SecondWindGroup
patreon
[COLUMN] Wonka Flattens Its Willy | by Darren Mooney
🕑 Added 2023-12-15 21:00:05 +0000 UTC
NOTE: This piece contains spoilers for Wonka.
This may sound like it is damning with faint praise, but Wonka is much better than “a Willy Wonka prequel” has any right to be.
A lot of this is down to director Paul King, who co-wrote the script with his Paddington collaborator Simon Farnaby. King infuses the movie with a dynamism and an energy that carries it along. It is a film with clear emotional and character arcs, with a strong grasp of structure and with an obvious enthusiasm for the old-fashioned musical. Coming up to Christmas, particularly after Wish faltered with critics and audiences, Wonka offers good old-fashioned family fun in time for the festive season.
As one might expect from a prequel to a book that has been adapted into two very successful films, Wonka leans hard on nostalgia. When Lofty the Oompa Loompa (Hugh Grant) shows up, he dutifully riffs on the classic “Oompa Loompa” song from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. Composers Joby Talbot and Neil Hannon weave “Pure Imagination” into the film’s soundscape. It spoils little to reveal that the movie ends with Willy (Timothée Chalamet) establishing his chocolate factory.
There is something inherently comforting in all of that nostalgia, in those references and allusions to a beloved children’s classic. To the credit of King and Farnaby, this desire to reconnect with the innocent wonder of childhood is woven into the text of the film. Willy arrives in town to make and sell chocolate, but his character motivation is firmly rooted in an attempt to reconnect to the happy childhood that he spent with his mother (Sally Hawkins).
This backstory is perhaps a little overwrought and heavy-handed, effectively the flipside of the origin story that Tim Burton offered in his version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which framed Willy’s (Johnny Depp) choice of career as an act of rebellion against his dentist father (Christopher Lee). Chalamet’s version of Willy remembers the chocolate that his mother would make for him on his birthday. He believes that, if he can succeed as a chocolatier, he might commune with her again.
This is an effective emotional hook. Willy Wonka is an eccentric and unusual character, so giving him such a straightforward motivation makes it easier for the audience to root for him. After all, while Gene Wilder and Johnny Depp were the stars of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, they were never the protagonists of the story. Charlie Bucket (Peter Ostrum, Freddie Highmore) was the focal character, with Willy Wonka serving as a trickster foil.
In Wonka, Willy is still weird. Chalamet has a certain off-kilter energy that distinguishes him from his contemporaries, more conventional young leading men like Tom Holland or Jacob Elordi. It’s telling that Chalamet’s big franchise play wasn’t a superhero franchise like Spider-Man, although he was reportedly on the shortlist, it was something as bizarre and unusual as Dune. Chalamet brings that unconventional style to Willy. He’s alternatingly intense and fanciful, introspective and flamboyant.
However, there are limits. Ultimately, Wonka presents the eponymous weirdo as a conventional hero. The movie’s morality is clear cut. Willy is introduced not even fresh off the boat, singing optimistically about his ambitions and dreams as he arrives in port. The canny locals quickly spot a mark, and Willy is promptly separated from his money. Even then, the film goes out of its way to underscore that Willy is fundamentally decent. He gives his second-to-last coin to a poor beggar on the street.
Wonka depicts a world populated by clear-cut heroes and villains, setting Willy against the predatory hostel owner Mrs. Scrubbit (Olivia Colman), the corrupt Chief-of-Police (Keegan-Michael Key), and the sinister Chocolate Cartel headed by Arthur Slugworth (Paterson Joseph). Tricked into indentured servitude by Scrubbit, Willy befriends a young, abandoned girl named Noodle (Calah Lane) and a colorful collection of other laborers. He concocts a plan to free them all and start his business.
Wonka positions Willy as a wholesome figure. He clearly cares about Noodle and the other victims of Scrubbit’s schemes. His partnership with Noodles is more than mere expedience. He promises her a lifetime’s supply of chocolate and begins delivering immediately. At the turn of the third act, Slugworth is able to leverage Willy into submission by forcing the young business to abandon his dreams of opening a story in return for Slugworth buying out Scrubbit’s contracts on her laborers.
This is a large part of why the movie works as well as it does. Wonka never asks its audience to feel uneasy or uncomfortable about the eponymous character. His actions might be unpredictable, but his motivations are always pure. Willy is a selfless and sincere hero, who is just eccentric enough to be compelling but never strange enough to appear threatening. Befitting his grand ambitions as a chocolatier, this version of Willy is sweet to the core.
However, this approach also feels like something of a betrayal of the source material, pushing the beloved and iconic character towards something much more generic and conventional. Like most of Roald Dahl’s classic children’s stories, there is a darkness nestled at the heart of the original Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Critic Ann-Marie Cahill argues, not unreasonably, that the book is a horror story in which Charlie is “the final girl.”
In Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Wonka is an eccentric and lonely tycoon. Unmarried and childless, he claims to be “much older” than he seems. He invites a bunch of children into his factory, subjecting them to a variety of temptations and tortures. The children all survive the experience, but Wonka is somewhat indifferent to their safety. When Veruca Salt gets whisked down a chute to the furnace, Wonka muses, “There’s always a chance they decided not to light it today.”
As with so many of Dahl’s books, there's something dark nestled at the heart of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The original draft of the story imagined Charlie as a Black child covered in chocolate and delivered to Wonka’s son. The published version of the story includes a sly dick joke. It is no wonder that popular internet memes posit that Willy Wonka is a serial killer. There is something unpleasant bubbling beneath this fantastical story.
That carries to the film adaptations. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a frequently unsettling watch, to the point that even the young actors on set felt uncomfortable. Julie Dawn Cole, who played Veruca Salt in the movie, acknowledges that shooting the memorable tunnel sequence was “scary.” Gene Wilder is an incredibly charming comedic performer, but his portrayal of Wonka vacillates between menacing and maniacal to great effect.
Wilder famously insisted that he be introduced in the film as a doddering old man with a cane, only to suddenly reveal his true appearance with a dynamic summersault. When director Mel Stuart asked why he wanted to be introduced in that way, Wilder explained, “[B]ecause no one will know from that point on whether I am lying or telling the truth.” Widler tapped into that untrustworthiness and that unknowability that defined Willy Wonka.
Johnny Depp adopted a similar approach. Much of the discussion around Depp’s performance as Willy Wonka focused on comparisons to Michael Jackson, which had decidedly sinister undercurrents even then. For what it’s worth, despite expressing a desire to play the pop star on screen, Depp has consistently denied modelling his performance on Jackson, instead arguing that he “imagined what George Bush would be like incredibly stoned.”
Depp acknowledged the unsettling effect of Wilder’s take on the character. “It was brilliant but subtle,” Depp told The Los Angeles Times. “So that scares the crap out of you.” Depp’s take was similarly uncomfortable. He wore veneers that “changed the shape of [his] face a little bit”, although Burton reportedly talked him down from a prosthetic nose. Interviews with younger audience members tended to settle on the word “freaky” to describe the performance.
There is something undeniably dangerous about these earlier takes on Willy Wonka, evoking fairytale figures like the Pied Piper of Hamelin or Rumpelstiltskin. That danger is entirely missing from Chalamet’s take on the character in Wonka. Chalamet has some of the eccentricity that defined Wilder and Depp’s versions of the entrepreneur, but none of the edge. He’s much more conventional. He’s much flatter. Wonka cares a great deal more about Noodles than he does about any of the children he invites to tour his factory.
Of course, Wonka is a prequel and an origin. There is perhaps an interesting story to be told about how Chalamet’s kind-hearted bohemian became a creepy recluse like the versions played by Wilder or Depp. After all, Wonka is about a man trying to build a financial empire, forced to confront a villainous cabal plotting against him. What compromises might he have to make to succeed? What kind of man might he need to become in order to win?
Paul King has jokingly described Wonka as “a savage indictment of contemporary capitalism”, but it feels like it could go a lot further. It’s possible to imagine an alternate version of Wonka that gives its lead an arc closer to that of Coriolanus Snow (Tom Blyth) in The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, a well-intentioned man who is down on his luck and so desperate to succeed that anything becomes acceptable. Wonka lacks that edge.
There is a lot to enjoy in Wonka. It is a well-made movie with a game cast and an infectious joy. At the same time, it feels like it misses the appeal of its central character. Throughout Wonka, the protagonist throws together exotic ingredients. The chocolate exteriors of Willy’s confections often encase a richer filling, balancing competing flavors, mixing the sweet with the sour. Biting into Wonka, the blend seems wrong. There’s no filling, only sweetness.
Comments
Stephen Kilbey
Great write up. Personally I loved the movie. The changes in Wonka as a character didn’t bother me as much as some. Not a big musical guy but the songs I thought were really fun. Love these columns Darren! I regret not discovering you sooner.
Darren Mooney
Not at all! Apologies if it read that way.
Wally Hackenslacker
I get it now, thanks for taking the time to reply! I have a decent English if I do say so myself but that word really caught me by surprise. It's not one I see often if at all, hell, I'm pretty sure I have never used it myself. I was afraid you meant it in a "I don't like where you're coming from so this is the most you'll get" kind of way and that I had come across as looking for a fight or something.
Darren Mooney
Not at all, “flippant” was referring to my answer, not your question. In that the cheeky, easy answer would be for me to say, “I think that is good, this was bad.” I do try to explain in the actual answer why I think this is good and that was bad. But it boils down to “that made both the adaptation and the original text richer, this makes this adaptation more generic, and adds nothing to any understanding of the original text.”
Wally Hackenslacker
I'm not a native English speaker so I'm not really sure how to understand the use of the word "flippant" here. If I came across as confrontational or in bad faith I apologize. I swear to God that wasn't the intention.
Darren Mooney
“ Honest question, why was it good that the Scott Pilgrim anime deviated so dramatically from the source material but deviating from the source material is a bad thing here? I know this is going to sound like a gotcha and I swear it's not the intention, but like you said, this movie doesn't erase the Gene Wilder or Johnny Depp ones nor the original book out of existence.” The flippant answer is that the changes that “Scott Pilgrim” makes are good. To expand on that, they are more interesting and they are made with purpose. The choices make a statement that reflects authorial intent, and that authorial intent enriches the larger work in a way that makes both it and the source material more compelling and engaging. It adds layers, complexity, detail and perspective. This is fundamentally different than what “Wonka” does, which doesn’t feel like a choice made with any authorial intent but out of a cynical calculation that the movie is easier to package and sell if it’s more generic. It makes the movie and the character less interesting, strips out interesting aspects of the source material, and produces a work that feels shallower and more generic.
Wally Hackenslacker
I'm not bothering with this movie because I don't really like musicals, but I have to say, after the last full decade of "get a load of this guy" type irony of varying degrees of cynicism and relentless "kill the past" nihilism on almost every single production, hearing of a movie that goes out of it's way to just be lighthearted and sincere (even if it's because of executive meddling, mind you) feels like a breath of fresh air. And I also gotta say, this passage "However, this approach also feels like something of a betrayal of the source material, pushing the beloved and iconic character towards something much more generic and conventional." makes me feels like the "this is an adaptation... sike" curve ball strikes again. Honest question, why was it good that the Scott Pilgrim anime deviated so dramatically from the source material but deviating from the source material is a bad thing here? I know this is going to sound like a gotcha and I swear it's not the intention, but like you said, this movie doesn't erase the Gene Wilder or Johnny Depp ones nor the original book out of existence.
Darren Mooney
Thank you. The title may have gotten the piece commissioned, I suspect!
Darren Mooney
Very fair!
ZhoRa13
Small detail, Darren, if I may be so bold - you mention the "nestled darkness" twice in a short interval in almost the same way :) Other than that little nitpick - amazing article, as always, thank you for it! ❤️
Coey Ohwow-Godsey
What a title. *applauds* Great article too. :)
Ryallen
Films are always drastically different than what they set out to be and it's a massive shame we're never privy to the original script/intention, the original Star Wars being the most famous example
Darren Mooney
Ah, I don't judge.
Darren Mooney
It has been kinda intimated by people in the know ("The Town" podcast brings it up) that Chalamet signed on for a different film than it ended up being, and that the finished product was heavily... guided by executives. I can't find anything to back that up outside of Belloni's gossip, but it makes a certain degree of sense. There is a lot riding on "Wonka", even with "Aquaman" out next week. I can understand the urge to play it safe.
ConTM
To be honest, I just don't think there's a "Wonka Cinematic Universe (WCU)" that can support its own narrative weight. Like once you start asking ANY of the questions necessary to expand the story beyond the books or the film with Wilder, it's either a horror franchise without the requisite fear or a cautionary tale with no good lesson. The Depp movie had its flaws, but I loved the quote: "Candy doesn't have to have a point, that's why it's candy." Yeah it's an emotional indulgence on my part to enjoy a movie where a kid with nothing is mocked by his peers for having nothing until he is put on trial by a chocolate-themed god of chaos who uses his kidnapped slave army to smite a bunch of demonically possessed micro-plutocrats his age before giving him everything he ever wanted, but what's chocolate if not an indulgence? Like how on earth could any productive conversation about racism, colonialism, and predatory capitalism take place when the racial allegory in question is a group of tiny orange people who only speak in song and are forever grateful to their """boss""" because he lets them have a pittance of the chocolate he produces in abundance? Ultimately the conclusion I come to is that the only blood we're ever going to get from this stone are fairy tale stories that aren't as strong as the Wilder version or Maleficent-style retcons that are about as nutritionally beneficial and tasty as a chocolate bar with a bunch of spinach pieces in it.
Darren Mooney
Yeah, I'll admit to be being pleasantly surprised at how charming the movie is.
Caleb Dennis
That sounds painful
Ryallen
Yeah, it's a bit disappointing to hear that Timothee's take was made an outright hero. I would've been very interested in seeing how Wonka developed his attitude towards children (even naughty ones), something which I think most people would find inhuman, in reality at least. The Willy Wonka stories have never been placed 1:1 in reality but seeing the protag of this titular childhood classic react to the death of people he finds unpleasant in the modern day would've been sadistically novel if nothing else. Regardless, it's good to hear that it's a solid film overall. Most of the Internet that was weighing in on the initial trailer drop had low hopes so seeing this turn out to be quality is good to see
Aaron Von Seggern
Talk about low-hanging fruit 😏
Matthew Shaffer
Oh my goodness! I had zero expectations one way or another for this one. Glad it is at least praiseworthy! Great column !
Darren Mooney
I may just have written the article for the title.
Aaron Von Seggern
🍆
