User reviews

While some may say this terrible film is more like the original book that the 1971 movie, but overall, it really isn't. My kids actually have the book and I read through it right after watching the DVD.

This film may be more true to the book with some of the finer details (the original lyrics to the Oompah Loopah songs, Charlie having a living father who worked at a toothpaste factory), none of these details add anything to the story.

On the other hand, the creepy, gray-skinned, androgynous Wonka is nothing like the original character in the book. He hates children (so why does he want to give the factory to one?). He can't even say the word "parents." He even hates old people. There is absolutely nothing funny, amusing, or likable about him (BTW, the dialogue in the movie is purely awful). By the time there's a feeble attempt to redeem Wonka's character at the end, it's too late. And where were the childhood flashbacks of Wonka in the book? So much for "more true to the book."

I saw the 1971 movie as a kid, and enjoyed it. But I watched it many years later as an adult, and LOVED it. There's so many great lines in it that I missed as a six-year-old. If you read a little about the history of the making of the movie (look online), you'll find that the script at one point was originally developed more for adults than children. It's no wonder, because much of the humor is more geared for adults.

Wilder plays the role of "Wonka" like it was made for him. Also, I believe the 1971 film story additions made for a much better story than the original book, and allowed you to see much further into the characters. Maybe I feel this way because I saw the movie before reading the book, but who can ever forget the scene near the end where Charlie shuns the opportunity for ill-gotten gains, even with his own Grandpa encouraging him to do the opposite. Wow. After seeing that, the book's ending seems kinda dull.

This is not the only awful film to be made from a children's book in the last few years: Lemony Snicket and Cat in the Hat spring to mind, and certainly, the Harry Potter movies are never much better than mediocre.

But Charlie and the Chocolate Factory suffers from the fact that it must be compared to the Gene Wilder version, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, which is not only superior to it in every way, but is truly a classic film.

One might well ask why anyone would dare to remake a film that was written by Roald Dahl himself. A film that had beautiful, classic songs, biting humor, and a hilarious cast.

The answer, of course, is money.

This film was made for one reason -- to wring more money out of a Warner Brothers property. Why else remake a nearly perfect film? It's an insult to moviegoers and an affront to the many children who may never bother to watch the original now that they've seen this trash.

The thing is, the Gene Wilder version is very, very funny. Its comedy still seems edgy today. And somehow, they've managed to turn it into a movie with almost no laughs. The timing is sometimes, it seems, deliberately thrown off.

Johnny Depp's performance is, I think, his worst ever. It's just stupendously bad. Then again, he has basically nothing to work with, caught between plain, unfunny new dialogue, and struggling to go in the opposite direction from Gene Wilder's brilliance. I don't envy the task. But don't worry, Johnny got lots and lots of money for his troubles.

The new Charlie, Freddie Highmore, was decent enough in the tearjerker Finding Neverland. But here, he's just all wrong. His one acting choice seems to be "Smile Every Time You Say Something," which I last saw used by Denise Richards in Starship Troopers.

On one hand, I wondered as I was watching it whether the movie would fare better with someone who'd never seen the original. But on the other, this film is so disjointed and strange, I'm not sure how anyone could follow it if they hadn't seen the first film.

The Oompa Loompa "songs," if you can call them that, consist of CG clones singing the same rhyming lines over and over again. There is no narrative or melodic progression to the songs -- they are as two dimensional as cardboard cutouts.

Add to this bland, unimaginative mix a few ghastly changes from the earlier movie: Charlie has a father now, his family magically gets "unpoor" at the end by the dint of their own optimism, and Willy Wonka learns -- get ready for this one -- that families are not a bad thing.

It's beyond awful. Watch the original again instead, I beg of you.

I'm not much of an avid reader so I never read the original book but I watched the original movie. I loved the original movie and this one seems like a sick, demented, Tim Burton twist on the beloved original. I will never let my kids watch this. I don't see how anyone can say that this is a family movie. To make things worse the oompa lumpas were played by one ugly person. This has to be one of the most sadistic movies that I've seen Tim Burton put a twist on. I had a sneer on my face from the beginning to the very end. I forced myself to watch the entire movie. You may like it if you liked the book but if you never read the book and enjoyed the original movie then this is not the movie for you.

This doesn't hold a candle to the 1971 original classic. Period. Yes the special effects are superior but beyond that it is instantly forgettable. Gene Wilder had a point that this movie had none other than a much needed cash cow for this summer's weaker box office. Johnny Depp is a good actor but this role was completely wrong for him. His choices of playing Wonka as clutzy and spaced out conflicts with the fact Willy Wonka is supposed to be a mastermind of the candy business. Then of course there is the fact Depp's Wonka looks like something out of a Marilyn Manson video no parent with even half of a brain would bring their kids near. Burton's added back story of Wonka's childhood was his standard fare of misunderstood artist who just wants to feel like he fits in the universe. The brilliance of Wilder's performance was the fact he played someone who came across as a nutcase but was in fact a misunderstood genius always a step ahead of everyone else. Then there's the Oompas and their musical numbers. Oy! Half the time it's almost impossible to understand their vocals and what they're singing. I think this movie proves the general movie going public has become as catatonic in the brain as Depp's portrayal in this film. The children and their parents in this film were equally as practically lifeless. No wonder Hollywood is having trouble right now. This is so much of an insult to the 1971 classic that it leaves you wondering what classic they'll ruin next to get an all age audience back into the theatres.

I don't know how in the WORLD this film received 7.5 out of 10! This was such an insult to the original "Willie Wonka" that it should make Gene Wilder want to spit! The plot was ridiculous, the songs were lame, the script stunk, I mean I can't figure out what Burton was on when he threw this together. I know it made a lot at the box office because everyone anticipated that it would have been as excellent as the first, but to come to this website and see that it received this many votes, who in the world are you people? It was the worst 40 minutes of my life! 40 MINUTES BECAUSE I SPENT THE REST OF THE TIME FAST FORWARDING THROUGH THE THING! I am just truly embarrassed at how sad this film was and how very boring! When I think back to the 1970's version I remember being filled with happiness and contentment, what a beautiful tale, and how very entertaining! I mean everything about it! My cousin and I can still quote the entire film and still find it HILARIOUS! Then we have this present day flop where they duplicated the ugliest midget they could find OVER 1,000 times! Talk about saving money! I realize Johnny Depp has only been in about 3 good movies in his whole career, I should have remembered that before I rented this film! Do yourself a favor and see the ORIGINAL! Never mess with excellence!

I don't even know where to begin with how disappointed I was with this movie. Having grown up with the incredibly talented Gene Wilder as "Willy Wonka," I expected my view to be tainted, but I tried to watch this film with an open mind. Nice try. Johnny Depp, who has made some wonderful movies in his own right, cannot hold a candle to Gene Wilder in this role. Whereas Wilder played Wonka as mysterious, a bit mischievous, but good-hearted, Depp played him like he had just done a serious amount of cocaine. His dislike for the children was overplayed and I was waiting for him to beat the crap out of them at any moment. Wilder's performance was more subtle and sarcastic. Depp's June Allyson hairstyle did nothing for me either. Whereas "Willy Wonka..." was made years before all this computer graphics crap, it seemed more real. "Charlie..." seemed like a film student's graduate project. Bottom line: "Willy Wonka..." is for adults. "Charlie..." is for children with a low I.Q. Some movies just don't need to be remade; in fact most don't. Look at "Cheaper by the Dozen" and "Yours, Mine, and Ours." The people who made these movies took classic comedy and turned them into fart jokes and basic toilet humor. Doesn't anyone in Hollywood have an original idea? Or has America lost its integrity when it comes to movies? The best movies being made these days are independent films. What does that tell you?

Would I allow my children to see this movie. No. Do I wish I had not wasted the 4 bucks to rent this movie? Yes. Virginia this is not your mother's Wonka movie. Burton must have been severely beaten as child because his view of the world is horror filled. The music is off key and just plain bad. The visuals are mostly CGI and like the latest Star Wars trilogy lacking in human emotion and reality. Johnny D's version of Wonka is Wonka as Howard Hughs. Creepy and perverse. He reminded me of some weird child molester. Don't waste your money or your time with this remake. Instead rent the original and enjoy the wonderment and beauty of true film making. The music is great and every kid that grew up seeing this favorite can hum the tunes to this day. There's a reason it's a considered a classic like the Wizard of Oz. Tim Burton and Johnny D are two very twisted men and this load of garbage is a bad egg. The original did not need to be remade. It was never broken.

Such a waste of good talent -- Tim Burton directing, Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka -- how could it be better? It should be great, but they ruined it. Having read and loved the book as a kid, and very much enjoying the first film version, this one doesn't cut it. It's a timeless story and didn't require "modernizing" -- keeping with the original story and merely updating the special effects would've been great. Willy Wonka was turned into a Michael Jackson-like character and the Oompa Loompa's were all one actor, digitally duplicated to appear as many identical characters -- the musical numbers with the Oompas were 'updated' with electronic music and Oompas attempting to disco-dance.

This movie is what happens when a bunch of college kids get jobs at studios, do drugs, and dig into the movie-rights vault. Fortunately, there's always the book -- and the first film version -- if anyone could've matched Gene Wilder's performance as Willy Wonka, Johnny Depp could've, but he didn't...

I went to see this film as I am a big Johnny Depp fan, but I was completely turned off by the whole thing. The pace was so slow I was almost asleep, and I kept waiting for the magical moments to happen. Alas, they never did. The opening went on for ever and a day - remember the wonderful entrance Gene Wilder makes in the original? Well, Willy Wonka's entrance here, with the stupid "song" of the puppets, was just dire. He actually looked embarrassed to be there. The parents of the "lucky winners" were one-dimensional to say the least, and although the child actors were OK they were nothing to write home about. My 11 year old son went with me to see this film, and as we came out of the theatre I was wondering what he would have to say about it (and whether I would have to pretend that I had liked it!) but the first thing he said was, "Well, that's not the best film I've ever see. Bit of a disappointment really." I just felt that the director had wasted so many opportunities, not to try to emulate the first film, but to bring some fresh magic to the wonderful story. Instead, all we got was long-drawn out scenes, bad dialogue and a faintly embarrassed Johnny Depp.

I avoided watching this movie for a long time for mainly this reason: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory earned a place in my heart through much thought, discussion, and rewatches. The characters were uncannily well-written and acted out. Not to mention Gene Wilder's positively brilliant acting as Wonka which is in the top 50 performances of the century.

Therefore, a remake of this classic film is positively unwarranted. From the previews you can tell how the whole thing is going to go. Burton's style, beloved from such masterpieces as Beetle Juice and Edward Scissorhands, is becoming more cartoonish and predictable as I felt this lands in the same seam as Sleepy Hollow.

Willy Wonka by Depp is portrayed as a high-pitched jerk. His clean and make-up heavy appearance is completely unattractive. There's no endearment to his personality anymore. He didn't even want to know the children's' names at when he first met them.

There's no more contrast. The whole film is cartoonishly creepy which just felt cheesy and half baked. I mean, I've seen his style before done well, ya know. You can tell this is a step down (or two). There's no more beauty to go along with the mystery. Everything on the screen is suspect and cold.

In conclusion to this small chunk of a very long list of things wrong with this film and the very principle of this film, the first Willy Wonka had a magic and brilliance that cannot be touched and should never have been in the first place. Anybody who likes this film is obviously a rookie who probably liked Batman Forever and should not be trusted.

It simply blows my mind that such a classic film was fooled with by an overactive ego of a director.