msecaur

Being something of a Dickens purist, I very rarely watch new adaptations of his novels, television or otherwise, and after being badly disappointed by the BBC's 2011 soap-opera-like adaptation of "Great Expectations", I didn't exactly have high hopes for this film; in fact, I didn't even catch it when it first aired on PBS. After reading the novel (or half of one, anyway), I really wanted to see this and find out just what kind of ending the filmmakers came up with. I was astonished at just how excellent it was, and would rank it as one of the best productions of Dickens I've seen since "David Copperfield".

"The Mystery of Edwin Drood" was Charles Dickens' last novel; he was only able to complete half of it before he died in 1870. He intended his story to be a thriller, requesting that his publisher accept the book in twelve parts instead of the usual twenty. That being said, the film reflects that ideal in spades, clipping along at a nice pace that rivals even the best modern-day mystery novel and incorporating a healthy dose of psychological drama for extra suspense. The dramatic tension is there from the very first scene and doesn't let up until the end credits roll. Highly atmospheric and oftentimes chilling, it would be hard to imagine a more ideal production.

The second half falters a little bit, owing to the the lack of true Dickensian dialogue and plotting, but the numerous twists and turns and surprising character development never really feel as though he couldn't have written them himself. Some people might dislike the ending, but I found it unexpected and very appropriate. Dickens wasn't above resorting to using the "deus ex machina" device himself, so who's to say it doesn't belong here? While he probably had a different though equally surprising finale in mind, the one devised by screenwriter Gwyneth Hughes isn't exactly shabby.

The only real reservation I had about this film was that it would feel too "modern". To my delight, the historical side of the film is never once questioned: there's never a single moment over the course of all two hours where you don't feel that you're truly in 19th century England. The fact that it was actually filmed in Rochester, Kent, the place where Dickens based the fictional town of Cloisterham upon, gives it a whole new layer of authenticity.

I was also quite impressed with the cast. Not only do they look their parts, but they also perform them flawlessly, giving real yet Dickenesque portrayals. Freddie Fox is entirely wonderful as Edwin Drood, literally embodying the phrase "laissez-faire". Tamzin Merchant is a steady yet perhaps a little too pert Rosa Bud, but that would be my only complaint. The true star of the show is Welsh actor Matthew Rhys, who just lives and breathes the dark, brooding, obsessive opium-smoker John Jasper. He brings out the character's passive-agressiveness to perfection, and his intense, emotional performance will keep you on the edge of your seat.

In short, I absolutely loved BBC/Masterpiece's 2012 adaptation of "The Mystery of Edwin Drood", and would recommend it to anyone as one film not to be missed.

I would have completely passed this film over if not for the fact that it was written and directed by the brilliant Paul King of "Paddington" and "Paddington 2". In anyone else's hands, it would have become yet another lifeless, overstuffed, unnecessary origin-story prequel. But in his, it becomes, like the Paddington films (albeit with a bit less slapstick bear humor and far more music) an equally whimsical, quirky, wondrous, and warm film about how one person, just by being themselves, can change the world around them, as long as they remain positive and don't give up on their dreams.

I've always felt that Roald Dahl's 1964 novel, while not without its dark moments, was more joyous than many of his later books, a wondrous ode to his love of chocolate and a giddy exploration of the wish-fulfillment of being handed the keys to your own candy factory. King has tapped into and run with this sweetness, but he keeps it tempered, just as Dahl did, by following the mantra that adults are not to be trusted and make the best villains via his (and co-writer Simon Farnaby's) introduction of just enough grotesque, menacing, yet somehow funny grown-ups to keep things from becoming too easy for the protagonists without making the story too grim.

Speaking of protagonists, as the title suggests, this story is all about the man himself, Willy Wonka, and while it took a few scenes for me to get used to seeing anyone but the incomparable Gene Wilder in the role, Timothee Chalamet gives a wonderful performance that definitely grows on you. By the end of the film, he literally moved me to tears. As a sort of amalgam of Chaplin's The Little Tramp and a young Harry Houdini, his youthful, wide-eyed Wonka definitely leans more towards the warm-hearted, twinkly-eyed side of Dahl's incarnation and Wilder's interpretation than the nonchalant candy maker who calmly accepts the possibility of naughty children being boiled into fudge or thrown down a garbage chute. All young Willy wants to do is make the world a better place with his chocolates. Yet Chalamet still manages to capture the eccentric, energetic, excitable, reckless, inventive man of the 1971 film version and Roald Dahl's novels without letting his quirks become overpowering (yes, I'm looking at you, Johnny Depp) such that it isn't a stretch to imagine that his Wonka and the man he will eventually become are one and the same.

Timothee Chalamet also pleasantly surprises with his singing and dancing skills, which come in handy considering that, in spite of what the trailers will tell you, "Wonka" is an unabashedly old-fashioned movie musical courtesy of Neil Hannon's fun, catchy, and tuneful original songs. While Chalamet may not be Josh Groban, he has a sweet, natural voice with lots of color and personality, not to mention a gorgeous vibrato. For my money, I would much rather buy a record of his over Nick Jonas or Harry Styles any day, and I hope that he continues to be given the chance to further develop and show off his skills.

In short, "Wonka" is a wonderful and unexpected surprise in more ways than one. King's childlike view of the world and his deftness at telling stories that are neither too clever for children yet too inane for adults matches perfectly with the world and words of Roald Dahl, a feeling clearly shared by Dahl's grandson Luke Kelly, co-producer on this film and guardian of Dahl's estate, who allowed "Wonka" to be the first time Roald Dahl's characters have ever been used in an original story. Worlds away from Tim Burton's nightmarish 2005 "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," "Wonka" instead meshes beautifully with Roald Dahl's original 1964 novel and the 1971 film, giving fond nods and Easter eggs in abundance for those paying attention, while also managing to stand on its own feet as a great film, whether or not you've ever heard of Oompa-Loompas or let yourself explore a world of pure imagination before.