Farms: Books vs. Movies Review REDUX: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Productivity | Information | History | View | Quality

1. I happen to love all versions equally. I grew up with the 71 movie as it was always on TV. But I was always a bit disappointed with it. It was kind of saccharine but also trying hard to be über dark. Dahl always walked the thin line between being very dark and very whimsical. I think the new movie is walks that line a lot better. Plus they actually had the proper OL songs. The 71 version were like nursery rhymes, all bark and no bite. So wimpy in comparison to the book.
2. The movie better than the book???? NO WAY!
3. I love all your book vs movies. This one, however, I would have titled book vs movie vs strange attempt at a movie...
   
   Plus, I hate to say this and look like an immature prat, but the river part made me laugh hard! "Not appropriate, Editing Matt!!" "Sorry, couldn't resist."
   
   Lastly, and this is a personal opinion. I think the Gene Wilder one is great because of two unsung characters that first drew me into the story. The candyman, who had the wonderful opening song, and is just fun to watch. And the teacher. The teacher is just wonderful. He is so goofy, yet so serious about his complete absurdity, that he is just hilarious. Plus I think he is like the everyman reacting to the Wonkamania craze, but since we get so see him and get to know him better than the others that are affected, he somehow makes it more real for me. I can see the ups and downs caused by it through his reactions best. Short moments but they are still some of my favorite lines in the movie.
   "Of course you don't know. You don't know because only I know. If you knew and I didn't know, then you'd be teaching me instead of me teaching you - and for a student to be teaching his teacher is presumptuous and rude. Do I make myself clear?."
   "Class dismissed!" "Class undismissed!" "Class redismissed!"
   "I've just decided to switch our Friday schedule to Monday, which means that the test we take each Friday on what we learned during the week will now take place on Monday before we've learned it. But since today is Tuesday, it doesn't matter in the slightest. Pencils ready!"
4. The original movie is my favorite movie of all time!!!
5. I'm starting to wonder if Ronald Dahl hated children when he created Willy Wonka??
6. For once, I would like to see an unbiased comparison of the two movies. In every review of the 2005 movie I've seen, the reviewer worships the 1971 movie. I honestly think their bias gets in the way of reviewing, and they end up making excuses on why the old one is better. Or I would like to see a collab. One reviewer who likes the old, and one who likes the new. I think the debate between the two would be interesting to watch.
7. why does everyone hate the 2005 movie have you already forgot about the oompa loompa songs if there was another movie i would skip straight to the oompa loompa songs
8. did everyone involved in the making of the 2005 film dislike the original film.
9. did anyone see the 2013 stage musical.
10. I actually liked the 2005 one more. But it's probably different for you because you didn't watch it as a kid. It's a lot brighter, a lot more pleasing to actually look at. The 70's one is probably a better adult movie. But that didn't work for me. The 70's aesthetic, as a child, really threw me off. I couldn't connect the wacky fonts with anything serious and the truth is that everything seemed discolored and kind of dirty or sad. The hair and clothing seems lazily done or just more simplistic and it made it seem sad and unappealing to my child sensitivities. Besides, the Willy Wonka you liked so much really scared me. I find his performance to be cryptic in a scary way. His mysteriousness was creepy and he reminded me of an adult. An actual real adult, which is probably why if I watched it now I would probably like it better: he's a lot better developed as a character. But I just don't think a kid, or just I as a kid, could appreciate that back then. As I said, I found him scary. At the beginning I didn't understand that awkward old-man walking scene and it left me with a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the film. He was like one of those people that you're never sure whether they're lying to you and making fun of you or are actually serious. It was weird. The creepy acid trip scene was really scary for me and the part when he screams at Charlie was also really off putting. It made me feel like I was being scolded by my parents. I didn't like it. 
    The 2005 movie, on the other hand, was much more colorful. It was all more exaggerated and symbolic, with less psychological nuances and more audiovisual interest. And that resonated a lot more with me as a child. The psychology was a lot more abstract in a way that I could see into much better and have my own child like philosophical thoughts. And Willy Wonka is unique. He's not realistic by any chance, but I hadn't seen a character like him before and I haven't since. And that really attracted me to him. He was a character who I felt was mysterious in that sort of imaginative magical way that children understand, and the part that wasn't mysterious was easy to understand and had its own appeal. At the time I actually liked Johnny Depp a lot more and now I don't mind him. But I think that even if I watch these movies again now and I agreed with you, I still think that I'd like the 2005 one better, precisely because it isn't for 20 year olds. It's for ten year olds. That movie really made me think. I analyzed the annoying kid characters and I saw my own flaws as a kid in them, and I investigated them. It's true that they're great at being "those annoying children", but when you're a kid, you could easily be either one of them, or among them. Willy Wonka is more of an abstract idea with a really interesting audiovisual carcass. It's more of a concept. He IS a child who wants another child to give his factory to. And he comes across much more easily with his simple back story. He was also mysterious and kind of not very honest, but it was plain to see for a child and I wasn't put off by it as I was by the 70's one.
    The truth is I'm biased. But I think you may be a little biased too because you clearly saw these movies at different times in your life. And you clearly had more time to think the 70's one over
11. I really like Roald Dahl's works. One of his works that I really liked reading as a child that I want to see some sort of adaption to is George's Marvellous Medicine
12. i grew up the 71 verson to and i love it !
13. U should do book vs movie again 
14. You really need to learn to take off your nostalgic goggles, dude. If you love the old movie more than the new one and the book, fine. But your arguments defending the old movie tends to at times make no sense.
15. i hate you
16. 2005 wins
17. I think it wasn't gum chewing I think it was being obsessed, not knowing when to stop something that was clearly annoying, and thinking you know everything and not listening 
18. There is only 1 problem with the 2005 movie:Tim Burton
19. 2005 Charlie wins because of his imagination. In the lift,where only he and Mike Tv(i think thats the tv kids name) Mike Tv says that this(the umpa lumpas shooting each other with laser candy cannons or something like that) makes no sense. Charlie responded by saying that sweets(and imagination) dont need to make sense, they are just simlpy good. And basically thats the mentality of that movie's Wonka
20. So going for something different with the 2005 film was not the right way to go for. So, what? You'd want it to be the same as the Gene Wilder version? If that were the case, then that would just be another thing to complain about. You see, that's just the problem with adaptations or remakes or whatever. When it's the same as the original, then what's the point? And when it's different, another complaint made is that "it's too different." There's obviously an issue with either choice that you make, leaving the only solution is to not make the movie at all. I'm not commenting on this in a negative way. It's just something that I've always noticed.