Charlie and the Chocoate Factory

[Kimberly]

This Novel is very similar to the movie. I would recommend that you read the book before watching the movie because the book goes into more detail.

[H.M.]

I have not seen the movie but have read the book years ago and I also read it to my own children when they were young. It was a big hit in our household.

[Lynne]

I love the book and love love love the movie - but only the original one.The new movie is dreadful and doesn't capture the true story and magic of the book at all.

[Tesh]

Definitely try to read the book first. However, I liked the way the new movie gave a plausible back story for Wonka. Although he does act a bit too eccentric sometimes, I think it sticks to plot better than the first movie(if I remember correctly).

[Sarajean]

Tesh wrote: "Definitely try to read the book first. However, I liked the way the new movie gave a plausible back story for Wonka. Although he does act a bit too eccentric sometimes, I think it sticks to plot be..."
I agree about the back story. The first movie felt like it was lacking in characterization without giving reason for Willy's strange--but brilliant--behavior.

[Somerandom]

I read the book first.
So I oddly had to overcome my prejudices against both movies before enjoying them. The first because it was my first book to movie adaption I saw and it kind of threw me a little. Especially those Oompa Loompa songs and turning them into walking carrots. (They kind of creeped me out when I was little lol)
And the second because I was comparing it to the movie of my childhood.

So after I got over that I found that I could enjoy all three versions of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory!

[Julia]

Sarajean wrote: "The first movie felt like it was lacking in characterization without giving reason for Willy's strange--but brilliant--behavior. "

Um, so did the book. I don't think quirky people necessarily need a back-story. Many are just born that way.

[Anna]

The back-story did help a bit, but when it comes to movie adaptations, I don't like when they add something that wasn't in the book; it's the filmmaker's opinion of what really happened. If one is going to write a backstory/retelling, fine. Go do that. But don't make it part of the story and pass it off as part of the original story. I'm not exactly a purist, but new material changes the feeling of the plot. And like Julia said, sometimes people just are quirky because that's the way they came. I'll always enjoy the older movie more. Wonka was a bit zany and goofy, but he wasn't creepy, the way he was portrayed in the new movie.

[Somerandom]

Eliza wrote: "The back-story did help a bit, but when it comes to movie adaptations, I don't like when they add something that wasn't in the book; it's the filmmaker's opinion of what really happened. If one is ..."

I don't know. Having a Dentist dad who was an authority figure to rebel against and ultimately shaping Willy Wonka as an eccentric rule breaking candy maker seems very much like what Dahl himself would have written. I mean an adult seen as a stifling nuisance, ultimately rejecting the creativity of their child and being too proud or perhaps too stupid to appreciate the unique wonderland children live in does seem to be a common theme with Roald Dahl's books. Willy Wonka reconciles with him, but in a way, he also proves him wrong. Becoming his own man and becoming successful despite his father's warnings and misgivings (perhaps to his own detriment, but still.)

Plus, I think either this book or the sequel actually does go over Wonka's past. But I haven't read either in years so..........

And don't forget that the original movie did add things. Like Charlie and his Grandpa breaking the rules by drinking fizzy lifting drinks. (Much to the dismay/disgust of Dahl himself.) Not to mention turning the pygmy race of Africans (now white skinned)into walking mutant carrots who, for some odd reason, wore German clothing. They had so little in common with Dahl's actual creation, they might as well have called them a different species altogether!

That being said, I got much more of a Roald Dahl type vibe from Burton's adaption than I got from the "original" version. But I love both equally for different reasons.

[[deleted user]]

I never watched the original movie, but I've heard that it's closer to the book. However I think you should keep in mind that Burton's version was not made just for kids, like Dahl's books as. When I watched the movie I didn't feel the need to compare it to the book. I just watched it as a stand-alone movie and I liked it.
The book is, of course, a classic and will always be one of my favorite children's books.

[Anna]

Somerandom wrote: "Eliza wrote: "The back-story did help a bit, but when it comes to movie adaptations, I don't like when they add something that wasn't in the book; it's the filmmaker's opinion of what really happen..."

The backstory did make sense. A childhood like that would very well lead to Wonka's. . . Um. . . Interesting behavior. . . Yeah. :)

It did make sense, but just seemed so different (not to mention felt so dark). And the things they changed in the original version did bug me after I read the book. Making good Charlie and good Grandpa Joe do something so sneaky was out of character for them.

"Walking mutant carrots". . . That's great. :)

[Somerandom]

Eliza wrote: "Somerandom wrote: "Eliza wrote: "The back-story did help a bit, but when it comes to movie adaptations, I don't like when they add something that wasn't in the book; it's the filmmaker's opinion of..."

Well, it is a Tim Burton adaptation after all lol. So I would expect it to be dark. And Roald Dahl isn't exactly known to be all fluffy bunnies or sunshine either. I mean, he's called a "Dark horse of children's literature" for a reason lol

Yeah, I guess Grandpa Joe had a dark side after all. Who knew? haha!

[Anna]

That's what he's called? Sheesh. . . Well, it's true, he can get a bit dark, if you think about it. First thing that comes to mind when talking about Mr. Dahl is usually the funny stuff.

I always liked Grandpa Joe. He was my favorite character next to Charlie. . . :)

[Somerandom]

Eliza wrote: "That's what he's called? Sheesh. . . Well, it's true, he can get a bit dark, if you think about it. First thing that comes to mind when talking about Mr. Dahl is usually the funny stuff.

I always..."

Well it is his unofficial nickname that a few fans have bestowed upon him lol
I often associate both funny and dark when talking of Dahl.

Grandpa Joe is one of my favorites too! (Although my next favorite would have the be the cigar smoking Grandma from The Witches.) Never liked Charlie, personally. But eh.

Fun fact, the man who played Grandpa Joe in the 1971 movie also voices Amos Slade (the hunter) in the Disney Movie the Fox and the Hound from the 80s. To make things even more interesting, that was during a time when Tim Burton was working for the Disney company and was even involved in that very movie.

Haha! Funny how fate works like that, ain't it?

Personally, I preferred the new Grandpa Joe in Burton's version. Only because he was so adorkable and reminded me of my Dad. The actor who played him sadly lost his life only last year. =(

[Donna]

I just finished the Eric Idle audio version...I loved it, as I did the first movie (with Gene Wilder). The movie was slightly different,and I did love the added details. I did looked up the movie detail snd noticed that Roald Dahl WROTE the screenplay. If I missed a post where this was previously mentioned I do apologize!

[Somerandom]

Donna wrote: "I just finished the Eric Idle audio version...I loved it, as I did the first movie (with Gene Wilder). The movie was slightly different,and I did love the added details. I did looked up the movie d..."

He wrote it, mostly. But it was rewritten by David Seltzer which was uncredited. And......well you know how authors are. Dahl disowned the movie, ultimately.

[Donna]

Oh...Well...I enjoyed it anyway!! :)

[Somerandom]

Donna wrote: "Oh...Well...I enjoyed it anyway!! :)"

As did I. Although those freaky Oompa Loompa Carrot mutants still haunt my nightmares. 0.o

[Sarajean]

Julia wrote: "Sarajean wrote: "The first movie felt like it was lacking in characterization without giving reason for Willy's strange--but brilliant--behavior. "

Um, so did the book. I don't think quirky peopl..."

Maybe so, but I'm one of the few people that likes to see a movie build on what a novel leaves to the imagination.

[[deleted user]]

I enjoyed both movie adaptations (I own both).

[Joelle]

i love Roald Dahl's books especially Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Matilda
as for the movie's you should read the book first i personally like the Johnny Depp one better then the Gene Wilder one but the Gene Wilder one stays more true to the book

[Jennifer]

I just read the book last week. I have already seen the two movies and I wish I could have read the book first. I loved the book and the movies. The Johnny Depp one is my favorite of the two.