Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Usually I post stuff in the Last Film but this is a Johnny Depp flick and I think it is gonna be awesome

some critics are trying to say he modeled his Wonka performance after Micheal Jackson which he vehemently has denied.

after you watch the movie tell me what you think of his performance

if you havent seen a trailer check one out, he acts so fuckin weird in this movie, I love it!

can't wait for this one either

The material just seems to fit Burton and Depp perfectly

I also want to see it, and already i've noticed some changes from the book and original 1971 film 9instead of geese, the aminals are squirles). as long as it isnt another musical, then i think i could make some adjustments

Read the book, there were squirrels in the book.

I heard he based the character on marilyn manson.

Interesting that you say that.  I hadn't head anyone say that, but after seeing one trailer for it, I told someone that I wondered if he based it on Michael Jackson.  Something about the way he talks, I think. 

Anyway, I'll be seeing it Friday.  I'm looking forward to it.  I love the Gene Wilder version, but I have high hopes for this one as well.

Were there? Can't remember last time i read it. Oh whatever, its been ages since i read it anyways.

I stand corrected.

Its not a musical, Johnny Depp will not be singing or at least i dont think so.

I can't wait till friday ,this is my second most looked forward to movie of the summer


If I 'm not mistaken  I thnk Mason was considered for the part at one time .

This one is supposed to be more faithful to the book right?  I heard that's why this one is called "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" as opposed to the Gene Wilder one which was "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory".

There was an article about in Entertainment Weekly a week or two ago.  This one will not be a musical (Johnny Depp was quite relieved about that).  And the person who wrote the screen play adapted it purely from the book, he'd never even seen the first movie.

It was an interesting read.  I can look for it online if anyone wants me to post it, but I think it might be too long.  It was 3 or 4 pages in the magazine.

i wish they made new movies with new stories instead of re-making an all-time classis book and movie !
(the oompah loompah song !!!! classic !)

tim burton and johnny depp bore me :)

can u? if it isnt too much trouble? Id love to read that.

Wat-ever Johnny Depp is the greatest actor alive, if he bores you than I dont know what to say.

He has never played the same character twice, he is a rare individual that brings something different every role

Its hard to imagine that Edward Scissorhands is the same guy in Finding Neverland and that guy is the same guy in Secret window but yet that guy is Jack Sparrow in Pirates and that guy was Donnie Brasco, and now the way he plays Willy Wonka

No one is as diverse as Depp.

no no. i think that depp plays "excentric" characters all the time.
scissors hand, neverland, once upon a time in mexico, f&l in las vegas, Pirates ... willie wonka .... they all are excentric.

and come on, watching  once upon a time in mexico, i thought it was fear and laughin in las vegas ...the way he walks .. his funn FBI tee shirt or flower shirts , the shorts ... the cellphone ... i dont ll these little details ....

i think he is overrated cause we see him great through the character that are wierd and special,  so we are like " johnny depp" is so cool ...
and well, he's typecasted. the "excentric". easy job i guess. im not an actor, but i can guess that playing a crazy guy, a wierdo, must not be the hardest thing ...

i like the 9th gate tho. he was good in it.

but i dont know. i dont care for actors anyway, movies are the main thing. a good movie makes a good actor.

there is NO oompah loompah song. THE oompah loompah song. man, im' bummed out :(

The oompah loompah's do a musical number or two.  But nobody else sings.

It is not, however, the oompah loompah song you remember from the original.

Classic lines from this version (I'm paraphrasing a bit):

"But Mr. Wonka...Why would Augustus' name be a part of the Oompah Loompah song unless they....?"

"Improvisation is a parlor trick...anyone can do it."

I've seen snippets of the movie and it reminds me a LOT of the original illustrations for the book.  The visual style is much closer to what you saw in James and the Giant Peach except using real actors and sets rather than stop gap animation.  It was one of my gripes with the first movie: It captured some of the eccentricity of the Dahl books, but none of the style and visual flair.  The illustrations in the book, sparse as they are, are almost as famous as the text.  I was glad to see this incarnation do them justice.


Good clips can be found here:

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/charlieandthechocolatefactory.html

Here's a link to the article.  Let me know if it doesn't work and I will copy and paste it.

http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1073574_1|109123||0_0_,00.html

What you have to understand though Wat Ever, is Johnny brings his own flavor to the character

It isnt written in the script for him to act the way he acts.

he decides his own style and idioscyncracies for his characters

there isnt a director or a producer telling him to act a certain way.

Once upon a time in Mexico was a shitty movie only watchable because of Depp.

he makes shitty movies good, and good movies great.


Did u also know that he almost got fired from Pirates of The Carribean cause of the way he acted the part?

They were scared to death at how weird and stuff he acted, but they took a chance and it paid off.

same for this WIlly Wonka role, Johnny Depp designed his style of acting for this role, he designed his haircut,the voice everything.

When I watch most actors, they seem like the same guy in every movie, Tom Cruise comes to mind, I mean it could be Jerry MacGuire playing in War Of The Worlds.

Johnny Depp however gives a unique and different performance almost everytime.

Sure there are roles here and there that are probably similiar, but considering how many different roles he has played its an amazingly low ratio especially compared to other actors.

well D, he is certainly over the average, but i'm, personaly, bored by his "excentric" / "nice wierdo" role.
he did that too much.
about the movie

marilyn manson did his video clip Dope Hat, and that was crazy. (95) - and manson was a perfect willie wonka, i guess johnny depp watched that clip numerous times...)
download:
http://manson.morgus.cz/download/video/official_clips/Dope_Hat-(www.mansoncz.tk).avi

the original movie did what it had to do. ( the song, the oompah loompah song ...? :peace:)

why on earth would you create something again with that book.
we have everything we need.
why can't tim burton uses his mind to do something new. a new story. a new THING. are we gonna revisit every classic for the next 40 years ?
i mean.
in a few years, people will actually do a remake of star wars ?

there is so much more to create.

he nearly got fireed frm potc?! i dont know how i didnt hear that, im a huge johnny depp fan!

i have to agree with u on every point u make here, for example, i like orlando bloom but he plays the same person(not the same role,cus thers a difference) in every film iv seen him in.

Personaly, i think Johnny Depp is the best actor about, an no one can say anythin to the contrary.

I cant wait to see CATCF, i seen a clip for it wen i went to see Batman an it looks halairious(sp?)!
The oompah0loompals look different than in the original dont they? but like i said it was only a clip so i didnt get a gud look.

 :peace:
Cubb

He showed up with a mouthful of gold teeth and his braids etc on POTC and the movie guys told him he had to change the way he played Jack Sparrow

Johnny said he wouldnt and that if they didnt like it they could fire him and find someone else.

so they didnt really come close to firing him I dont guess but Johnny stood up and wouldnt change even though they wanted him too.

He also turned down countless big budget blockbuster roles simply cause the roles were dull and could be played by anyone.

He turned down Tom Cruise's role in "Interview with a Vampire" turned down Keanu Reeves role in Speed and Brad Pitt's role in Legend of the Fall.

I wont take any review of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to heart, cause most critics wont be able to seperate it from the original and its damn near impossible to beat anything that was the original simply cause peoples minds are already made up.

Tim Burton + Johnny Depp = Movie Gold

At least thats been my experience. Check out the trailer for Corpse Bride, their next collaboration due out in October. Looks pretty good.

I'm not going to get my hopes too high for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory but Burton has yet to make a movie that I didnt like.

I once heard Johnny Depp on  Howard Stern, saying how he couldn't even get through the script for Titanic.? He's never been about just trying to make money.? He does stuff that interests him.?

Okay in the trailer, what the fuck is up with the Oompah Loompahs?

I read the book when I was 10. It's a great book.

I'm going to bail out of work and go in a couple hours.  Its good to be the boss.   :)

The key to world dominence.

Hai Hitler  :P  :hihi:

just kidding, dont worry

____________________________________________________________________________________________

I guess the Oompah Loompahs are put in the book for comical relif, after all it was geared towards children. The movie does look pretty...whats the best word for this....odd, at best, but it still looks like a good watch

i can't wait.
i'm a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE Johnny Depp fan. i saw a trailer for it and it looks really good.
isn't the kid in it in Finding Neverland?
Johnny rocks!!!

GO JOHNNY!!! : ok: : ok: :peace:

I'll take Gene Wilder over Depp anyday....

i'll take a sheep over Depp anyday. (i hope there is no sexual under-meaning to this phrase)

the 1st movie was great. the oompah loompah were great.
no need to do it again.
this movie is just easy money by the studios, and burton/depp were used.

Lots of movies like that today.....

ie, no need to do them again.

They were good the first time.

lots ?
king kong, war of the worlds, charlie, herbie ...

i tell ya, in 6 years, some hip director will do a remake, oh sorry, an adapation of the star wars scripts swearing he never saw the first movies .... ?____?

i'll stick with The Taste of Tea - http://imdb.com/title/tt0413893/ - this movie is a lesson to all the current directors and studios.

I liked the first movie better, but I really enjoyed this remake.

I really wasn't into going to see the movie at first ! A friend of mince convince me to go yesterday evening ! I just loved it ! Funny, entertaining and rather clever ! WEB I still cannot understand how you can criticize a movie you haven't seen yet !  ;D

cause they're all the same.
sometimes i start thinking i might like the movie. i get in a good mood and watch it
i tried : sin city, mr & mrs smith (half of it), war of the worlds, batman begins .... but they are all the same. they just suck.

on the case of CACF, it's about sucking, it's about, we already have too many things about that universe, i dont wanna watch it, cause i dont want to support what the industry is doing : going for easy-money instead of creation.

maybe i'll download the movie, but i wont pay for it. i'm sick of adaptation, re-adaptation, remake, re-remaks .... :-/

I got your point well ! And sometimes I even agree  ;) ;D Not on Star Wars but I confess I'm a bit biaised on that one ! I just adore both trilogies ;)
I agree on War of the Worlds to a certain extend, batman etc etc ... but in this case "Charlie and the chocolate factory" no. Because you can't just compare  the movie w/ all this summer blockbusters ;) Well it also happens I usually like Tim Burton's style ... not always but in this one it's pure genious ;)

i dont compare. i just expect much from burton. i expect easy-mainstream-nice movies (even if his fans try to picture like some kind of underground rebel crazy mofo), but he usually does interesting movie, that have their share or "innovation" and "creation".

CACF is a movie about a book that is a classic. that ALREADY has been put to cinema - and not a crappy 1920s movie, a real, well liked, classic, movie -
and the universe of CACF has already been used so much (manson, other books, tv ...)

so, in the end, the movie is USELESS.
;D

 :rofl: :rofl: No it's not ! it's at least entertaining !  ;D
Not every movie needs to mark History !  ;D
Your way of thinking is sometimes so radical !  ;D

The newer movie is a different adaptation, and from what I understand, a far more accurate one, of the book.  Its not about getting rid of the older movie or even doing it better.  Just different.  What's the harm?

As far it being for money, that's what Gene Wilder said too.  Johnny Depp's response: of course it is, when is anything in Hollywood not about money.  People make movies to get a return on their investment.

If you don't want to watch movies that are made with the object of making money, then you better give up movies all together.

But if you are determined not to like it, don't watch it.  If you are open minded, you might find you are pleasantly surprised. 

im sorry, i see difference between the Taste of Tea way of "making money" and what CACF is doing.

different adaptation ? that kills me.
so every good director should do this movie because he will have a different version ?

burton's movie might be entertaining. but im asking for more.  im sorry. if people see entertainment as sufficient. then it 4 years someone will remake star wars.  because it will be "different ... "

i want something new.
we have everything we need in terms of CACF.
burton could have used his mind to create something less .... already done. that's it.

cause if you think like that, then GUNS N ROSES should just do covers of the rolling stones , and we'll get 30 Sympathy for the Devil, oh sure it will be good (as burton's CACF is good) but would you be happy ?
or maybe you'd like a new song.

we diss bands when they do covers.
i diss directors when they do remake, adapation (this one is ok,once), and worst re-adaptation ( uh ! )

I do see entertainment as sufficient.  When I pay my money to go watch a movie, if I'm entertained, then I've got my money's worth.  That's entirely the point of watching a movie, to me, entertainment.  I don't look to movies to change the world, or keep me informed, or tell me what my morals should be. I see just as much value in a move like Saving Private Ryan and American Pie.  If they are entertaining, then they did their job.  Not everything has to have a message to be valuable.  Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a good movie, it is entertaining and fun.  Who cares if a movie based on the same book has already been made?  Do you know how many different versions of Pride and Prejudice have been made?  I think its about 8 now.  Yet there's another one on the way, and no one is crying about that. 

And if someone wants to remake Star Wars in 4 years, fine with me.   I might even watch it.  If its crap, it won't make money. 

well, i can see why the industry is like that , if people think like you.
im not saying you're stupid. im saying you accept what makes the studios life easier and less risky.

you see entertainment sufficient ?
well take the Seven Samurai, this movie is both entertaining and smart and beautiful.
take THE TASTE OF TEA (2004) this movie is both beautiful, touching, funny, and innovative ....

and when you watch these movies you find CACF and saving private ryan very very very boring ...

until people say " we want something new",   " we're gonna watch mr. and mrs. smith" ... until then the industry will keep fuckin us in the ass with their easy movies.

but hey, thats just me.
i think it's sad, cause im so disapointed in movies now ... because we have all these great movies in mind.

just like if you're served a meal you like for ever, woudlnt you get sick of it ?
thats what's happening, you're being served pasta bolognese for 20 years, and you like it, but it's been the same meal :)

ehe ;D

The matter is you have a primary statement : " you don't see the point in adapting something that was already adapted" and you won't bulge from there whatever we can say. Sorry but for me it's completely the other way around ! I see re-adaptations as not being a copy of what has already been made but as a liberty of the author/director/actor to do something fresh and new with it.
And if I go further I would say that every book that is written, every movie that is made (in hollywood or not) is a remake of something that has already been written ... you can find fundamental myth in everything ...
We can say so for the first Star Wars trilogy you're so fond of. We can say that for every single movie that coming out there.
By the way and interestingly I've read one of your post in GNRFRANCE not so long ago in which you were eager to see the new King Kong movie... Is that not a re-adaptation of a 1933 movie and 1976 movie ? It will be the third one ... ;D

im eager to see the movie cause i'm working on the game. that's it. and i wanna see if we will be close enough to the movie and the feel - even if i saw most of the movie (not in order or finished ...)

as i said:
" cause if you think like that, then GUNS N ROSES should just do covers of the rolling stones , and we'll get 30 Sympathy for the Devil, oh sure it will be good (as burton's CACF is good) but would you be happy ?
or maybe you'd like a new song.
"

/* Lil' part in French:

Tu te la p?tes trop c'est de la folie! ;D "Ouais ouais j'ai vu les rushes du film. Oui, exact, je bosse sur un kit de d?veloppement 360 et PS3, oh la routine. Johnny Depp et Tim Burton? Des bons potes, oui, exact! On se fait un brunch dimanche vers 14h30 du mat? Je vous offre le mojito et le mimosa!" ;D

Sorry about that lol */

He is...

(http://jeanclaudevandamme.free.fr/images/jcvdenslip%2050.jpg)

 :hihi:

PS/ WHATEVER, don't take it bad it's a joke.

/* sorry too
roooo lalala .... je me la pete pas du tout !!!! j'?tais sur que ca all? ?tre mal pris ..... je me la p?te pas. je le jure sur la t?te de johnny depp !
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
*/


GRRRR!!!
I TAKE IT BAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*taking it bad smiley*

:peace:

I won't say you are stupid either, but...

I will say you sound like a young person who has grown up in a college town.  I won't say the word pretentious, but...

My reality is that I work an incredibly high stress job.  I'm not a doctor or anything, but I'm responsible for the well being of alot of people.  I'm on call 24 hours a day, 7days a week.  I make major decisions all day long and when things go wrong, I'm responsible for fixing them.  So yes, sometimes, I just want to be entertained.  I want to curl up on my couch with a glass of wine and watch Zoolander and laugh my ass off.  Or I go to the theater and escape into a different reality for awhile.  That's what movies are to me.  I don't need to prove I'm smart by watching some independent intellectual piece of crap that no one understands, but say they love for fear of looking stupid.  I know I'm smart.   And I've seen very few independent films that didn't suck.  But at least I'm willing to watch with an open mind and decide for myself.  When I hear a lot of good things about a movie, I often check it out.  Maybe I like it and maybe I don't.  But at least I'm not afraid to see.  And by the way, new and original doesn't necessarily mean good and quality. 

Didn't you make a comment in the last film thread about Napolean Dynamite, something along the lines of it was good, but too bad its becoming trendy with teens in America?  Does something being popular make it any less valuable?  Don't be so afraid to like the same things that others like.  Being different doesn't prove you are smart either.

As far as charlie and the chocolate factory...what about people who didn't like the first movie, like Tim Burton?  I myself found it kind of boring as a child.  Isn't there a reason to make a movie if the filmmaker feels he could do it better? 

well sterling, my favorite movie of all time is the first star wars movies so .... not indie i would say.
i want a vote for pedro teeshirt even if it's trendy in the us (well it's not in france, so tahts ok :) )

i totally get your point about "entertainement".
my point was that the pseudo-intelectual flicks, that people are afraid to see because they are in black and white and propose no big explosion or sex jokes ... ARE actually very entertaining.

for example, the Seven Samurai bu kurosawa, is 100 times for entertaining than any big action blockbuster. but people sometime refuse to watch it.
if i forced a 14 years old who swears by the matrix and all that shit, if i forced him to watch Seven Samurai he would enjoy the 3 hours like he never enjoyed a movie.

i am saying, you can find the same "i wanna relax",  " i just want entertainment" in a LOT of *indie* movies ...

Taste of Tea would enlight your day. would bring hapiness and smile at the end of your stressful day.

and i'm like you, open minded. i watch all the crap.
i love mainstream stuff, i love will ferrel and zoolander.
i even downloaded Mr and Mrs smith. but it's sad.

and i'm not smart, i'm actually very dumb. im just arrogant  ;D
it's just that, if a stupid fuckin asshole like me can sit through Ozu's 1940s black and white movies and appreciate why can't everybody ?
i sometimes have a feeling that the industry don't want people to watch these masterpieces cause they're afraid the audience would understand how shitty is the production these days.


http://www.ozuyasujiro.com/ <<< this guy was born in 1903 !  1903 ! and he had more talent in his eyelashes than spielberg and burton together.

about new/innovation/creation problem in the movie industry right now. first it's obvious.
then i dont wanna shoot at tim burton because it's tim burton. CACF is just and example of what's going on.
i know that burton is not the average dumb director that follows what hollywood says. but it's there. he did that movie. and it's just a good example of whats going on ...

I love movies of all genres

I like the intellectual dialogue driven movies but I also love a good raunchy comedy, I love a nice action movie.

Everything doesnt have to be intellectual and life changing, sometimes I just want to laugh and be entertained.

Depp has appeared in 26 movies and he has been a normal non eccentric guy in 10 of them

So thats a great ratio

16 eccentric characters  10 regular guys


thats better than people who have been in 30 movies and have been normal in all 30.

well said D! just thought I'd let you know you made sense yet again! ;)all I could think of was  "ME TOO!"

What the hell is with everyone talking about someone "remaking Star Wars"?  It already happened! By the man himself!  Greedo shooting first, anyone?

How are you any better, or more open minded, than a person who would refuse to watch Seven Samurai?  You are refusing to watch CACF, no matter how many people tell you its great.  You refuse to accept that it might be great, or worthwhile.  So it sure seems to me that you are like the people you are blasting for refusing to watch any particular type of movie.  You just think you have a better reason for your stubbornness.

Seven Samurai is an excellent movie but by todays standards it wouldnt be very popular because it spends a very long time developing the story and the characters. Not exactly a recipe for success in todays Hollywood.

I did see CACF this weekend and enjoyed it alot. The back story was a bit much, but I always like to see Christopher Lee pop up so it wasnt all bad. I'm not going to pass it off as the greatest thing ever, but I thought Burton did a better job at showing how rotten the other 4 kids were. It's been awhile since I read the book but this movie reminded me of alot of things that were completely eliminated from the original film.

Just saw CATCF

Depp was superb

But the film was....well, naff

Nothing was developed properly. The characters where so 2-d, we're supposed to hate them because they are...fat? rich? dedicated?

The whole film could have been far weirder and funnier - kinda feels as if they had the ideas but where afriad to go all the way.

Wonker wasn't mad enough, and the 'tour' seemed almost incidental. His childhood really wasn't....intresting enough, his dad disapproved of chocolate - omg, what a tramatic upbringing!

I found it really frustrating - they could have done so much more, there were so many lines the film was just crying out for - but never occured.

Nothing really seemed to happen....

plot holes - his dad didn't recognise a guy he had (recent) photo's of in his scrap book :confused:

The ending was just....well, lazy

Not impressed, take out Depp and this wouldn't merit a one, as it is i'd give it 5/10 with all 5 points going to Depp's acting ability

The parents' characters bugged me more than the kids.  I take it we were supposed to fault the parents for bringing up their children to be super-fat, super-rich, super-competitive, etc.  But the parents themselves were so passive and wussy in spite of witnessing their children being turned into blueberries, or chucked down a giant hole! 


I agree.  I remember reading The BFG, Fantastic Mr Fox, and Witches as a kid, and they all had that creepy/funny/weird element to them.  If I remember correctly, the little boy in Witches is turned into a rat and remains that way!    Depp definitely picked up on that feeling though.  He hit all the right notes.

One thing that had me laughing were the Oompa-Loompa song/dance routines.  I felt the movie was poking fun (in a good way) at us - the MTV music video generation.

I especially liked the chocolate bar becoming the Monolith for the chimpanzees in the clip from the 2001 movie.

I'd give it a 7/10.

Violet was the best of the kids... Her Oompa Loompa song was great.

Overall though, I was a little disappointed with the movie.

^^really?
i thought it was great.
especially when he kept walking into the glass elevator.
Mike was my fave outta the kids.
Johnny Depp was great in it, as usual. : ok:

I was wondering how many kids (or their parents) wouldn't see what was so wrong with Mike.  I actually know a kid like that, and his parents think he's the perfect kid.  They just brag about how smart he is, and ignore his behavior. 

whos seen the new one i just watched it and thought it was really good,jonny depp great as ever only let down for me was the oompa loompas...

what are ur thoughts?like or not like?

There's a 2 or 3 page thread on it in the Jungle.... Is this thread for dicussing the Oompa Loompa songs?  :P

yeah i totally forgot about the jungle until after i posted so yeah this post is about the oompa loompa songs. i personally preferred the original song and didnt really enjoy the songs in this one!

See what we do to Johnny ?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Noooooo deary, don't expose your bum, vanessa will be mad at you !!!!! ( i hope she would !!)


By SIMON THOMPSON
Sun Online
JOHNNY Depp says his next movie might be a porn film because he doesn't want to be typecast.

The gorgeous actor whose previous roles include Edward Scissorhands and Captain Jack Sparrow, is currently playing Willy Wonka in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Johnny told German magazine Gala: "These kind of characters are not so far from my own personality, but I don't want to become typecast as an eccentric.

"Maybe next time I should do something totally different and film a cracking porn with Tim Burton.

That would really send my popularity down to the depths!"

Tom Cruise's part in Interview with the vampire is flawless I think I couldn't get a better view of Louis' view of lestat so well played, I didn't seen any movie in Tom Cruise carreer that he made that evil look that makes Louis think twice.


As I can see you like The Taste of Sea, so I'm gonna take that as a Recomendation, I'm going to see The Seven Samurais today so I'll tell you tomorrow how was it.


Yeah also he didn't take the chocolate to eat it. Agree on both of you about his dad, with all his tracking carrer he couldn't recognize his own son? blah!

Overall the movie is quite entertaining I'll give it 7/10  : ok:

Great post.  I couldnt agree with you more.  There are so many people that do this.

I hated Napolean Dynamite.  I actually think it is a pretty good example of what you stated above.  There are so many people that I believe think this movie was funny just because others like it and they are supposed to find it funny.  I mean I got the movie, it was funny for about 10 minutes, then it became incredibly boring and depressing.

I was very dissapointed in the movie.  I expected a lot more.  The critic reviews I saw raved about the movie, exactly why I never listen to critics.  There are people and critics that would give 4 stars to a movie of Depp taking a shit.  And then the academy would nominate him for an oscar.  I think he was good in 21 jump street, but I think he has had more misses than hits.

he has had box office misses only because he is one of the few actors who dont play it safe, he takes chances and plays roles that arent goldmine anyone could play this type roles.


Watch Ninth Gate and then say to yourself, this guy is Edward Scissorhands

Watch Donnie Brasco and then say this guy is Jack Sparrow

watch Cry Baby and say "This guy is willy wonka

his diversity is unparallelled, no one alive today and can do what he does.

I challenge u to find two roles that he has played that are just a alike. U cant.

I think that Wanky Wanky(or what ever) looks like a child molester and the movies somehow sick too.

johnny "i'm an exentric , i wear shorts and FBI tshirts, and i talk on the cell phone " depp :)
he really plays the excentric kinda guy a lot. :)

First comes to mined is See No Evil Hear No Evil, that movie is a laugh n' a half :hihi:

I like Gene Wilder films, i think he's a great actor, he's got that strange humer i like, but i havent seen the remake yet, not out here yet :no:

He does take risks, but perhaps thats why I dont like him as much.  When I walk into a movie I want to see a good movie that entertains me.  Not some weird movie, nor some movie that criticis love but the rest of the public can hardly sit through.  He just seems to play too many parts in movies that everyone tells me I am supposed to like, but I dont.  There are flat out just certain people the critics love regardless of their performance in any movie, Depp is one of them.  Perhaps his great performances are overshadowed by some of the bad movies he chooses to do.  I dont know.  I hate actors that take roles just to try and win an oscar.  Such as taking the lead in a historic time piece.  Too me, its almost as if Depp is trying to do the same thing by just taking weird roles.

I don't think Deep wants to get a oscar or else he could choose better movies, In Pirates he did a great job interpretating Jack Sparrow and he didn't even knew that he was gonna be nominated, so I don't think he's choosing weird caracthers to win an oscar.

Could've been a great movie - if they would've left those rotten musicial numbers out.

Man.....Johnny Depps performance was fuckin' awsome....and really weird :hihi:

This movie was excallent...in the long run, the origenal is more a kids movie and is a total classic, this one is just as good and does the origenal book justice all the way!!

The songs put me in a weird spot, im still unsure what i think of em' but over all the movie is a thumbs up!! : ok:


I loved Depps intro, i laughed my arse off!! :hihi: : ok: : ok:

clint.

you' not much of an arthouse movie fan then arnt ya :hihi:

Weird is cool, i love the movies he picks, thats what makes him a real actor, he challenges himself.

I finally saw this flick, matter of fact I just got this on dvd for free this thanksgiving. ;D, my cousin hated the movie, so it's mine. No one I knew last summer, wanted to go see this flick in theaters , I was really bummed out. Although I think the original is a timeless classic, I liked this one better. I just don't know why. I liked how Charlie helped Willy reunite with his dad, the story seem extended more.

Shut up . . . I laughed my ass off  ;D