June 22, 2020
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory / Four Roses Single Barrel
The player is loading ...
Bob and Brad revisit a childhood classic in 1971's Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. This movie is constantly on cable TV, but neither host has seen it in years. And they certainly have thoughts on how well it holds up into adulthood. Among the topic of conversation are Gene Wilder's title role, the crippling depression of Charlie Bucket's home life, and how to fix some of the film's glaring flaws.
Meanwhile, they finish out a flight of Four Roses samples from their friend Austin Dupree with Four Roses Single Barrel. So far, they've been hit-or-miss with Four Roses products. How will this last one stack up?
- 0:00 - Intro and Initial Thoughts
- 26:00- Four Roses Single Barrel Review
- 37:00- Analysis and Final Thoughts
- Film & Whiskey Instagram
- Film & Whiskey Facebook
- Film & Whiskey Twitter
- Call-in Line: (216) 800-5923
- Email us!
- Join our Discord channel!
Theme music: "New Shoes" by Blue Wednesday
Transition music: Solace by Johto
--- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/filmwhiskey/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/filmwhiskey/support
Transcript
Brad
In 1971, director Mel Stewart and star Gene Wilder gave the world a quirky classic that taught us all the importance of pure imagination.
Bob
In 2020, we finish off a flight of four whiskeys from a friend.
The film is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
The whiskey is Four Roses Single Barrel.
Brad
And we'll review them both.
This is...
The Film and Whiskey Podcast!
Bob
Welcome to the Film and Whiskey Podcast, where each week we review a classic movie and a glass of whiskey.
I'm Bob Book.
Brad
I'm Brad G.
Bob
And this week we are looking at the 1971 film Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
Brad, it's good to be back again for episode two of season three.
Last week we talked about The Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, a movie that is near and dear to both of our hearts.
And this week we're talking about a movie that I think is near and dear to a lot of people's hearts.
This movie has, you know, in the almost 50 years since it's been out, really become a family and children's classic.
Brad
Yeah, I love that you went from a movie that we love to a movie that you guys love.
Bob
Yeah, I think you're probably picking up on it a little bit.
Just right off the top, I'll say this.
I think this movie is fine.
I think it's a good movie.
It's a movie that I remember watching a ton growing up.
It was always on ABC Family, like every weekend.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, dude, I watched this movie a ton growing up.
Yeah, for sure.
And, you know, it holds up pretty well.
But I'm excited to get into talking about it because I think there's a lot of things we can really parse out about this movie.
Brad
Yeah, there were certain aspects of this film that, you know, we talk a lot about approaching these movies with a little bit more of a critical eye, especially for movies that we've seen before.
And I think approaching this movie a little bit differently than I had in the past, it really did open up my eyes to certain things.
But overall, Bob, I'm kind of right there with you.
Like, this movie's fine.
It's charming.
It's quirky.
It's fun.
It's over the top.
And I think that it knows that it's over the top.
And so I'm kind of okay with it.
But yeah, yeah, it's fine.
Yeah.
All right.
We'll see you next week on Filmin' Whiskey.
Bob
What are we reviewing next week, Bob?
Exactly.
So, Brad, as we get into talking about this movie, you know, every week I say we're going to review a classic movie and a glass of whiskey.
And there are things that make movies a classic in different ways.
And with this movie, one of the ways that it has really become a classic with audiences is that over the years, it's been released and re-released in theaters, and the more that it's been out, the more it's kind of picked up momentum, you know, from being on TV.
And over the years, it's become one of the highest grossing movies in North America, even though when it was first released, it was only a modest commercial success.
This was not a movie that a ton of people saw, but it was so cheap to put into syndication, and TV stations played it so much that generations of Americans now have grown up on this movie.
So it's kind of become a classic in a roundabout way.
It's a Shawshank kind of movie.
It is like a Shawshank, or like, you know, that's the kind of thing that you saw with It's a Wonderful Life.
Nobody really wanted that movie, and it became a public domain movie, so it was on TV all the time.
You kind of have the same thing here.
And this is another one of those movies, Brad, that, like The Wizard of Oz, I think we kind of have to separate a little bit of the nostalgia of watching this movie when we're growing up as children from the actual quality of what's on screen, because there's definitely some huge flaws going on in this film.
Brad
Yeah, I'm really glad you brought up The Wizard of Oz, because that, as I was watching this movie, I realized that, like, The Wizard of Oz was an extremely quirky, strange movie, and it just didn't jive well with me.
I don't remember the final score I gave it, but it wasn't very kind from what I remember.
With Willy Wonka, it's just as quirky and weird, and, you know, they have that bright Technicolor that, you know, looks a little better in 71 than it did in 39, but, like, it has a similar feel to The Wizard of Oz, but for some reason, like, I was on board with the quirkiness.
There's a lightheartedness to this movie that I just, I don't know, I found myself attracted to in ways that I did not with Wizard of Oz.
Bob
So before we go any further, I imagine that most people in our audience will have seen this movie at some point, but for those who haven't, that's why we have a special segment, America's favorite segment, which we call Brad Explains.
That's where Brad breaks down the plot of the movie that we have just seen.
So Brad, I'm going to turn it over to you.
Can you give us a spoiler-filled synopsis of the movie Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory?
Brad
So Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory is a movie that has a young boy named Charlie Bucket as its protagonist, and his crippled grandparents live in a bed, and there's this big chocolate factory nearby his house.
Also, big question, do they live in, like, Charles Dickens, England, or do they live in America?
Bob
Yeah, it's a very weird mix of half the actors are very British, half the actors are very American, and they filmed parts of this movie in Germany.
Like, especially at the end of the movie, when you see the rooftops, it's actually, I think, Munich?
Brad
It feels super European, and yet, like, the comedian guy that plays the teacher is super-duper British, and then the family's all really American.
I, you know, who knows what's going on?
So Charlie is living his best life now, but his family is poor, and in case you wondered if they were poor, the movie's gonna beat you over the head with the fact that they are, like, crazy, crazy poor.
In the most depressing way possible.
In the saddest ways possible.
I mean, the kid who plays Charlie Bucket is, like, he's so easy to empathize with, because he's so cute and charming and so sad, and he's really, and Bob, I don't know if you were wondering this, but he's really poor.
Just so you know, he's really poor.
But there's this cool chocolate factory nearby, and it's run by a guy named Willy Wonka, and he got into this big old corporate battle with Horace Slughorn, or something or other, and he shuts down his factory for his health, and so he can start making new chocolate.
Well, he finally announces that he's going to open the factory back up, and he's going to have a special tour for five people who win his contest.
And the contest is that he's going to put a golden ticket in five separate Wonka bars, and whoever gets these five tickets gets to bring one family member, and they get a really cool tour of the factory.
So a bunch of really terrible children win it, that have terrible parents, and then Charlie wins it, and Charlie's good, and he's got a cool family.
And then they go on this really wonky, psychedelic tour of the factory, and at the end of it, Charlie turns out to be a good kid, so he gets the factory, and they ride an elevator out into space and see a flying space baby.
Oh, wait, was that another movie?
That was 2001.
Bob
The mashup we all need.
Willy Wonka and the Flying Space Baby.
A Space Odyssey.
So Brad, I actually think that's a really good summary of the movie.
It's a very simple plot, and it comes from a children's book by Roald Dahl, which was adapted into the screenplay by him.
When I turned this movie on this time, there were a few things that I remembered kind of vaguely in the back of my mind about the film.
I mean, one of them being the absolutely terrifying sequence on the little canal, which we'll get into talking about, but one thing that has always kind of stuck out to me is that I always thought that this movie looked very cheaply made.
That, like, something about the film stock, the way that the props are used in the movie, the inside of Wonka's factory.
You know, we've been comparing it to Wizard of Oz already, and Wizard of Oz is a movie that came out 80 years ago, and like, can you tell what's fake in the Wizard of Oz?
Absolutely.
But I think that the special effects in the Wizard of Oz hold up better to this day than some of the props and things that I saw in Willy Wonka.
But I will say that, like, it looks like Warner Brothers has restored the movie, and I was really, really pleasantly surprised with how good the actual quality of the film looks, but having it in high def, I think, kind of cursed it even more for me, because you could tell even more how fake and how cheap some of the sets in this movie look.
I don't know.
Did you have that same thought?
Brad
Oh, yeah, dude.
When he was making the Everlasting Gobstoppers, like, they themselves looked terrible and tacky, but the machine that made them with, like, the covers over it and stuff, and it starts like cranking and booming and all that.
Bob
It cost $11 to make that whole machine.
Brad
Yeah, well, yeah, and I know that with inflation, that means it costs, like, $40 in today's money, but still.
Even still.
Bob
So the history of this movie's production, it wasn't made as a very expensive film.
It actually was part of a marketing ploy that the director of this movie, Mel Stewart, his daughter had read this book.
She really liked it.
He looked at it, thought it would be a cool idea, and so he
took it to his producer, who at the time was also working with
the Quaker Oats Company, and Quaker was trying to find a way
to market this new candy bar they were making, and this guy
convinced Quaker Oats to put up $3 million for him to make
this movie, and as a result, Quaker changed the name of the candy
bar they were making to the Wonka Bar, and so they started
selling Wonka-related products as a tie-in to this movie
they were producing, and, like, I had no idea the backstory
of this, Brad, until I started watching the opening credits,
and right at the bottom of one of the, you know, the opening
title cards, it said, created or produced by the Quaker Oats
Company, and I was like, wait a minute, what?
Not a film producer that you're used to seeing.
Brad
Honestly, Bob, earlier you were, you mentioned scenes that you just, like, vividly remember from watching this as a child, because if I'm being honest, I probably watched this movie about 17 to 47 times when I was a kid, but I probably haven't watched it since I was, like, I don't know, maybe 9 or 10.
The scene for me that always, I will never forget, is that the fact that his four grandparents just lay in a bed facing each other in the middle of a room.
Is that something that has always stuck out to you, or am I crazy?
Bob
It's a very weird dynamic that they have going on with the grandparents in this bed, Brad.
Brad
Yeah, I just always remember being, like, kind of weirded out by that, and then this time through, Grandpa Joe is, like, just dispensing wisdom.
If Brad looks like a banquet, then I shouldn't spend a penny on tobacco.
Bob
Like, yeah, Uncle Joe, you tell them.
You know, there's a lot of things that I noticed on this watch through, Brad, that I hadn't remembered, because it's been years and years since I saw this movie, and the first thing that I'll say that I noticed was that this movie is way shorter than I remember it being.
Like I said, I grew up watching it on TV, and ABC Family is notorious for having more commercials than, like, any other channel on TV.
So I'm used to, in my mind, thinking this is a two-plus hour movie.
This movie is an hour and 39 minutes.
It's very, very short.
And I'll say, you know, once they actually get to the Chocolate Factory, it is at the, like, the halfway point or more of the movie.
You spend at least 45 minutes of setup waiting to get to the Chocolate Factory, and the thing that I really came away with, Brad, wasn't that the setup took too long.
I actually thought they did it really, really well, building the anticipation, but that by the time we got to the factory, everything seemed rushed, and, like, that carried over even to the very end of the movie.
I thought that everything just seemed like they were trying to wrap things up, and they didn't really give it, like, the emotional heft and weight that it needed, and it just kind of seemed like, okay, now we're going to do this, this, this, and this, and the movie's over.
I really feel like this is one of those rare instances where 10 more minutes really could have benefited this movie.
Brad
Yeah, Bob.
The amount of times we've called for 10 to 20 minutes to be cut off of a movie is vastly superior to how many, I don't know if we've ever said that a movie needed 10 more minutes.
Right.
But, honestly, I'm right there with you.
You were spot-on.
I was, I paid attention to when, I think, the moment when they start opening the gates, and, you know, Wonka comes out for the first time, was that, like, 44 minutes and 20 or 30 seconds.
Like, I paused it and looked, because I was like, man, I forgot how long this opening was.
I thought it was, like, 20 to 30 minutes, and boom, you're in the chocolate factory.
No, it's almost half of the movie.
And so you finally get to that scene, and the movie just feels like it's two separate movies.
Yes.
Right?
Yep.
Like, the opening movie is, like, telling a story, and it's crafting a narrative about the world being consumeristic and greedy, and you get these terrible children, and there's kind of a message going on there that, you know, it does get continued on in the second half, but I almost feel like the second half gets muddled down with all of the spectacle of the factory.
Bob
Absolutely.
Yeah, and this is something we're going to keep getting into throughout the episode, but it almost feels like they shift protagonists halfway through the movie, too.
Like, once Wonka shows up, it's his movie, and it's not even that it seems like it's told from the perspective of Charlie anymore.
It's like, Charlie is a spectator to what's going on inside the factory.
And the crazy thing is, like, when you think about this movie, you don't think about anything that happens in the first 45 minutes.
Like I said, I forgot that it was that long of a setup.
And yet, the weird thing to me is, like, I felt like the first 45 minutes were actually more well done than all the stuff that actually mattered in the last half of the movie.
Brad
Well, I think this is what you get when you have a cast of, like, C-plus actors as the parents, you know, decent child actors.
Like, I like Charlie well enough, and I think the other child actors did well with what they were asked to do.
But, like, when you have a cast that's a bunch of child actors and a bunch of, like, extras playing the parents, and then you have Gene Wilder come on stage, like, for me, it was just an obvious, like, thing that when Gene Wilder came on screen, his charisma and charm and ability to just capture the camera just utterly dominated the second half of the film.
So, like, I don't know if it's totally anyone's fault, other than maybe the casting director, but, like, in my mind, getting Gene Wilder to play that role, he just overshadowed everyone else in the film.
And the problem is, I love him.
I think Gene Wilder is spectacular in this film.
I really, really love how he plays Willy Wonka.
But does that make sense, Bob?
What I'm kind of getting at?
Bob
Yeah, I totally agree, Brad.
You know, I keep going back to The Wizard of Oz, but, like, this has a very similar structure to Wizard of Oz.
Like, you have your protagonist, your kid, who's in a dull, hopeless situation.
Brad
The most hopeless situation of all time.
Bob
Gets the opportunity to be transported to, like, you know, the world of his dreams and learns a valuable lesson.
But I think where this movie kind of is unlike Wizard of Oz is that Wizard of Oz did a really good job of making the viewer feel how dull Dorothy's life was.
And like this film, I actually thought the first 45 minutes were really, really well made.
More than the last 45 minutes.
Not that I wasn't ready to get out of Charlie's depression, but I felt like the last half of the movie was too rushed.
And I feel like the reason that it seems so jarring is that they focus too much on Wonka in the second half and not enough on Charlie.
Part of it's Charlie's character that he's just like a really quiet and respectful boy and the other kids are so obnoxious that like, of course, Charlie's going to blend into the background, but the way you get around that is you have to do your job as a filmmaker.
And this is where I think that Mel Stewart really kind of drops the ball in the second half of the movie.
You should have shown more shots of Charlie reacting to things.
You should have in those first few moments where you're really unsure about what's going on with Wonka and like as these kids start, you know, what apparently looks like dying, you know, you find out at the end they're not dying, but like when Augustus Gloop gets sucked up into the little tube, you need more of Charlie's reaction.
You need more of Charlie taking things in and really trying to determine like, is Wonka a good guy or not?
They actually even put the camera at eye level with Gene Wilder.
It really becomes his movie.
You're seeing this factory through his eyes and not so much through Charlie's eyes.
And I think that's why it was like so shocking and jarring to me because Charlie kind of becomes not even a secondary character, but almost like an extra in this movie for a good chunk of the second half of the film.
Honestly, Bob.
Brad
I think that the movie would have been better if they had done a movie where the entire movie was done from Willy Wonka's perspective or where the entire movie was from Charlie Bucket's perspective, right?
I mean, because like like what you're talking about is we should have had Charlie's perspective throughout the entire second half.
I think they could have made an interesting movie about just Willy Wonka and brought Charlie in and done exactly what they did in the second half.
And in the first half, they just explore Wonka's life before the factory.
And I, you know, who knows, but like, I agree.
They switch focus halfway through the film and the movie really, really suffers because of it.
Bob
Well, then maybe we should talk about the first half of the
movie, you know, before we take our break with our whiskey
today, because I think that's really where a lot of the successes
that this movie has can be found, you know, it opens with this
great musical number, The Candyman, which ended up becoming an
actual hit like on the Billboard charts, and you get your first
introduction to Charlie framed from the inside of the candy
shop looking out at him.
He's on the outside looking in and it tells you kind of everything you need to know about Charlie.
You come to find out that he's really poor, that he works hard for what little bit that he gets, and his dream is to go see this chocolate factory that all of his friends are able to, you know, buy candy bars to try to get these golden tickets that he can't afford.
And I, you know, like, I really think that the kid that plays Charlie is really, really good in this movie.
Brad, like you said, he knows how to use his face really well, and the script goes overboard to try to like earn your sympathy.
But I thought that as an actor, I was really pretty impressed with his performance.
Brad
Yeah, I totally agree.
You brought up the the Candyman song, and as I was watching that scene specifically, I just was thinking, I was like, dude, whoever this guy is, he is trying so hard to be Gene Kelly right now.
But overall, the opening sequence, you know, that opening 45 minutes, I think the best thing that they do is they create this sense of tension in the world that, you know, Charlie isn't able to have his dreams.
And he finally comes about to get the golden ticket.
And, you know, I love that they, it takes him three separate candy bars before he finally gets the golden ticket.
But they create this tension that when they go and there's the band playing and they're opening up the Wonka Chocolate Factory, I love that scene moving into, you know, how they're going to get into the factory.
But like you said, like we said earlier, it feels like once they are actually finally into the factory, it becomes such a movie about Willie that you just, you lose out on so much.
And I don't know, man, they just did such a great job setting up Charlie and his family that I wish you had more time with them.
Like at the end of the movie, you don't even get to see the reaction of, you know, his other grandparents or his mom.
Like, why didn't I get to spend any time with them?
Bob
Yeah, for sure.
Well, and one of the things that I love about the first half of the movie that they completely drop in the second half is that they have these like these intermediary scenes in between Charlie's misery and it becomes like an actual farce.
It's a social satire in a lot of ways, and they have these scenes that are completely unrelated to the main characters of the movie, but it shows the sort of like Wonka hysteria that's going on.
There's a great one where, you know, like somebody gets kidnapped.
I was reading that there was actually a deleted scene where they showed a guy like climbing a mountain to talk to a sage at the top of the mountain.
And when he gets to the top of the mountain, he asked the guy, like, what's the meaning of life?
And the guy's unwrapping a Wonka bar and there's no golden ticket in it.
And the sage just says, like, life is pointless.
And like, I really wish they'd love that in the movie because I think those scenes were really, really funny and they moved real.
They helped move that first half along really, really well.
And then when you get into the factory, it's no longer really satire as much as it's just moralizing.
I don't know.
Does that make sense?
Like, oh, for sure.
These kids each absolutely check a stereotype for like how kids can be obnoxious and then the Oompa Loompas come in and sing their little song where they make it explicit what each kid did wrong and why they deserve to be punished for it.
And it no longer has the sort of like whimsy kind of winking tongue-in-cheek thing.
It's more of just these kids are terrible.
They deserve to die.
Let's move on.
And I don't know.
It just go ahead.
Brad
Good.
Well Wonka in and out will never commit to the fact that these children did not die.
Which is like really dark and funny in a certain way.
Yeah, one of my favorite favorite parts of the movie is when Veruca or whatever the the whiny little brat girl.
She's like jumping up onto the golden egg the hen thing and and Wonka just goes no don't stop right like that.
That genuinely might be one of my favorite movie lines from any movie, but you just kind of wonder you're like this movie went from a pretty smart satire on culture to just a really darkly funny but unimpressive moralizing of children.
Bob
I don't it was weird.
Well, yeah, and I think that that the way they end up bringing the point of the movie about which is like you don't find out that Wonka actually wanted to give the factory away until the last three minutes of the movie.
I don't like that.
I feel like something about the way that they do that twist at the end everything is kind of leading up to Wonka as this great villain and then you find out how cruel he is to Charlie at the end of the movie.
Brad
It's all there black and white clear as crystal you stole fizzy lifting drinks you bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized.
So you get nothing you lose good day, sir.
You're a crook.
You're a cheat and a swindler.
That's what you are.
How could you do a thing like this build up a little boy's hopes and then smash all his dreams to pieces.
You're an inhuman monster.
Bob
I said good day, but then it ends up being a test and oh, by the way, like you get you get the factory.
It just seems like it they didn't do the character of Willy Wonka justice and it comes across like this whole golden ticket idea is this one huge manipulative exercise by Willy Wonka.
He comes across as this old paranoid man, and he keeps painting himself as like I can't keep looking out for spies among me.
So I'm going to give it all up and who does he choose to give it to a child?
Like why would you put that responsibility on the shoulders of a child?
They don't do a good enough job.
I don't feel like of making him a truly sympathetic character because it's kind of too little too late.
It's like the last 30 seconds of the movie and Wonka is like hey, by the way, I'm a good guy and I want to give you everything I have and I'm still like, I don't know if I trust you.
Brad
I have two thoughts Bob first thought is the plan of like putting out the golden tickets.
He specifically says to Charlie that he couldn't give the factory to an adult that he had to give it to a child and I'm like, but if you just put five random golden tickets in random, you know chocolate bars, how would how did you know that a child was going to be receiving those tickets?
My second thought is that if you actually read the book, this is just this is just randomness in the actual book.
There's actually I think two or three books in the Charlie
and the Chocolate Factory series and in the second one,
the first one ends with them going on the elevator like
it does in the movie, but the second one starts that when
you press the red button, it actually takes you straight
down into the earth and you start traveling forwards in
time and Charlie ends up seeing his grandparents who
all four of them are in the elevator with him because
they're traveling forward in time.
His grandparents like turn into ghosts in the elevator while they're moving.
Bob
Wait, what does that have to do with what we're talking about?
Brad
It's all I have to say is rolled all is a weird weird dude.
Yeah, man for sure.
Bob
All right, Brad.
I think it's time for us to take a break and drink some of this whiskey when we come back.
I want to talk a little bit about the songs in this movie which have become pretty iconic and then I actually want to give I think I have a way to fix this movie and I want to hear your thoughts on it.
But before we get there, let's try this Four Roses single barrel.
What do you say?
Let's get to it.
All right.
So today we are checking out Four Roses single barrel and this is actually the last in a lineup of four Four Roses samples that we were given by our friend bourbon earring and it's actually been so long since he's given these to us Brad that when he gave them to us, he was still going by bourbon in college on Instagram.
That was a hot minute ago.
Yes.
It's been quite a while.
I think we've stretched this across season one two and three.
Now we did the regular Four Roses yellow label.
We did small batch and small batch select which I really liked but I will say that I am not really a huge fan of the Four Roses line in general.
The only one I've ever really liked was that small batch select and so today we're finishing it out with Four Roses single barrel.
This is a 100 proof whiskey from the Four Roses company Brad.
What have you thought so far of this lineup that we've done Bob?
Brad
I'm kind of the same vein as you Four Roses has never been a brand that I've I don't know gravitated towards like I've had it once or twice here there and it just strikes me as an okay whiskey their yellow labels just decent but it's not something I would want to buy at I think their yellow label is around the like 28 to $32 range.
Am I off on that?
I want to say it's closer to 20 bucks.
Okay.
Well even at $20, I guess there's just other things that I would prefer to drink.
Like honestly, I can get Jack Daniels for 22 or $3.
I will say though this nose is intriguing me.
It's a little bit alcohol forward.
Bob
Yeah.
Yep.
It's a little it's definitely astringent.
Brad
Yeah, it's it's a little astringent but there are some pleasant vanilla notes and I'm getting a little bit of floral on it that I don't know if I expected after drinking the other Four Roses.
Bob
So one thing about Four Roses that that people seem to like about it is that it is definitely a high rye bourbon meaning that the second most used grain in the mash bill is rye and I don't necessarily think that's what turns me off from it Brad.
I think that it's always seem to be very alcohol forward like you said and and it just is kind of a harsh whiskey to drink this one.
You definitely do get some of those alcohol notes on the nose.
It's it's the first thing I smelled but underneath that I get a lot of herb like you said a little bit of floral and then behind that I'm actually getting like a really thin sort of like a wisp of peanut butter, which is something that I you know that I like in my bourbon.
So I'm excited by that.
I'm a little bit worried that I'm going to have to push through a bunch of alcohol flavor to get to that.
I'm going to give this a six and a half on the nose.
It's a good nose, but it kind of makes me a little bit leery about what I'm going to drink.
Brad
Yeah, Bob.
I'm going to give it a six on the nose.
I think it smells decent, but well, you know, we'll see where the taste takes us.
All right, Brad.
Let's give it a sip.
Huh?
Bob
Yeah, that's that's okay.
Huh?
Yeah.
So this is one of those whiskeys.
I've said this before Brad like hundred proof in that middle proof range from like 94 to 108.
I feel like sometimes can be the harshest whiskeys to drink in a way.
They're sometimes harsher than barrel proof.
This one definitely lives up to that.
The alcohol tingle and burn is immediate on your tongue.
I don't I don't find much sweetness on this bourbon, you know, even as I go to swallow like the things that are lasting in my mouth is a taste of alcohol and oak and there really isn't a lot of complexity to the flavor.
It's just a fairly unsweet bourbon all the way through.
Brad
Yeah, Bob.
If I remember correctly, I think that with one of the previous four roses, I remember comparing it to lemon pledge and this one isn't quite as strong as that but it does have kind of a tart like citrus lemony flavor to it that I'm not super impressed with when there's nothing soft to kind of pull me back from that ledge.
Bob
The first thing I notice on a second sip the the sweetness is right in the front and it's not a brown sugar sweetness.
It's not like a molasses.
It's it's closer to a honey sweet to me, but it is coupled with like a pretty strong alcohol burn all the way through you get a lot of pepper and a lot of alcohol tingle and for some reason I keep picking up this kind of like herbal note on it.
It's almost like a like a really strong like a mint leaf or something but not in a sweet way.
It's it's definitely got like some grassy kind of notes to it.
I'm really I'm struggling with this Brad because I don't think this is a poorly made whiskey, but it's not my preferred sort of palette.
Like it's not my preferred flavors that I would want on a whiskey.
So for me, I'm only going to give this a five and a half on the taste.
Brad
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and give it a six on the taste.
It's honestly the nose is kind of where the taste is.
It's decent.
It's not great.
It's not going to overwhelm you with quality, but you can also tell that it's not low quality.
I think I'm getting a lot of that.
I don't know almost like a lavender or sage like kind of the like you said, it's an herbal floral type of type of note, but the sweetness doesn't pair with that very well.
I think that might be my biggest complaint with four roses is that the the flavor profile just doesn't match itself very well, you know when you get a nice.
Like mapley or brown sugar bourbon that also has some nice dark coffee notes on the end.
Like those are notes that pair well together that you start off in a place and it takes you on a journey to those dark deep notes that you're like, wow, that I just went on a whole roller coaster of awesomeness.
Whereas this one it starts off kind of like a honey a little bit of citrus tartness and then it moves you into, you know, this florally finish and I just it's not it's not my style Bob.
Yeah, mine neither.
So Brad, what would you give this on the finish?
I'm going to give it a five.
I think it gets a little bit sour at the end.
That might be the high rye content.
It's just okay.
Bob
Yeah, I'm kind of in the same place.
I really don't mind the sourness as much as you call it.
It does get kind of bitter, but it's again, it's more herbal than than grain to me.
I don't really get a lot of rye on this.
The finish is not very lasting, but it's not like the flavor dissipates completely.
Like I am aware that I've been drinking bourbon the whole time.
And so I actually found the the finish more pleasant than the taste.
I'm going to go ahead and give the finish a six out of ten and that takes us to overall balance.
This is where we talk about the nose the taste and the finish all put together Brad.
I mean, I don't know.
This is a poorly balanced whiskey, but it's just not my cup of tea.
Are you kind of in the same boat?
I actually don't think it's it's greatly balanced.
Brad
I think a part of balance is is keeping the alcohol forwardness in check and I don't think they do a good job of that.
And like I said, the flavor profile for me is kind of all over the board and I don't think they mix well.
So I'm actually going to give this a four out of ten on balance.
Bob
Wow.
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and give it a five and a half on balance and I feel bad doing that because like I said, I I don't think that it kind of went in peaks and valleys.
It was kind of all just not my cup of tea.
Someone who likes this flavor profile might find that it's incredibly well balanced.
But for me, this is not really a whiskey that I'd find myself drinking very often.
So I'm going to stick it a five and a half and that takes us to value.
Our value score is based on how much a fifth of this would cost in our home state of Ohio and in Ohio a fifth of four roses single barrel will cost you 4199.
Yeah.
Well, it's still less than the small batch select which at the time we drank it actually wasn't even available in Ohio.
That one costs $59, I believe now, but I actually really loved that whiskey and I could see that being something that I would pay $60 for way before this as something I would pay $42 for this to me is just kind of a higher proof version of four roses yellow label.
It kind of has those same astringent harsh qualities and I wish that they would just make a hundred proof version and not call it saying, you know, not be a single barrel and charge, you know, $28 for it as opposed to this.
I think this is astronomically overpriced Brad and I know that we're going to have people out there who disagree with us because four roses has a really committed fan base, but we do not count ourselves among fans of four roses.
So for me, I don't think that this is a good value at all.
And I think I'm actually only going to give a three and a half on value.
Brad
Yeah, Bob.
I'm going to give it a four on value.
I it's not the worst whiskey.
I think we've had in the 40 to $50 price range, but it's not great.
So a four for me and that brings out my total score to a 25 out of 50.
I'm like right there in the middle.
I think this is an average whiskey.
I think it could have made up some ground if it was priced better if this was like 25 to $28 this might get like a seven or an eight on value, but it's not it's $42 and so it's just a it's just a run-of-the-mill average whiskey for me.
Bob
I added a few drops of water to mine just now and it improved the entire drinking experience Brad.
The problem with that is if it's better with a couple drops of water in it, then they should have just diluted it down to like 94 or 96 proof.
It would have had a much better whiskey, but you're right.
This is this is not something I would recommend and especially not at the $42 mark.
I am coming out to a 27 out of 50 which puts our average at a 26, which is just over the halfway mark.
I can think of a number of whiskeys that are significantly cheaper than this that I would recommend way before I'd pull out Four Roses single barrel.
Brad
I don't remember my thoughts on the small batch, but overall I don't think I would recommend Four Roses as a as a distillery to many people.
Bob
It's not my cup of tea.
The only one in this lineup Brad that I would wholeheartedly recommend would be that small batch select but at $60.
That's a hard one to recommend to people who may not have tried it any of these before if you find small batch select at a bar and they're pouring it for seven eight dollars a glass.
I would recommend trying it.
I really really enjoyed that one.
This one does not get a recommendation from me and you've heard Brad say that he does not recommend either.
So that's where we are on our Four Roses flight.
We do want to thank our friend bourbon earring for sending these to us even though we're not great fans of Four Roses as it turns out.
It was really great to walk through kind of the whole lineup that they offer.
So Brad, what do you say we get back into talking about Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory?
Brad
Let's get to it.
Bob
All right.
So that was Four Roses single barrel a whiskey that Brad and I were not too keen on and we're getting back into a movie that we both think is kind of fine but nothing to write home about and that would be Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
Brad before we went to the break.
I said I wanted to talk about the songs in this film.
There's I think only four or five songs in this movie.
There's the initial one the Candyman.
There's the one that Charlie's mom sings called Cheer Up Charlie there which is so so sad.
Well also just a terrible song.
I mean it goes on way too long and the and the actress playing Charlie's mom can't get the lip sync quite right, but you're right Brad.
I mean, especially at that point in the movie.
They are like going overboard to show you how miserable Charlie bucket is at first.
I was like, oh, okay.
He's just poor and life is a little hard but then I was like, oh no Charlie is like clinically depressed.
Yeah, dude.
This is really bad and at some point in my notes.
I wrote down they should have called this movie Charlie
bucket and the devastating psychological effects of abject
poverty because that was that was a way more accurate title
for this movie at that point and Cheer Up Charlie Cheer
Up Charlie drives that point home, but then they get into
the factory and Gene Wilder sings the song pure imagination,
which I love and then you get the Oompa Loompa song which
comes up three or four times which is you know become part
of the kind of cultural fabric.
We all know that song.
So Brad overall, what did you think of the music and the songs in this film Bob?
Brad
I actually really enjoyed the music for the most part.
I didn't actually think the Cheer Up Charlie was that terrible of a song.
It's not great and I don't think the actresses, you know portrayal of it was very good, but I actually kind of like that song.
I really liked Grandpa Joe with you know, I've got a golden ticket pure imagination is spectacular.
The Oompa Loompa songs as weird as they are.
I actually really like them when Gene Wilder is is on the crazy psychotic boat ride from hell and he's kind of singing intentionally like a little bit off-key.
Which direction we are going?
There's no knowing where we're going or which way the river is flowing.
That like for some reason that song is just perfect for that point in the movie.
I don't know.
There's something amazing.
Bob
Can I just ask you as an aside like what was the purpose of that scene because it's terrified generations of children and they actually don't show it in the TV version anymore.
And I think the fact that they can cut it out completely and you don't lose anything from the movie kind of shows me that it has no purpose like I don't understand what he was trying to accomplish Willy Wonka as a character by doing that.
Brad
Yeah.
I mean Bob when you when you look at it though in Dumbo in in the the Marvelous Adventures of Winnie the Pooh or whatever that movie was called like there's multiple scenes in children's movies of these like dream worlds.
There's just weird stuff happening.
And so when I saw the Willy Wonka it made me think about like
the pink elephants in Dumbo and I'm like, I don't know what
it is, but I think there was something going on in Hollywood
at like psychology back in the 40s 50s 60s where they were
like obsessed with dreams and like dreamscapes and I don't
know if it was some Freudian thing, but I think that the
Willy Wonka, you know, the the steamboat see or the rowboat
scene that was just like an extension of that obsession
with dream sequences.
Bob
Well, it was also an obsession with psychedelic films of the late 60s.
I mean, this is very early 1970s.
So it's not like we have completely moved into a new style of filmmaking yet.
And nowhere is that more apparent the psychedelic touches than when the Oompa Loompas sing their song the picture shrinks down and they put these psychedelic fonts on the screen that show the words of what the Oompa Loompas are saying and Brad.
I mean this has always been something that's bothered me because I think it really dates the movie a lot.
But in addition to that, it's just it really pulled me out of the movie.
Those touches aren't introduced anywhere else in the film and for us to get these weird captions written in clearly psychedelic 1960s fonts as the Oompa Loompas sing their song every time I thought it was just a terrible filmmaking choice by the director.
Brad
Well, I actually kind of disagree with you there, Bob.
I think that the the direction of the movie, you know, the first half of the movie is so grounded in reality and it's farcical of, you know, something that could happen in real life.
How the news media just grabs onto this story and runs with it and becomes obsessed with it.
Like, I think it really did a great job of representing reality in the first half of the movie in order that they might set up this farcical, crazy, imagination-filled world that is Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory.
So the touches of whimsy and fancy and the psychedelic nature of the Oompa Loompas and Willy Wonka and all that, it actually didn't bother me that much once you got into the factory because I thought they set you up well for saying this is a different special place where things don't operate under the same rules that the rest of the world does.
Bob
So I think that's a great point, Brad, and I have an idea that I want to run by you as we kind of wind down today.
We've talked about some of the very jarring and glaring differences between the first half of the movie and the second half, and I think I have an idea for how to fix this movie and it's a really, really small change, and I want to get your opinion on it.
So if you'll just let me kind of get on my soapbox for a minute, I want to share my fix for Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
Share with me what's been percolating in your little brain, Bob.
Here's the big problem I have with the movie, like dramatically speaking.
We spent 45 minutes of this movie building up to the tour of the Chocolate Factory.
We see Charlie's life in graphic detail, like we know that his family needs to find a way up and out of poverty.
They're very poor.
We also know that like more than anything, Charlie wants to see the Chocolate Factory, but until the big reveal at the end of the movie that he gets the factory to himself, there's actually not a lot of dramatic tension.
Like he wins a ticket to go on the tour and it's an incredible contest that he won and it's cool that he gets to do it.
But at the end of the movie, like if he hadn't been given the factory, he would just go back home and continue living in really destitute circumstances.
And like, yeah, I guess that's still a good story, but it doesn't actually explain why we spent 45 minutes looking at Charlie's life and wondering like, why are they showing us how poor he is?
My fix for this movie would be this, Brad.
I think Willy Wonka should have announced up front that he was stepping down and turning the factory over to one of the five golden ticket winners.
Like if at the very beginning of the movie, when they first announce it, they say like Wonka stepping down.
This is what the contest is.
If you get one of the five golden tickets, you are a finalist to take over Willy Wonka's factory.
Like if we had that knowledge up front, we as a viewer would already be rooting for Charlie to win going into that factory tour because we know where he's come from and we know that he needs this to get his family up out of an impoverished life.
And then like, I think it would help the movie because all of the traps that Willy Wonka is setting for these kids, these sort of moralistic traps going into the TV room, going into the bad egg room, they make more sense because they would show us as the viewer right from the get-go that these kids aren't worthy to take over Willy Wonka's factory.
Like without knowing that he's trying to give the factory away, it just seems like he's a really sadistic person who is indiscriminately like killing children for no reason at all.
I think that it would even help that scene where Willy Wonka comes out of the factory when you first meet him because if you're wondering as a viewer, why is he giving the factory away?
Is something wrong with him?
And then Gene Wilder walks out with a cane.
You're thinking, oh, maybe he's like in really poor health.
Maybe that's why he's giving the factory away.
I honestly think that knowing up front what his intentions were would make every scene better and would add so much more dramatic weight.
And then at the end of the movie, you wouldn't have that crazy whiplash of Willy Wonka being this terrible villain and then immediately being a good guy.
He could do that entire scene with Good Day Sir the exact same way, but with Charlie thinking, I've won the factory.
You know what I mean?
Like going in and being like, hey, when does Charlie get to take over the factory?
And then Willy Wonka saying like, you don't.
You're disqualified because of the fizzy lifting drinks or whatever.
I think that would actually make that scene have way more dramatic impact.
And you'd actually be with Grandpa Joe on his side when he's like, hey, F this guy.
Let's go give that, you know, that gobstopper to Slugworth.
You'd be rooting for him to do that.
And then for Charlie to turn it in and you find out that it was actually just the last test and he gets to the factory anyway.
I feel like that wouldn't be as jarring because you already know that Wonka was intending to give the whole thing away.
I don't know.
I mean, I feel like that would just be a really simple fix, but it would fix the whole movie.
Brad
Yeah, Bob.
The more you talk about it, the more it makes me think about another movie, a very modern movie that we haven't reviewed, but did you see Ready Player One?
Yes.
And honestly, it kind of reminds me of that, like from the very start, everybody knew the premise, you know, the whole premise of that movie is there's this crazy virtual reality that runs the world, basically.
And the owner of it has died and he's going to gift the company to somebody who can solve these puzzles.
And honestly, the premise that you're setting up is somewhat similar to that.
And I loved at the end of the movie that you get in a reverse way.
You get what you're talking about.
You get the double fake of like, man, I got to the end and I'm getting what I thought I was going to get, but the person giving me this gift fakes me out.
You know, Gene Wilder makes him think, oh, you invalidated the contract that you signed, which I, you know, just by the by, I didn't know that like nine-year-old children could sign legally binding contracts, but you know, no big deal.
But yeah, you kind of get tricked out by the owner of the large company at the end of the film.
And in the case of Willy Wonka, Bob, I think you have a lot of validity there.
If everybody knew that this was the, you know, this was what it was at stake.
Honestly, it would give a lot more depth and meaning to all the news, the media representation of the film that, you know, the news reporters would be like Wonka giving up the factory.
If you get one of these tickets, you have a chance to have the factory.
Like it doesn't change anything from the opening part of the film.
It doesn't really change anything from the middle or the ending part of the film.
It just changes the motivation.
I, Bob, I, man, I think you're onto something, sir.
Bob
Well, thank you, sir.
I appreciate it.
And Brad, I think that's one of the frustrating things about this movie is that it could be so easily fixed and it's not.
I think this movie is fine, but you know, to tip off my final score here, I'm going to give this movie a 7 out of 10.
It's the kind of movie that's like you can watch it on TV.
You know, it's a good way to spend an afternoon when you're watching ABC family as a 12 year old, but I don't really think it's any more than that.
Does this movie stand the test of time?
I think for the most part it does, but it still isn't a movie that I would consider like in the upper echelon of children's films.
I guess I'll just say this, Bob.
Brad
I think for me, we didn't touch on this a lot, but there's something about this movie.
That's just incredibly charming.
Everything about this movie is attractive in different ways.
Like I like the dark humor that Gene Wilder indulges us with.
I like the way that you can empathize with Charlie about being poor.
I like the way Grandpa Joe brings kind of this old person vigor, you know, vim and vigor to life.
There's something just incredibly attractive and charming about this movie that I agree with you on everything that you said that it's kind of a meh, decent children's film.
But even, you know, as I was watching it the other day, I just found myself going, yeah, I like this movie.
So I'm going to give it an 8 out of 10.
Do I think it's perfect?
By no means.
Do I think it could easily be a six and a half to a seven?
Yeah.
I like, I think I could give it that score, but I left the movie going, you know, I'd be okay with my kids watching this someday.
I like it.
It's a fun, interesting film and I, you know, it's fine.
Bob
It's good.
Well, there you have it.
Those are our scores for Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
We are averaging out to a seven and a half out of ten, but we want to know what you think.
So please get on social media.
You can find us on Twitter, Facebook or Instagram at FilmWhiskey or you can give us a call.
Brad
Our phone number is 216-800-5923.
Once again, it's 216-800-5923 or you can check on us on our Anchor.fm page and leave us a voicemail there.
Bob
Next week, we'll be back with the 2012 film, Life of Pi.
For the Film and Whiskey Podcast, I'm Bob Book.
Brad
I'm Brad G.
Bob
And we'll see you next time.
