1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory

#545- Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)
Starring: Gene Wilder, Jack Albertson, Peter Ostrum
Directed by: Mel Stuart


Plot Summary: Candy maker extraordinaire Willy Wonka has re-opened his famous chocolate factory to those who find one of five golden tickets found in Wonka's bars of chocolate. The five winners are children from around the world, Augustus Gloop, a glutton, Violet Beauregarde, a gum-chewing enthusiast, Veruca Salt, a spoiled brat, Mike Teevee, a kid addicted to television, and Charlie Bucket, a child living in poverty. Once the children are led into the factory, they discover a world they never thought possible, as they are introduced to Wonka's eccentric methods of candy making, as well as his fascinating workers known as Oompa Loompas.


You know, I haven't reviewed a family movie in a long time. And by that, I mean a movie targeted for kids that adults can enjoy as well. When looking at 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, the majority of family movies are timeless classics that are entertaining through the fantastical world its able to create on film, whether its through plot, settings or characters. In my opinion, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is one of the best family films because of the world its able to create through settings and characters, and a plot that anybody could understand and relate to.

Easily, the most memorable part of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is the titular character Willy Wonka, played by Gene Wilder. Wilder is absolutely fantastic as Wonka, making the character both heartwarming and occasionally dark and mysterious. Wilder has great comedic timing and has great chemistry with each of the other characters. Wilder is definitely the heart and soul of the film, and Willy Wonka is one of film's greatest characters, and to be honest, that's the best compliment I can give his portrayal without giving much of his antics and quirks away so trust me when I say it's worth checking out.

Even if Willy Wonka's name is in the title, the movie actually focuses on Charlie Bucket, played by Peter Ostrum. It's a shame that this is Ostrum's ONLY film role (he got out of the acting business shortly after filming Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) because I really thought he did a great job of capturing the true spirit of a child in Charlie's situation. There are moments where I found Charlie going through the emotions a kid would, including anger, sadness and even selfishness, while still being a nice kid. Honestly, I found Charlie's best scenes are when he's acting alongside his Grandpa Joe, played by Jack Albertson. Charlie and Grandpa Joe's relationship has a very warm element to it that makes you believe you're watching an actual grandfather and grandson interact, instead of just actors performing.

The world created in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is created partially through its wonderful sets, particularly Wonka's chocolate factory. For the first half of the movie, the audience has seen scenes that are mostly stone buildings with a primarily grey color pattern, making the look of the chocolate factory even more fantastical. I loved the camera angles and lighting used for the factory, as it really makes everything stand out so the audience can see it. The chocolate factory is probably one of the best fantasy film environments because it creates a world of pure imagination.

Surprisingly, I felt that one of the strongest elements in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was the songs. None of the songs in the movie I feel are weak entries and I found myself humming most of them days after I watched the movie for this review. There's a certain whimsical feeling that the music is able to capture. Of the songs, my favorite is "Pure Imagination," which wonderfully accompanies the scene where the children are introduced to Wonka's chocolate factory. There is also an example of where the songs performed by the Oompa Loompas, Wonka's workers from Loompaland, are an important aspect to the film's plot and a way to deliver the film's morals to its viewers.

Parents and children can identify with the morals the film tries to set for itself. While Charlie is represented as a good-natured kid, the other four children all have a bratty quality, such as overeating, being spoiled rotten, watching too much television and chewing gum all day (yeah, I know that one didn't really age well), that will eventually lead to their comeuppance. The Oompa Loompas sing a song for each child upon their leaving of the factory, which also provides a commentary for how parents should raise their kids. When looking at the example that Charlie creates for children, as well as seeing the reward he gets for the content of his character, you have a great lesson that is relatable to all audiences.


Rating:  4 out of 5 stars.

I would say this movie is a golden ticket of film, because it is a shining example of what a family movie should be, and one I would recommend to all audiences. It's a movie with a lot of heart to it, with the visuals and Gene Wilder's amazing performance as Willy Wonka creating a fantasy that will be remembered until the end of time.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the movie or to discuss a topic that I left out of my review 

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory and movie images are copyrighted by Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros.

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Avatar

#1117- Avatar (2009)
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Stephen Lang
Directed by: James Cameron


Plot Summary: A valuable mineral known as unobtanium is located on Pandora, home of the Na'vi, peaceful, blue-skinned creatures who live in nature. Scientists use human-Na'vi hybrids called "avatars" to explore Pandora. Among the humans is former marine Jake Sully, a paraplegic who is instructed to gather as much information as he can about the Na'vi. If Jake helps uncover unobtanium, he will be granted surgery to restore his legs. But as Jake becomes more involved with the Na'vi, he is torn on if his alliance should be with his own people, or the new culture he's been introduced to.


I promise not to harp on this fact so I will say it once......THIS IS THE HIGHEST GROSSING MOVIE OF ALL TIME!?!?!?!?! Now that I have that out of the way, I will openly say that I avoided seeing Avatar for a number of years after it was released. After going 3 years without ever seeing it, I finally cracked down to watch it, and to my utter irritation, I was not impressed by it. For something that was hyped up so much and received so much attention from people, I was at least expecting something I could enjoy, but even that was asking for too much. So let's look at why I think Avatar is one of the most OVERRATED films of all time.

Our main hero in Avatar is Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington. Worthington's performance is overall harmless, but the problem is that Jake is a bland main character. Despite Jake's cocky attitude, Worthington adds a unique charm to the character. But the biggest flaw with Jake is that he seems to go through the motions that any other main character would go through, with the twist being that Jake is in a wheelchair. This isn't necessarily bad. However, it feels like that was all that the filmmakers cared about when it came to Jake. While a wheelchair can be a good character motivation, I feel like a lot of it is underplayed and the wheelchair just becomes a supposed personality for Jake. I personally felt that Jake was wasted potential on a writing perspective, and is only partially saved by the charisma Worthington is able to bring to the role.

Neytiri, played by Zoe Saldana, is Jake's main love interest and his connection to the Na'vi. I know she has her fanbase with many sci-fi fans, but I honestly don't see it. Most of the time, I found her nagging and waving her finger at Jake, normally referring to him as an idiot. It's honestly not a very endearing character trait for two reasons, first because we are supposed to like her cause she's obviously Jake's love interest, and secondly, because she's supposed to be the audience's main connection to what the Na'vi are like. I found myself not really caring about the Na'vi because I found Neytiri to be overbearing and pretentious, and when she's part of the colony I'm supposed to be rooting for, that is NOT a good thing.

The villain of the movie is Colonel Miles Quaritch, played by Stephen Lang. Of the cast members, it does seem as if Lang is having the most fun with what he was given. Quaritch is not a subtle villain, I do find him chewing the scenery in many of the scenes he's in, but he at least is a memorable character in the film. And when I say he isn't a subtle villain, I REALLY mean he's not subtle. By the time he's introduced, the audience knows right away that he's going to be the villain, yet it comes off as a big surprise to the other characters when it's revealed later on. Even if he's the most generic type of bad guy there can be (the greedy military type who is only out for what he wants and is willing to wipe out an entire nation to get it), Lang does seem like he's enjoying what he's doing, which does translate well to film.

Of course, the only real thing this movie has going for it is the special effects. While I do believe the effects used to bring Pandora and the Na'vi to life are very impressive to look at, It should not be the selling point of your film. When I told people why I didn't like this movie, I heard two excuses for it. The first was, "You didn't see it in 3D? Well then, you didn't understand the movie." A 3D gimmick should not be the factor in what makes a film good, that's just ridiculous. And the second was, "Yeah the story and characters suck, but the effects were good." It astounds me to realize how many people were fine with saying the effects made a film good, even if the plot and characters weren't. The less I say on that the better, I think I'm gonna give myself an ulcer if I talk on that too much.

When talking about Avatar, the word I feel I must stress in this review is OVERRATED. The biggest problem I have with the movie is the false sense of originality it created, and in turn, the big ego it created for director James Cameron. I'm sure it was probably a unique idea when he wrote it decades ago. But by the time it was released, numerous other films did the same storyline idea, and the only thing making Avatar stand out from the others is the special effects. And based on my stance on special effects in movies, you can pretty much figure out that I enjoy character development and engaging plot, and I honestly don't find much of that in Avatar. The plot is as basic as you can get and the personalities and development of the characters are paper thin, so naturally, the appeal Avatar had on millions of viewers was lost on me.


Rating:  2 out of 5 stars.

Even if it is the highest grossing film of all time, that is not a good reason to see Avatar. It has the most basic plot and characters you will find for a film of its kind, but with a bigger effects budget. Only recommend seeing Avatar if you want something nice to look at for nearly 3 hours.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the movie or to discuss a topic that I left out of my review 

Avatar and movie images are copyrighted by 20th Century Fox

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Scream

#948- Scream (1996)
Starring: David Arquette, Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox
Directed by: Wes Craven


Plot Summary: The town of Woodsboro has become the setting for someone's personal horror movie. A mysterious, masked killer has taken their love of scary movies to an extreme level, as they have made threatening phone calls to unsuspecting teens, and then murdered them based on how it would play out if they were actually in a horror movie. The killer seems to target Sidney Prescott the most, making it hard for her to trust anybody, as she knows the killer could very well be someone very close to her.


Do you like scary movies? I know I sure do. And when it comes to scary movies, one of my favorites is Scream. I remember watching it when I was younger, and ever since, I make sure to watch it at least once a year, with the Scream franchise now being my favorite horror series. Scream was a movie that I not only found to be scary, but also funny. And it was a horror film I appreciated more and more every time I watched it. The more horror films I saw, the better Scream got when I watched it. When looking at the genre of horror, it begs the question of why it had this effect on me and how it's been able to stay a relevant name in horror since it first premiered in cinemas in 1996.

The main protagonist of Scream is Sidney Prescott, played by Neve Campbell. Campbell does a great job of turning Sidney into one of the great horror heroines. While she may run from the killer at first, over time she knows she must fight to survive. And when Sidney fights, she becomes a character we can really root for, instead of the endless crop of modern horror characters that fans can't wait to see die. Campbell has a natural innocence to her, but instead of naivety, she is crafty and is a strong character. She is made strong through her endurance of past events in her life, which does a good job of establishing her motivations, as well as making her a well-rounded and likable character.

Deputy Sheriff Dewey Riley, played by David Arquette, is Sidney's protector following the killing spree. Originally, Arquette was brought in to play another character, Sidney's boyfriend Billy Loomis, but I'm glad Arquette chose to play Dewey instead because he owns that character. Dewey is seen as a bit of a goofball and a joke on the police force, the only one not in on the joke is Dewey. He takes himself seriously, or at least tries to, but his bumbling nature does shine through occasionally, making him a somewhat naive, but likable character. There are some fans that put Dewey on the suspect list early in the film, but when I look at him, I genuinely believed Dewey couldn't do it because of his kind nature, particularly towards Sidney.

Local reporter Gale Weathers, played by Courtney Cox, is an intentionally unlikable character at first, but is somewhat redeemed by the end of the movie (she is more likable as sequels progress, but we're only looking at the first Scream movie). Majority of the main characters do not care for Gale snooping around, except for Dewey, who falls for her charm and eventually develops a close relationship with her. I honestly don't think a character like Gale would have survived or even been likable by the end had it not been for Courtney Cox, who was on Friends at the time of the film's release. Honestly, she doesn't have much growth or involvement in the first movie, with the only thing holder her to the plot is her love and hate relationships with Dewey and Sidney, in that Dewey loves Gale and Sidney hates her.

The killer, and most marketable face of the Scream franchise, has nowadays been labelled with the name Ghostface. Originally a discount, generic horror costume, Ghostface has since become one of the most recognizable faces of horror. On a costume standpoint, it's an effective costume, with dark eyes that help mask the killer's identity, as well as a full black cloak with a white, ghost-like face. Also, credit should go to Roger L. Jackson for giving Ghostface his voice, as I don't think the killer's phone calls would have been as scary without Jackson lending his vocal talents. And before you ask, I am NOT going to spoil who the killer is. But for me, the true horror factor of Ghostface is that behind his black cloak, white mask, and disguised voice, ANYBODY could be Ghostface.

The greatest impact on horror that Scream offers is its self-aware humor. Director Wes Craven had an idea to breathe new life into the slasher genre by acknowledging the cliches, so he set Scream in a setting where other horror movies exist, and the characters know the rules on how to survive if they were in a horror movie. However, since they ARE in a horror movie, instead of being smart about what's happening to them, they fall for the cliches they had been making fun of earlier in the film. Originally, Scream was meant to be purely parody. It was not meant to be taken as a scary movie, but when audiences saw it, they found it scary for its very believable premise that any moviegoer could take their love of movies one step too far.


Rating:  4.5 out of 5 stars.

Scream may not be the scariest movie of all time, but it is the first film in my favorite horror franchise. If you like scary movies, I'd recommend watching it, whether you're a casual fan, looking to watch the big name scary movies, or a die-hard fan of horror who will truly appreciate every referential joke this film has to offer.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the movie or to discuss a topic that I left out of my review 

Scream and movie images are copyrighted by Dimension Films

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- The Shawshank Redemption

#919- The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Starring: Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman, Clancy Brown
Directed by: Frank Darabont


Plot Summary: Andy Dufresne is a hot shot banker who is found guilty for the murder of his wife and her lover. Andy is given two life sentences at Shawshank State Penitentiary. Throughout his journey, he uses his banking skills on the guards to get him protection against violent inmates, shares his love of music and literature with the prison, and forms a deep friendship with fellow inmate Ellis Redding. During all of this, Andy continuously states that he was innocent and maintains hope that one day he could have his freedom outside the walls of Shawshank, by any means necessary.


Is it bad to say I only recently watched The Shawshank Redemption for the first time? I know, probably lost a little credibility, but hey, there's a lot of movies out there, can't see all of them......yet. Anyways, before watching it, I heard many great things about this movie, from friends and also from reviews online (it is currently #1 on IMDB's top 250 movies, as voted by the fans). I knew the movie was a big deal, so I finally decided to sit down and watch it. By the end of my viewing, I was blown away. I couldn't recall a time recently where I had sat down and watched a movie for the first time and was thoroughly entertained within the first half hour. The Shawshank Redemption had my undivided attention from beginning to end, not just because of specific characters, themes or settings, but because all those elements blend together tremendously, in a film that instantly became one of my favorites.

The story follows the double life sentence of Andy Dufresne, played by Tim Robbins. Andy is described as a hot shot banker, who carries himself with a higher regard in Shawshank, which makes him come off as a snob to the other inmates. As his time continues in Shawshank, he develops greater bonds, both good and bad, with fellow inmates, the guards and the warden, allowing Andy to be embrace the prison life and be himself, even if he's locked away at Shawshank. I think Tim Robbins did a great job of giving Andy his calm demeanor and overall pleasant optimism. I know it's odd to say, but a prison like Shawshank doesn't seem like that bad of a place, at least if someone can be like Andy Dufresne.

The Shawshank Redemption is narrated by Morgan Freeman, which of course automatically makes this movie cooler. Freeman plays Andy's friend Ellis "Red" Redding. Red is a real smooth talker and his narration helps fill the audience in on the status quo of Shawshank and all its inhabitants. Red speaks as someone who has tons of experience and wisdom of the prison life, and even fears the idea of facing life outside of prison. Freeman's best part in the movie is at the end when he goes in for his parole hearing. I won't spoil what he says, but trust me when I say it's a very satisfying bit of Morgan Freeman doing what he does best, making whatever he says sound epic.

I know Warden Samuel Norton, played by Bob Gunter, is the main villain of the movie, but for me, Clancy Brown as Captain Byron Hadley was the villain that left the biggest impression on me. Hadley was great because he could be Andy's good friend or greatest enemy depending on what Andy did. When Andy helped him on financial situations, he could provide Andy protection, while still being menacing to the other prisoners. But when Andy crossed the Warden, then Captain Hadley became Andy's worst nightmare. What made Hadley a great villain was all in Clancy Brown's face and voice, as he had a great scowl and smile that could make anyone feel uneasy at his presence, and his words were what helped carry himself, as they were always intimidating and to the point.

The main setting is at Shawshank State Pennitentiary. Director Frank Darabont gave this prison a fantastic, almost surreal look. The use of lighting and shadows really helps illustrate the prison as this intimidating structure. Upon Andy's arrival, you see what he sees and I personally felt like I would never want to be in a place like Shawshank. Darabont is fantastic with creating scenery, as is evident with his help in the creation of The Walking Dead, which just happens to be one of my favorite shows on TV. And just like on The Walking Dead, Darabont had a grand vision for the imagery he wanted to make Shawshank feel like it was its own character in the film.

One question I had throughout the movie was how the audience can like the prisoners as characters, and it is simple, because the movie humanizes them. Throughout the film, Andy helps introduce culture and humanity to the inmates. He helps the convicts develop an appreciation for books by creating a larger library, a love of music by playing an opera album over the intercom, and even offers to give some inmates a higher education. But the key theme Andy gives is hope. Andy believed that hope would be his salvation, and it is hope that allows Andy and Red to find tolerance in a place like Shawshank, as they know that fear can lead to their imprisonment, but hope can lead to their freedom.


Rating:  5 out of 5 stars.

Even if it's a film that I only discovered recently, I developed a very deep appreciation for it. Robbins and Freeman are excellent in their roles, and the film's themes and setting make The Shawshank Redemption arguably the greatest prison movie of all time. It's a film that I will enjoy watching over and over again, and I highly recommend that everyone do the same.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the movie or to discuss a topic that I left out of my review 

The Shawshank Redemption and movie images are copyrighted by Castle Rock Entertainment

1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die- Monty Python and the Holy Grail

#617- Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
Starring: Graham Chapman, Eric Idle, John Cleese
Directed by: Terry Gilliam and Terry Jones


Plot Summary: Arthur, King of the Britains, along with his squire Patsy, embark on a quest to find a group of knights to join him at the Round Table in Camelot. He is able to recruit Sir Bedevere the Wise, Sir Lancelot the Brave, Sir Galahad the Pure and Sir Robin the Not-Quite-So-Brave-As-Sir-Lancelot. On their journey, they are given a mission from God to find the Holy Grail. The knights split off and come across numerous obstacles while trying to find the Grail, including a three-headed giant, the Knights who say Ni, and the dreaded Rabbit of Caerbannog.


When it comes to how I review a movie, I like to keep it as spoiler-free as I can. That way, I can talk a lot about a movie, while still, hopefully, leaving my audience curious enough to check the movie out for themselves. With that said, I think comedies are the most difficult genre of films to review for me. I thought it would be difficult using many paragraphs to say how funny a movie is without spoiling the punchlines to numerous scenes and lines. So here I am, getting ready to watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail, one of film's most celebrated comedies, and I find myself unsure about what I should focus on while watching it. There were numerous scenes and moments I could talk about, but I realized what I could talk about, without giving too much away, looking at the characters and seeing why the jokes work. 

Monty Python and the Holy Grail follows the story of King Arthur, played by Graham Chapman. Arthur serves the purpose of being the straight man in this comedy. Every action and phrase Arthur has, Chapman tries to play him with seriousness and class, making his reactions to the ridiculousness of the situations and other characters around him all the more funny. While many of the film's actors play numerous roles throughout the film, Chapman mainly plays Arthur, with only a few other side characters. I think this was good for Chapman, as it allowed him to focus on one specific character, which makes sense since he is the main protagonist of the film and, logically, would be featured on screen the most.

Probably the most famous member of the Monty Python comedy group is John Cleese, who plays Sir Lancelot in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Like Chapman with Arthur, Cleese plays Lancelot with seriousness and as a brave character, but his bravery is over the top, as he ends up playing Lancelot as a knight who stabs first and asks questions later. What makes Lancelot's portrayal so funny to me is that he is a satire of how chivalrous the knights were, by making Lancelot TOO brave to be taken seriously. Cleese also is famous for playing a French knight who taunts Arthur and his knights, as well as playing the ruthless Black Knight, in some of the films most memorable and quotable scenes. Cleese is one of the best performers in the movie for his memorable characters and great comedic delivery, knowing how to have the audience's attention on his characters in every scene he's featured in.

Another one of the group's more beloved members is Eric Idle, who plays Sir Robin. Sir Robin is an ironic Knight of the Round Table who, instead of being brave and chivalrous, is actually cowardly and meek. One of the factors that make Sir Robin's scenes hilarious is his band of minstrels, who not only sing his praises, but also sing of how cowardly he is, which only further demonstrates the irony of this cowardly knight. Idle plays numerous side characters that I always found entertaining in their scenes, and I think it has to do with Idle himself. I find Idle's delivery to be quick witted and not over the top. There's a humor in his voice that is very distinct and I find it most hilarious when he's playing a ridiculous character like Sir Robin, and having other characters act off of his performances.

So when looking at Monty Python and the Holy Grail, I had to ask "Why do the jokes work?" Throughout the film, I realized that it wasn't just the writing of the jokes, and it wasn't even the individual actors, but it is the comedic chemistry that the Monty Python group have with one another. Scenes in which all 6 actors, consisting of Chapman, Cleese, Idle, Michael Palin, and directors Terry Gilliam and Terry Jones, are acting off of one another are the most effective because they are all very comfortable acting together. It would be like if I decided to make a comedy, I would film it with five of my closest friends because we would have the chemistry to perform comfortably with each other. You could tell the guys had a blast shooting the film, which translates on film through some of the wittiest dialogue and best comedic timing you could ask for in a comedy.


Rating:  4 out of 5 stars.

This is one of my favorite comedies, as well as a movie with lines and scenes so memorable that I could recite most of them word for word. For one of the sharpest, wittiest, and most celebrated comedies of all time, I would highly recommend checking out Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Comment below to share your thoughts on the movie or to discuss a topic that I left out of my review 

Monty Python and the Holy Grail and movie images are copyrighted by EMI Films, Rainbow Releasing, and Cinema 5 Distributing