Wonka: Not as good as we’d hoped

A lot of hype around this movie. I was excited to see it on its opening night. I was hopeful, like the young Willy Wonka I was about to meet. I knew it would be difficult—the original having set such a venerated bar. I promised myself not to give into the temptation to compare. But the new Wonka seemed to want me to do just that, nudging me, as the film started, with those three notes—C, E-flat, B-flat… “Come with me… and you’ll be”—and I was back with Charlie in the chocolate factory. There were more ties to the classic 1971 film, sprinkled throughout. Unfortunately, those old sprinkles are the best parts of Wonka, the new treats underneath are much less memorable.

Notwithstanding the clear attempts to maintain a connection to the original film’s older Wonka, this origin story presents a very different chocolate maker than Gene Wilder’s recluse. Young Willy, played enthusiastically by Timothee Chalamet, has yet to create his great chocolate factory as this tale begins. He is outgoing, generous, hopeful, whimsical. He’s a dreamer and  buoyed in his dream by a lost mother’s promise to be with him when he shares his gifts as a great chocolatier. Missing from this youthful version is the jadedness of the older Wonka; the snarkiness, and the mistrust created by years of the covetous trying to steal his genius. He has yet to learn, as his new band of downtrodden friends will try to teach him, that “the greedy hurt the needy every time”. 

There’s nothing wrong with this take on Wonka’s origin, although numerous big-media critics dislike this more-sugary Willy. It’s not the idea of this story that misses, it’s the telling of it.

At first, the stage, the music, and the story’s many characters and strong cast seem well positioned to make things interesting. Young Wonka encounters a duo of swindlers and winds up in servitude along with a small group of other unfortunates. These members of Team Wonka, however, are duller than their first impression would indicate and are given little to work from the film’s script. Their evil counterparts in the “Chocolate Cartel” are equally flat; a trio of one-gag melodrama villains. Even the excellent effort from Chalamet, who plays Wonka with great verve, is not enough to move the needle much off the half-full mark. Chalamet seems to put everything he as into his new Wonka. This includes his execution of the film's song and dance which is delightful and endearing. But the dances are minor and the tunes unmemorable. His excellent performance makes the mediocrity that surrounds it that much more frustrating.

I should make clear here that Wonka is not an unpleasant film. I suspect most of the younger patrons will give the film a thumbs up—the bones are good as they say. And all will enjoy Hugh Grant’s Oompa-Loompa (we could have used more of Hugh Grant… and a lot more Oompa-Loompas). But that magic was missing. I was patient. I kept waiting for Wonka to kick in… but it never did. 5.5 out of 10. 

Fresh Flash is Better Than Most

So, why The Flash. Why did this movie drag me out of the basement to start writing these reviews again. I’ll tell you why! Because the man’s suit comes out of his ring. That’s why. I was a Marvel kid (and this was when comic books cost 12 cents so that’s a long time ago); I wasn’t into a lot of DC heroes. But the Flash intrigued me, and I bought the comics. I liked fast. I thought I was fast. My favorite athletes were fast, and the Flash was the fastest of them all. But, more importantly, yes, his suit came out of his freeking ring. Fortunately for me, and this review, DC’s depiction of The Flash keeps the suit-in-the-ring thing. If it hadn’t, I would have walked out. I would have. I’m glad it did and a I didn’t because The Flash is a good film. I know there’s a lot of negativity swirling around this movie. Notwithstanding, I found the film to be fun, funny, engaging and, overall, better than most of its ilk. 

I do give one caveat here right up front—The Flash is another multi-verse thing. And I understand you may feel completely alternative-universed out. But this time it’s not colliders, or worm holes, or magic… it’s speed. The dang Flash runs so fast (and we find out he’s still learning to run faster) that he can run through space-time creating some sort of ‘speed force”. And he has an idea. Barry Allen (The Flash played by Ezra Miller) lost his mother in his youth and his father was blamed for her death. Allen now believes that he can use his speed to travel back in time and change the one thing that resulted in his mother's death and his father incarceration. Allen’s universe’s Batman (Ben Affleck), a Flash Justice League colleague, warns against such an attempt, reminding Allen that any change he makes to the past may destroy his present and future. The possibility of bringing her back is too much for Allen, however, and he travels back to the day of his mother’s death and prevents it. But as he returns, he is pushed out of the Speed Force by an unknown being and into an alternative 1983 where he finds a younger version of himself and his mother alive. 

It is in this new place that Ezra Miller and the film find something special. Miller shines when portraying, simultaneously, the glitchy Flash alongside his goofball, 18-year-old self. The interaction of the two Flashes (the younger Barry obtains Flash superpowers also) is the best part of the show. Not only are there two Flashes because of Allen’s time-meddling, but there are also two Batmen--the Affleck Batman from Allen’s home universe and a Michael Keaton Batman from the 1983 alternative universe. Affleck is necessary, Keaton in memorable. Keaton plays, with gusto, an aging crimefighter with no more crime to fight, invigorated by the task of helping Allen fix the mess he has made—his obligatory revelation that “I’m Batman” gave me a quick nostalgia chill. He also gives a great explanation of the film’s multiverse using a pile of spaghetti which is a seriously needed primer as the film and its infinite alternatives get confusing near the end. 

Although The Flash does fall prey to the usual superhero movie motif of jamming just too much stuff in, it still is able to maintain a thread of uniqueness. Its story is sound, and it sticks with it to the end. There is a sort of Ground-Hog-Day moment in the final scenes of The Flash where our heroes must face the possibility that no matter how hard they try, bad things happen, or must happen. There is a lot of ties-that-bind stuff that comes out in this dilemma that is moving without being too corny or overly sentimental, and the cast was excellent, especially Miller, in projecting those feelings to the audience. 

Still, lots of criticism out there. The kids say the special effects were bad. The movies’ creators, in a recent interview, explained that the different feel of the special effects was intentional as they wanted to portray a slightly distorted imagery for the Flash’s speed world. Everything did look a little bit off to me--shinny. Whether that was their true intent of not, I was fine with the graphics–they were different… and in the world of superhero movies, different is good. 

The Flash felt fresh to me. And most of that came from Miller giving us a different type of hero. I am not familiar with the details of Ezra Miller’s significant struggles, including recent run-ins with the law. I can understand if people don’t want to see the show because of that. I hope he finds himself and can make the corrections he needs to be better and continue in a positive direction—as I have read he says he is doing. I’d like to see another Flash–and I can’t say that for most superhero films.  7.5 out of 10.