CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

I just watched the original version of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory for the umpteenth time. So, this is a question for you: which version is better: the original or Tim Burton's? For me, it's original all the way. Tim Burton's was too creepy

The original is the one I believe I've seen. Tim Burtons is Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. And let me just say, Johnny Depp in that roll = scary.

XD for me at least! The original/older one is the best IMHO.

I actually enjoyed both versions, but Gene Wilder's will always be my favorite. I did like some of the things they did with the story in the new one, though.

I like the newer one better. Mainly because it doesn't carry the memory of me being freaked out every time it came on when I was 7... You all heard nothing!

I can't decide. Thier both great in there own right.

Original is better hands down.

I like Depp; I like Wonka...but throw in a bit of Burton and it all goes to pot.

Not to say I dislike everything Burton did...but why did he 'Burton up' my Wonka?

Wilder had some creepy moments, but it was more in his reactions. The new one just isn't that good.

The recent version. The only part that was better in the original was the Tunnel sequence (and some parts leading up to the Factory).

The original. I just prefer to go with what I grew up with.

While both versions each had their strong points, I'm going to have to go with Tim Burton's version for its amusing self-deconstructing quality. No longer is Willy Wonka just a neutral bystander completely irresponsible for all the accidents that befall the children in his factory (a dubious assumption to lend any industrialist), but rather a knowingly complicit agent of their downfall. So too, the way Burton's version highlights the elements of poverty, industrialization, media, globalization, commodity fetishism, and the importance of family already implicit in the original film make it a classic. If some of us find Johnny Depp's portrayal of Willy Wonka to be too creepy, perhaps this is because we are too easily seduced by Gene Wilder's charm and charisma to really see the dark undertones of his character. I mean, the man can take a song about the pits of hell and the grim reaper's moaning and turn it into a sweet lullaby, which should set off at least at least a couple of alarm bells about Mr. Wonka and his motivations. Finally, by shifting the story's focus away from Willy Wonka and back toward Charlie, Burton's version is more consistent with the moral of the story. After all, whether or not the world wants to admit it, Charlie is a wonderful and virtuous boy, and he does not need a rich industrialist like Willy Wonka to bestow a glory that was always his. Indeed, in Burton's telling, it is Willy Wonka who needs help from Charlie far more than Charlie needs help from Willy Wonka.

The original. I haven't seen the new version but it doesn't matter. There is no way Johnny Depp did a better job than Gene Wilder, and the Oompa Loompa songs were better in the original too.

Also, I just don't care for Tim Burton that much. His early stuff is fantastic (Pee-wee's Big Adventure, Beetlejuice, Batman), but everything after Batman is either mediocre or terrible in my opinion (seriously, Batman Returns was hideous). I don't care to see his "dark" interpretation of a movie that already had a wonderful sense of twisted humor. He certainly can't have improved on it, and likely he just made it worse.

The new version, no contest. And I didn't even care for that one much. The old movie sucked though. Seriously, I can't stand that movie, never could. The only thing that was good about that one was the Oompa Loompa songs. I still can't understand what everyone thinks is so great about it and the new version surpasses the old one in every possible way. Still, the new one isn't even that great. But I'll sit and watch that over the old one any day.

Both movies were fine. I though they each did a good job of accomplishing what they set out to do.

The Oompa Loompas were way better in the first. The news one were just kind of lame.

I did enjoy Wanka's more twisted personality in the second one. I liked how it was Charlie who rescued Wonka from his inner torment as opposed to Wonka rescuing Charlie from poverty (even though this is sort of a stretch, the original one gives this feel).

That said, Wilder's Wonka was exactly what it needed to be at the time and for the story being told. Depp's Wonka was perfect for its own version.

I give the edge to the original - a classic that has stood the test of time - but the new one's a good watch, too, and probably connects better with people under the age of 25 or so.

Oompa, Loompa, doom-pa-dee-do
I have a perfect puzzle for you
Oompa, Loompa, doom-pa-dee-dee
If you are wise, you'll listen to me

What do you get when you guzzle down sweets?
Eating as much as an elephant eats
What are you at getting terribly fat?
What do you think will come of that?

I don't like the look of it

Oompa, Loompa, doom-pa-dee-da
If you're not greedy, you will go far
You will live in happiness too
Like the Oompa Loompa doom-pa-dee-do

GhostontheNet (post: 1291993) wrote:While both versions each had their strong points, I'm going to have to go with Tim Burton's version for its amusing self-deconstructing quality. No longer is Willy Wonka just a neutral bystander completely irresponsible for all the accidents that befall the children in his factory (a dubious assumption to lend any industrialist), but rather a knowingly complicit agent of their downfall.

I'm not sure I agree with this 100%, actually, though I haven't seen the new one since it was in theaters, so I may be forgetting something. But in the original, I loved the aspect of Wonka's character that sat back and said "no, don't" in that monotonous, uncaring tone, allowing the children to run off and get themselves into trouble. It's one of the funniest parts about Gene Wilder's version, I think. XD However, this:

Finally, by shifting the story's focus away from Willy Wonka and back toward Charlie, Burton's version is more consistent with the moral of the story. After all, whether or not the world wants to admit it, Charlie is a wonderful and virtuous boy, and he does not need a rich industrialist like Willy Wonka to bestow a glory that was always his. Indeed, in Burton's telling, it is Willy Wonka who needs help from Charlie far more than Charlie needs help from Willy Wonka.

This, I do agree with, and it's the part I liked best about the newer version.

I didn't like the aesthetic of the new version. It was so cheerless and sterile that it just didn't really capture my imagination at all. The old version might be less faithful to the book, but as a film, it has a lot more heart, color, and life. Also, I much preferred Gene Wilder's Wonka to Johnny Depp's. Depp's portrayal was creepy in the wrong sort of way.

I've never seen the newer version, but in the old version.. I remember watching it with my niece and nephew and was all like,"YOU CAN MAKE SUCH A BIG KATAMARI WITH ALL OF THOSE BUILDINGS O.O"

Yes, that was a bit (ok a lot) off topic, but that's what it reminded me of in the hot air balloon scene XD

You mean when the girl turned into a blueberry? EVERY TIME that happened in the old one (Or the tube, OR the shrinking) I had nightmares. I WAS seven after all. Leave the eccentric alone!

Ok, just to be 100% clear with everybody, I do, in fact, love the original movie. I even made it a point to buy mom another copy for Christmas after our old VHS cassette gave out so my family could watch it. You know, it's funny, Nate bashes everything Tim Burton created after Batman, but for me, Batman Returns came out when I was in kindergarten, and so it would be accurate to say that I basically grew up on Tim Burton's films and that they had a remarkable impression on me. When Charlie and the Chocolate Factory came out, I had gone through this really long dry spell where I had not seen or heard about any new Tim Burton movies for years. The man, it seemed, had completely vanished and gone into isolation after the commercially successful but studio-sterilized Planet of the Apes. Looking back in retrospect, Burton had, in fact, directed the excellent Big Fish in the interim, but somehow I never caught word of that. Therefore, to walk into the theaters and see an injured and isolated man risk opening up the factory of wonders to the world again created a very strong impression in my mind, and I know I'll never forget that.

In Tim Burton's defense, I haven't seen Big Fish. I heard it was really good though so I might give it a shot, perhaps it's the ONE Tim Burton movie that has been good since Batman.

I saw Batman Returns when I was in...hmm, if you were in kindergarten, then I would've had to have been in 6th or 7th grade when it came out. I didn't like it, finding it creepy and unnecessarily "dark," what with Michelle Pfeiffer dressed like a cheap Vegas whore and acting like one to boot, and the Penguin being more Danny Devito than the Penguin. It was an insult to the strong independent Catwoman and the civilized gentleman Penguin of the source material. It's as if Burton went out of his way to say "Okay, how much can we **** off the people who like these characters?" Very different from the original Batman in that, while the original took some liberties, it was pretty close to what the characters were like in the comics.

Anyway like I said. Everything after Batman just fell apart to me. Edward Scissorhands was good but ultimately forgettable, Batman Returns was awful (though, it was certainly better than Shoemaker's atrocities), Mars Attacks! was bland, and Sleepy Hollow was boring.

I haven't seen Nightmare, but I really don't have much of a desire to.

tim burton 100 miles!!!!!!!! old one was way to.............. wierd

armeckthefirst (post: 1292185) wrote:tim burton 100 miles!!!!!!!! old one was way to.............. wierd

Lol, how is the new one any less weird than the old one? The new movie practically oozes weirdness. XD

yeah, but did we really need to know Wonka's parents were dentists?

armeckthefirst (post: 1292185) wrote:tim burton 100 miles!!!!!!!! old one was way to.............. wierd

What!? The new one is the weird one! Old Wonka was the bomb! XD But seriously, how?

Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, and Danny Elfman.....what's not to like?

I won't vote in the poll because I have not seen the original, but I will say this; Johnny Depp was amazing as Willy Wonka. I loved how creepy and misanthropic he acted. Now, if only it didn't have the songs......

You think remake Wonka is creepy now? Could have been cast worse...

Johnny Depp



Marilyn Manson



Johnny Depp



Marilyn Manson



Michael Jackson

Cheap vegas whore? Catwoman's costume is much more in common with a certain take on the Gothic aesthetic, while the stitched together look is well suited to her psychologically shattered state. As far as acting goes, the distinctly feline take on the old femme fatale persona was well suited. Likewise, Penguin's character is a rather excellent balance of civilization and savagery, the human and the animal, his public persona drawing heavy influence from Orson Welles' Citizen Kane. While comic book fans always complain about film directors taking liberties with the characters, I believe that for a director to truly make an effective superhero movie, he must remove the characters from their illustrated and streamlined two-dimensionality, and instead flesh them out in the real world. Burton's innovation upon the superhero movie genre was to take the risk of diving in to really explore the character's psychology, imagining what might drive a person to really act that way in the real world. Such directorial tendencies would come to play a major role in defining which superhero movies left a lasting impact and which superhero movies lasted only one summer, so I think this was a very good call on Tim Burton's part.

Similarly, by contrast, I say that Edward Scissorhands had very powerful imagery that was completely unforgettable. Batman Returns was a pretty good film already mostly discussed. Mars Attacks! was by no means a great movie, but its iconoclastic satire of nineties inanity still made it amusing. Sleepy Hollow was a fine tribute to the gothic horror movies of Hammer Films, its style and narrative functioning as an effective commentary on the promise and peril of the American ideal.

Holy cow, Az. Marilyn Manson as Willy Wonka would have been AWESOME, but only if it had been directed by Rob Zombie.

Kkun (post: 1292401) wrote:Holy cow, Az. Marilyn Manson as Willy Wonka would have been AWESOME, but only if it had been directed by Rob Zombie.

Dude, we should start spamming Zombie and Manson with letters right away. This could be epic.

I have to agree that Edward Scissorhands was pretty unforgettable.