Internationally recognised art and literary critic, writer and cultural producer. Published in ELLE, Glamour, Esquire and Cosmopolitan; member of the Union of Writers.
Wonka, the latest film from the makers of Paddington 2, is a prequel that tells the story of how Willy Wonka, the legendary candy man from Roald Dahl’s classic 1964 children’s novel, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, became the owner of the most amazing and mysterious chocolate factory in the world. Starring Timothée Chalamet as the young Willy, the film is a feast for the eyes and ears, with dazzling sets, costumes, and special effects, and catchy songs by the composer of The Greatest Showman. But, while it may appeal to the sweet tooth of some viewers, it may also leave a sour taste in the mouths of others, who may find it too relentlessly wacky and over-the-top, and too far removed from the spirit and message of Dahl’s original work.
The film is directed by Paul King, who also co-wrote the script with Simon Farnaby, and produced by David Heyman, the team behind the critically acclaimed and commercially successful Paddington films, which adapted the beloved books by Michael Bond about a polite and lovable bear from Peru. Having proven their ability to bring a cherished literary character to life on the big screen, they decided to take on the challenge of reinventing another one: Willy Wonka, the eccentric and secretive chocolatier who invites five lucky children to tour his factory and compete for a lifetime supply of chocolate.
But, instead of following the plot of Dahl’s novel, or the 1971 film adaptation starring Gene Wilder, which is widely regarded as a classic, they opted to create a new story that explores Willy’s early years, before he built his factory and met the Oompa-Loompas, his diminutive and musical workers. In their version, Willy is a starry-eyed dreamer who tries to set up a chocolate shop in a fictional city that is a mix of Victorian London, New York, and Paris, but faces opposition from three rival sweet-makers: Slugworth, Prodnose, and Fickelgruber, who are mentioned briefly in Dahl’s book as the thieves who stole Willy’s recipes. With the help of a streetwise orphan named Noodles, and a giraffe named Geraldine, Willy has to overcome various obstacles and dangers, including a corrupt police chief, a ruthless landlord, and a giant robot, in order to realise his vision and share his creations with the world.
The film is clearly a labour of love for King and his collaborators, who have spared no expense or effort in making it a visually stunning and entertaining spectacle. The production design by Gary Williamson is impressive and inventive, creating a rich and colourful world that is full of surprises and details. The musical numbers by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul are catchy and energetic, featuring Chalamet and a talented cast of singers and dancers. The special effects by Framestore are seamless and spectacular, bringing to life Willy’s fantastical inventions, such as a chocolate fountain, a candy cane helicopter, and a bubble gum machine. The film is a candy-coated delight that is sure to please the senses and stimulate the imagination.
But, while the film is fun and flashy, it is also shallow and silly, lacking the charm and depth of the original novel and the 1971 film. The film is so busy trying to be the best possible family entertainment that it forgets to be a good story. The plot is thin and contrived, relying on coincidences and clichés, and failing to explain the logic and motivation behind Willy’s actions and inventions. The characters are flat and forgettable, with none of the complexity and nuance that Dahl gave them. Chalamet, who is a fine actor, does his best to capture Willy’s charisma and eccentricity, but he is no match for Wilder, who infused the role with a dark and mysterious edge that made him both fascinating and frightening. The film also misses the point and purpose of Dahl’s work, which was not just to entertain children, but also to educate and challenge them, to expose the flaws and follies of human nature, and to celebrate the virtues of kindness and imagination. The film has none of the wit and wisdom, none of the satire and morality, none of the heart and soul, that made Dahl’s book a timeless and beloved masterpiece.
Wonka is a sweet treat that may satisfy some viewers, but it may also disappoint and annoy others, who may find it too sugary and artificial, and too far from the source material. It is a film that tries too hard to be everything to everyone, but ends up being nothing to no one. It is a film that is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
