At the end, he puts Charlie through a psychologically cruel test of trust.
You're referring to the carbonated drink that Charlie and Grandpa Joe drink, right?
If so, Charlie failed that test... Just like the rest of the children... Just like Wonka suspected they would... because he's essentially incapable of trust.
Wonka's happiness at the end is due to believing his plan was a success. If Charlie didn't give back the gobstopper, he wouldn't have won the chocolate factory.
That moment, more than any other (at least to me), shows Wonka's growth and the lack of growth in Charlie.
Charlie was always the most trustworthy boy, but Wonka couldn't see it. Do you really think that Wonka believed that Charlie was worthy of inheriting his factory after he knew that Charlie and his grandpa drank the sodas? No, of course not. But Charlie proved Wonka wrong when he handed over the gobstopper.
And in that moment, we see Wonka's realization that he was wrong... about Charlie... about the children... about his own beliefs.
We see the growth in Willy Wonka. Not in Charlie. Because Charlie was always the boy who deserved something better.
Re: The psychologically cruel test of trust: Wonka berates Charlie and tells him he doesn't get the lifetime supply of chocolate he was promised because they stole fizzy lifting gas. Then Wonka kicks Charlie and Grandpa Joe out of his office.
That's when Grandpa Joe tells Charlie, "If Slugworth wants an everlasting gobstopper, he'll get one." Upon hearing this, Charlie looks at the gobstopper in his hand then looks at Wonka and puts the gobstopper on Wonka's desk.
Without looking up, Wonka moves his hand toward the gobstopper and when he grasps it he smiles and says, "So shy and such a good deed." He then tells Charlie that he won and Wonka says he knew the whole time that Charlie would pass his test. He says something like, "Charlie, my boy, I knew you would do it!" Wonka then apologizes for testing Charlie.
So, Wonka had faith in Charlie from the beginning and believed his faith was justified when Charlie returned the gobstopper.
Wonka never believed he was wrong about the other children. He was right about them. They were horrible brats who got what they deserved. ('Cause deserves got something to do with it.)
Is anyone but me focusing on the fact that August said he doesn't really use theme or write from it?
So the fact that others are ascribing a particular theme to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory doesn't matter. Wasn't the larger point of the podcast -- August's point, anyway -- that theme doesn't have to be some huge headache-inducing thing that people are trying to make it out to be? Just tell a story and the theme takes care of itself, simply because movies/characters require a change from beginning to end, and therein lies a movie's theme????
I found it enlightening that August was saying, "I don't write from theme." And Mazin was saying, "Yes, you do, this was your theme." Because they'd both end up at the same place, regardless.
That may have been the theme, but August wasn't WRITTING TO IT. Theme takes care of itself because characters start at one point and end at another point. If your character has an arc, bingo, you have a theme. If they start at one point and end up at that same point, emotionally, that's also your theme.
Just tell a story and the theme takes care of itself, simply because movies/characters require a change from beginning to end...
This may be true for August, but he's an incredibly great writer and highly experienced. Maybe he doesn't consciously write from theme, but isn't it possible that he's aware of it on another level?
Maybe he doesn't need to write with theme in mind because it comes naturally to him. I mean, if you've seen his films, themes are clearly present.
I can't believe that a less-talented, far less experienced writer would be able to craft stories like August without being conscious of theme.
I found it enlightening that August was saying, "I don't write from theme." And Mazin was saying, "Yes, you do, this was your theme." Because they'd both end up at the same place, regardless.
Like I said: is it possible he uses theme without being conscious of it? And that he's able to do that because of his (IMHO) mastery of the craft?
Theme takes care of itself because characters start at one point and end at another point. If your character has an arc, bingo, you have a theme. If they start at one point and end up at that same point, emotionally, that's also your theme.
But character arc isn't always aligned with theme. Shouldn't theme be woven throughout your story, not only within your character's arc?
Character arc is one part of a story. Theme or CDA, in my opinion, is the foundation of a story.
Sure. Certainly. We can leave theme to be excreted by plot (by-product) or we can develop a theme (complement). Those of us choosing the latter need to know how to do it right and well. CDA.
Standing on a hill in my mountain of dreams telling myself it's not as hard, hard, hard as it seems.
Sure. Certainly. We can leave theme to be excreted by plot (by-product) or we can develop a theme (complement). Those of us choosing the latter need to know how to do it right and well. CDA.
This is the problem with trying to distill the "writing experience" into a specific set of rules or guidelines. No two writers are the same and the same writer can work differently on different projects.
STANDARD DISCLAIMER: I'm a wannabe, take whatever I write with a huge grain of salt.
There are plenty of good writers who don't focus on theme. Most do, but plenty don't.
Sometimes it's enough to ask yourself, "what is this movie really about?" and whatever the answer is, be it a single word, or just some random sh!t that only means something to you, is enough.
This is the problem with trying to distill the "writing experience" into a specific set of rules or guidelines. No two writers are the same and the same writer can work differently on different projects.
I agree and am actually one of those writers who's written from a few different approaches. But, I didn't say it's a rule. It's a tool and it wasn't my intention to imply it's the only tool to develop theme, though I can see how it might appear that way from what I wrote. I did intend to acknowledge some writers prefer to let theme take care of itself.
Standing on a hill in my mountain of dreams telling myself it's not as hard, hard, hard as it seems.
I agree and am actually one of those writers who's written from a few different approaches. But, I didn't say it's a rule. It's a tool and it wasn't my intention to imply it's the only tool to develop theme, though I can see how it might appear that way from what I wrote. I did intend to acknowledge some writers prefer to let theme take care of itself.
I was basically just agreeing with you. I've never written with CDA in mind, but I "get it" and think it would probably be a great way to focus my writing.
STANDARD DISCLAIMER: I'm a wannabe, take whatever I write with a huge grain of salt.
Wonka knew what he was doing the whole time. He saw the ending before anyone else.
That's opinion, not fact.
In my opinion, Wonka had a plan. It's didn't go as expected. He gave up. He thought none of the children were worthy of his factory.
I don't believe that Wonka expected Charlie to break the rules.
Once he did, Wonka's plans were out the window. No child was going to get his factory. Until Charlie gave him the gobstopper.
But I don't think Wonka expected that to happen once he realized Charlie may not be trustworthy.
I think Wonka basically tested himself more than he tested the children. He thought he knew how it would all go down. But he didn't. It didn't go as planned.
And that's why I think Wonka's the protag. He was tested more than the children.
Comment