Charlie & the Chocolate Factory

[GeorgeC]

You guys are entitled to your opinions even if I don't think they're the majority opinion in this case.

There are huge problems with the Burton film and the music and ultimate creepiness of Depps' Wonka are two of the more visible signs. Burton should definitely stick to making original films. His remakes and revisitations of stories that have already been done are the worst films he's ever produced and directed. I'm not so sure I want to spend money seeing his version of "Alice in Wonderland" after what he did with "Sleepy Hollow," "Planet of the Apes," and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory."

The charm the original film had and the iconic moments with the original Veruca just aren't on display in this film amongst others.

Don't know about your musical tastes, either, but I know I'm not alone in thinking Elfman has lost his "magic touch" in his last few collaborations with Burton. This film and "Corpse Bride" are amongst the worst musical compositions and lyrics-writing of his career.

[EricJ]

This film and "Corpse Bride" are amongst the worst musical compositions and lyrics-writing of his career.

Uh, the "gimmick" was that Elfman/Burton's Oompa lyrics were taken from the original Dahl verses--
That pretty much 90% constituted "Closer to the original book", so they could advertise that as an alibi and go off on their own indulgences.

Listen to Gene Wilder in the interviews, though, and he'd read the book...Even agreed to take the role only on the condition that he could do the somersault-fakeout, just so that we would deliberately not know how much of him to trust.
Dahl's Wonka was free from all forms of restraining etiquette, and half of Wilder's deadpan ripostes ("You should open your mouth a little wider next time") have Roald's name on the script.

[Whippet Angel]

The problem with the Depp film is that it IS mean-spirited without the clever wordplay and innuendo the previous film had. Both film adaptations take liberties with the story and Burton's film is more a flawed remake of the 1971 film than a faithful adaptation of the Wonka books.

Totally disagree with you there (and it's not cause I'm a Burton fangirl ). I was introduced to the book when I was in the first grade. I remember being excited when our teacher let us watch the movie in class, because she had just finished reading it aloud to us (I had read it on my own a few times as well).

I remember being just a bit disappointed. I liked the movie, but it was not quite what I imagined it would be. I also didn't understand why it had to be a full on musical. I still feel this way about the film today. Burton's version on the other hand, just had the right "feel" to it. It wasn't a 100% faithful adaptation either, but it was close enough.

Out of all the films based on Dahl's novels, I think The Witches was probably the most faithful adaptation. It stayed pretty close to the source material, but the small changes that were made did make sense (such as giving the main character a name). I didn't have a problem with the "happy ending" either.

Oh, and speaking of Dahl adaptations, I can't wait for Fantastic Mr.Fox! ^___^

[Ben]

Droo...it always has been "Willy Wonka and...", even from Dahl's first draft.

I'm with you on the Great Glass Elevator - indeed my first thought when WB and Burton announced the Depp film was that they were setting things up for a franchise, seeing as the original had not performed very well and a sequel was never made.

I reasoned that the new Charlie was simply a way to remake/update the original film (since it otherwise strayed so little from its basic concept) so that things (and a new audience) were in place for Great Glass Elevator and whatever other new stories they wanted to tell with the characters.

But...it doesn't seem to be happening, does it?

[estefan]

I reasoned that the new Charlie was simply a way to remake/update the original film (since it otherwise strayed so little from its basic concept) so that things (and a new audience) were in place for Great Glass Elevator and whatever other new stories they wanted to tell with the characters.

But...it doesn't seem to be happening, does it?

Well, I remember reading a while back that Depp was interested, but Roald Dahl refused to sell the film rights since he hated "Chocolate Factory" so much. And I guess the Dahl family are respecting his wishes.

Oh, well. We have The Fantastic Mr. Fox and Guillermo del Toro's The Witches to look forward to.

[Ben]

That argument doesn't actually make much sense, for various reasons...

[Dacey]

David Kelly, aka Grandpa Joe, passes away at 82:

http://www.nextmovie.com/blog/david-kelly-obit/

[ShyViolet]

Pretty great:





In my opinion both films are equally entertaining, although each have their own positives and negatives. But as for which Willy Wonka is better: Wilder hands down. He was not only sweet, charming, mysterious, wicked, and wise; but seemed so much more like an actual PERSON compared to Depp's portrayal.

Depp was basically a combination between creepy and pathetic. The bottom line with his Wonka was that he was so stunted emotionally that Charlie was actually a lot more mature than him; it's Charlie that "teaches" Wonka about the value of family and facing your inner demons. Interesting plot development...but not one I'd consider to be my first choice for what should be a fun, mysterious, heart-warming adventure that both kids and parents can enjoy. (It may just be me, but the Burton film was something else entirely: a meditation on adult frustration, disappointment, and loneliness. Not really the happy children's film it was marketed as.)

But musical score: DEFINETLY the Elfman version. Yes, I realize that he only "adapted" Dahl's rhymes, but he did so brilliantly, with each song/musical number a world onto itself. And the opening credits theme was just the right amount of spooky/disturbing.

(But will also make sure to add: Absolutely nothing can top "Pure Imagination." )

[EricJ]

=Depp was basically a combination between creepy and pathetic. The bottom line with his Wonka was that he was so stunted emotionally that Charlie was actually a lot more mature than him; it's Charlie that "teaches" Wonka about the value of family and facing your inner demons. Interesting plot development...but not one I'd consider to be my first choice for what should be a fun, mysterious, heart-warming adventure that both kids and parents can enjoy. (It may just be me, but the Burton film was something else entirely: a meditation on adult frustration, disappointment, and loneliness. Not really the happy children's film it was marketed as.

The Burton version was a product of overly-misinterpreted mistakes:

- There were always plans to try and do a "purer" version after Dahl's death, on the reason that Dahl hated the Wilder version, but that was mostly because Dahl had written his '71 script on the assumption that a manic Spike Milligan was going to be cast. Just try half of Wilder's classic-ref lines ("Nil desperandum, across the desert lies the promised land!") in Milligan's "Whatwhatwhatwhatwhat?" voice, and you can see what Dahl was expecting and didn't get with Wilder's calm-manic Frahnkensteen delivery.
Also, Dahl objected to the added subplots, like that Wilder was "testing" the kids, including deliberately being mean to Charlie at the end.

- A new version was going to be directed by Gary "Hunger Games" Ross for Nicholas Cage (don't laugh, he was great with kids in "Sorcerer's Apprentice")...But, the minute the pop-Internet heard about a New Wonka, childhood-deconstructionism immediately put up fake rumors of "Tim Burton casts Marilyn Manson as Wonka!" News services that had bit for the easy gag even had to put out retractions when the rumor was busted, and Ross joked "Why didn't I think of that?"
When a new director had to be found, nobody was aware Burton wasn't directing...And wherever Burton is, another name will invariably follow.

- Some wag at some point said "Hey, isn't Wonka in the story sort of like Michael Jackson and Neverland?" (which was a big issue at the time), and Depp's makeup and performance, as well as Burton's approach to the story, just sprang from there...

- And Tim, seriously: Hadn't you worked out your "Daddy didn't appreciate me!" issues in "Big Fish" YET?? (Remember when "Alice Through the Looking Glass" wasn't even directed by Burton and still had to have a "Daddy didn't want me to be an artist!" plot in it?)

It did, however, spawn a new term into filmgoer's slang:
"Chocolate Factory Syndrome" = The strange psychological habit of expectant fans waiting for a remake believing it will be superior to all versions, and to begin demonizing the original for its "mistakes" that the new version is going to "correct" once and for all.

[Daniel]

Too bad the comparison doesn't include the Tom and Jerry Wonka film. Yeah, it's basically a shot-for-shot of the Wilder film with Tom and Jerry shoehorned in, but I liked it. It at least got creative with some scenes, although I didn't really care for Slugworth singing Veruca's song.

[Bill1978]

I'm clearly one of the few who prefers Burton's version over the original one. As a fan of Roald Dahl's work I always hated the original was called Willy Wonka. I admit I hated the Wonka backstory in Burton's film, but I felt his film captured the Dahl essence, plus it helped the movie used Dahl's fantastic rhyme. When I want to experience the cinematic telling of the book my default will always be Burton's.

[Daniel]

Jeff Nathanson set to rewrite screenplay for the prequel.

The ‘Willy Wonka’ prequel will follow Wonka’s early adventures which includes the discovery of the Oompa Loompas. Ryan Gosling, Ezra Miller and Donald Glover are reportedly on the shortlist for the titular role of Willy Wonka, our personal choice is Donald Glover.

Ryan looks like a young version of Wilder's Wonka. Plus, I feel he would be able to capture a similar charm. He would be my choice. Donald and Ezra I feel would pull a Johnny and be too weird...

[Bill1978]

Is the world really demanding to know about Wonka before the Factory? Isn't that part of the appeal of the character in the original story - the unknown makes him mysterious. I'm so tired of Hollywood wanting to explain the origin of every character.

[ShyViolet]

Yeah, origin stories are basically the gift that keeps on giving as far as Hollywood is concerned; they can constantly be “re-imagined” to suit the needs of the audience (studio).

[Ben]

I’d be up for a Burton-Depp Great Glass Elevator though. Getting to that was the only point of the remake as far as I could make out, but they never did it!