I go into every movie hoping it will be great. If it’s not I hope it’s at least interesting. But if a film can’t even accomplish that, I want it to be so bad it’s a remarkable disaster, like seeing a violent car crash where no one gets hurt. Any of those three outcomes ensures you had a memorable viewing experience. Unfortunately Wonka isn’t any of those things. At worst, the prequel about the famous chocolatier is boring old normal bad. At best it’s totally fine in the most average way possible. How much you’ll think it’s the former versus the latter comes down to one question: how much do you like whimsy? Because Wonka tries—and fails—to get by on whimsy and little else.
Wonka comes from director and co-writer Paul King. He’s best known for the two Paddington films, and this new musical looks and feels like it exists in the exact same hyper-reality universe of those movies. From the costumes and sets, to the vibe and tone, the playful Wonka is a spiritual sibling to King’s beloved bear movies. It’s just not nearly anywhere as good. King doesn’t come close to conjuring up the same magic he found with Paddington. Wonka might look similar in style, but it lacks substance. It tells a trite and predictable story. It also has far too many characters who are defined by a single trait. Villains and heroes alike are more like colorful toys to play with rather than rounded figures worth investing in.
One thing the film does not lack is love for its main character. The biggest reason Wonka isn’t outright terrible is that it was clearly made by people who adore Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. That’s why most of the many references and Easter eggs to the legendary 1971 classic feel organic rather than forced fan service. (Note: Most, not all.) They each come across as little love letters to the character and his first movie. As much as it might seem like it on the surface, Wonka does not feel like a cynical IP cash grab. The result is a sweet story—almost too sweet—that feels totally sincere.
Star Timothée Chalamet also holds the film together with a charming, likable performance. His fun, compassionate, weird Willy is closer to the wild Wonka from Roald Dahl’s books rather than Gene Wilder’s version of the charater. However, Chalamet is burdened with a role that is written inconistently. Sometimes Willy seems as “nutty” as his candy; other times he seems pretty normal. Often Wonka embodies the playful, whimsical spirit that permeates all aspects of the film. Other times it’s almost as though he’s in a totally different movie. The scenes with a more serious, more normal, downright sad Willy aren’t nearly as effective. Every time that Wonka shows up it takes you out of the viewing experience rather than make you care more about him and his plight.
The film’s songs do that, too. Wonka suffers from some of the worst, most unoriginal numbers you will ever hear in a musical. They all sound like an A.I. wrote them after analyzing a million of the most banal Broadway tracks ever recorded. Each song is more forgettable than the last. They’re also poorly mixed. They all feel small and sound weirdly quiet, even though they come with excellent choreography and blocking. Wonka generally has a good, kinetic energy, but not during the majority of its musical scenes. Not great considering it’s a musical.
Wonka really works best as a fun comedy that is slightly (slightly) more hit than miss. Even then it feels like it underutilizes some of its best performers. Olivia Colman and Keegan-Michael Key are too good for their roles, which don’t ask nearly enough of them. Rowan Atkinson’s chocolate-loving priest gets to do a little more, but while no one in the cast is bad (everyone is pretty much “fine” to “excellent”), the only star besides Chalamet who gets to have some real fun is Hugh Grant.
Grant plays an Oompa Loompa tasked with stealing Wonka’s candy. Is he funny as a very serious, very smart, very cunning Oompa Loompa seeking vengeance? Very much so. The problem is that no matter how good he is, Grant can’t fully overcome the feels his casting is exactly the stunt it appears to be. The film thinks it’s hilarious to have Hugh Grant playing an orange Oompa Loompa. That part of the joke— more whimsy on top of a never-ending pile of whimsy—gets old immediately. It undercuts Grant’s actual performance, which is hilarious in a vacuum.
Grant’s Oompa Loompa is a mixed bag, like Wonka itself. It’s sometimes really fun, sometimes really tiresome, but never close to great. Far worse, though, is that it’s not good enough to be good, but not bad enough to be bad. It’s only interesting for how uninteresting it is.
Mikey Walsh is a staff writer at Nerdist. You can follow him on Twitter and Bluesky at @burgermike. And also anywhere someone is ranking the Targaryen kings.