WONKA (Spoiler Review) - Pure Abomination
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- The best case people have been able to make about why Wonka is a good film is because it's "better than other stuff that has come out this year." That's a pretty low bar. Do you think Wonka stacks up to the original Gene Wilder film in any way? Let us know in the comments below!
Check out all our videos and subscribe!
/ @hardcutreviews
Music by @whitebataudio
#wonka #moviereview #willywonka #christmasmovies #warnerbros #roalddahl #timotheechalamet #hughgrant #genewilder
"I can't wait to see this film with my wife and her boyfriend!" - Every cuck on the internet.
Stop reviewing junk
🤣🤣🤣
@@thehouse3501are u watching it?
The charm of the original movie was having a colourful and fantastical factory in the middle of a real, humdrum, somewhat depressing and grey world. When everything is 'wacky', nothing is. Big misstep.
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
Matt looking like he's going to a church picnic after this 😂
🤣🤣
These guys give me a red letter media vibe and i cant get enough. Stoked every time they post.
Appreciate that.
I thought the same.
yeah But Red Letter is not Red Letter not anymore. They are getting Disney checks. Notice they don't make fun of Marvel or Star Wars anymore
Great channel. Pretty sure the end of next year will see you at 100k.
That would be nice. WeI’ll see if the YT gods allow it. Appreciate the comment!
i mean, the quality is really good. it does seem like it would be a channel with 100k-1mill subscribers. it is only a matter of time. but, it does take time. maybe add a fat dog/cat as a side character in the future?
What modern films prove is that the notoriously tough to get into industry doesn't require compentence when it comes to filmmaking anymore. Anyone can do it now. And that's dangerous. Because most do it poorly. Most don't have anything truly profound to say or aren't allowed to bring a unique voice to their work. Film is dead. We're rating corpses now.
actually a very solid point on forgetting the original was a musical!
Love that film and you are right
it was so well done it just fitted the story
back when Hollyweird had real writers
not just activists for Misandrist racists
have a great day
great video as always
Nobody will ever top the original for me
THAT Wonka was the right blend of zany and dark at the same time :)
It’s amazing how much of a departure this movie was from the original. Thanks for watching!
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
I heard from one or two people I know that this movie was good… I am glad y’all have shown me the truth!
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
It’s terrible. If you’re a 6 year old, you might like it. But even then… the kids in the theater were bored AF.
@@hardcutreviews thanks for the enlightenment!
To this day, i'm still not sure why we have any follow ups, sequels, or remakes involving the "Wonka" franchise. why?
Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory is all you need. Why all this other nonsense? I didn't leave that film as a kid thinking "Yeah, I need to see more of this world." No, it was whole, complete, story. It was great. Leave it ALONE. They tried to do this same garbage with The Wizard of Oz, too, and it doesn't work.... Okay, Return to Oz was kinda cool, but... No! No more of this, please!
Yeah saw it eh feel same way you say to omg. Nothing like 1971 Gene did great. Does not even connected with the 1971 one. Yea I feel Like this movie didn't have to be made. all. I love the Willy wonka 1971 the best hands down nothing can replace it.
I agree this movie was pure 💩
hahaha great review as always guys i have no need to ever watch this abomination as you call it lol when i can watch the wonderful original with the great gene wilder
They didn’t even try to match the energy of the original. They should have just come up with a new character and told a new story.
@@hardcutreviews true but we both know original ideas are an antiquated idea in hollywood. originality is dead
@@djs1244 Facts.
Love the Buc-ees shirt! Hubby and i just went there a couple weeks ago heading to Gatlinberg. 👍🏼
There really is no place like it. Top tier gas station fudge.
I'm new, 1st video. I loved it. You're agaisnt Antiwhiteism. No globohomo stuff. I look forward to more.
Appreciate you checking it out!
I just watched “The Gentleman” this week after seeing Charlie Hunam in “Rebel Moon” and was treated to a phenomenal Hugh Grant performance. He should stick with Guy Richie.
The Gentleman is a solid, underrated flick.
Thanks, fellas. Gonna skip this one for sure. I’m with Matt. I hate musicals.
You’re not missing anything.
Beta wonka 😂
Facts.
Joker “Follie e duex” is going to be a musical, and I’m interested in seeing that one. Although I’m scared because I haven’t liked a musical other than MAYBE Grease and Orphan. Annie when I was a kid.
They’re definitely taking Joker in an interesting direction. Not sure who they’re trying to grab with that move.
I honestly think they just wanna ruin everything that was once good.. no way you mess up so many remakes without a plan to do it
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
Some of the worst movies i have ever seen from the 80s and 90s look like masterpieces compared to todays crap
In the Wilder version the climax of the film began when Wilder appeared on screen for the first time. It played out like a horror film. One by one they all vanish on their journey in terrifying ways.
It’s fantastic.
Modern musicals sre absolutely awful...mbutni kinda liked Wonka.
The original movie cant be touched but if you have a family or young kids this movie is worth watching unlike most other modern crap.
Why is modern cinema so full of bland, beige actors?
He’s painfully beige in this.
Scrub scrub is high art.
The highest of art.
My this looks awful modern for something that should be a period piece.
The most unbelievable thing about this movie is that we are expected to believe that a black man would be filthy rich 100 years ago.
Wrong. Wrong. Bitter jaded unhelpful review. No insight. Joyousness, humor, pleasant entrancing music, how cliche.
For the record, your pan of ''Wonka'' means next to nothing. It scored an A- at CinemaScore, and has a 91% Audience score at Rotten Tomatoes. It just topped $100 million during its second week in the U.S., and grossed $270 million worldwide. ... And before anyone gets too nostalgic for the 1971 movie, Roald Dahl, the author himself, hated that film, didn't think Gene Wilder was right for the role, and found the music ''saccharine and sappy.''
Yeah, it definitely confirms how low people’s standards are for what makes great films these days. $270 million is barely above the films break even number of $250, so, weird flex, but glad to see people like you and your wife’s boyfriend had a great time gushing over Chalamet.
Your argument makes their argument stronger, but you are not self-aware and intelligent enough to appreciate it.
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
You’re right, it’s not 100% faithful to the book. It’s superior to the book. Charlie has no test that he has to pass to prove to Wonka that he’s worthy. The film tightened the story and made it better. No film is 100% the book but the 71 film elevated beyond the book in a great way. This prequel was trash.
Pretty damn faithful minus a room full of squirrels. You should try reading it.
Wonka was a charming and propaganda-free flick, I watched this entire review and still don't understand what your gripe is. I mean you literally said the designing is perfect so you hated the aesthetic... wtf..?
Our gripe with it is that it sucks.
@@hardcutreviews... deep.
Standards just aren’t what they used to be.
@@hardcutreviews It wasn't a Great movie, just refreshingly Not woke. It doesn't elevate/oppress any particular skin color/gender/sexual preference, which should be notable in this age, is all.
I thought it was pretty good
this story is not a prequel story, is like luke taking a dump just before new hope started
Pretty spot on comparison.
Coming soon to Disney +
The movie was made for the rainbow 🌈 community 😂
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
@@Unknown-ms3tr why are you copying and pasting the same brain dead comment? It was not worth posting once, let alone multiple times.
To be fair to Tim Burton, his version was MUCH closer to the book, and the family of the original author greatly preferred Tim Burton's version to Gene Wilder's version. Apparently, they felt that the Gene Wilder version was an insult to the original author. That said, the book is seriously freaky. I hated it as a kid. 😅
The Tim Burton version definitely hit the book beat for beat slightly more than the 1971 film. However, the end of the 71 film is superior to the end of the book. It actually gave Charlie something important to do rather than just being in the background until Wonka just gives him the factory. Wonka in the book is pretty close to how Wilder played him. Wilder did take the character in a more sarcastic direction though so that is fair to say. This film though, it was supposed to be a prequel to the 71 film so it just felt really weird that they didn’t try to fit into that universe at all. Appreciate the comment!
@@hardcutreviews disagree, roald dahl hated what they did to his book
I never said Dahl liked what they did to his book. And sometimes, work can be elevated. Sorry, but the film just did some things better. Dahl hated all adaptions of his books.
In almost every case of a book being adapted to film, I say that the book is better. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is one of those very rare exceptions where every movie version is better than the book, in my opinion. That said, I can recognize that the original story does belong to the original author, and he does have the right to hate adaptations of his work.
@@BasedLiz Definiitely fair. Most books are better than their adaptations. Very rare it's the other way around and Dahl can hate it all he wants. His right. A lot of people keep citing that he didn't like the '71 film but I'm not sure what that has to do with this film being a prequel to the '71 film. It's not a prequel to the book. If they wanted to honor the book in some way, even though this story is entirely independent of the book, they should have erased any connections to the '71 film completely and let it live on it's own, but they can't. They needed to tap into the nostalgia of a classic to draw in the older crowds. Just seems odd to tie it to that universe then not set it in that universe.
I know Matt loves musicals...His theater kid history shines through his hatred lol
I used the word "abomination", exactly. It was kind of amazing to witness. The way it constantly hits some kind of bizzarro expectations relative to source materials, book or film.
I mean, when you hear audio reverb from being in a studio...while the character is on top of a mast in the middle of the ocean, and this happens within 15 seconds of the film...I mean, abominably bizzarro. Amazing to witness. Millions of dollars went into this production. Millions. Amazing.
Any modern musical writers should be required to watch the "Once More With Feeling " episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. imo
I’ve got a movie ticket!
I’ve got a movie ticket!
And it only code me forty bucks (yikes)
So glad we have the AMC passes. Makes it hurt a little less.
yeah i would rather watch the original movie. not watching this one.
What about the Tim Burton version?
Great video. Thanks again. Keep up the great work. Michael Keaton will always be the best Batman for me. The last Batman Movie sucked and I wanted it to be good. ;) See ya
Gene Wilder's film isn't even a faithful adaptation to the original book. And yet you always complain adapted films should be faithful.
Yeah, you guys a pure quality. It's all up to the algorithm now.
Thanks, dude. Appreciate that.
Timothèe Chalamet is adorable! He is literally the cutest little angel ever and I recently developed a crush on him. By the way, I'm currently writing a novel about Willy Wonka's daughter, Hillary. It's called Little Wonka. Fun fact: Willy Wonka's wife's name is Ava. And when I write Willy Wonka in this book about this thirteen-year-old girl who's half Lynn Loud Jr. athlete (If you know about The Loud House, you'll know what I'm talking about) and half chocolatier (takes after her daddy and mama, Ava), I see Timothèe Chalamet in this version. In the book after an introduction with Willy marrying Ava and Ava becoming pregnant with Hillary then giving birth to Hillary after nine months, the novel really starts when Hillary meets fourteen year old Sir Patrick Roswell Larkin. He's the youngest son of Pepperidge Larkin and the younger brother of Rocky Larkin. According to prophecy, Hillary is to save London from an evil threat. Turns out Pepperidge is the threat and Rocky is also a threat. They turn Yub Yub, Willy's trusted Oompa Loompa and Hillary's uncle since before she was born who speaks with a British accent and also speaks Loompanese, which is actually Ewok language, into an evil version and Pepperidge clones Patrick into evil clones and Hillary had to shoot them but ends up actually shooting Patrick (the real one). Her tears heal him, Willy is proud of his daughter, Hillary and Patrick share their first kiss, they end up together at the end, and Pepperidge and Rocky are arrested and they turn into the famous Roald Dahl characters, Aunt Sponge and Aunt Spiker.
We want a signed copy when it comes out.
@hardcutreviews, I promise you will get a copy at Barnes & Noble when I become famous. I am still waiting for Chris Colfer's new book to be signed in June 2024 so you will just have to wait patiently.
I didn't see this movie and I refuse to, so thankyou for the review.
With that said, I think your rating system is somewhat flawed when a 3.5/5 is your "atrocious". That's the same as a 7/10. Maybe I'm just crazy, but that seems off to me.
Thanks for watching! Well, the two scales are entirely different. A 7/10 on the normal ranking scale is a good film. Higher the rank, the better. For the agenda scale, it’s the opposite. A 0/5 is the best score. 5/5 means it’s the wokest movie out there.
A musical with no memorable songs is a failure.
Two key takeaways from this review, stick to the original and Netflix casting,,, lolol both so true in nature, thx again for the review, skipping this one with the grandkids and buying them the original!
Nah, not my Willy Wonka. This kid ain't no Gene Wilder. Hell I'll take Johnny Depp's weird Michael Jackson take over this crap.
He was just so bland in the role. I don’t get the love for this film. Standards are so low these days.
Thanks!
As a person that never saw the original wonka. I really liked this one.
Interested in hearing your opinion on the original now since you’ll technically be watching them in chronological order.
The movie was awesome go see it. Unless you don't like musicals.