วองก้า

เรื่องย่อ

"วองก้า" บอกเล่าเรื่องราวสุดแสนมหัศจรรย์ของนักมายากล นักประดิษฐ์ และนักลงทุนที่ยิ่งใหญ่ที่สุดในโลก กว่าที่เขาจะก้าวเข้ามาเป็น Willy Wonka เจ้าของโรงงานช็อกโกแลตอันสุดแสนวิเศษราวกับต้องมนตร์ที่ทำให้แฟน ๆ รักได้จวบจนทุกวันนี้ได้อย่างไร

คะแนน

10 รีวิว

• 

  farthington

  2 ม.ค. 2567

  Unfortunately, this movie fails marvelously. It has such incredible potential. The imagined prequel is consistent with Ronald Dahl's charm and wit. Timothee Chalamet’s performance was sensational. The supporting cast including Keegan Michael Keye, Patterson Joseph, Hugh Grant, Olivia Coleman and Jim Carter were all at their best. The film falls short with the casting director's (Nina Gold's) attempt to find new talent in a novice actress named Calah Lane who stars in the movie opposite Timothee Chalamet as the character known as Noodle. The character itself is drawn well but the performance is so dreadful by Lane that it single-handedly destroys what could and should have been a classic prequel to Dahls original masterpiece. Lane throws out all her lines without any emotion and spends no time listening to her supporting cast. The writing becomes meaningless and almost immediately you do not find yourself caring about the Noodle character at all. This becomes quickly distracting to any audience member who has an inclination to invest in the story or other characters in the movie. The film completely dies and falls short on this one performance because the character of Noodle is drawn in such a way that her present and future well-being is central to the strength of the story's momentum. One has to blame the casting director Nina Gold first. Nina Gold's work on projects like Bad Sisters, Game of Thrones and The Crown has been quite exceptional but in terms of finding new talent for this prospective cinema masterpiece just is not consistent with her previous achievements. I would also say that the failure of this film should also fall on Director Paul King's shoulders who also needs to bare the burden of this complete and utter disaster of a decision to put poor Calah Lane in this role and have all of us suffer this miserable performance and ultimately crushing blow to Roald Dahl's reputation as a storyteller and great wit.

• 

  BornKnight

  8 23 ม.ค. 2567

  After so many years I wonder if the majority of people have seen the original (comedy / musical) movie of 71, that is a classic. I myself was a bit worried when I saw the announce for this one (haven't watchet a single trailer). Oh how I was wrong - Timothée Chalamet's Willy Wonka is just perfect on how he emulates the original Wonka by Richard Gere plus the musical and dance scenes aren't bad at all. To those who knew the original movie, this gets the start of life of Wonka as a chocolatier, and fill many gaps on the original story - but not all, one being the personality he achieved later and the later relation with the OOmpa Loompa. The movie is just a delight - every little character have its little part and backstory and the story is a family friendly one with all the magic of the original. Even the secondary characters are good choices and all relates in perfect tune. To those who don't know, the character was original from a book "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' a 1964 children's novel by Roald Dahl, that had a sequence (a crazy one btw, in 1972). Many politically incorrect terms were already omitted in the 1971 book. The movie gets outside of those, being more a spiritual prequel film for the 71 one, exploring Willy Wonka's origins in 2023. And remembering the 2005 remake of the original by Tim Burton and starring Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka. As a complimentary note, the Dahl's family agreed with Netflix to expand the Wonka universe on a series of animations for the streaming channel. The movie gets a 7.7 out of 10.o for be a B+.

• 

  rmorell1

  10 27 ม.ค. 2567

  Timothée Chalamet's subtle but heartfelt performance of a young Wonka helped to offset the depressingly intriguing world of this prequel. Willy is a mysterious and flamboyant character, disconnected from the harshness of reality by the magic of a childhood dream, which matches the subtle facial expressions he uses, per the (stellar) acting direction. The notes of nostalgia and whimsy make this a 10/10! The musical score is something else as well, with sound effects and subtle humor mixed into nearly every song, background or not. The music alone gives this movie re-watch value.

• 

  Victor Müntzing

  19 มี.ค. 2567

  This is 100 procent the best Wonka movie. Theres alot of exciting moments in the movie which I appreciate.

• 

  tmdb51616167

  10 2 ก.ย. 2567

  #MovieReview #WonkaMovie #Wonka Let me start by saying that this movie is truly amazing from start to finish. It stands out for its focus on a fantastic storyline without any political agenda, overly emphasized themes, or unnecessary controversies. Instead, it offers a captivating narrative, an exceptional cast, and outstanding music. From the beginning, this movie is a delightful treat, filled with delicious surprises and exquisite chocolates. It brings the joy of craving candy, even though Willy Wonka's confectioneries are not widely available, adding to the allure. While the film incorporates comedy, it strikes a balance, avoiding excessive cheesiness. The cast, including actors I initially doubted, delivers phenomenal performances throughout. The emotional depth of Willy Wonka's character, from his childhood trauma to his aspirations for success, is portrayed with authenticity. The movie sheds light on his motivations for owning a chocolate factory, a detail not fully explored in previous adaptations. Throughout the film, you'll find yourself laughing, smiling, and even shedding a few tears during the poignant moments. The charm and magic of the movie truly come alive on the big screen, making it a must-watch in theaters. Timothée Chalamet impresses with his acting and surprising singing abilities. Similar to the original films, this adaptation strikes a balance between storytelling and musical numbers. The music enhances the narrative without overshadowing the plot, enriching the overall experience. The iconic song sung by Chalamet towards the end of the movie evokes nostalgia and captures the essence of the Willy Wonka legacy, resonating with fans of all ages. I highly recommend experiencing this film in theaters for the full cinematic experience. I eagerly anticipate a potential sequel exploring Willy Wonka's future, especially with Hugh Grant's rumored involvement as an Oompa Loompa. So, grab your candy, settle in with your popcorn, and savor this excellent cinematic

• 

  Marco-Hugo Landeta Vacas

  7 7 ม.ค. 2569

  (CASTELLANO) Lo primero que sorprende es que funcione sin hacer demasiado ruido. No intenta justificar su existencia a cada minuto ni competir de tú a tú con los recuerdos que ya tenemos del personaje. Va por otro lado, con una ligereza bastante consciente, y eso se agradece. Se deja ver con una sonrisa constante, sin prisa, sin necesidad de demostrar que es más lista o más profunda de lo que realmente quiere ser. La película es entretenida casi desde el arranque, con un ritmo que no pesa y un humor que entra fácil. No todo acierta igual, pero rara vez se estanca. Hay una sensación de espectáculo bien engrasado, de producto cuidado, donde cada pieza sabe cuál es su función. No deslumbra por ambición, sino por oficio, y eso hoy en día no es poca cosa. Visualmente está muy trabajada. El diseño de producción tiene encanto, color y detalle, sin llegar a saturar del todo. A ratos parece que va a empachar, pero suele frenar justo antes. La puesta en escena tiene algo clásico, casi de musical de otra época, y esa elección marca mucho el tono general: es una película que no tiene ningún miedo a ser amable. Timothée Chalamet sostiene el conjunto con una interpretación que no intenta imitar ni competir con nadie. No siempre tiene el magnetismo necesario para elevar ciertas escenas, pero sí una presencia constante que mantiene el relato en pie. Funciona mejor cuando baja revoluciones y deja que el personaje respire, más que cuando fuerza la exuberancia. Donde flojea un poco es en la sensación de necesidad. Da la impresión de que la historia avanza más por inercia que por verdadera urgencia narrativa. No molesta, pero tampoco deja huella profunda. Es de esas películas que disfrutas mientras dura y que recuerdas con cariño… aunque sin la sensación de haber visto algo imprescindible. En conjunto, es una propuesta simpática, bien hecha y honesta con lo que quiere ofrecer. No reinventa nada ni falta que le hace. A ratos es encantadora, a ratos algo previsible, pero siempre agradable. Un dulce correcto, quizá no memorable, pero muy fácil de consumir. (ENGLISH) The first thing that stands out is that it works without making too much noise. It doesn’t try to justify its existence every minute or compete head-on with the memories we already have of the character. It goes another way, with a fairly conscious lightness, and that’s appreciated. It lets itself be watched with a constant smile, unhurried, without needing to prove that it’s smarter or deeper than it really wants to be. The film is entertaining almost from the start, with a rhythm that doesn’t weigh it down and humor that goes down easily. Not everything lands equally well, but it rarely stalls. There’s a sense of a well-oiled spectacle, of a carefully made product, where each piece knows its role. It doesn’t dazzle through ambition, but through craft, and these days that’s no small thing. Visually it’s very well worked. The production design has charm, color, and detail, without fully tipping into overload. At times it seems like it might become cloying, but it usually pulls back just in time. The staging has something classical about it, almost like a musical from another era, and that choice strongly defines the overall tone: it’s a film that isn’t afraid at all of being kind. Timothée Chalamet holds the whole together with a performance that doesn’t try to imitate or compete with anyone. He doesn’t always have the magnetism needed to lift certain scenes, but he does have a steady presence that keeps the story standing. It works better when he lowers the intensity and lets the character breathe, rather than when he pushes the exuberance. Where it falters a bit is in the sense of necessity. It feels like the story moves forward more by inertia than by true narrative urgency. It doesn’t bother, but it also doesn’t leave a deep mark. It’s one of those films you enjoy while it lasts and remember fondly… though without the feeling of having seen something essential. All in all, it’s a likable, well-made proposal that’s honest about what it wants to offer. It doesn’t reinvent anything, nor does it need to. At times it’s charming, at times a bit predictable, but always pleasant. A decent sweet, perhaps not memorable, but very easy to consume.