Buy DVD Movie Online – Cheap DVD Movies

10 Comments

1. 

   Tsuyoshi said

   September 5 2010 @ 4:47 pm

   Review by Tsuyoshi for Howl’s Moving Castle
   Rating:
   (In fact 4.5 Stars) Though ‘Howl’s Moving Castle’ (‘Hauru-no Ugoku Shiro’) may not be Miyazaki’s best film, it is still far more enjoyable than many other films, Japanese or American, animated or not. I for one very much enjoyed watching it, and I love the film for its interesting characters and the rich textures of the designs, especially the fantasy world itself where witchcraft and humans’ mundane works can be seen side by side. And the titular six-legged castle that really walks among the wilderness is something you never see except in his films.

   Miyazaki’s new film is based on a book of the same title written by Diana Wynne Jones. The film’s story is told from the viewpoint of a 18-year-old girl Sophie, who is working at a milliner’s shop every day. But she can hear the sound of bloody battles from the distance, and it is clear that this beautiful country, where witches and wizards live among humans, is going to see another war sooner or later.

   But apparently Sophie is still leading an ordianary life until her uneventful routine days are suddenly broken by one accidental meeting with wicked ‘Witch of the Waste,’ who turns her into an old woman with a curse. Seeking for her place to live, Sophie goes to the wilderness where, the townspeople say, a young wizard named Howl wanders. In fact, Sophie encounters Howl’s Moving Castle in the foggy moutainside, and she decides to hop in. There, forbidden to talk about her curse, she starts a new life with young and handsome Howl, who speaks to her kindly like a prince, but at times acts like a spoiled child.

   [MIYAZAKI'S LOVE STORY] You will be impressed with many fantastic and colorful images created by Miyazaki. You might find an anti-war message deep in the film’s story, but will find the romantic relations between Sophie and Howl is the most touching and impressive part of the film. Sophie’s romantic feeling towards Howl is expressed in a unique way (which I don’t disclose here), and Miyazaki, as usual, is very good at drawing the character of this independent heroine. One interesting thing is, probably this is the first case in which Miyazaki attempted to show a love story in his films. And a kiss too.

   I must say that not everything works in ‘Howl’s Moving Castle.’ I haven’t read the original book, but it is obvious that Miyazaki made changes. Not that I’m blaming them. But the story is sometimes told too hurriedly, and when you think something (actions or whatever) will start, it ends abruptly. Howl’s character is full of contradictory traits, that’s good, but his complicated personality could have been more effective and convincing with more detailed episodes about, say, his mentor magician (and politician) Madam Suliman or Witch of the Waste.

   (If I am not mistaken, ‘Howl’s Moving Castle’ is a rare case for Miyazaki who prefers to use his own stories, and this is the first time he adapts someone else’s story in 15 years, last time being ‘Kiki’s Delivery Service. But ‘Kiki’s’ story written by Eiko Kadono is not long — I know, I read — while ‘Howl’s’ story is, I think, much longer. Maybe these facts have soemthing to do with my complaint.)

   Greatly helped by Jo Hisaishi’s beautiful score, ‘Howl’s Moving Castle’ is full of imaginative power, with one strong heroine you can relate to (though she is 90-years-old), plus memorable supports including fire damon Calcifer, (not a bad guy at all), and ubiquitous Prince Turnip who always appears at the right moment. Flawed, to be sure, but enjoyable fantasy tale with a healthy amount of humor and lots of imagination.

   The review above refers to the original Japanese version. I know the English version includes the voices of Christian Bale, Jean Simmons, and Billy Crystal, but as I have never seen the version, I did not talk about them. Still, as Mr. Miyazaki is not likely to approve any changes done to his films, I hope what I saw in Japan, you will see in your country.

2. 

   E. A Solinas said

   September 5 2010 @ 4:47 pm

   Review by E. A Solinas for Howl’s Moving Castle
   Rating:
   Not a lot of directors would be brave enough to take on a love story between a girl-turned-old-lady and a wizard missing a vital organ. But Oscar-winning Hayao Miyazaki tackles a new fantasy realm in in “Howl’s Moving Castle” — namely, that of fantasy dowager Diana Wynne Jones.

   Sophie (Emily Mortimer) is a plain, unhappy young woman working in a milliner’s shop — lightened only slightly by a mysterious wizard who rescues her one day. But then the evil Witch of the Waste (Lauren Bacall) comes into the shop, and casts a spell on her, turning her into an ancient old lady (Jean Simmons). Sophie ends up wandering into the Moving Castle, a chicken-legged chaos machine, and encountering the sexy if childish wizard Howl (Christian Bale), smart-aleck fire demon Calcifur (Billy Crystal), and preteen apprentice Markl (Josh Hutcherson).

   Sophie appoints herself the cleaning lady and starts whipping the castle into shape, trying to deal with Howl’s temper tantrums and the war brewing all around them, and trying to cure her peculiar curse. But when she runs an errand to a castle in Howl’s place, she finds that her new boss has some sinister problems of his own — including his missing heart, and impending transformation into a monster.

   Don’t expect much fidelity to the novel; Miyazaki takes plenty of liberties with the story. As a result, it feels more like his story than Jones’, with all the earmarks he usually has — blobby monsters, colorful rural settings, intense anti-war messages, strange machines, and a Jules-Verne atmosphere of Victorian technology. But “Howl’s Moving Castle” is very different from the others Miyazaki has done, since he kept the British flavour of the original book.

   It’s also different because it’s a love story — and a surprisingly un-cheesy one. In less skilled hands, having Howl say “I finally found something worth protecting. It’s you” would seem inane, but Miyazaki keeps it brief and powerful. And even though Sophie looks elderly through most of the movie, Miyazaki never falls into trite observations about inner beauty. He just lets the story tell us that.

   The animation is virtually flawless, from the chaotic absurdity Moving Castle to the breathtaking aerial battles with the bird-man Howl. Tiny details are everywhere, from painted ceiling beams to elaborate doorknobs. But there are also quiet, entertaining moments, such as Sophie attempting to houseclean the entire Moving Castle. Calcifur is the one sore point — he’s not done badly, but he looks vaguely artificial. I suppose a fire demon is hard to animate.

   There are a few flaws, in that the story could have used a bit more fleshing out — at times the relationships between the characters are sketchy. Not much detail, for example, is given about sorceress Suliman (Blythe Danner) and her relationship to Howl, or why she’s so peeved at him. Or about the nature of Howl’s increasingly dangerous magic and why he did what he did to lose his heart.

   While there are the usual “howls” that the English dubbing is inferior to the original Japanese, the assorted voice actors did exceptional work in the American version. Christian Bale and Billy Crystal are the major standouts — Crystal is funny and dry as usual, while Bale is sultry, sexy, soft-spoken and deep. Except, of course, when Howl runs around the house shrieking that his hair is ruined.

   “Howl’s Moving Castle” moves on a little too fast in places, but it’s still a breathtaking, romantic, colorful ride. A wonderful story, told by one of the few filmmakers who could do it justice.

3. 

   Ken said

   September 5 2010 @ 5:36 pm

   Review by Ken for Howl’s Moving Castle
   Rating:
   Probably many people find the story confusing. I felt the same thing when I saw it in the theater for the first time! The story seemed arbitrary and I couldn’t connect the pieces together. But when I watch it again on the DVD, I realize the movie is probably about one thing: personal freedom.

   Howl is a free person. He doesn’t has a heart and even his home (which is usually characterized as a stable point in one’s life) can move He is disguised as different wizards in different counties, and when Sophie asks him how many identities he has, he said “Enough to guarantee my freedom”. When Sophie confronts Suliman, she comments Howl as “selfish and cowardly and unpredictable, but he’s straight as an arrow. He only wants to be free.” But in Miyazaki’s world, nothing is black and white. According to Suliman, Howl’s power is too great for a person without heart, and he will eventually becomes a monster (some political figures come to my mind).

   Sophie, on the other hand, is bounded by responsibilities. She is young, but her heart is old. She refuses the invitation from her friends and keep working at the hat shop. When her sister asks her “Are you going to spend your life in that shop?” She replies “It meant so much to papa. Besides, I’m the eldest.”. Even her sister asks her to “look out for yourself”.

   When Sophie is turned to an old lady, it actually set her free because the good thing of being old is that one has “so little to lose” She becomes more adventurous and takes control of her life. She is very assertive as being the cleaning lady in Howl’s castle and even tames Calcifer to cook her food. For Howl, his turning point comes when he refuses to move his castle anymore (I’ll leave it to the reader as why he does that) By the end of movie, he regains his heart. He feels terrible because it is like “trapped under a stone”. And Sophie says, “Yes, a heart is a heavy burden”.

   There are other wonderful things in the movie. For example, this is probably one of the few movies that tell me what it is really like to be old. But I do want to highlight the thread about personal freedom as it will help you to tie up the pieces of the story.

4. 

   E. A Solinas said

   September 5 2010 @ 6:14 pm

   Review by E. A Solinas for Howl’s Moving Castle
   Rating:
   Not a lot of directors would be brave enough to take on a love story between a girl-turned-old-lady and a wizard missing a vital organ.

   But Oscar-winning director/writer Hayao Miyazaki tackles a new fantasy realm in in “Howl’s Moving Castle.” In this case, it’s the world of fantasy dowager Diana Wynne Jones, and he wraps the storyline in humor, romance and genuine flair. No, it’s not faithful. But it is fantastic.

   Sophie (Emily Mortimer) is a plain, unhappy young woman working in a milliner’s shop. But then the evil Witch of the Waste (Lauren Bacall) comes into the shop, and turns her into a hobbled old lady (Jean Simmons). Sophie ends up wandering into the Moving Castle, a chicken-legged chaos machine, and encountering the sexy, immature wizard Howl (Christian Bale), smart-aleck fire demon Calcifur (Billy Crystal), and preteen apprentice Markl (Josh Hutcherson).

   Sophie appoints herself the cleaning lady and starts whipping the castle into shape, trying to deal with Howl’s temper tantrums and the rapidly deepening war. And, of course, trying to de-curse herself. But when she runs an errand that Howl is too scared to deal with, she finds that her new boss has some sinister problems of his own — including a missing heart.

   Don’t expect much fidelity to the humorous fantasy novel. Miyazaki takes plenty of liberties with the story, leaving out characters and adjusting others. As a result, it feels more like his story than Jones’, with the earmarks of his style — blobby monsters, colorful rural settings, intense anti-war messages, strange machines, and a Jules-Verne atmosphere of Victorian technology. But “Howl’s Moving Castle” is very different from the others Miyazaki has done, since he kept the British flavour of the original book.

   Moreover, it’s a love story. Miyazaki has vaguely touched on romance in prior movies, but here it’s full-blown, and surprisingly un-cheesy. In less skilled hands, having Howl say “I finally found something worth protecting. It’s you” would seem inane. In Miyazaki’s hands, it’s not. And even though Sophie looks elderly through most of the movie, Miyazaki never falls into trite observations about inner beauty. He just lets the story show it.

   Not that it’s all lovey-doviness — Sophie’s housecleaning and Calcifur (“Sophie, help! I’m going out!”) provide plenty of amusement. And the animation is as close to flawless as you can get, from the chaotic absurdity Castle to the breathtaking aerial battles that Howl swoops in on. Tiny details are everywhere, from painted ceiling beams to elaborate doorknobs. Calcifur is the one sore point — he’s not done badly, but he looks vaguely artificial.

   There are a few flaws in that the story could have used a bit more fleshing out — at times the relationships between the characters are sketchy. Not much detail, for example, is given about sorceress Suliman (Blythe Danner) and her relationship to Howl, why she’s so peeved at him. And it’s a bit hard to comprehend why Howl’s condition would turn him into a monster bird.

   And while there are the usual “howls” that the English dubbing is inferior to the original Japanese vocal work, the American voice actors did exceptional work. Christian Bale and Billy Crystal are the major standouts — Crystal is funny and dry as usual, while Bale is sultry, sexy, soft-spoken and deep. Except, of course, when Howl runs around the house wailing that his hair is ruined.

   “Howl’s Moving Castle” moves on a little too fast in places, but it’s still a breathtaking, romantic, colorful ride. A wonderful story, told by one of the few filmmakers who could do it justice.

5. 

   Robert Moore said

   September 5 2010 @ 7:03 pm

   Review by Robert Moore for Howl’s Moving Castle
   Rating:
   Well before HOWL’S MOVING CASTLE, Hayao Miyazaki had established himself as the finest creator of feature length animated films in the history of cinema. So pointing out that this marvelous film isn’t quite as good as his very best work really isn’t very illuminative. He has done at least three or four films that are better, but that cannot be said of any other animator. This film suffers only by comparison with his own work, not with that of anyone else.

   A number of Miyazaki’s films have been set in non-Japanese settings, so this one’s being imagined in a vaguely European locale really isn’t terribly unique. In every other way, this is an exceedingly typical Miyazaki creation. There is, for instance, the preoccupation with flying, fields of non-identical flowers that wave in the breeze (each drawn separately by hand and not computer), richly detailed landscapes, and eccentrically designed rooms. There is hardly a moment in this film that isn’t a delight to gaze upon.

   In two ways this film stands comparison with anything that Miyazaki has done. First, he has created a host of astonishingly vivid and convincing characters. What is marvelous about them is that none of them are simple, but are wonderfully complex and often deeply flawed. Howl of the title is a powerful sorcerer, horrified by the absurd war being waged in the land, but in danger himself of turning into a giant bird of prey. He is struggling with sanity, infected by the insanity that he sees throughout the world. The central character, Sofia, begins the movie a young, simple girl who embroiders hats in a hat shop, but who is turned into an extremely old woman by a witch’s spell. Through the rest of the film the spell waxes and wanes, sometimes maintaining completely the illusion of her being ancient, but sometimes in sleep restoring her completely to her youth. At times she appears a blend of old crone and young girl. There is also a extraordinarily well-conceived scarecrow that lays claim to be the finest such creation since THE WIZARD OF OZ. There is even an animal, a dog that is the utter antithesis of all the too cute, too loud sidekicks that populate the Disney films. Almost immobile, unexpressive, he can’t even quite bark, but can only manage a bit of a wheeze.

   The second way the film stands out is visually. With one exception, every aspect of this film is magical and unique. For instance, the scarecrow is fascinating to watch at every moment, despite the fact that except for being able to hop about on its post as if it were mounted on a pogo stick, it is incapable of facial expressions or moving either arms or hands or legs. As usual in Miyazaki, every aspect of nature is vibrant and alive, but even more than in previous films his interiors are stunning. Each room is filled with bric-a-brac and personal items that make them feel actual and lived-in unprecedented in animation.

   So why does HOWL’S MOVING CASTLE fall short of Miyazaki’s very best work, even while it surpasses the work of most others? There are two reasons. First, Calcifer the Fire Demon, at least in the English version (I have not seen the Japanese original), is both uninventively drawn and poorly voiced by Billy Crystal. The drawing I dislike because in contrast with everything else in the movie, Calcifer is drawn as an orange blob with eyes and mouth, a hunk of poorly differentiated color in contrast with everything else onscreen, which is carefully nuanced and hued. It is one of the least imaginatively executed characters in all of Miyazaki. I love Billy Crystal, and have thoroughly enjoyed his work way back in the days of SOAP to the present, but he just wasn’t appropriate for this film. His loud, somewhat brash New York accent simply didn’t mesh with all of the others. The second major problem I had the film was the last quarter of the story. At a certain point the story lost both its coherence and its pacing, and failed to maintain pace with the earlier parts of the movie. The movie did not fall apart, but neither did it remain equally marvelous throughout.

   One other element in the film was both a delight and a mild disappointment: the Castle itself. Visually, this is one of the most amazing things one will see in an animated film, and the magical door that allows one to exit in any of four places suited it perfect. The only problem is that we don’t get to see much of the interior. Virtually the entire action is kept inside one room in which all seem to eat and sleep. I wanted Sophie to explore!

   These minor points aside, I enjoyed this film very nearly as much as I have any of Miyazaki’s other films. If you are a Miyazaki fan, it is highly unlikely that you will have any reaction other than sheer delight, and if have not seen Miyazaki before and love this one, you will be delighted to learn that he has done even better.

6. 

   Anonymous said

   September 5 2010 @ 7:40 pm

   Review by for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (Full Screen Special Edition)
   Rating:
   The 30th Anniversary Edition of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was originally botched as a fullscreen-only effort. However, Warner listened to the people and gave them a wonderful widescreen transfer. Colors are vibrant, the 5.1 Dolby Digital track is very nice, and there are a handful of cool extras. There is the 30-minute documentary “Pure Imagination” which shows some of the cast today, including all the children and Gene Wilder himself. The interviews of the cast looking back at the movie which was the defining thing for so many of them is very interesting. The documentary on the whole is rather fulfilling. While one feels that the documentary could have delved deeper and maybe been an hour-long, at a brisk 30 minutes, the pacing seems okay and it won’t leave you wanting too much more. There is a limited amount of archival on-set “B” roll footage, but all that is there is interesting. Also included is the original theatrical trailer (Warner left off the 25th Anniversary trailer that was on the original DVD release from 1997), a 4-minute featurette on the production design, and a feature-length audio commentary from the children, who have now grown up. The other features – “character bios” and sing-alongs – are pretty much fluff features. Since this was one of my most anticipated DVD releases of the year, I can’t help but feel Warner could have done more in the way of extra features – games, outtakes, deleted scenes, etc. Nevertheless, the overall content of this DVD is satisfying enough. As one of the greatest films of all time, and certainly one of the most enjoyable musicals and most enjoyable films of the 1970s, “Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory” has a timeless feel to it. This DVD deserves a place in every collection. If you like the movie, then know better than to be the fullframe edition, which was released earlier. Widescreen in the original ratio is the only way to go. Especially in a few years from now, when we all have 16 x 9 widescreen TVs, and that “fullframe” version leaves you with big bars on the side of the TV. See the movie the way it was made and meant to be seen – in widescreen. And when you do get that 16 x 9 television, guess what – the widescreen DVD will fill your screen! A classic movie with classic peformances, and a wonderful amount of heart. What are you waiting for — get the widescreen 30th Anniversary Edition DVD of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory so you can enter a world of pure imagination today!Video: A -
   Audio: A
   Extras: B+

7. 

   Joy said

   September 5 2010 @ 8:23 pm

   Review by Joy for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (Full Screen Special Edition)
   Rating:
   WOW, I can’t believe how long ago this film was made and how wonderful it is even today! It really doesn’t seem like it’s from 1971. I have probably seen this film over 500 times by now, since the 80′s and I still am not the least bit bored of it. At 28 years old, I still totally love this film!!! The characters, especially Gene Wilder who plays Willy Wonka, who is THE Willy Wonka, who could never be topped EVER (yes I’ve seen the 2005 film!), the music, the setting, the songs, and especially the Oompa-Loompa’s! Everything in this film is so wonderfully done and everyone who hasn’t seen it yet, needs to as soon as possible!!

   My favorite place or scene in the whole film has to be the big candy and chocolate room where Willy Wonka sings “Pure Imagination.” Not only for the song but because I can see how much work the director put into this film. All the candy and chocolate looks so real and alive and the whole room looks so beautiful the way everything is set up! I also love that teacher, Charlie’s teacher that you see a lot until they go into the chocolate factory, he is so funny! And it’s set in London, an added bonus!! I just cannot get enough of this film or recommend this film enough!! It’s a masterpiece!!! It’s definitely one of my favorite movies of all time!!!

   Who could not love Veruca’s “I Want It Now” performance? That whole scene was totally brilliant!

   The Special Widescreen Edition DVD has tons of extras. There is commentary by the kids who got to go inside the factory. You’ll also learn that Gene Wilder wouldn’t play Willy Wonka unless he was able to do that somersault that he does before letting the kids through the gate. There is an interview with Gene Wilder from 2001, The Making of Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory, four sing along songs, a 1971 behind the scenes featurette, and a photo gallery.

8. 

   FrKurt Messick said

   September 5 2010 @ 9:13 pm

   Review by FrKurt Messick for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (Full Screen Special Edition)
   Rating:
   The film is based on a much-loved children’s book, ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’, by Roald Dahl. Dahl wasn’t always happy with the changes made between his book and the film, and wasn’t always consulted on them. Today probably more people are familiar with the film sequence of events than the book. Charlie is a down-on-his-luck boy who is nonetheless optimistic and happy. He and his mother work to tend for their bed-ridden family members, all living together in a one-room home.One day there is an annoucement that Wonka is going to open his factory to visitors, to be chosen more or less at random through finding the Golden Tickets, contained in Wonka bars (a brilliant marketing device back then). Scenes of shoppers’ frenzy are shown all around with world, including a Wonka delivery van shown arriving at the White House. The five golden tickets are found all around the world – the first one in Dusselheim, Germany, by the fat boy, Augustus Gloop (played by Michael Boliner, who is now a tax accountant in Munich, and is still rather large). The second ticket was found in the UK, by spoiled brat, Veruca Salt (Julie Dawn Cole, the only Wonka child still acting), whose father, Roy Kinnear, is a well-known actor in British cinema. The third ticket was found in the USA, by gum-chewing Violet Beauregarde (Denise Nickerson, now an accountant at a nuclear plant in Colorado), whose used-car-salesman father was played by Leonard Stone (who was selected over Jim Bakus). The fourth ticket was also won in the USA, by Mike Teevee (Paris Themmen, considered a real brat by most of the cast and crew); his frantic mother was played by Dodo Denny (later Nora Denny), who was one of the few minor characters in the film to consistently act after this film. The final ticket at first is reported to be won by some shady businessman from Paraguay, but in the end, that is proven to be a forgery. Of course, Charlie buys a Wonka Bar expecting nothing, and gets the ticket.An ominous figure, Slugworth (the arch-enemy of Wonka – who knew chocolate makers also made arch-enemies?), appears to each of the winners, whispering in their ears. Charlie is also confronted, and promised a reward should he bring Slugworth an example of Wonka’s latest creation, the Everlasting Gobstopper. One wonders why (a) any candy maker would make a candy that never wears out (thus defeating re-sales), and (b) why Slugworth can’t just buy one himself when they are released, analyse it and ruin his own factory the same way? But I digress… Gunter Meisner, a very prolific German actor, played the villain, who wasn’t in the book (nor was the ‘gobstopper plot’).The grand day of the event, the winners enter the factory with great fanfare, meeting Wonka (Gene Wilder) for the first time, and get the first taste of his bizarre sense of theatre. (It is reported not only Wilder’s idea for the limping/somersault introduction to the crowd, but also a condition of his accepting the role.) From that point on, what was truth? It is ironic that Wonka’s entrance doesn’t occur until the film is half over. What we remember of the film comes after this, but over half the film is actually set-up. This is rather like the Wizard of Oz, where most of the film is done before we see ‘the major character’, although admittedly Wonka is far more prominent than Oz’s balloonist.Wonka, the man of mystery, only ever became even more of a mystery as the tour progressed. He is constantly switching his words (‘we have so much time and so little to do’), and there are surprises at every turn. Wonka borrows a lot of his key phrases (Ogden Nash, Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde) and there are a lot of fantasy-inspired elements (Alice in Wonderland, Lord of the Rings). At each major scene, something ghastly seems to happen, but in epic-fantasy form, it doesn’t seem to matter to the majority, who proceed onward with their quest. In the chocolate room, Augustus Gloop meets his untimely exit from the factory by falling in the chocolate river. Violet turns into a blueberry by chewing experimental gum, and has to be squeezed (squoozed?). Veruca, in the room with the geese who lay the golden eggs, turns out to be a bad egg herself, but has a sporting chance of going down a chute with an inactive furnace. Mike Teevee shrinks in the Wonka version of the Star Trek transporter beam, leaving in the end only Charlie, who is denied his prize of a lifetime of chocolate for a minor infraction. It would seem that Wonka had a sinister side in many ways – the boat that carries the prize winners only seated eight, implying that Wonka knew someone would be missing. The Wonkamobile only had seats for four guests. Of course, the children apparently all had sinister sides, too, including Charlie, until the end. None of them let Wonka know of their Slugworth contact. In the end, we never know what becomes of the fallen questers – we are led to believe that in this candy factory they got their just desserts. The Oompa-Loompas put the moral to each downfall in song, with a 1970s karaoke-type presentation of the lyrics as they sing. In the end, of course, goodness and justice win out, as the factory is given to Charlie after his act of unwarranted kindness toward Wonka.Director Stuart always saw this film as a ‘realistic’ fantasy film. Those things that are not over the top are very ordinary. The people are not superheroes, and the situations, while fantastic, are not beyond the credible. Stuart also did his best for ‘real’ reaction – the kids had never seen Gene Wilder before his appearance at the door, the chocolate room in the factory, or the Oompa-Loompas prior to the first scene, either, so their reactions are more natural. A great film for children and adults!

9. 

   CHI GAL said

   September 5 2010 @ 9:54 pm

   Review by CHI GAL for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (Full Screen Special Edition)
   Rating:
   As a fan of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory since the 1970s, I may be a little biased, however, the recent re-make can not hold a candle.

   If you like musicals, this should definitely be on your list. The songs are delightful and fun,and with the exception of Charlie’s Mom’s song, I love them all. The screen writing is excellent.

   Gene Wilder is masterful as the eccentric candy maker, Willy Wonka. One can not help but feel anxious as Willy Wonka guides us through the inner workings of his factory.

   Adults and children alike will enjoy the lessons one learns from not listening, being selfish, greedy and not respecting others through this timeless classic.

   I highly reccommend it to anyone both young and old. No need to have children to “view paradise, simply look around and view it.”

10. 

    R. Miller said

    September 5 2010 @ 10:37 pm

    Review by R. Miller for Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (Full Screen Special Edition)
    Rating:
    Firstly, despite what one reviewer says, the widescreen edition is NOT simply the deceptively named ‘full screen’ version with the top and bottom chopped off (no, it’s not a ‘faked’ widescreen) it was originally filmed ‘open-matte’ in a 1.33:1 ratio (same as a 4:3 television), a process which involves covering up (matting out) the top and bottom of the image for presentation in theatres to create a 1.85:1 aspect ratio. I do not like this method of filming as it gives widescreen movies an underserved bad name. The widescreen shape is what the director intended to be seen but ,alas, it does offer less visible image than the open matte version so can make one feel ripped off! However, that said, keep in mind that when movies filmed this way are seen ‘full frame’ the artistic composition of the shot is often lost and sometimes things that shouldn’t be visible such as microphones are seen. Widescreen is easily the way to go if you want to see the most image on the vast majority of releases as ‘open-matte’ is really not all that common a format.I would not say ‘buyer beware’ just ‘buyer be aware’ that there are a myriad of formats. I would encourage anyone who isn’t familiar about the different film formats to do a web search for the letterbox and widescreen advocacy page for an excellent visual description of the various formats and matting techniques used in films.Finally, this movie is a lot of fun and I recommend it to children and adults alike. Yes, the boat ride is kind of bizarre and perhaps could be a bit unsettling for some, but it’s no more scary (in my opinion) than a lot of scenes in ‘The Wizard Of Oz’ such as the witches legs curling up after she gets crushed by Dorothy’s house. Children can’t be so sheltered from life so as to not see a bit of darkness at times. Also, the worm in the ‘Willy Wonka’ boat ride scene crawls across a living person’s face not a dead person…you can see their eyes follow the movement of the worm. One more comment on the boat ride scene…despite what a reviewer said, the widescreen version DOES have violet picking her nose while saying “spitting is such a dirty habbit” – my copy certainly does anyhow.I would give it 4.5 stars if I could but will have to round it off at 5.p.s. I must mention that Amazon.com incorrectly shows the widescreen ratio of this DVD as being 2.35:1 instead of its actual 1.85:1 ratio.

Comment RSS