The movie is pretty good but not a good adaptation. I like the freedom they took in the movie though which makes this a different experience for the reader. Also this book leaves more questions for the viewer which I hate.
Media Momentos said that they killed off Charlie’s father so that Wonka can be the new dad; which is a bad idea. Also, the real reason the Oompas were pixies in modern publications of the book was because in the original 1964 publication (with illustrations by Joseph Schindelman), the Oompas were suppose to be African pygmies no smaller than a child’s doll, and they work for cocao beans (which is a detail that was retained in the 2005 film). The 1970s film is the first to give a race swap with the Oompas, although they look more like cartoon characters in a 1960s Looney Tunes Redraw.
I actually rewatched both the 1971 and 2005 versions a while back. I have seen them both before, and enjoyed them both originally, but as more time has passed I’ve come to appreciate the 2005 version more…and dislike the 1971 version more. Like, I get the appeal behind the ‘71 version and all, but to me it’s incredibly overrated and honestly kind of boring. Even when you look past the poor adaptation aspect, the characters (aside from Charlie) are flat, a majority of the sets look too fake, and a lot of the songs are just awful. It’s why the 2005 version is one of my top 10 favorite movies; it does the original story justice and is a much more interesting and well-written movie on its own. Also, I’mma get flack for this, but Gene Wilder (as wonderful of an actor as he was) never clicked as “Willy Wonka” to me. In the words of Media Mementos: “When I see Gene Wilder(‘s Wonka), all I see is Gene Wilder playing a toned down version of his character from Young Frankenstein.”
Actually, speaking of Media Mementos, I’d actually recommend a video he made talking about both films - it actually covers/goes into detail about a similar topic to what you bring up here, that being how the 1971 film isnt rhe best adaptation (no shade towards your video btw, I rly liked your video as well)
I honestly think I like the 1971 most of all of them, probably more than the book. It has an enduring timeless appeal and very enjoyable with good acting and memorable songs. Sure it’s not the most faithful adaptation out there, but I can’t think of many changes they made that I don’t prefer over the source material.
I'm sorry but what do you find offensive in the 2005 adaptation? Other than Wonka's backstory everything is from the book you find something the book you find offensive
They made Augustus a German, becourse it was convenient as they were filming the movie in Bavaria and the actor was a actually a local boy who didnt even know any english
This movie is the truest definition of: "Good film, bad adaptation", although I appreciate and love this classic film, it has a lot of flaws but people often says that is perfect and better than the movie of 2005 Edit: Btw I like your videos man, you are like the few who likes Roald Dahl's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and also points out the differences between the movies and the book itself
I actually prefer the 1971 version over the book and Tim Burton’s film from 2005. I agree the 1971 has flaws like the VFX and technology and some plot holes but other than that I find it to be a classic. I agree that the Tim Burton film is the superior adaptation but I think the 1971 film is the superior film. Gene Wilder IS Willy Wonka. Grandpa Joe is hilarious despite doing some things that aren’t admirable. Charlie acts like a real kid instead of Charlie in the book and Tim Burton’s film that’s not to say that’s it’s a bad thing I don’t think it’s a bad thing at all. Veruca is way more of a brat than Tim Burton’s Veruca. I think the chocolate room looks beautiful and stunning not as much as Tim Burton’s chocolate room but it’s the best room in the factory with it’s only problem being the chocolate river which looks disgusting. Not every adaptation has to be a perfect recreation of the book to quote Felicity Dahl “All books have to be changed”. While I understand where you’re coming from along with Mr Coat and Media Mementos I don’t agree with any of you
Slugworth? Never heard of him. Grandpa Joe is the true villain of the movie.
The movie is pretty good but not a good adaptation. I like the freedom they took in the movie though which makes this a different experience for the reader. Also this book leaves more questions for the viewer which I hate.
Even if the adaptation isn't too faithful, this is still my #1 favorite movie
Media Momentos said that they killed off Charlie’s father so that Wonka can be the new dad; which is a bad idea.
Also, the real reason the Oompas were pixies in modern publications of the book was because in the original 1964 publication (with illustrations by Joseph Schindelman), the Oompas were suppose to be African pygmies no smaller than a child’s doll, and they work for cocao beans (which is a detail that was retained in the 2005 film). The 1970s film is the first to give a race swap with the Oompas, although they look more like cartoon characters in a 1960s Looney Tunes Redraw.
I find the scene where Charlie & Grandpa Joe secretly try the Fizzy Lifting Drinks in the 1971 adaptation rather out of character for Charlie Bucket.
I actually rewatched both the 1971 and 2005 versions a while back. I have seen them both before, and enjoyed them both originally, but as more time has passed I’ve come to appreciate the 2005 version more…and dislike the 1971 version more.
Like, I get the appeal behind the ‘71 version and all, but to me it’s incredibly overrated and honestly kind of boring. Even when you look past the poor adaptation aspect, the characters (aside from Charlie) are flat, a majority of the sets look too fake, and a lot of the songs are just awful. It’s why the 2005 version is one of my top 10 favorite movies; it does the original story justice and is a much more interesting and well-written movie on its own.
Also, I’mma get flack for this, but Gene Wilder (as wonderful of an actor as he was) never clicked as “Willy Wonka” to me. In the words of Media Mementos: “When I see Gene Wilder(‘s Wonka), all I see is Gene Wilder playing a toned down version of his character from Young Frankenstein.”
Actually, speaking of Media Mementos, I’d actually recommend a video he made talking about both films - it actually covers/goes into detail about a similar topic to what you bring up here, that being how the 1971 film isnt rhe best adaptation (no shade towards your video btw, I rly liked your video as well)
I honestly think I like the 1971 most of all of them, probably more than the book. It has an enduring timeless appeal and very enjoyable with good acting and memorable songs. Sure it’s not the most faithful adaptation out there, but I can’t think of many changes they made that I don’t prefer over the source material.
I'm sorry but what do you find offensive in the 2005 adaptation? Other than Wonka's backstory everything is from the book you find something the book you find offensive
They made Augustus a German, becourse it was convenient as they were filming the movie in Bavaria and the actor was a actually a local boy who didnt even know any english
This movie is the truest definition of: "Good film, bad adaptation", although I appreciate and love this classic film, it has a lot of flaws but people often says that is perfect and better than the movie of 2005
Edit: Btw I like your videos man, you are like the few who likes Roald Dahl's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and also points out the differences between the movies and the book itself
4:23 Kalle och chokladfabriken swedish name
"The Tinker Man With KNIVES Talking About LITTLE PEOPLE" Uhmmmmm FBI agent? yep he's by the factory right over there
The Tinker with the knifes was most likely a traveling knifesharpener. So no, i see no dangerwarning there.
most likely @@marcusfridh8489 but then again we must remember, this was a joke. XD also 7 months ago my goodness
Can you do one for the 2005 one please
Is it just me or is Slugworth creepier than the boat ride seen
I actually prefer the 1971 version over the book and Tim Burton’s film from 2005. I agree the 1971 has flaws like the VFX and technology and some plot holes but other than that I find it to be a classic. I agree that the Tim Burton film is the superior adaptation but I think the 1971 film is the superior film. Gene Wilder IS Willy Wonka. Grandpa Joe is hilarious despite doing some things that aren’t admirable. Charlie acts like a real kid instead of Charlie in the book and Tim Burton’s film that’s not to say that’s it’s a bad thing I don’t think it’s a bad thing at all. Veruca is way more of a brat than Tim Burton’s Veruca. I think the chocolate room looks beautiful and stunning not as much as Tim Burton’s chocolate room but it’s the best room in the factory with it’s only problem being the chocolate river which looks disgusting. Not every adaptation has to be a perfect recreation of the book to quote Felicity Dahl “All books have to be changed”. While I understand where you’re coming from along with Mr Coat and Media Mementos I don’t agree with any of you
good job and remake movie