Octopus Overlords

As someone who saw it as a child, I think the problem is the perspective. You can't analyze it from an adult film critic's perspective and understand why it was loved. Charlie was irrelevant in that movie when I saw it as a child. It was a film about a magic chocolate factory and the amazing guy that ran it. The whole point of that movie, when I used to stay up with popcorn to watch it when it came on once a year, was to experience the amazing setting.

Paingod wrote:

Kraken wrote:It's a children's movie from when I wasn't a child.

That's really my issue with a lot of older kids movies. I find Charlie to be kind of a whiny prick and close-up scenes of his face all screwed up in confusion make me want to hit him with an Oompa-Loompa. I'm going against the tide and will say I enjoyed the newer version more, which had a much more likable Charlie and more exaggerated "bad kids" that came across as caricatures instead of horrendously gross children.

Yep, against the tide. I get to be on the popular side for once! I fall in with Blackhawk. The original was a timeless story about Man Child locked away from the world of Adults, not about charlie. And there was a fantasy about his world and the nasty people who would pollute it. And that had a long lasting appeal to a small child. The remake was like it was about a different kind of Man Child, a sort of Michael Jackson of candy, if you will. It was creepy and uncomfortable to watch but for a wholly different (and not good fantasy) reason than the original. It was a showcase for Burton's imagery and not a story with a fascinating narrative.

I can't speak for how kids today would react to either films. Anachronisms were what we grew up with, as technological advancements were still slow. Most stories were timeless because history seemed slow and present in the present. Charlie's world was the world our parents grew up in. Now, kids are in the middle of all things technology. The world I grew up in is the world their parents grew up in.

Paingod wrote:

Kraken wrote:It's a children's movie from when I wasn't a child.

That's really my issue with a lot of older kids movies. I find Charlie to be kind of a whiny prick and close-up scenes of his face all screwed up in confusion make me want to hit him with an Oompa-Loompa. I'm going against the tide and will say I enjoyed the newer version more, which had a much more likable Charlie and more exaggerated "bad kids" that came across as caricatures instead of horrendously gross children.

If anything, it's Charlie's Grandpa that was the whiny prick; after all, he starts the movie bedridden, and completely reliant upon child labour to make ends meet, yet becomes fully ambulatory upon entry to a chocolate factory.

Speaking as someone that grew up reading the books prior to having seen any of the movies, I was a fan from a very early age. Though I much preferred the sci-fi bent of the sequel to the original book, "Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator", with its Vermicious Knids and such. I can still recall being captivated at the notion that shooting stars were, in fact, Knids burning to death, due to their foolhardiness in attempting to attack Earth despite its atmosphere. That was some edgy stuff for a kid's book, back in the day.

Anonymous Bosch wrote: If anything, it's Charlie's Grandpa that was the whiny prick; after all, he starts the movie bedridden, and completely reliant upon child labour to make ends meet, yet becomes fully ambulatory upon entry to a chocolate factory.

ThatSteveGuy (infrequent OO poster, frequent OctoCon attendee) has an entire web site devoted to the topic of just what a prick Grandpa Joe was.

Say No To Grandpa Joe

Paingod wrote:

Kraken wrote:It's a children's movie from when I wasn't a child.

That's really my issue with a lot of older kids movies. I find Charlie to be kind of a whiny prick and close-up scenes of his face all screwed up in confusion make me want to hit him with an Oompa-Loompa. I'm going against the tide and will say I enjoyed the newer version more, which had a much more likable Charlie and more exaggerated "bad kids" that came across as caricatures instead of horrendously gross children.

Depp's Wonka was darker, too. I didn't especially like either version, and I'm fond of Gene Wilder in general, but I also preferred the remake.

Wilder felt like a sociopath child with all of the privileges of an adult at the end he sort of realized he was an adult running a business and that he was taking on moral responsibilities all along.
Depp felt like child molester staying in touch with his youth by tormenting children. I don't really remember the end being anything other than a showcase for showing the objects of his torment but I'm sure there was more. There must have been something meaningful in his hand off to Charlie that somehow involved Christopher Lee but I'll be damned if it left enough of an impression to be remembered.

I don't know which is darker but one made for an engaging story of fantasy and the other was just uncomfortable.

I desperately want to hear what you think of Winnie the Pooh.

"Christopher Robin oppressed Pooh and made Piglet his emotional plaything. His day to day abuse of Tigger probably resulted in a mass shooting at some point. And don't get me started on Eeyore. That guy was freakin' Richard Simmons before Robin imposed his own brand of frontier justice on all those around him."

I've never read any of the stories by Milne but in classic Disney, Christopher Robin was mostly a non entity, the vehicle to get on the journeys. Disney's Pooh will forever be cherished because, even as toddler, there was something excellent to grab on to with a narration that defied convention and turned in on itself for examination. I didn't understand why it was so special, but it was and I loved it. With no Pooh, I don't think twenty years later, I'd have ever gotten authors like Milan Kundera.

I did find Rabbit to often be depressing, though, in spite of the narrative, and he often made me sad even when the trials of a blustery day couldn't.

OtOH, if you replaced Sebastian Cabot's narration with say, Dennis Hopper, a la, Blue Velvet you'd get a sense of how I felt about Burton's Wonka.

Cabot's narrative was the only reason I gave A Family Affair a chance. *blech* what a non show that was.

Oh, and Tigger was kind of a dick, but I don't like to think about that.

...


Did you have Disney's Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day album? It was brilliant from a five year old's perspective. Life shaping. The text would vary from the narrative and would often change to interact animals. Just amazing stuff to fuel the fantasy.

Should I be a-scared that I'm nodding my head in agreement to everything that LM is saying?

During my last few months as a senior in college, I dated a girl that indicated to me she wanted to get married immediately after we graduated and start having a family. She let me know she had already picked out the theme of the nursery - Winnie the Pooh. To this day, I still find it all terrifying.

You want Dennis Hopper narration, you go to Fire Coming Out of the Monkey's Head by Gorillaz

LOL

And THIS still cracks me up...

And you thought my take would be twisted?

the original A.A.Milne "Winnie-ther-Pooh" stories are well worth reading. they are surprisingly sarky and very funny. one of my favorite parts is when Owl - the Literate one - writes out the birthday card.

It's been on my list for many many years. I love children's stories from the past.

I've also meant to read all of the Frank Baum stuff, who was apparently generations ahead of his time, recognizing the need the for little girls to be recognized as strong independent protagonists and supporting characters, even if they were still often princesseseses. Even Alice was relatively weak as a character, subject to the fancy of all of the minor characters. Though Lewis Carol is among my favorite children's authors. Him Roald Dahl are are the top of my list and hard to compare modern authors to. Maybe give Nick Bantock deserves some due but I don't think he wrote children's books, specifically. I think his work was adult fiction with a flair for what children gravitate. Again, only appreciated because of how much I adored Pooh growing up. As it turns out a quick stop on wiki and hes' doing more Griffon and Sabine stuff and has done more of their stuff since the 90s. I really need to read more.

Roald Dahl is a very dark writer. I've never been quite sure whether he was being sadistic towards younger readers or inviting them to share his cynicism. Probably both.

He also flew Hurricanes in the Mediterranean in WW2 until he was sent back home (to join the intelligence services) due to injuries. He's credited with shooting down five Axis aircraft, making him a fighter ace.

Guy creates Super Mario World scenes using 81,200 dominoes. The Bowser one at the end is amazing.

i read Roald Dahl's _The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar_ many times back in the early/mid 80s. such a satisfying story arc. the actual plot is kinda fuzzy in my head now and seems to be gradually assuming the role of 'personal myth'.

Holman wrote:Roald Dahl is a very dark writer. I've never been quite sure whether he was being sadistic towards younger readers or inviting them to share his cynicism. Probably both.

He also flew Hurricanes in the Mediterranean in WW2 until he was sent back home (to join the intelligence services) due to injuries. He's credited with shooting down five Axis aircraft, making him a fighter ace.

Indeed, he was a total badass; one of his greatest short stories, Beware of the Dog, was very much based upon his own horrific plane crash during WWII, and was pivotal to his genius and creativity as a writer.

No board insomniacs to keep me company through my long night of merger babysitting.

Isgrimnur wrote:No board insomniacs to keep me company through my long night of merger babysitting.

I slept three hours last night, if that helps. But a sick kid kept me away from the computer.

Skinypupy wrote:Guy creates Super Mario World scenes using 81,200 dominoes. The Bowser one at the end is amazing.

"You won't believe what he did with the last one!"

Isgrimnur wrote:No board insomniacs to keep me company through my long night of merger babysitting.

The reddits never stop.

I fell asleep around 11am yesterday thinking Id take a nap since I had been sleeping normal at night. I got up today at 9am thinking it was Wednesday when its Thursday.

hepcat wrote:And THIS still cracks me up...

Just a couple weeks ago I would not have gotten that reference at all. But somehow I came across it online and watched it.

Thats just wrong ....But I cant recall the name of the movie or who was in it. I know I watched it because of the lead actor.

EDIT: Now I remember..Cage and the Wicker Man.

Holman wrote:

Isgrimnur wrote:No board insomniacs to keep me company through my long night of merger babysitting.

I slept three hours last night, if that helps. But a sick kid kept me away from the computer.

I was up until 5 am after discovering at my 2 o'clock bedtime that the cats had popped a screen out of a window at some point during the evening and made a break for freedom. We got Beery back in without too much trouble but Gus didn't sashay through the door until 4:30. They were probably on the lam for five to six hours, and they had a legendary time.

I'm planning to sleep this afternoon away.

I actually liked the original 70s film, but I have never seen the Cage version. I saw just enough to know that I don't want to. Ever.

Blackhawk wrote:I actually liked the original 70s film, but I have never seen the Cage version. I saw just enough to know that I don't want to. Ever.

I never thought it was as bad as it's reputation states. There are a number of cringe worthy moments (like the bees), but I thought it did a few things right.

Not having seen the original, I have no idea how the two compare though.

Kraken wrote:

Holman wrote:

Isgrimnur wrote:No board insomniacs to keep me company through my long night of merger babysitting.

I slept three hours last night, if that helps. But a sick kid kept me away from the computer.

I was up until 5 am after discovering at my 2 o'clock bedtime that the cats had popped a screen out of a window at some point during the evening and made a break for freedom. We got Beery back in without too much trouble but Gus didn't sashay through the door until 4:30. They were probably on the lam for five to six hours, and they had a legendary time.

I'm planning to sleep this afternoon away.

Aren't you supposed to stop for school buses regardless if you are behind them or approaching from the other direction? I was out walking the dog this morning, and a school bus was stopped to pick up a load of kids on the corner (a residential street). Four cars going the opposite way simply drove right on past the bus, even though it had its flashing red lights and stop signs out.

I'm left wondering if these people were just assholes, or if I've misunderstood the school bus rules for the past 26 years.

Skinypupy wrote:Aren't you supposed to stop for school buses regardless if you are behind them or approaching from the other direction? I was out walking the dog this morning, and a school bus was stopped to pick up a load of kids on the corner (a residential street). Four cars going the opposite way simply drove right on past the bus, even though it had its flashing red lights and stop signs out.

I'm left wondering if these people were just assholes, or if I've misunderstood the school bus rules for the past 26 years.

It's not you. It's them. They didn't see kids crossing the street, so they didn't believed the law doesn't applied to them. They are wrong. If a child is late and comes bolting across the street from nowhere....

Skinypupy wrote:just assholes

Check.

Every single one of them would be written a ticket. Odds are the bus driver noted the cars in some way and if they get a pattern, the cops will be there waiting at some point.

It's too bad school buses aren't allowed to park diagonally across the road when their flashers are going and they are picking up/dropping off kids.

That would be fun.

GreenGoo wrote:It's too bad school buses aren't allowed to park diagonally across the road when their flashers are going and they are picking up/dropping off kids.

That would be fun.

Which is all well and good, until people drive over the sidewalks to get around a bus.

That just makes it easier to identify who is resisting arrest.

GreenGoo wrote:It's too bad school buses aren't allowed to park diagonally across the road when their flashers are going and they are picking up/dropping off kids.

That would be fun.

We live on a relatively narrow road (no shoulder) and when the school bus stops he pulls towards the center of the road (across what would be a yellow line, if one was painted). I appreciate his effort.

People today. As far as I know even on a 4 lane road with a median in the middle the far lanes should still stop. I do. You wouldn't believe the belligerent people behind me being mad or going around me.

I still stop for a funeral going by. My grandad would stop, get out and stand by the car, and remove his hat.

Daehawk wrote:People today. As far as I know even on a 4 lane road with a median in the middle the far lanes should still stop. I do. You wouldn't believe the belligerent people behind me being mad or going around me.

I still stop for a funeral going by. My grandad would stop, get out and stand by the car, and remove his hat.

You don't stop if there's a median usually. Don't be part of the problem by stopping unnecessarily and making it dangerous for those following you. If you're supposed to stop in your jurisdiction, nevermind.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_ ... _stop_laws