Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Kerrigan · 12:16 AM

So who else here thinks that Depp's Wonka looks a lot like Michael Jackson?

The white face, the reclusive lifestyle, the fact that they both live in their own little playgrounds... do you think Depp modeled his character after MJ?

demograph68 · Jul 17, 2005, 12:55 AM

I think Gene Wilder was better.

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 01:50 AM

Gene Wilder was da man! Nobody can replace him.

-

GSixZero · Jul 17, 2005, 02:05 AM

They're dressed similar, and Michael Jackson and Willy Wonka were both rich old single guys who loved children a little too much. You're right about living in playgrounds. They're both white too...

DeathMan · Jul 17, 2005, 02:20 AM

Depp's Willy Wonka disliked children. And adults for that matter.

ghporter · Jul 17, 2005, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by DeathMan

Depp's Willy Wonka disliked children. And adults for that matter.

That's kind of the point-Willy is so completely isolated from the world that he has forgotten why he does what he does...until he meets Charlie.

And Depp does not look ANYTHING like Michael. Not in the least.

wolfen · Jul 17, 2005, 09:39 AM

You know, I'm about the most liberal person I know. I've got gay friends, lesbian friends, and I like to consider myself open-minded. Tim Burton can be gay all he wants. I don't care, doesn't bother me.

BUT does he really have to mess with Willy Wonka? I mean, keep your gay fantasies out of my childhood movies. Pimping Johnny Depp in some creepy homoerotic movie role -- fine. If you've got the fancy director's chair and millions of dollars you can dress the man up any way you like. Hell, give him a gentle spank and make him call you Daddy if you like. You're the director, have fun. But why taint one of the best stories ever told with your dirty little fantasies? Hmmm? Why not just call it Willy Wanker's Cream Sauce Factory and make it into a gay p0rn flick? At least then you'd be honest about what's going on.

It's just wrong.

ManOfSteal · Jul 17, 2005, 10:28 AM

Depp was awesome.

dlefebvre · Jul 17, 2005, 11:08 AM

You have to give credit to Depp. He's one one of the most versatile actor of his generation. He creates unique characters an does something different. He has the stature to do big Hollywood flicks but it's not rare to see him in independent flicks. As opposed to some actors who do the same thing over and over again.

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

And Depp does not look ANYTHING like Michael. Not in the least.

How can you say that when they look very similar, they are nearly mirror images of one another. Maybe this was unintentional, but the resemblance is undeniable.

ghporter · Jul 17, 2005, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

How can you say that when they look very similar, they are nearly mirror images of one another. Maybe this was unintentional, but the resemblance is undeniable.

<scarasm>Eyemasters called; your appointment is tomorrow.</scarasm>

They are both slender and upright as opposed to portly and bent over. Johnny's face is much more oval than Michael's. The costume in the movie looks nothing at all like Michael's suit from the trial (completely different styles as well as color, cut, and fit). And Johnny appears to have an original equipment nose, which is something NOBODY IN THE WORLD can say about Michael. (That could be LaToya's fault, as he I think used the same surgeon. But WHY? Didn't he see what a crap job the guy had done to his sister's nose?)

zerostar · Jul 17, 2005, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by wolfen

I mean, keep your gay fantasies out of my childhood movies.

What are you talking about?

DeathMan · Jul 17, 2005, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by wolfen

It's just wrong.

He didn't really seem gay at all in the movie. Not anymore than Edward Scissorhands seemed gay. Just completely different and eccentric. Never in the movie (maybe a bit in the previews) did he come across as any kind of sexual deviant, or seem to have any kind of mal-intent. That is not to say he went out of his way to save or stop the kids from doing stupid stuff, but thats just Willy Wonka.

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

They are both slender and upright as opposed to portly and bent over. Johnny's face is much more oval than Michael's. The costume in the movie looks nothing at all like Michael's suit from the trial (completely different styles as well as color, cut, and fit). And Johnny appears to have an original equipment nose, which is something NOBODY IN THE WORLD can say about Michael. (That could be LaToya's fault, as he I think used the same surgeon. But WHY? Didn't he see what a crap job the guy had done to his sister's nose?)

I think you're clutching at straws with those reasons there. They both wear strange, dandyish clothing, they both have unnaturally pale faces, they both are pictured parading around a fantasy world with children, and they both have the same mannerism.

You on the other hand are hung up by tiny details like the shapes of their noses and the cut of their suits. Take a step back, watch the movie, and the resemblance is clear.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jul 17, 2005, 04:33 PM

Even Johnny Deep mentioned how stupid this is.

What is the worlds fascination with Michael?

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by wolfen

BUT does he really have to mess with Willy Wonka? I mean, keep your gay fantasies out of my childhood movies. Pimping Johnny Depp in some creepy homoerotic movie role -- fine.

I don't think the character is supposed to be gay, just weird and reclusive.

lavar78 · Jul 17, 2005, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

What is the worlds fascination with Michael?

Duh! Because he's bad! He's bad! You know it! You know! And the whole has to answer right now just to tell you once again who's bad.

ghporter · Jul 17, 2005, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

I think you're clutching at straws with those reasons there. They both wear strange, dandyish clothing, they both have unnaturally pale faces, they both are pictured parading around a fantasy world with children, and they both have the same mannerism.

You on the other hand are hung up by tiny details like the shapes of their noses and the cut of their suits. Take a step back, watch the movie, and the resemblance is clear.

Willie Wonka is a character written many years ago. Michael Jackson, on the other hand (and who apparently picks his own clothes) is a real (ok, realish) person today. Michael's suits emulate an overly formal, pseudo English style. Willy Wonka's clothes are most definitely late-Victorian. Michael (according to him) is pale because of a disease that reduces or eliminates the melanin in a black person's skin, and he's exceptionally sensitive to the sun because of it. Willy Wonka is pale because he's been inside his chocolate factory for a LONG time and hasn't interacted with anyone but his Oompa-loompas and such. Michael grew up (if you can call it that) in the spotlight and under a ton of pressure from all directions, resulting in an intense interest in childlike behavior. Willy voluntarily isolated himself for a very long time, and thus became somewhat bizarre.

Any similarity is both exceptionally superficial and an enormous stretch.

DeathMan · Jul 17, 2005, 09:44 PM

Michael's not wearing purple latex gloves, though, and there's your key difference. And why not? People would think he was crazy, thats why not.

kmkkid · Jul 17, 2005, 10:38 PM

Depp was sexy in Pirates of the Caribbean. mmmm.

pathogen · Jul 17, 2005, 11:01 PM

This depresses me to think that the public imagination at-large can only summon up a comparison with Michael Jackson when given such a neat character design like Depp's portrayal made this new Wonka. It really depresses me.

I agree with all the naysayers and never would have thought it myself, and my first impression was that Anna Wintour was getting a bit mocked.

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Blah, blah, blah, MJ

I wonder if her underwear is pink or white?
Oh, wrong thread.

There is no way that looking at this image of Johny Depp reminds me of Michael Jackson. I can't see how you could even consider such an obtuse thing to state.

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 11:31 PM

Calm down, calm down!

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 11:39 PM

It's obvious from your threads that you are only trying to be provocative, and should expect such responses. I'm calm! I'm Calm!. :/

JoshuaZ · Jul 17, 2005, 11:45 PM

I gotta see this movie. Depp is such a good actor, he does the craziest characters.

Ozmodiar · Jul 18, 2005, 12:53 AM

Kerrigan, I read Roger Ebert's review of the movie, too, and I disagreed with the idea back then.

Angus_D · Jul 18, 2005, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by wolfen

I mean, keep your gay fantasies out of my childhood movies. Pimping Johnny Depp in some creepy homoerotic movie role -- fine. If you've got the fancy director's chair and millions of dollars you can dress the man up any way you like. Hell, give him a gentle spank and make him call you Daddy if you like. You're the director, have fun. But why taint one of the best stories ever told with your dirty little fantasies? Hmmm? Why not just call it Willy Wanker's Cream Sauce Factory and make it into a gay p0rn flick? At least then you'd be honest about what's going on.

It's just another aspect of the grand homosexual conspiracy to turn all your kids gay. Quick, boycott Warner Bros to show them who's boss!

Eriamjh · Jul 18, 2005, 06:18 AM

Deep looks more like a young Demi Moore in a wig than MJ.

Since when does MJ wear a top hat?

dlefebvre · Jul 18, 2005, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Since when does MJ wear a top hat?

You don't want to know.

Zimphire · Jul 18, 2005, 07:22 AM

I had to.