Isn't that why they only show up in the background of every other scene or so, and that they're not front and center 100% of the time? I think that shows that on at least SOME level, they DID understand that.
@@gracekim25 Well, even if Tom and Jerry were to be in film, I’d say the closest to a Tom and Jerry-esque film would be Dreamworks’ MouseHunt, a movie full of slapstick comedy and features a mouse outwitting two guys, in a house in need of repairs, and even includes a chase with a cat.
Yeah this is why all the movies never work also doesn't help they don't talk at all unlike the loony toons who have enough personally to carry a whole show or movie
Phineas and Ferb did the "insert beloved cartoon characters into a classic live-action movie" concept a lot better than this movie did in the Star Wars special. It didn't try to shoehorn the characters into the plot of A New Hope, it just put the characters in a new sidestory without altering or insulting the original.
Ya, you can actually watch Doof and Perry more than 11 minutes. They never really feel forced or shoehorned. Besides that god awful semi live action special that shall not be named.
WB could've just made a short film about Tom being Wonka's cat who's trying to keep the factory mouse free for its opening. Jerry of course has other ideas. That's a pretty classic Tom and Jerry setup.
Every time I hear the opening notes of "Pure Imagination", I hear "Come with me and you'll see a world of OSHA violations." sung to the tune of that song, thanks to Film Theory and Legal Eagle.
Come with me and you'll pee And you'll crap and shoot ejaculation Take a look at your pee At your yellow urination Rub it into your chin All that excrement of your creation Shit and pee and yell crude Exclamations If you want to poo on the mice Simply drop your pants and do it If you have TP, eschew it Fart on all the world There's nothing to it There is no life I know To compare with endless masturbation Blow your load, set it free Mix it with your poo and pee If you want to poo on the mice Simply drop your pants and do it If you have TP, eschew it Fart on all the world There's nothing to it There is no life I know To compare with endless masturbation Blow your load, set it free Mix it with your poo and pee RIP, Annoverse's T&J:WWatCF.
This movie just reminds me of those fanfics where people inserted their own characters into a movie’s plot-line. Normally those were copy and paste but some tried cramming way too many characters in as the main cast it was confusing and ridiculous.
I'm not gonna lie: while the uncomfortable caricature aspect should absolutely not have happened (along with this entire movie), I do honestly find the idea of Droopy being the fraudster millionaire to be legitimately funny.
2:47: That's a good argument; If you want a movie that *does* shift the perspective to someone else, look no further than Disney's "The Lion King 1 ½"; it's an interesting midquel to the original, as it shifts the focus on the narrative to Timon and Pumbaa. Not only that, but it also gives a sort of origin to Timon, based on a deleted lyric to "Hakuna Matata" (In Europe, it was called "The Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata", despite the teaser trailer arguing it shouldn't have "3/III" in it). We get to see that Timon was struggling through the actual life of a Meerkat, digging tunnels and running from hyenas. Although "Hakuna Matata" was taught by Rafiki, the wise sage of the original movie, Rafiki taught this to tell Timon that the best way to experience this lifestyle is with the people you love. The narrative is a good take on what we see in Timon, and changed our view on the character for the better; Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella really sold on their performances, and gave a fresh look on the characters that we didn't see in the original film. It's also a better origin story than what the "Timon & Pumbaa" TV Series gave us.
Jess Harnell as Grandpa Joe was the only actor who actually put his all into it. Aside from him (and okay maybe Kath Soucie), nobody else sounded like they cared.
Would you believe me that Sean Schemmel played Veruca Salt's dad here? Yeah, the guy who plays GOKU was in a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie with Tom and Jerry, that sounds like I'm making it up but it's true.
Well, I would also give Mick Wingert kudos for giving it his all as Slugworth. He sounds nothing like his most famous role, that being Jack Black's understudy as Po in various Kung Fu Panda installments.
The sad part is, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" could TOTALLY work as an Animated Movie, but they ruined this opportunity by adding Tom & Jerry with no good reason.
The implication that Mr. Salt will pivot from spoiling Veruca to physically abusing her becomes even more "OOF" when you remember the whole point of that scene is that Mr. Salt is WORSE than Veruca and made her what she is, hence why he goes down the drain too. So you basically end up with the character who actually needs to change the most here not only learning nothing, but never-my-faulting in the worst way imaginable. HAPPY END!
This movie makes "The Room" look like an Oscar Winning masterpiece. WHAT were they thinking, making this abomination so soon after Gene Wilder's passing?!
The fact that Anthony Newley never has acted or wrote music for any animated work is one of the most offensive kinds of missed potential in existence, ESPECIALLY knowing THIS atrocity exists.
I actually liked the Tom and Jerry Wizard of Oz. I think it's because of how it balanced the different elements. This movie was too much Tom and Jerry for people who wanted Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and too much Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for people who wanted Tom and Jerry. The even split worked against it. The Wizard of Oz crossover put more focus on Tom and Jerry and pushed the Wizard of Oz into the background. So it feels more like a straightforward Tom and Jerry movie set against a Wizard of Oz backdrop. The different parts of the crossover aren't competing with each other the way they are here because one is willingly giving way to the other. Of course, that means it's lacking for people who want a Wizard of Oz movie, but it works for people who want a Tom and Jerry movie set in Oz.
@@CalliopePony Basically the Wizard of Oz cartoon was able to pick a lane, relying more on Tom and Jerry. The Willy Wonka cartoon seems to be trying to do both all at once but by attempting to please everyone they please no one.
@@CalliopePony Actually, with these particular projects, the complaint that it's not enough like the original film always confuses me. The idea here is the insertion of Tom and Jerry into these classic movies. If you want more of the classic movies, then why wouldn't you just go watch the classic movies? Why would you come to the Tom and Jerry version of The Wizard of Oz if you just want to watch The Wizard of Oz? Or, why would you come to this version if what you want to watch is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory? In this case, I would argue that these should be Tom and Jerry cartoons first and foremost.
From the title, I was expecting Tom and/or Jerry to end up with a golden ticket and accompany Charlie et al through the chocolate factory, with sugary slapstick as the focus and the original movie's plot just being a backdrop to what you expect Tom and Jerry to do. They couldn't even focus enough to make something that basic?
@@Rabbitlord108 oddly, I’m not that bothered by them? I think because the designs remind me a little of the Looney Tunes Show human designs. I think the uncannyness comes from the fact they’re copying so much from the live action movie, but doing it in a much more cartoony way
Agreed. The art style is very similar but the human characters mostly look off. I mean Charlie (when he isn’t doing that creepy dead eye stare), Grandpa Joe, Slugworth, Veruca and Mr Salt and the Gloops are drawn pretty well but then Violet looks ugly when she was a bit pretty in the live action version, Mike has a horrible looking face and his hair looks weird, and then Wonka looks more like some boring man wearing a woman’s wig that lost all of its volume and personality. His hair should be a bit messy and sticking out not perfectly flawless. Gene Wilder’s Wonka’s hair was neat but the curls signified him as being a chaotic mad genius like the typical portrayal of a mad scientist which is essentially what Wonka is.
You know never once have I ever watched the original Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory with Gene Wilder and thought "You know what this movie is missing? You know what would really make it a masterpiece? Adding Tom and Jerry!" Like who asked for this?
The best thing to come out of this movie was an internet artist (I forget their name) doing a dead-on recreation of the weird art style for the humans in these movies but for The Shining.
I want to see a T&J crossover with Misery where Tom is also strapped to a bed and Jerry does the hobbling thing using a croquet mallet and a brick and gleefully smashes Tom’s ankle where he does his famous scream of pain.
There was an episode of Glee where the club gets hired to sing Pure Imagination at their gym teacher's sister's funeral. As idiotic as that show was, it was admittedly still more respectful to Roald Dahl and Gene Wilder's legacies in 5 minutes than this flick was in an hour
Y'know, if all they really wanted to accomplish was to remake the old Willy Wonka movie in an animated medium, they could've just gone ahead and done that without dragging T&J into it.
That's true of _all_ the Warners T&J bastardizations. But they had already made _Tom & Jerry and the Wizard of Oz_ and *then* turned right around and gave it a _sequel. (Wonka_ was the last of these, thankfully, although I confess I'd love to cringe at _Tom & Jerry's Poseidon Adventure_ or _Tom & Jerry and Batman v Superman.)_
I was thinking the exact same thing: this attempt at a crossover between these two properties is less than half-assed to the point of being unnecessary.
The problem I always had with the “Slugworth” test in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate was that the tour in the book was the test. Willy wanted to see personally how each child would act which was why he didn’t put much effort intervening when the kids were about to do something bad.
The thing about the book, though, is that Charlie is never really tested. All of the other children are confronted with their personal temptations, but Charlie is just polite and nice until everyone else has been dealt with and then he gets everything. It's kind of anticlimactic, so each of the movies deals gives him some stakes. In the 1971 version "Slugworth" offers Charlie wealth and security for himself and his family, the chance to never eat cabbage soup again and get his grandparents separate beds with warm covers. And he has every incentive to take that offer after Wonka abruptly throws him out and declaring he won't even get the lifetime supply of chocolate he's been promised. But instead he returns Wonka's property and submits to the consequences of his actions, proving his character. In the 2005 Charlie is offered a dilemma: he can inherit this amazing candy empire and fantastic fantasy world of a factory, but in order to do that he has to forsake the people he loves. His decision to turn down Wonka shows what he truly values and helps Wonka reconcile with his own past.
@@MusicalHell The thing is, in the book Charlie basically has nothing to lose, cause he has nothing to begin with. The other children are spoiled rotten with parents that give in to their vices, so they're easily tempted. Charlie's family barely have enough food to live on, let alone anything else! He's quiet and polite because that's basically all he has, and he knows he just got into the factory by pure luck! (or- sorry Diva- maybe Divine Intervention). Either way, Charlie knows to shut up and just enjoy the tour cause he knows he was lucky to just BE there.
(melody for Pure Imagination) 🎶Just sit back and relax and enjoy some absolute frustration 🎶Take a look and you'll see into this abomination 🎶Wilder's dead go ahead and butcher a classic adaptation 🎶Add Jerry and Tom without inspiration. 🎶Warner Brothers sure doesn't care what is done to two classics 🎶Punish the director for tactics proven to be dumb. Dip him in acid! 🎶There is no film so bad as that of Tom and Jerry Willy Wonka 🎶Don't watch it, it is bad. An abomination.
The Tom and Jerry shorts often combined music with their storyline. Case in point 1946's "The Cat Concerto" (centered around Liszt's Hungarian Rhapsody) or 1964's "The Cat Above and the Mouse Below" with a similar format. Except "Concerto" featured Tom as a pianist with Jerry as an inhabitant of his piano and "Cat Above" had Tom as an operatic tenor with Jerry living under Tom's stage. Both shorts had Jerry intent on disrupting the recital.
My "say something nice." It sucks that the Slugworth stuff is so bad since chalk-style graffiti animated against a brick wall like the "I Want It Now" scene could be an interesting visual.
You know, I think it would have been better to throw Tom and Jerry into a WWE wrestling movie instead... Also, geez... Did Jumanji curse Slugworth into a monkey?
Oh how I miss the days when the Tom & Jerry films were being original. Heck. Even A Nutcracker Tale didn't put Tom & Jerry in a rehash of the ballet's story.
the practical effects in the original live action movie chocolate room were great. It felt like a room full of wonder. Yet in this movie I'm so surprised at how lacklustre everything is. It costs the same to pay an animator to draw a surreal chocolate tapestry vs bland room.
My thoughts exactly. I have always considered Roald Dahl's books perfect for 2D animation. Yet here we are with this bland scenery. The only thing that I consider an update is the chocolate river. It shows that the filmmakers from 1971 actually cared what they were making. That's it. It is a matter of effort that is put in.
Thank goodness for the Tunnel scene even if the Mouse doing it is so bizarre but given how underwhelming Wonka is in this version I’ll take the Mouse doing it.
9:56 I LOVE IT WHEN I SAY PLANS THAT ARE REALLY NICE IN A EVIL WAY! 11:55 Funny thing about this part is that in the original my little brother and I felt there was a bit foreshadowing in if. Gene wilder signs the last line of “pure imagination” in sort of melancholy way. We felt that Wonka was getting little tired of what he was doing, that he was ready to move on, that for all of his genius he wanted to leave the factory so he truly could be free or something like that. But here this Wonka is smiling so there’s no potential foreshadowing to him give Charlie the factory.
Considering the actions of Max’s CEO David (can’t remember his last name) for awhile, he should be subjected to watching the schlock that passes through Musical Hell’s court and not be able to look away or close his eyes.
People absolutely HATE when Tom and Jerry speak (1993 movie especially), but have never had an issue with Nibbles/Tuffy speaking. In the original cartoons, Nibbles even spoke fluent French. (His Tuffy name comes from the comic books of the time, which created considerable confusion over his real name).
@@gracekim25 He’s never really addressed by name on screen. I had the Tom and Jerry SNES game where player 1 was Jerry and player 2 was Nibbles/Tuffy and the manual called him Nibbles and first time I saw it, I was like “Who’s Nibbles?”
15:40 Wait, the dog didn’t know it was an act? Was he secretly hoping to take over the factory the whole time? Is he the real Slugworth? And most of all, why do I care so much?
Great review Diva and I agree that Tom and Jerry only work in short films and not feature films (unless it's a cameo in Anchors Aweigh or a Roger Rabbit like movie). Also in December you are going to review Richard Williams' Raggedy Ann & Andy: A Musical Adventure?
No. An even better punishment is forcing them to eat an entire giant bowl full of Bertie Botts Every Flavor Bean except they’re all vomit flavored yet colored in various hues so they have no idea I what flavor they are getting.
“Sin #2: Why is this even a (crossover) thing?” Again, Warner: They have three cartoon properties they can use to cross-promote house IPs to a kid demo-Hanna-Barbera (spec. Scooby-Doo), Looney Tunes, and MGM. And while Wonka showing up in an episode of “Scooby-Doo & Guess Who?” might be entertaining, Warner also labors under the delusion that the audience has “forgotten” Bugs Bunny except for Space Jam. So, the job of promoting every Warner house IP to first-time preschoolers falls to the Cat & Mouse, whose fanbase oddly doesn’t complain, even for “T&J Meet Sherlock Holmes”.
Because of this, Tim Burton’s Charlie & the Chocolate Factory should no longer be considered the bad movie adaptation of Dahl’s bestseller. Especially since Burton’s movie was actually really good.
the Burton film actually adapted the book the only filler added was wonka having flashbacks to his childhood and his dentist dad.and that was added to fill the space the removal of the sequel hook left since the author hated the Film so much and it's casting of Wonka he banned his estate from selling the rights.
While I do enjoy Willy Wonka a lot, there are a lot of things that I really like about Charlie and I think it did some things better. Like making the children brattier, the Oompa-Loompa songs are catchier and it’s more visually interesting.
Not gonna lie, the Tuffy tunnel scene is what makes this movie memorable for me. If this movie absolutely had to exist, then that scene needed to be in it, and to be honest, having this Willy Wonka do it would’ve fallen flat for me, (really, they couldn’t even have done the “stop, don’t, come back” line?) so who better to replace it than Tuffy?
Yeah. The fact that they tried to mimic the nightmare tunnel scene as well as actually getting Tuffy to say "Hell" was the ONLY thing I mostly see people talk about with this movie!
It creates a sort of funny implication that anyone who drives a boat through that tunnel just... _has_ to recite that creepy poem, like their minds are taken over by a supernatural force for a minute.
This could've worked as a short film where it's just Tom and Jerry screwing atound in Wonka's factory. Jerry could either be an Oompa Loompa or Charlie's pet. As for Tom, he could've served as Veruca's pet or spy to the REAL Slugworth instead of Spike. The same goes for their crossover with "Wizard If Oz". Come to think of it, Wonka should've been great in cartoon form with how insane he can be. And "Pure Imagination" should've been more...imaginative.
Bruh, if she is covering A Musical Adventure and she sins Andy's character in ANY SHAPE OR FORM i will riot Make fun of the plot, make fun of the less good songs, but hands off Andy. I'll also pull out the Musical Adventure Bingo Game and see if she'll do an incest joke at the "Candy hearts and paper flowers"
8:06 Talk about a missed opportunity! 😓 We’re already familiar with the charming strangeness of Wonka. So, imagine what the antithesis of that could be like! What kind of person would be so bold, creative, and/or maniacal enough to challenge Wonka for his candy man throne? 😈
Yeah Seeing Tom & Jerry crossing over with the Classic Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory just Screams DOOMED to Fail to begin and thus is Why Tom and Jerry should Never cross over in any movie ever again
The reason we get a COMPLETE shot for shot Gene Wilder remake is Warner: They need to sell their Wonka and Oz IP to parents (because kids don’t have money), but mention either to parents, and the first thing their Boomer childhoods associate is “Flying monkeys!” and “The psychotic boat ride! 😱” With help from Warner’s T&J, enter the Playskool My First Wonka, where nothing scary actually happens-We even get a lengthy reassurance that Veruca and her father made it out of the garbage furnace okay. Next, Warner’s “T&J Meet the Neverending Stiory”, where the horse survives. 😂
@@colleen4ever And even in the movie, Wilder's Wonka reassures Charlie that the other kids will be all right, and hopefully "a little wiser for the wear."
"You got Willy Wonka in my Tom and Jerry! You got Tom and Jerry in my Willy Wonka! And together they both taste like crap." But seriously, if Warner Bros wanted to make another Willy Wonka movie, why didn't they just make an animated adaptation without Tom and Jerry? It seems like that would've been the better and easier option.
The saddest part about this is I think alot of Roald Dalh's books would make amazing animated movies. I know the BFG got one and its the only adaption of his works Dahl liked. Yet this movie fails at both an adaptation and a Tom and Jerry work. And as a side note. If Wonka doesn't like cats or heck even stray animals in his factory that should have been what caused the outburst not the Fizzy Lifting Drinks (as that scene wasn't in the book and would gave a better excuse of Tom and Jerry being included)
Fun fact! The Tim Berton Willy Wonka is more accurate to the book, with wonka being a childish freak, being closer to the Daul's vision. Daul would haaaaate this wonka, especially since he hated the gene wilder wonka for being too "soft".
@@colleen4ever While the 2005 version does stray from the book, such as with Wonka's backstory, it never feels disingenuous to the character or themes of the story. From my understanding, Daul's family adores the movie, and have gone on record saying that they wish thus was the one that came out when he was alive. I think it's safe to bet he'd appreciate the change in ending, even if it's not what he expected.
Despite it being pointless, I kinda like “Slugworth’s” version of I Want It Now, especially when it pops up later in a chase scene. I like villain songs so seeing an evil looking dude sing a classic song that was originally sung by a bratty little girl puts a smile on my face
Honestly, I think the idea of "Tom and Jerry wander into classic movies and chaos ensues" is a great idea and it's a god damn shame they don't commit to it in this movie. Instead we get "A classic movie is occasionally interrupted by the antics of Tom and Jerry, who don't really influence the plot in any way."
If Warner Bros. wants to make a good Tom and Jerry crossover, they should pick a slapstick comedy movie. The Wizard of Oz and Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory are neither, so Tom and Jerry's antics feel painfully forced. For example, "Tom and Jerry Meet Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner" might actually work.
@@justinpassing4003 I disagree that Wonka and Wizard of Oz are bad choices. The idea for me is to have Tom and Jerry completely derail the plot and the characters all have to adapt around it.
You know, I just realized that the 2017 broadway version of CATCF has a lot of the same problems that this movie does. Both try to ape the 1971 film without understanding what made it work in the first place. In the case of the broadway version, it's trying to turn the West End version into a clone of the 1971 movie without realizing the they have very different tones. In the case of Tom and Jerry, it's that they just don't fit together in the first place. Honestly, the only thing this version has over broadway is that Veruca Salt doesn't get torn apart. Frankly, this would have been MUCH better if it had just been a new adaptation of CATCF with the Tom and Jerry characters. Then, they could have used the two more naturally and not just aped the more popular version and it might have a reason to exist.
I must admit, the way you described this film's sins were more toned down than I expected. All the same it doesn't save it from utterly deserving the chopping block.
There are maybe a couple aspects of this movie that I legit like, even as a novelty. Those being Jess Harnell as Grandpa Joe, & Kath Soucie's cover of the Spooky Tunnel monologue. That said, I only recommend this for Bad Animated Movie Night with your friends. (Violet Beauregard wins the Best Face Award in that scene when she presents her ticket to Mr. Wonka.) Other than that, we're all better off watching the original with Rifftrax.
Excellent choice for this month's Musical Hell, Diva! I have never watched this film, and I'm not planning to, even if I watched the Wizard of Oz one and some others.
@@colleen4everProbably would think Depp wasn’t acting like how Wonka really should have acted. Wonka is basically a mad scientist that makes candy and need to have a chaotic edge to him.
Speaking of animation, omigosh you're finally doing Raggedy Ann & Andy...I trust you'll be fair to it. I know it's far, far from perfect but it's so beautifully animated and a couple of the songs are so good....
That movie only exists because WB keeps trying to (and failing at) greenlighting a live action Johnny Quest movie. Yeah. The same non-existant movie plans that made the Venture Bros staff change their character to "Action Johnny." It's a series that hadn't had a show since the 90's, and the only other representation was the crossover episodes of Mystery Incorporated. The thing was meant to reintroduce those characters by way of a more popular franchise, especially one that's more famous globally. I own that movie and haven't gotten around to it, so I can't tell of its quality, but at least it has to have an original story, rather than "Pooh's Adventures"-ing the characters awkwardly into the plot.
I never saw it, but I wish to see it, since it's a major crossover between two Hanna-Barbera properties, which probably hasn't been done since "The Jetsons Meet the Flintstones", if I'm not mistaken.
@@robbiewalker2831 Well, there's the show Jellystone. And there was an episode of the 2017 Wacky Races that starred Hing Kong Phooey. Weirdest one had to have been an episode of OK KO where the three monster girls from Scooby-Doo and the Ghoul School had an appearance. But I want a Tom and Jerry meet the Jetsons movie. WB hasn't dusted off that property since that WWE movie, and even then it was in mothballs forever while plans for a live action movie also kept falling through.
It's not as big of an issue with cats because they don't taste sweet (at least not in the same way dogs and humans do) so they're less likely to attempt to eat chocolate in the first place. But yes, theobromine is toxic to cats as well. (Mice can take it in moderation, but nothing about the chocolate in Charlie/Willy Wonka is moderate.)
This movie had to have had the easiest script to write. I mean given how Roald Dahl notoriously hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, there’s no doubt this would’ve made his blood boil.
11:42-11:55 I'm looking at this scene and the one from the live-action original back-to-back and somehow the live action version is MUCH more expressive and full of life. It's baffling to me since being animated usually means you get to heighten the emotion and expressiveness even more, but this seems really neutered by comparison. I suppose it's a testament to how well-made and acted that film is and this is just a tired retread with Tom and Jerry popping up every now and then.
YAY!!! Raggedy Ann and Andy!!! (I'm presuming this is the Richard Williams version? That's something I've been hoping you'd cover. Although from the reviews I've read about the animated remake of Scrooge that came out last year, that would be a good December candidate as well. Also the animated musical Christmas Carol from the nineties with the voices of Tim Curry and Whoopi Goldberg.)
@@colleen4ever That too. That was a disappointment to me because I loved the cast album. (Unfortunately, since the release of the cast album, a good chunk of the lyrics were changed...for the worse, I thought.)
This film steals a bit from the other CATCF source material: the rock candy mine was a reference in the book as one of the rooms that you could visit, and Mr. Salt being stricter with Veruca was a plot point from the 2005 Tim Burton film. In trying to cash in on Tom and Jerry, they have recycled not just the whole 1971 film in general but have managed to recycle from other material as well.
I've only seen this once, but I remember how cheap the orchestrations sounded. They even recycled some of the orchestra tracks from the original film and mixed them in with their new score!
...What the hell was that? I could see Tom and Jerry's usual slapstick chase stuff happening with the plot of the movie going on in the background working pretty well, just not... whatever happened here. A 30 minute long (and honestly that's probably too much) crossover where Tom as the Wonka Factory cat tries to catch Jerry while they cause minor chaos for the tour group would be a better fit. They could be responsible for knocking Augustus Gloop into the chocolate river or whatever, Tom could get briefly whammied by the stuff that took out the other kids, there were ways this could work dammit!
The Tom and Jerry in The Wizard of Oz movie has the exact same problems. And speaking of Warner Brothers crossovers, at least another animated crossover movie they did recently, that I won't name drop for my own safety, at least it was it's own thing.
Here I was, assuming this was some slapdash effort from the 80s or 90s. 2017?! To its credit, the crew were obviously trying their best to make this look like the original shorts. I think they did pretty well on that front. I'm also sick of 3D animation, so it's possible I'm just desperate for 2D animation.
I'm from the future, and if you think that rendering of the chocolate waterfall room was disappointing, just wait until you see what's about to happen in Glasgow.
Spike's original voice back in the cartoons was based on Jimmy Durante. Jimmy Durante had a very distinguished career as a comedian and singer and one of his most notable songs was "Make someone happy!" ...Why didn't Warner Bros listen to the man when they made this cartoon?!
15:40 so... spike was aiding and abetting someone he thought was trying to sabotage his boss? I guess he's lucky slugworth works for Wonka, or his ass would be on the chopping block right now.
One more possible point of interest about Raggedy Ann: Had you noticed that the small roles of "Socko" & "Barney Beanbag" were voiced by Sheldon Harnick, whose songwriting resume I'm sure I don't have to quote you?
This got me thinking; I actually wouldn’t mind seeing a cartoon version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Like Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is actually surprisingly cartoony. Grandpa Joe instantly goes from a bedridden disabled old man to jumping up and down like an old prospector who just found gold. But this is not it. This is a sub-par immigration of a live action movie and doesn’t really expand much on what animation can do.
Someone once said it as a joke, but I'd legit be interested in seeing "Tom and Jerry: Home Alone". Now THERE'S a crossover that might actually work.
It would work a lot better than this at any rate.
That’s a great idea.
@@Jaceblue04 Right? I mean, Home Alone was BASICALLY a live action cartoon, at least once the Wet Bandits vs Kevin started.
Let this person keep cooking
Unfortunately, that won't ever happen due to Disney owning the rights to the Home Alone franchise among other 20th Century Studios IP's
I hate how Warner doesn't understand that Tom and Jerry were born as 7 minutes shorts for a reason, their comedy works best in a short format
Exactly 😅 and it’s better to do crossovers as a parody with their humour or not at all
Isn't that why they only show up in the background of every other scene or so, and that they're not front and center 100% of the time? I think that shows that on at least SOME level, they DID understand that.
@@the-NightStar I guess but like the duo aren’t really worked into the story organically 😅
@@gracekim25 Well, even if Tom and Jerry were to be in film, I’d say the closest to a Tom and Jerry-esque film would be Dreamworks’ MouseHunt, a movie full of slapstick comedy and features a mouse outwitting two guys, in a house in need of repairs, and even includes a chase with a cat.
Yeah this is why all the movies never work also doesn't help they don't talk at all unlike the loony toons who have enough personally to carry a whole show or movie
Phineas and Ferb did the "insert beloved cartoon characters into a classic live-action movie" concept a lot better than this movie did in the Star Wars special. It didn't try to shoehorn the characters into the plot of A New Hope, it just put the characters in a new sidestory without altering or insulting the original.
Heck Disney also did a crossover between that show & Marvel characters with "Mission Marvel"
Kinda like The Lion King 1 1/2 did with Timon and Pumba.
@@colleen4ever Yep.
Ya, you can actually watch Doof and Perry more than 11 minutes. They never really feel forced or shoehorned. Besides that god awful semi live action special that shall not be named.
@@juniortyrell3950 They did a parody of the Wizard of Oz, with Doofenshmirtz as the Witch, but he calls himself a Warlock.
WB could've just made a short film about Tom being Wonka's cat who's trying to keep the factory mouse free for its opening. Jerry of course has other ideas. That's a pretty classic Tom and Jerry setup.
Sounds so much better.
Meow
Why wasn’t that the idea?
And have Tom suffer all the same fates as those kids.
Every time I hear the opening notes of "Pure Imagination", I hear "Come with me and you'll see a world of OSHA violations." sung to the tune of that song, thanks to Film Theory and Legal Eagle.
Come with me and you'll pee
And you'll crap and shoot ejaculation
Take a look at your pee
At your yellow urination
Rub it into your chin
All that excrement of your creation
Shit and pee and yell crude
Exclamations
If you want to poo on the mice
Simply drop your pants and do it
If you have TP, eschew it
Fart on all the world
There's nothing to it
There is no life I know
To compare with endless masturbation
Blow your load, set it free
Mix it with your poo and pee
If you want to poo on the mice
Simply drop your pants and do it
If you have TP, eschew it
Fart on all the world
There's nothing to it
There is no life I know
To compare with endless masturbation
Blow your load, set it free
Mix it with your poo and pee
RIP, Annoverse's T&J:WWatCF.
This, oddly enough, feels like the inevitable endgame of how a pointless remake plays out.
As Gene Wilder said, “You get NOTHING. You LOSE.”
It might not be Halloween anymore, but I think this is one of the scariest movies you’ve ever covered
This is nothing. Wait till you see next month (If it's THAT Raggedy Ann and Andy)
This movie just reminds me of those fanfics where people inserted their own characters into a movie’s plot-line. Normally those were copy and paste but some tried cramming way too many characters in as the main cast it was confusing and ridiculous.
No kidding. I've read some underwhelming crossovers in my day, but to think this movie had professional writers... _Gah._
You mean Pooh's Adventures?
Yeah, this makes Kingdom Hearts feel like Citizen Kane, for Christ's sake.
@@80sDisneyFan I had to look that one up and oooh boy... I guess I picked a nice rock to live under to miss all that. I haven't the spoons for it.
@@80sDisneyFanyeah those things I hate😅
I'm not gonna lie: while the uncomfortable caricature aspect should absolutely not have happened (along with this entire movie), I do honestly find the idea of Droopy being the fraudster millionaire to be legitimately funny.
2:47: That's a good argument; If you want a movie that *does* shift the perspective to someone else, look no further than Disney's "The Lion King 1 ½"; it's an interesting midquel to the original, as it shifts the focus on the narrative to Timon and Pumbaa. Not only that, but it also gives a sort of origin to Timon, based on a deleted lyric to "Hakuna Matata" (In Europe, it was called "The Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata", despite the teaser trailer arguing it shouldn't have "3/III" in it). We get to see that Timon was struggling through the actual life of a Meerkat, digging tunnels and running from hyenas. Although "Hakuna Matata" was taught by Rafiki, the wise sage of the original movie, Rafiki taught this to tell Timon that the best way to experience this lifestyle is with the people you love. The narrative is a good take on what we see in Timon, and changed our view on the character for the better; Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella really sold on their performances, and gave a fresh look on the characters that we didn't see in the original film. It's also a better origin story than what the "Timon & Pumbaa" TV Series gave us.
Jess Harnell as Grandpa Joe was the only actor who actually put his all into it. Aside from him (and okay maybe Kath Soucie), nobody else sounded like they cared.
Would you believe me that Sean Schemmel played Veruca Salt's dad here? Yeah, the guy who plays GOKU was in a Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie with Tom and Jerry, that sounds like I'm making it up but it's true.
Well, I would also give Mick Wingert kudos for giving it his all as Slugworth. He sounds nothing like his most famous role, that being Jack Black's understudy as Po in various Kung Fu Panda installments.
@caitlyncarvalho7637 What's that have to do with anything?
The sad part is, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" could TOTALLY work as an Animated Movie, but they ruined this opportunity by adding Tom & Jerry with no good reason.
The implication that Mr. Salt will pivot from spoiling Veruca to physically abusing her becomes even more "OOF" when you remember the whole point of that scene is that Mr. Salt is WORSE than Veruca and made her what she is, hence why he goes down the drain too. So you basically end up with the character who actually needs to change the most here not only learning nothing, but never-my-faulting in the worst way imaginable.
HAPPY END!
Spanking is hardly physically abusing her. A good spanking was just what she needed.
Yeah that's pretty bad
When I first saw this movie, I was left with 1 short question I had no answer to: "Who is this for?" 6 years later, and I still got nothing.
A 3 year old who likes Looney Tunes?
That's been my observation so that's the closest I've come to an answer🤷♀️
@@RosesTeaAndASD Yeah that sounds about right.
6 years later I still can’t believe how bad the characters faces are. How did anyone look at this and say “that looks good.”
This movie is 6 years old? Really? I've only heard about it last year. Wild.
This movie makes "The Room" look like an Oscar Winning masterpiece. WHAT were they thinking, making this abomination so soon after Gene Wilder's passing?!
They were probably thinking 💵💵💵
In fairness I think the trailer came out like a couple days after he died. So the movie was well into production, was just bad timing upon release.
Well, at least The Room was entertainingly bad.
I ask the same about Kamp Koral, The Patrick Show and the 3rd Spongebob movie after Hillenburg's death.
In the words of another Tom and Jerry movie: "We've got to have......MONEY."
This movie’s saving grace is Jess Harnell (the voice of Wakko Warner) giving his all as the voice of Grandpa Joe and the Storekeeper
The fact that Anthony Newley never has acted or wrote music for any animated work is one of the most offensive kinds of missed potential in existence, ESPECIALLY knowing THIS atrocity exists.
At least this isn't Tom and Jerry in The Wizard of Oz levels of intrusiveness! Though I'll admit, Grey Delisle does a good impression of Judy Garland!
Good idea for the next offender though
Yeah, and Tom and Jerry's reactions during her rendition of "Over the Rainbow" are adorable.
I actually liked the Tom and Jerry Wizard of Oz. I think it's because of how it balanced the different elements. This movie was too much Tom and Jerry for people who wanted Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and too much Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for people who wanted Tom and Jerry. The even split worked against it. The Wizard of Oz crossover put more focus on Tom and Jerry and pushed the Wizard of Oz into the background. So it feels more like a straightforward Tom and Jerry movie set against a Wizard of Oz backdrop. The different parts of the crossover aren't competing with each other the way they are here because one is willingly giving way to the other. Of course, that means it's lacking for people who want a Wizard of Oz movie, but it works for people who want a Tom and Jerry movie set in Oz.
@@CalliopePony Basically the Wizard of Oz cartoon was able to pick a lane, relying more on Tom and Jerry. The Willy Wonka cartoon seems to be trying to do both all at once but by attempting to please everyone they please no one.
@@CalliopePony Actually, with these particular projects, the complaint that it's not enough like the original film always confuses me. The idea here is the insertion of Tom and Jerry into these classic movies. If you want more of the classic movies, then why wouldn't you just go watch the classic movies? Why would you come to the Tom and Jerry version of The Wizard of Oz if you just want to watch The Wizard of Oz? Or, why would you come to this version if what you want to watch is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory? In this case, I would argue that these should be Tom and Jerry cartoons first and foremost.
From the title, I was expecting Tom and/or Jerry to end up with a golden ticket and accompany Charlie et al through the chocolate factory, with sugary slapstick as the focus and the original movie's plot just being a backdrop to what you expect Tom and Jerry to do. They couldn't even focus enough to make something that basic?
If I can give this movie SOME credit, then I will praise them for accurately animating all the correct details to the classic 70's version.
Yeah, I think the animation is pretty good, especially for direct to dvd!
Yeah. The animation is good. But the designs of the human characters are just WRONG!
@@Rabbitlord108 oddly, I’m not that bothered by them? I think because the designs remind me a little of the Looney Tunes Show human designs. I think the uncannyness comes from the fact they’re copying so much from the live action movie, but doing it in a much more cartoony way
@@lillithefangirl2422 Yeah. It's mostly because of how (Not sure how to describe it) uncanny the expressions can get
Agreed. The art style is very similar but the human characters mostly look off. I mean Charlie (when he isn’t doing that creepy dead eye stare), Grandpa Joe, Slugworth, Veruca and Mr Salt and the Gloops are drawn pretty well but then Violet looks ugly when she was a bit pretty in the live action version, Mike has a horrible looking face and his hair looks weird, and then Wonka looks more like some boring man wearing a woman’s wig that lost all of its volume and personality. His hair should be a bit messy and sticking out not perfectly flawless. Gene Wilder’s Wonka’s hair was neat but the curls signified him as being a chaotic mad genius like the typical portrayal of a mad scientist which is essentially what Wonka is.
You know never once have I ever watched the original Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory with Gene Wilder and thought "You know what this movie is missing? You know what would really make it a masterpiece? Adding Tom and Jerry!"
Like who asked for this?
I literally asked the same question when I first saw the ad for the first WWE Scooby Doo movie.
The best thing to come out of this movie was an internet artist (I forget their name) doing a dead-on recreation of the weird art style for the humans in these movies but for The Shining.
Oh do you have a link ?
Heeeeere's Willy!
I want to see a T&J crossover with Misery where Tom is also strapped to a bed and Jerry does the hobbling thing using a croquet mallet and a brick and gleefully smashes Tom’s ankle where he does his famous scream of pain.
I'll give Kath Soucie credit for doing well with what she had to work with.
Honestly she at least did decent with creepy child vibe of that version of the tunnel scene, I’ll give her that
She's a voice actress that should be respected more. Everyone praises Tara Strong, but I think she wouldn't have made scenes like that okay.
@@francorota8638 Especially given that Tara has now been mask-off about her Islamophobia
@@KaminoKatie ehhh, I didn't want to imply that. Someone's phobia doesn't have to do with their acting range, or does it?
@@francorota8638yeah um acting ability and on’s views are two different things
There was an episode of Glee where the club gets hired to sing Pure Imagination at their gym teacher's sister's funeral.
As idiotic as that show was, it was admittedly still more respectful to Roald Dahl and Gene Wilder's legacies in 5 minutes than this flick was in an hour
If ever there was proof that the Tom and Jerry series should retire, this is it.
Y'know, if all they really wanted to accomplish was to remake the old Willy Wonka movie in an animated medium, they could've just gone ahead and done that without dragging T&J into it.
That's true of _all_ the Warners T&J bastardizations. But they had already made _Tom & Jerry and the Wizard of Oz_ and *then* turned right around and gave it a _sequel. (Wonka_ was the last of these, thankfully, although I confess I'd love to cringe at _Tom & Jerry's Poseidon Adventure_ or _Tom & Jerry and Batman v Superman.)_
I was thinking the exact same thing: this attempt at a crossover between these two properties is less than half-assed to the point of being unnecessary.
Futurama did it better!
@@ScreamingScallopDon't forget 'Tom And Jerry: Barbie' and 'Tom And Jerry: In The Heights'
@@ScreamingScallop To be fair, Tom and Jerry ruining Batman v. Superman would be awesome.
🎵There is no/sin I know/to compare with shitting on classic🎵
The problem I always had with the “Slugworth” test in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate was that the tour in the book was the test. Willy wanted to see personally how each child would act which was why he didn’t put much effort intervening when the kids were about to do something bad.
The thing about the book, though, is that Charlie is never really tested. All of the other children are confronted with their personal temptations, but Charlie is just polite and nice until everyone else has been dealt with and then he gets everything. It's kind of anticlimactic, so each of the movies deals gives him some stakes. In the 1971 version "Slugworth" offers Charlie wealth and security for himself and his family, the chance to never eat cabbage soup again and get his grandparents separate beds with warm covers. And he has every incentive to take that offer after Wonka abruptly throws him out and declaring he won't even get the lifetime supply of chocolate he's been promised. But instead he returns Wonka's property and submits to the consequences of his actions, proving his character. In the 2005 Charlie is offered a dilemma: he can inherit this amazing candy empire and fantastic fantasy world of a factory, but in order to do that he has to forsake the people he loves. His decision to turn down Wonka shows what he truly values and helps Wonka reconcile with his own past.
@@MusicalHell The thing is, in the book Charlie basically has nothing to lose, cause he has nothing to begin with. The other children are spoiled rotten with parents that give in to their vices, so they're easily tempted. Charlie's family barely have enough food to live on, let alone anything else! He's quiet and polite because that's basically all he has, and he knows he just got into the factory by pure luck! (or- sorry Diva- maybe Divine Intervention). Either way, Charlie knows to shut up and just enjoy the tour cause he knows he was lucky to just BE there.
@@MusicalHellhave you review the lego movie the second part and meet the feebles???
I love how this movie made Slugworth German for absolutely no reason.
I presume based on the movie character having an British accent.
Slügvörth.
Maybe it's a coincidence, but the actor who played Slugworth in the original movie was actually German.
@@mando9364mmm interesting 🤔 you never know 🤷♀️
(melody for Pure Imagination)
🎶Just sit back and relax and enjoy some absolute frustration
🎶Take a look and you'll see into this abomination
🎶Wilder's dead go ahead and butcher a classic adaptation
🎶Add Jerry and Tom without inspiration.
🎶Warner Brothers sure doesn't care what is done to two classics
🎶Punish the director for tactics proven to be dumb. Dip him in acid!
🎶There is no film so bad as that of Tom and Jerry Willy Wonka
🎶Don't watch it, it is bad. An abomination.
(claps) Bravo. bravo!! Author, author!!
The Tom and Jerry shorts often combined music with their storyline. Case in point 1946's "The Cat Concerto" (centered around Liszt's Hungarian Rhapsody) or 1964's "The Cat Above and the Mouse Below" with a similar format. Except "Concerto" featured Tom as a pianist with Jerry as an inhabitant of his piano and "Cat Above" had Tom as an operatic tenor with Jerry living under Tom's stage. Both shorts had Jerry intent on disrupting the recital.
My "say something nice." It sucks that the Slugworth stuff is so bad since chalk-style graffiti animated against a brick wall like the "I Want It Now" scene could be an interesting visual.
You know, I think it would have been better to throw Tom and Jerry into a WWE wrestling movie instead...
Also, geez... Did Jumanji curse Slugworth into a monkey?
Not gonna lie, Tom shrinking "Slugworth" and Spike just like that was kind of nice.
Thank you for taking one for the team.
Oh how I miss the days when the Tom & Jerry films were being original. Heck. Even A Nutcracker Tale didn't put Tom & Jerry in a rehash of the ballet's story.
the practical effects in the original live action movie chocolate room were great. It felt like a room full of wonder. Yet in this movie I'm so surprised at how lacklustre everything is. It costs the same to pay an animator to draw a surreal chocolate tapestry vs bland room.
My thoughts exactly. I have always considered Roald Dahl's books perfect for 2D animation. Yet here we are with this bland scenery. The only thing that I consider an update is the chocolate river. It shows that the filmmakers from 1971 actually cared what they were making. That's it. It is a matter of effort that is put in.
To be fair the chocolate river still looked like sewer sludge tho
Thank goodness for the Tunnel scene even if the Mouse doing it is so bizarre but given how underwhelming Wonka is in this version I’ll take the Mouse doing it.
Jeez, this film. Calling it a bad decision is an understatement of an understatement.
9:56 I LOVE IT WHEN I SAY PLANS THAT ARE REALLY NICE IN A EVIL WAY!
11:55 Funny thing about this part is that in the original my little brother and I felt there was a bit foreshadowing in if. Gene wilder signs the last line of “pure imagination” in sort of melancholy way. We felt that Wonka was getting little tired of what he was doing, that he was ready to move on, that for all of his genius he wanted to leave the factory so he truly could be free or something like that. But here this Wonka is smiling so there’s no potential foreshadowing to him give Charlie the factory.
Considering the actions of Max’s CEO David (can’t remember his last name) for awhile, he should be subjected to watching the schlock that passes through Musical Hell’s court and not be able to look away or close his eyes.
I find it really funny how they even kept the little girl getting hit with the counter 3:09
People absolutely HATE when Tom and Jerry speak (1993 movie especially), but have never had an issue with Nibbles/Tuffy speaking. In the original cartoons, Nibbles even spoke fluent French. (His Tuffy name comes from the comic books of the time, which created considerable confusion over his real name).
He’s…not called tuffy?😅
@@gracekim25 He’s never really addressed by name on screen. I had the Tom and Jerry SNES game where player 1 was Jerry and player 2 was Nibbles/Tuffy and the manual called him Nibbles and first time I saw it, I was like “Who’s Nibbles?”
FWIW, the rock candy mine was briefly mentioned in the original book.
15:40 Wait, the dog didn’t know it was an act? Was he secretly hoping to take over the factory the whole time? Is he the real Slugworth? And most of all, why do I care so much?
Great review Diva and I agree that Tom and Jerry only work in short films and not feature films (unless it's a cameo in Anchors Aweigh or a Roger Rabbit like movie). Also in December you are going to review Richard Williams' Raggedy Ann & Andy: A Musical Adventure?
I don't think she is, in all honesty. But we never know.
If she is, I, for one, am wholeheartedly looking forward to it. If nothing else, it'll confirm one of my WMGs on TV Tropes.
Actually, a more suitable punishment for the makers of this trash is to force them to eat Skittles and M&M's out of the same bowl all mixed together.
Make sure the Skittles are the sour ones.
Oh you guys. Your ideas are dumb. Hehehe
Make them ear sugar free gummy bears. That's how you really get them.
Add the Reese’s too!!
@@jenneacubero1036 But I love Reeses!!
No. An even better punishment is forcing them to eat an entire giant bowl full of Bertie Botts Every Flavor Bean except they’re all vomit flavored yet colored in various hues so they have no idea I what flavor they are getting.
“Sin #2: Why is this even a (crossover) thing?” Again, Warner: They have three cartoon properties they can use to cross-promote house IPs to a kid demo-Hanna-Barbera (spec. Scooby-Doo), Looney Tunes, and MGM. And while Wonka showing up in an episode of “Scooby-Doo & Guess Who?” might be entertaining, Warner also labors under the delusion that the audience has “forgotten” Bugs Bunny except for Space Jam. So, the job of promoting every Warner house IP to first-time preschoolers falls to the Cat & Mouse, whose fanbase oddly doesn’t complain, even for “T&J Meet Sherlock Holmes”.
Warner has obviously never heard of Toon In With ME.
Because of this, Tim Burton’s Charlie & the Chocolate Factory should no longer be considered the bad movie adaptation of Dahl’s bestseller.
Especially since Burton’s movie was actually really good.
I liked the Burton movie, up until the last third when it split from the book entirely.
@@colleen4ever understandable
Tbh I like a lot of what the 05 movie was going for, I really felt that Johnny Depp was miscast and the performance keeps pulling me out of the film
Personally I think both versions are good in their own ways
the Burton film actually adapted the book the only filler added was wonka having flashbacks to his childhood and his dentist dad.and that was added to fill the space the removal of the sequel hook left since the author hated the Film so much and it's casting of Wonka he banned his estate from selling the rights.
While I do enjoy Willy Wonka a lot, there are a lot of things that I really like about Charlie and I think it did some things better. Like making the children brattier, the Oompa-Loompa songs are catchier and it’s more visually interesting.
Not gonna lie, the Tuffy tunnel scene is what makes this movie memorable for me. If this movie absolutely had to exist, then that scene needed to be in it, and to be honest, having this Willy Wonka do it would’ve fallen flat for me, (really, they couldn’t even have done the “stop, don’t, come back” line?) so who better to replace it than Tuffy?
Yeah. The fact that they tried to mimic the nightmare tunnel scene as well as actually getting Tuffy to say "Hell" was the ONLY thing I mostly see people talk about with this movie!
It creates a sort of funny implication that anyone who drives a boat through that tunnel just... _has_ to recite that creepy poem, like their minds are taken over by a supernatural force for a minute.
This could've worked as a short film where it's just Tom and Jerry screwing atound in Wonka's factory. Jerry could either be an Oompa Loompa or Charlie's pet. As for Tom, he could've served as Veruca's pet or spy to the REAL Slugworth instead of Spike. The same goes for their crossover with "Wizard If Oz".
Come to think of it, Wonka should've been great in cartoon form with how insane he can be. And "Pure Imagination" should've been more...imaginative.
I think regardless the fact Gene Wilder passed away around when the trailer debuted certainly didn’t do this movie any favors
Does this movie fall under Reddit's hatred of Grandpa Joe?
Also...can't wait to hear Raggedy Andy getting his.
That came out when I was 10: it sort of freaked me to see Raggedy Ann with psychedelic images.
@@auldthymer She's a month behind. THAT movie would have been perfect for Halloween!
Bruh, if she is covering A Musical Adventure and she sins Andy's character in ANY SHAPE OR FORM i will riot
Make fun of the plot, make fun of the less good songs, but hands off Andy.
I'll also pull out the Musical Adventure Bingo Game and see if she'll do an incest joke at the "Candy hearts and paper flowers"
8:06
Talk about a missed opportunity!
😓
We’re already familiar with the charming strangeness of Wonka. So, imagine what the antithesis of that could be like! What kind of person would be so bold, creative, and/or maniacal enough to challenge Wonka for his candy man throne?
😈
I don’t know what’s more disturbing: Droopy being a cheater, or Droopy being Martin Bormann.
Answer: Droopy in handcuffs
Yeah Seeing Tom & Jerry crossing over with the Classic Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory just Screams DOOMED to Fail to begin and thus is Why Tom and Jerry should Never cross over in any movie ever again
The epitome of “I asked for this?”
The reason we get a COMPLETE shot for shot Gene Wilder remake is Warner: They need to sell their Wonka and Oz IP to parents (because kids don’t have money), but mention either to parents, and the first thing their Boomer childhoods associate is “Flying monkeys!” and “The psychotic boat ride! 😱”
With help from Warner’s T&J, enter the Playskool My First Wonka, where nothing scary actually happens-We even get a lengthy reassurance that Veruca and her father made it out of the garbage furnace okay. Next, Warner’s “T&J Meet the Neverending Stiory”, where the horse survives. 😂
Well to be fair, in the book they made it out OK too, just covered in garbage.
@@colleen4ever And so did the other three bratty kids.
@@colleen4ever And even in the movie, Wilder's Wonka reassures Charlie that the other kids will be all right, and hopefully "a little wiser for the wear."
@@Kahran042 Only Augustus and Verruca got dirty, Mike and Violet on the other hand just became freaks
@@KaminoKatie Good point.
"You got Willy Wonka in my Tom and Jerry! You got Tom and Jerry in my Willy Wonka! And together they both taste like crap."
But seriously, if Warner Bros wanted to make another Willy Wonka movie, why didn't they just make an animated adaptation without Tom and Jerry? It seems like that would've been the better and easier option.
The saddest part about this is I think alot of Roald Dalh's books would make amazing animated movies. I know the BFG got one and its the only adaption of his works Dahl liked. Yet this movie fails at both an adaptation and a Tom and Jerry work.
And as a side note. If Wonka doesn't like cats or heck even stray animals in his factory that should have been what caused the outburst not the Fizzy Lifting Drinks (as that scene wasn't in the book and would gave a better excuse of Tom and Jerry being included)
Lest we forget Wes Anderson's Fantastic Mr. Fox, (he also did the Henry Sugar films on Netflix, but those aren't animated).
Fun fact! The Tim Berton Willy Wonka is more accurate to the book, with wonka being a childish freak, being closer to the Daul's vision. Daul would haaaaate this wonka, especially since he hated the gene wilder wonka for being too "soft".
What would Daul think of the last 1/3 of the movie?
@@colleen4ever While the 2005 version does stray from the book, such as with Wonka's backstory, it never feels disingenuous to the character or themes of the story. From my understanding, Daul's family adores the movie, and have gone on record saying that they wish thus was the one that came out when he was alive. I think it's safe to bet he'd appreciate the change in ending, even if it's not what he expected.
I’ve always imagined Wonka as a mix of Wilder’s and Depp’s characterizations but only more chaotic and feeling amused when the kids get punished
Does anyone else get tired of the only characterization that that can seem to ever give to Tuffy is complaining about being too short/small?
Despite it being pointless, I kinda like “Slugworth’s” version of I Want It Now, especially when it pops up later in a chase scene.
I like villain songs so seeing an evil looking dude sing a classic song that was originally sung by a bratty little girl puts a smile on my face
Honestly, I think the idea of "Tom and Jerry wander into classic movies and chaos ensues" is a great idea and it's a god damn shame they don't commit to it in this movie. Instead we get "A classic movie is occasionally interrupted by the antics of Tom and Jerry, who don't really influence the plot in any way."
If Warner Bros. wants to make a good Tom and Jerry crossover, they should pick a slapstick comedy movie. The Wizard of Oz and Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory are neither, so Tom and Jerry's antics feel painfully forced.
For example, "Tom and Jerry Meet Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner" might actually work.
@@justinpassing4003 I disagree that Wonka and Wizard of Oz are bad choices. The idea for me is to have Tom and Jerry completely derail the plot and the characters all have to adapt around it.
You know, I just realized that the 2017 broadway version of CATCF has a lot of the same problems that this movie does. Both try to ape the 1971 film without understanding what made it work in the first place.
In the case of the broadway version, it's trying to turn the West End version into a clone of the 1971 movie without realizing the they have very different tones.
In the case of Tom and Jerry, it's that they just don't fit together in the first place. Honestly, the only thing this version has over broadway is that Veruca Salt doesn't get torn apart.
Frankly, this would have been MUCH better if it had just been a new adaptation of CATCF with the Tom and Jerry characters. Then, they could have used the two more naturally and not just aped the more popular version and it might have a reason to exist.
Honestly, THANK YOU. West End CatCF Supremacy
Love the reference to Lupita in Santa Claus! My husband and I all the time go, "No, no, Lupita".
I must admit, the way you described this film's sins were more toned down than I expected. All the same it doesn't save it from utterly deserving the chopping block.
Just when I thought that having Tom and Jerry talk was a horrible idea, this came along.
There are maybe a couple aspects of this movie that I legit like, even as a novelty. Those being Jess Harnell as Grandpa Joe, & Kath Soucie's cover of the Spooky Tunnel monologue.
That said, I only recommend this for Bad Animated Movie Night with your friends. (Violet Beauregard wins the Best Face Award in that scene when she presents her ticket to Mr. Wonka.)
Other than that, we're all better off watching the original with Rifftrax.
With Special Guest Riffer Neil Patrick Harris!
It’s nuts how they didn’t do a parody of the movie and actually incorporate the duo in organically 😅
Charlie finds an American silver dollar from the 1920's.
Excellent choice for this month's Musical Hell, Diva! I have never watched this film, and I'm not planning to, even if I watched the Wizard of Oz one and some others.
TBH, I think it would have worked better as an MHTV.
Roald Dahl hated the original Willy Wonka movie. I could only imagine how he would have reacted to this movie.
Oh why did he not like it?😅
@@gracekim25it was because of the deviations from the original novel. He also hated the music and the casting of Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka.
@@wallygator92 Gene Wilder was the best part! Wonder what he would have thought of Johnny Depp?
@@colleen4everProbably would think Depp wasn’t acting like how Wonka really should have acted. Wonka is basically a mad scientist that makes candy and need to have a chaotic edge to him.
@@kenthuang436 Wonder what he would have thought about the newest movie?
Speaking of animation, omigosh you're finally doing Raggedy Ann & Andy...I trust you'll be fair to it. I know it's far, far from perfect but it's so beautifully animated and a couple of the songs are so good....
10-year old me would think about the Camel with Wrinkled Knees and just cry and cry.
Tom & Jerry: Spy Quest seems better than this Willy Wonka Crossover.
That movie only exists because WB keeps trying to (and failing at) greenlighting a live action Johnny Quest movie. Yeah. The same non-existant movie plans that made the Venture Bros staff change their character to "Action Johnny." It's a series that hadn't had a show since the 90's, and the only other representation was the crossover episodes of Mystery Incorporated. The thing was meant to reintroduce those characters by way of a more popular franchise, especially one that's more famous globally. I own that movie and haven't gotten around to it, so I can't tell of its quality, but at least it has to have an original story, rather than "Pooh's Adventures"-ing the characters awkwardly into the plot.
I never saw it, but I wish to see it, since it's a major crossover between two Hanna-Barbera properties, which probably hasn't been done since "The Jetsons Meet the Flintstones", if I'm not mistaken.
@@robbiewalker2831 Well, there's the show Jellystone. And there was an episode of the 2017 Wacky Races that starred Hing Kong Phooey. Weirdest one had to have been an episode of OK KO where the three monster girls from Scooby-Doo and the Ghoul School had an appearance. But I want a Tom and Jerry meet the Jetsons movie. WB hasn't dusted off that property since that WWE movie, and even then it was in mothballs forever while plans for a live action movie also kept falling through.
@@mightyfilm I think you mean "Hong Kong Phooey", not "Hing Kong Phooey".
@@mightyfilmhmm I need to look up this Johnny quest then
Didn't know cats couldn't eat chocolate.....
All I've heard is how dogs can't eat it.
It's not as big of an issue with cats because they don't taste sweet (at least not in the same way dogs and humans do) so they're less likely to attempt to eat chocolate in the first place. But yes, theobromine is toxic to cats as well. (Mice can take it in moderation, but nothing about the chocolate in Charlie/Willy Wonka is moderate.)
This movie had to have had the easiest script to write. I mean given how Roald Dahl notoriously hated Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, there’s no doubt this would’ve made his blood boil.
What would he have thought about the changes Tim Burton made?
@@colleen4ever hard to say.
The fact this film was announced in the wake of Gene Wilder’s death did not help.
11:42-11:55
I'm looking at this scene and the one from the live-action original back-to-back and somehow the live action version is MUCH more expressive and full of life. It's baffling to me since being animated usually means you get to heighten the emotion and expressiveness even more, but this seems really neutered by comparison. I suppose it's a testament to how well-made and acted that film is and this is just a tired retread with Tom and Jerry popping up every now and then.
YAY!!! Raggedy Ann and Andy!!! (I'm presuming this is the Richard Williams version? That's something I've been hoping you'd cover. Although from the reviews I've read about the animated remake of Scrooge that came out last year, that would be a good December candidate as well. Also the animated musical Christmas Carol from the nineties with the voices of Tim Curry and Whoopi Goldberg.)
Or A Christmas Story Live?
@@colleen4ever That too. That was a disappointment to me because I loved the cast album. (Unfortunately, since the release of the cast album, a good chunk of the lyrics were changed...for the worse, I thought.)
This film steals a bit from the other CATCF source material: the rock candy mine was a reference in the book as one of the rooms that you could visit, and Mr. Salt being stricter with Veruca was a plot point from the 2005 Tim Burton film. In trying to cash in on Tom and Jerry, they have recycled not just the whole 1971 film in general but have managed to recycle from other material as well.
Thank you Diva for giving the film its deserving smackings and whackings and such (borrowed it from Gurgi, by the by.)
I've been waiting for her to tackle Raggedy Ann and Andy movie. At least the animation will get a saving grace.
Should have done it last month, if it's THAT Raggedy Ann movie.
The voice acting is also pretty good. At least the producers got voices that matched their characters such as Didi Cohn as Ann.
@@kenthuang436 OH yes and the voice acting is fantastic. Mark Lin Baker is great as Andy and Didi Cohn too.
@@nicklundy9965 Andy was Cousin Larry?! Really?!
@@colleen4ever yep
Jess Harnell does a good impression of Grandpa Joe
If the Willy Wonka Experience was a film, this would be it...
I realize I'm cutting it a bit close timewise, but a Thanksgiving musical suggestion is "The Mouse on the Mayflower," a Rankin Bass production.
“Tom and Jerry: Centaurworld”.
I've only seen this once, but I remember how cheap the orchestrations sounded. They even recycled some of the orchestra tracks from the original film and mixed them in with their new score!
...What the hell was that?
I could see Tom and Jerry's usual slapstick chase stuff happening with the plot of the movie going on in the background working pretty well, just not... whatever happened here. A 30 minute long (and honestly that's probably too much) crossover where Tom as the Wonka Factory cat tries to catch Jerry while they cause minor chaos for the tour group would be a better fit. They could be responsible for knocking Augustus Gloop into the chocolate river or whatever, Tom could get briefly whammied by the stuff that took out the other kids, there were ways this could work dammit!
The Tom and Jerry in The Wizard of Oz movie has the exact same problems.
And speaking of Warner Brothers crossovers, at least another animated crossover movie they did recently, that I won't name drop for my own safety, at least it was it's own thing.
13:21 Sure we can let people lick the walls all day long, but how dARe we end up with cAt hAiR in the iNVenTiNG rOOM-
Here I was, assuming this was some slapdash effort from the 80s or 90s. 2017?! To its credit, the crew were obviously trying their best to make this look like the original shorts. I think they did pretty well on that front. I'm also sick of 3D animation, so it's possible I'm just desperate for 2D animation.
I'm from the future, and if you think that rendering of the chocolate waterfall room was disappointing, just wait until you see what's about to happen in Glasgow.
Spike's original voice back in the cartoons was based on Jimmy Durante. Jimmy Durante had a very distinguished career as a comedian and singer and one of his most notable songs was "Make someone happy!" ...Why didn't Warner Bros listen to the man when they made this cartoon?!
15:40 so... spike was aiding and abetting someone he thought was trying to sabotage his boss? I guess he's lucky slugworth works for Wonka, or his ass would be on the chopping block right now.
One more possible point of interest about Raggedy Ann: Had you noticed that the small roles of "Socko" & "Barney Beanbag" were voiced by Sheldon Harnick, whose songwriting resume I'm sure I don't have to quote you?
So wait... Does this mean that Droopy is a fugitive Nazi?
Both Hardcore Kid, Hewy Toonmore, and a few other survived this creepy tunnel ride, but you madame are no difference compared to others.
This got me thinking;
I actually wouldn’t mind seeing a cartoon version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Like Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is actually surprisingly cartoony. Grandpa Joe instantly goes from a bedridden disabled old man to jumping up and down like an old prospector who just found gold.
But this is not it. This is a sub-par immigration of a live action movie and doesn’t really expand much on what animation can do.
I will say that at least the animation itself looks better than I might've expected.