I have been anticipating the release of Tim Burton's "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" for almost a year now. I have always had a great affinty for the Willy Wonka (1971) version, and have always wondered how it might translate if it were updated. However, I think it is unfair to compare the two movies too much. Also, it is just as unfair to compare Gene Wilder's brilliant performance as Wonka to what I hear is an uncharacteristically subpar performance from Depp.
Here are some blurbs from the reviews over at Rotten Tomatoes:
"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is not a total triumph. But it's successful enough to linger in your memory, for the most part pleasantly."
-- Philip Wuntch, DALLAS MORNING NEWS4/4 "An exhilarating and fanciful movie that never drowns in money or technology."
-- Michael Wilmington, CHICAGO TRIBUNE2/5 "Burton's gifts ensure you won't be able to take your eyes off the screen, but that doesn't necessarily mean you'll be happy with what you're seeing."
-- Kenneth Turan, LOS ANGELES TIMES3/4 "A treat for twisted children of all ages."
-- Peter Travers, ROLLING STONE"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a spectacle to be enjoyed, but only as such."
-- Desson Thomson, WASHINGTON POST
It looks like overall people are enjoying the movie. I can't wait to see it myself.
Also, The New Yorker has a really good article about Roald Dahl, the british writer who wrote "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory".
Update: Roger Ebert just posted his review online(3/4 stars):
"Now this is strange. "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" succeeds in spite of Johnny Depp's performance, which should have been the high point of the movie. Depp, an actor of considerable gifts, has never been afraid to take a chance, but this time he takes the wrong one. His Willy Wonka is an enigma in an otherwise mostly delightful movie from Tim Burton, where the visual invention is a wonderment."Posted by Paul Hina at July 15, 2005 09:27 AM