zhombu

Bad acting. Bad story. Bad effects. Bad music. Bad casting. Bad direction. Bad costumes. Bad ideas.

Chalamet is simply too weedy. He has zero physical presence. He delivered all of his lines as if it was a first-time table reading and then the one and only take on film is what was used. He's charmless. Has no voice. Inflects no emotion. Holds no intrigue. Utterly uninspiring.

The rest of the cast could have been anybody. Olivia Colman does a fine job, if a bit over-the-top at times, but, overall, the mix of accents makes the ensemble seem like they used whomever showed up first for the audition.

The musical numbers are rote and flat. Hookless and banal. Pointless, they add nothing to the story.

Things happen often that suggest that Wonka should have the ability to solve any problems that come his way...but he doesn't use them.

The industry must have been short on green screen while this was filmed because it's painfully obvious in all instances that characters aren't always in the same space.

Why was this movie even made? Why?

Formula 1 race car chassis are made from full, carbon fiber tubs. The stiffness is extraordinary, and few things on Earth could possibly be stiffer.

Except...

The contrived, non-conversational dialogue must be the reason for the stilted, ice-cold feeling that emanates from every character. Too many plot lines crammed into too short a time don't help. Key characters have atomic clock predictability about how they'll respond to every action, Baranski will be crabby, Nixon will be wimpy, Coons will be aggressive, Spector will be Mr Freeze, Nathan Lane will be....oh dear, that's supposed to be serious? There very little latitude or time for characters to develop. Secondary characters in Downton Abbey had solid backstories. Here, the staff are nearly furniture.

Would using British actors faking American accents imbue a Western with authenticity? No. And a world that is essentially unknown to Americans that looks for all the world like English society gentry just doesn't fly with American accents. Too flat. But I suppose its accurate.

And as others have mentioned, the sets, conveyances, costumes...everything looks brand-new, just built, just made. Sterile. Fake.

Eh.

Honestly, what is wrong with everyone? The script is bad. The acting is worse. The accents are comical. The direction is terrible. Farrelly clearly doesn't understand how to force a film into the genre into which it wants to operate.

This is not a comedy in any way. It's not written like one, nothing is funny, and very little should be funny. But Farelly can only see films in that light, so the timing is awkward throughout, as if he was waiting for the laughter to calm down before the next line is given. Everyone delivers his lines woodenly and in isolation form other conversation, like a play given by middle-schoolers who are doing it for extra credit.

Visually, the film is more successful but it's really old territory we've seen an awful lot over the years.

The embedded soundtrack is clearly reaching hard to create that mid-to-late 60's psychedelic sound. It achieves that flavor but except for bits of two songs from The Association, one from Jefferson Airplane, and perhaps another, they are are third-rate or unknown things you'd find on a Time-Life, "Man, Dig the 60's" CD collection because...they're cheap to use.

It's based on a book by the main protagonist in the film but...what a stupid thing to do. So dumb it was distracting. There was no shortage of beer in Vietnam. An acquaintance who was infantry there told me that all they drank was American beer because the water would kill you faster than the V. C.

I was very glad when it ended, both the Vietnam war and this torturous movie.