further causes me again to wonder if this is really the film to take the children to).
Clearly, they do not welcome Wonka, even though he produces magical chocolate. (Note: adults may wish to instruct children as to the meaning of “cartel” before taking them to see the film!)
What follows is largely predictable, especially as we all know the outcome. As Willy Wonka determinedly pursues his goal of establishing himself as a chocolatier, he engages in a variety of adventures, accompanied by an orphan, Noodle, also a prisoner of the laundress.
Much of this involves a variety of clever strategies and inventions on the part of the hero and ranges from making the laundry more efficient so that the owner will not notice the workers’ absence, to milking a giraffe! More thoughtful children may wonder why Wonka is so clever and yet so naïve and easily set back in his endeavours.
It is, of course, decidedly whimsical, often imaginative, and very, very complicated. To accompany everything, there are a number of musical sequences with songs heavy on rhythm, light on melody, and not particularly engaging lyrically, though they do help move the action forward. The settings are decorative, colourful, and crowded with detail – a testimony to computer technology and the creativity of the production crew.
The cast throw themselves into the proceedings with appropriate gusto and generally acquit themselves well. Timothee Chalamet offers a rather bland, inoffensive portrayal of Wonka, and manages to do so throughout. Calah Lane sweetly portrays Noodle as an adventurous and determined companion to Wonka, providing a great role model for young girls. Olivia Coleman clearly enjoys sinking her teeth (almost literally) into her portrayal of a villainess, while Hugh Grant provides a nicely caustic, scene-stealing Oompa Loompa.
Wonka clearly aims at diverting its viewers, though throughout I found myself wondering at whom it is aimed. Adults may find in it a political comment as it skirts commenting on organized crime, the abuse by cartels of the underprivileged and gullible, and even child exploitation. Children may find parts of it puzzling, while being diverted by the inventions of the plot and complexity of the animation.
Writers Simon Farnaby and Paul King have clearly aimed at providing homage to Dahl’s creation, but I leave it to more avid fans to determine just how successful they have been.
As a footnote to all this, Dahl fans may wish to view The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar and three other (very) short films based on Dahl’s short stories. Available on Netflix, they are superbly cast with actors such as Ralph Fiennes, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Ben Kingsley. Moreover, thanks to producer-director Wes Anderson, they are ingeniously made so that they are rather like a delightful children’s book which invites one to open windows on certain pages before switching to the next. Again, they reflect that really dark edginess that is typical of the author, but they are a filmgoer’s delight.
Share your thoughts and contribute to the ongoing conversation by sending us a Letter to the Editor.