Transcription
When it comes to book-to-movie adaptations of any genre, they usually go one of two ways. Some are instant, massive box office hits that go on to become iconic film franchises. Others fail upon release, with all plans for future sequel adaptations becoming scrapped.
However, once in a while, there are those that fall into a third category, as was the case for Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. It was an adaptation that was initially a box office failure in every sense of the word, yet over time grew to become a cult classic and beloved family film. But the origins of how it came to be is quite surprising and a story definitely worth telling. So, let's take a deep dive into the history of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
The story begins in 1964 with the publication of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by author Roald Dahl. The book told the story of eccentric candy maker and world-famous Willy Wonka, who after years of living as a recluse, sets up a special contest for five lucky winners to be given a tour of his highly secretive chocolate factory. The contest was simple: Mr. Wonka hid five golden tickets within his world-famous Wonka Bars, and whoever found them won. The first of the tickets are found by the gluttonous Augustus Gloop, spoiled rotten Veruca Salt, a chewing gum addict by the name of Violet Beauregarde, and Mike Teavee, who just so happened to be obsessed with television. The final lucky winner is Charlie Bucket, who unlike the other four children, is quite the opposite of spoiled and embodies far more desirable characteristics.
So, long story short, the five children and their parents (or in Charlie's case, his grandparent) toured the elusive factory with the outlandish Willy Wonka. However, one by one, each of the children fall into temptation, some quite literally, and are taken off the tour. The tale ends with Charlie Bucket proving to be of the highest moral caliber and the only one left, and is chosen by Mr. Wonka to be a successor, thereby inheriting the chocolate factory.
One story Dahl made up to amuse his kids became their favorite, so he told it over and over, polishing and embellishing it with every telling. He called it Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and it's become a phenomenon in the publishing world. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was an immediate success and captivated the minds of children all over the country and eventually the UK. It was also the book that launched author Roald Dahl to mainstream success and was praised for its mixture of whimsical fantasy, humor, and subtle lessons of morality. Because of this, it was also the rare children's novel that parents could actually enjoy reading to their children over and over without feeling the need to drown themselves in a chocolate river.
Fast forward a few years later to 1969 with a comedy called If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium. You see, this was documentarian filmmaker Mel Stuart's first fictional theatrical film, and soon after, he started looking for a story to become his next feature film. Around the same time, his 12-year-old daughter came up to him with a book, one he'd never heard of, a book called Charlie in the Chocolate Factory. It was a story she'd read all the way through, not once or even twice, but three separate times, and was adamant he should make it into a movie. However, at first, he was incredibly reluctant, as aside from If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium, Mel Stuart primarily focused on serious stories and hard-hitting documentaries, not movies for children. But once he read the book for himself, he found it surprisingly captivating and immediately saw its on-screen potential.
Now, back in those days, children's movies were actually fairly uncommon outside of Disney, who essentially had the entire family market all to themselves. There were, of course, exceptions, but by and large, there just wasn't much competition. Aside from Disney, which Mel Stuart saw as a plus, so he took the chocolate-centric novel to a family friend by the name of David L. Wolper, who just so happened to run the major production company that produced many of his films. David Wolper agreed that the story of Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory could make a fantastic family film and began the process of looking for financing. However, this is where the story takes a very unusual turn, and to fully understand why, it's important to briefly discuss what was going on in the film industry during this time period.
The motion picture studios are not all located right here; they are spread over a large area and neighboring towns, which, as far as film production is concerned, is generally known as Hollywood. You see, it was the end of the 1960s to early 70s that the motion picture studio system was on the verge of collapsing and is often referred to as the death of the Golden Age of Hollywood. Now, it is a bit of a complex topic, so to keep it somewhat simple, the catalyst for this was the result of a lawsuit in 1938 in which the major motion picture companies were accused of having a monopoly on film distribution. And no, I don't mean the board game. As for those unaware, a monopoly is when a company has exclusive and usually excessive control over a commodity or service, which in this case were the film studios and the film industry.
But the situation really came to the forefront in 1948 with United States v. Paramount Pictures, a Supreme Court case against virtually all the major film studios. The primary issue were these Hollywood studios owning 80% of first-run movie theaters all across the country, which gave them far too much control over what films were or weren't shown to the general public. So, ultimately, the court ruled against Hollywood and established a new set of strict rules and regulations to limit the studios' distribution power. Unsurprisingly, this loss of control led to a steep rise in independent movie theaters and the showcasing of films outside the studio system, giving audiences far more movie choices than ever before.
To combat this new competition, most of Hollywood then focused on producing must-see epics and extravagant musicals. Now, initially, these were very profitable. However, by the late 60s, the novelty of these genres began to wear with audiences. The 1968 Academy Awards is a great example, as four of the five Best Picture nominees were outside the major studio system. The one exception was Doctor Dolittle, but the Hollywood musical epic was a box office flop, and from that point on, Hollywood's dominance with theater-goers went into a bit of a lull.
This led to major motion picture companies to become incredibly cash-poor, and quite a few of them began to steer away from financing films to acquiring them for distribution. So, as strange as it sounds, companies like Mattel and General Electric began financing movies in their place as a way to break into the film industry. One example was Mattel's period *Hondo*, and another was a film called *Where the Lilies Bloom*, just to prove I'm not making this up.
But another company attempting to break into the industry was Quaker Oats, which brings us back to the story of Willy Wonka.
"We have something new, sir. What more could one dare hope for? The divine date, melting with sweetness in instant Quaker Oatmeal."
Remarkable. You see, Quaker Oats decided to join the bandwagon, and their first venture into the industry was funding a wildlife documentary called *Say Goodbye*. But this wasn't just any documentary; *Say Goodbye* just so happened to be produced by David Wolper's production company. Now, in a case of true serendipity, Quaker Oats was also developing a new line of candy, specifically chocolate bars, and were trying to find a movie or TV show to promote it. Of course, David Wolper did have such a project, one he was trying to find financing for, that was literally about chocolate. So, Quaker wrote, signed an exclusive deal with David Wolper's production company, and thus began the process of acquiring the rights to Roald Dahl's chocolate fantasy adventure.
Now, this wasn't the first time the author had been approached for a film adaptation of his work, as in the 1940s, Walt Disney set out to adapt one of his short stories called *The Gremlins*. Unfortunately, while the movie did get pretty dang far into pre-production, between allegations of copyright infringement and the war it was based on soon coming to an end, the film was ultimately scrapped. So, using the abandoned animation's concept art, Disney wound up publishing the short stories, a book which actually played a pretty big part in jump-starting Roald Dahl's success as an author.
"I was very lucky because I... I my first little book I wrote was called *The Gremlins*, which was bought by Walt Disney."
Anyway, the filmmakers expressed interest to Dahl in adapting Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and he was open to the idea, but he had a couple of stipulations that were non-negotiable. First was the staggering asking price of $500,000 for the film rights, or just under $4 million today. And while I usually refrain from jumping ahead in the story's timeline, just for a comparison, J.K. Rowling sold the film rights for the first four Harry Potter books for $2 million, or $3.3 million today. That said, the $500,000 was also to cover his writing fee, as he would only sell the rights if he was allowed to write the screenplay himself.
Now, at first, this didn't seem like it would become an issue. He did write the original source material, after all. He'd also written the screenplay for the recently successful and non-Disney family film *Chitty Chitty Bang Bang*. So, a deal was made in August of 1969, and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was given a budget of $2.9 million, or barely over $20 million today.
Now, initially, the tight budget did prove to be a bit of a concern, as to properly bring Willy Wonka's fantastical factory to life on the big screen, production design wasn't something that could be skimped on. So, the filmmakers reached out to Disney legend and Academy Award-winning art director Harper Goff, who was no stranger to making the absolute most of a tight budget, such as his work on the original Disney park and, at the time, the upcoming Walt Disney World theme park.
"I knew the story by Roald Dahl and admired it greatly. Technically, the picture is a special effects type of picture, and the art director's job is very important."
When it came to casting the children, honestly, there's not too much to say of particular interest, although they did all have to audition using the original book. Since Mr. Dahl was still writing the screenplay, that said, the casting of Willy Wonka himself is a whole other story, and the first of many, many creative differences between the filmmakers and Dahl. You see, the author pushed very hard to get either Spike Milligan or Peter Sellers for the part. For those unaware, Spike Milligan was known as a comedic genius, famous for his incredible improvisational skills, and was held as the godfather of British comedy. Peter Sellers was known for his versatility and ability to completely transform himself, sort of like a Daniel Day-Lewis of comedy, and personally begged Dahl for the part. But despite auditioning both of the two beloved comedic actors, they were both rejected for Willy Wonka, much to the frustration of Dahl.
However, another actor that was called in to audition was a rising star in American comedy by the name of Gene Wilder.
"I'm wet. I'm hysterical. And I'm wet. I'm in pain. And I'm wet. And I'm still hysterical."
You see, Gene Wilder had recently starred in Mel Brooks' *The Producers*, and while not necessarily a critical or box office success, his performance was highly praised and even received an Academy Award nomination. However, outside of this and a handful of other minor parts, by and large, he was still relatively unknown. Regardless, Mel Stuart was a fan of his work and felt the actor's devilish charm and cynical edge made him perfect for the part of Willy Wonka. Dahl, on the other hand, felt he was a very poor choice, believing his attitude to be pretentious and not even close to how he envisioned the Willy Wonka from his novel. But to the author's dismay and frustration, his objections were ignored, and Gene Wilder was hired on the spot after his audition.
Unfortunately, this wasn't the only issue, as there was another source of friction beginning to form that had to do with the screenplay itself. You see, the initial draft was finished by Dahl in 1970 and delivered more or less on schedule. However, to the annoyance of the movie's director and producers, it was less of an adaptation of his beloved novel and more of a carbon copy, just on script form. This was a bit of a problem, as the filmmakers were counting on the author to enhance the book's thematic elements and at least take some creative liberties so it'd properly translate onto the screen. So, they wound up giving the author a laundry list of requests for the second draft, crossed their fingers, and continued on with pre-production.
"The villages in this part of Germany are different from those in the other regions, not only in appearance but also in their way of life."
As far as where the movie was to be filmed, the director wanted to avoid setting the movie's story and events in a specific place or time, so we chose Munich, Germany, for its fantasy-like aesthetics and architecture, and the nearby historic Bavaria Film Studio for the indoor portions of Wonka's factory. Now, at this point, it's important to mention that as initially envisioned by director Mel Stuart, the movie was to be a straightforward drama. However, nearing the end of the film's pre-production, producer David Wolper was trying to convince him to make it a musical, using *The Wizard of Oz* as the perfect example of just how much it could elevate the material. But Mel Stuart was incredibly hesitant, as with his background in documentary filmmaking, he was determined to ground the movie in as much realism as possible. Thankfully, he did eventually cave into the idea, but with one condition: it was to avoid the clichés of most musicals, like obviously rehearsed choreography and random people somehow knowing the lyrics and belting them out in the streets. In fact, it wasn't until he heard the songs "The Candyman" and "Pure Imagination" by Leslie Bricusse and Anthony Newley that he was fully on board, as he then realized the movie's fantasy elements could benefit from a handful of musical numbers.
[Music]
By the spring of 1970, everything was coming together for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but a major problem began to surface that almost doomed the film entirely: the Oompa-Loompas. But not the ones you're thinking of. You see, in the original novel, they were described as, and I am taking this straight from the book, "black pygmies with the appearance of being made out of chocolate." Their backstory was also a bit troubling, as they were shipped, quite literally, in cargo from the jungles of Africa with the sole purpose of coming to work at Willy Wonka's factory. They were also paid entirely in cocoa beans with no living wage. Happily, I might add, so the whole thing had a very *Song of the South* vibe to it.
Now, in 1964, when the book originally came out, the depiction of the Oompa-Loompas was largely ignored and glossed over. However, within a matter of years, the ramifications of the Civil Rights Movement would change the country forever, and this extended to the ongoing issue of racial stereotypes and characterizations in the entertainment industry. So, by 1970, when the movie was being made, this particular aspect of Roald Dahl's beloved children's novel was seen as racially insensitive and derogatory. To make matters worse, upon learning the book was being made into a feature film, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, or NAACP, spoke out specifically against the film's production.
What's truly ironic is an early draft of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was called *Charlie's Chocolate Boy*, in which the title character was a black child. Although whether this was to be a powerful racial allegory or an even more potentially offensive depiction is highly debated. Another cause for concern, given the book's allegations of racism, was the name "Charlie" itself, as "Mr. Charlie" was a contemptuous expression in the black community for a white overseer or imperious white man.
So, given all this controversy, prior to filming, the title was given a slight name change from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. Although, full disclosure, this was also a request by Quaker Oats to better promote their upcoming Wonka Bar, so it might have been a two birds with one stone situation. This was also done to avoid confusion with those who would abbreviate the title, as "Have you seen Willy Wonka?" is far less awkward than "Have you seen Charlie?".
But the most significant change that came from all this was completely reimagining the Oompa-Loompas themselves, as they were given an orange skin color and bright green hair. The characters' origins were also altered pretty dramatically, as they now came from Oompa-Loompa Land and were given a far more fantasy-esque background. However, speaking of rewrites, let's dive back into by far the most controversial part of Willy Wonka's history: the screenplay.
Now, it gets a bit tedious because there are two entirely different accounts of events: those from producer David Wolper and those from director Mel Stuart. According to Mel Stuart, Roald Dahl's second draft was "a vast improvement over the first, but still could use a few revisions." So, a young writer by the name of David Seltzer was hired to polish up the script. Specifically, he would supply the filmmakers with concepts, which were then passed along to Roald Dahl to implement into the third draft. This third draft was then received in July of 1970, and they were "very pleased with all the revisions Dahl added to the screenplay," and aside from a bit more touching up by David Seltzer, this was the version to be filmed.
Producer David Wolper, on the other hand, had a much different account of events, implying that Roald Dahl refused to make any changes from the first draft and referred to it as "almost unfilmable." Going further, in his version, David Seltzer wasn't hired to supply concepts or polish up the script, but rewrite it, and this is what became the third draft.
Now, both the producer and director admit Dahl wasn't happy with the rewrites made to his original screenplay, but then the story changes once again. Director Mel Stuart states that he was asked by the author to fly to London to go over the script alterations, to which Dahl agreed with the changes. However, producer David Wolper contended that David Seltzer was flown to London, and that Roald Dahl was quite rude to the young writer and did not agree with the changes, but bitterly admitted they were acceptable. To support the producer's far less forgiving account of events, in one letter, Dahl expressed that he was appalled by the changes and referred to them as "pure bull." In other letters, Dahl referred to Mel Stuart as "vicious, cruel, idiotic, a loudmouth, and unpleasant with no talent or flair whatsoever."
Now, we'll get to more of Dahl's feelings on Willy Wonka a bit later because there's quite a bit more, but it's time to move on to the film's production.
The unique structure is now ready for director Mel Stuart to guide the stars of the motion picture: candy maker Gene Wilder, young Charlie played by Peter Ostrum, and Jack Albertson as Grandpa Joe, to bring alive all the wonderful characters of Roald Dahl's imagination.
The filming of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory took place in August of 1970, but with the film's very strict $2.9 million dollar budget, there was no room for even going slightly over schedule. This meant zero reshoots, with all the elaborate sets by Harper Goff and countless candy props tossed away the second they were no longer required for filming. There was also an issue of the Oompa-Loompas speaking little to no English, so they had a pretty tough time learning the choreography and song lyrics. Another amusing anecdote had to do with the chocolate river, as it took quite a bit of experimenting to get right, which, let's be honest, still wound up looking like a pool of diarrhea-infested water. It also gave off a terrible sour odor all throughout the set. To combat this, they were forced to use a combination of rather harsh chemicals, which, in hindsight, probably wasn't the safest for those who actually had to go in the water.
It also may surprise you to hear that despite all the drama, Dahl was able to put aside his frustrations and make a visit to the set. Those who were there said the author was in good spirits and had a very pleasant demeanor, but this kind of positive association with the film would not last long.
Now, unlike most stories here on Yesterworld, there isn't much else to say about the production itself or even the film's post-production, as virtually everything that was shot wound up in the final film. The reason was simple: the movie's financiers, Quaker Oats, only really cared about tying in their Wonka Bar, so they had little to no say on the final product. Even with Paramount Pictures agreeing to distribute the film, which is a bit ironic given the whole lawsuit situation mentioned earlier, they were also very hands-off. So, without the usual studio interference, the director more or less had final cut and kept almost everything in.
However, an exception was one of the golden ticket interludes, in which a man climbs a mountain to seek the wisdom of a guru, but after discovering a Wonka Bar with no golden ticket, tells the man, "Life is a disappointment." For better or worse, due to a poor audience reaction during a test screening, the sequence was cut and is yet to see the light of day. There was also more graphic imagery in the tunnel scene, one of which featured a live chicken getting its head cut off.
Now, at this point, you might be wondering, "Okay, so what about the Quaker Oats Wonka Bar? The literal reason for the movie even getting made?" Well, funny you should ask.
"Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory! I love that Willy Wonka! Yeah, but a chocolate? How about that chocolate factory? Sure wish I could make my own candy. Yeah."
You see, as the movie continued to receive the final touches for its release, Quaker Oats was indeed ramping up their Wonka Bar tie-in. This would also include a Wonka Candy Factory kit, which allowed kids to make their very own Wonka Bar. Unfortunately, the official Wonka Bar never became a reality, as supposedly there was a major problem with the chocolate formula, specifically its consistency. Some sources say it actually did make it onto the shelves and was recalled, while others insist it was abandoned before manufacturing. Regardless, while there wasn't a Wonka Bar, per se, they did have other candy products to tie into the movie: the Willy Wonka Super Scrunch Bar and the Peanut Butter Oompas. Even so, the irony of a movie about chocolate being financed and produced for a failed chocolate product is just as cruel as it is hilarious.
"From the pen of author Roald Dahl to the motion picture screen comes the most unusual chocolate factory and the mysterious candy man. Inside... I'm so glad you could come. This is going to be such an exciting day."
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, rated G. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was released on June 30, 1971, and the reactions were mostly positive. Many praised it for its unique and imaginative world, a cinematic adventure that was on par with what Disney produced, with Roger Ebert calling it "the best fantasy film since The Wizard of Oz." Other reactions were mixed; some criticizing the quality of the production design, its cynical nature compared to the book, and of course, that nasty-looking chocolate river.
But there was one person who was deeply upset by the film, more than anyone else: Roald Dahl. When it came to the music, he felt the songs "Cheer Up Charlie" and "The Candy Man" were, as he put it, "ghastly," with "Pure Imagination" too sappy and sentimental, requesting two of them to be cut entirely. As far as the film itself, he found it to be "pretty poor," and the reimagined Oompa-Loompas were horrible, and at one point, even threatened to campaign against the movie. It's also worth mentioning that despite the massive rewrites to his original script, Dahl was, and has always been, the only officially credited writer, which understandably led to his frustration since he felt the changes were again "pure bull." Although, for the record, under mounting pressure, in 1973, he did wind up revising the Oompa-Loompas for future publications of his book, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
"Which is probably almost successful, isn't it? Probably. Yes. Yes. And it's been made into a film. It was made into a rather crummy film. Yes. I wasn't pleased with it at all. Did you have anything to do with it? Well, I originally wrote the screenplay, but I made the mistake of letting Hollywood have a free hand, and I shall never do that again."
Now, despite receiving a positive audience and critical reception, Willy Wonka proved to be a financial dud. So much so that it placed at number 53 at the box office for 1971, with a measly gross of just $4 million, or barely over $28 million today. Those involved with the film put the blame on Paramount Pictures, as they felt the movie's marketing strategy was poor and unorganized and allowed it to fizzle away after its initial premiere. The Quaker Oats side of things didn't fare that much better, as not only did the Quaker Oats Wonka Bar wind up abandoned, but the two other candy products failed to garner up any meaningful profit. This is why, just a year after debuting the film, Quaker Oats sold its candy division to an actual candy company called Concord Confections. However, unlike Quaker Oats, this company fully embraced the Wonka brand and for a number of years had quite a bit of success producing Wonka-inspired candy. In fact, in 1975, they produced the very first official Wonka Bar, but ironically, this was actually the least profitable of their Wonka-inspired candy lineup.
"Willy Wonka is my name. Candy magic is my game."
[Music]
As far as Willy Wonka, the film, for several years, it seemed destined to remain as nothing more than a box office bomb and, at least in the public's eye, a largely forgettable film. Any hopes of a resurgence were initially squashed with the rise of the Hollywood blockbuster, as between films like *Jaws* and *Star Wars*, the industry shifted back to producing epic, big-budget action-adventure films.
But what did bring Willy Wonka back from the grave of forgotten movies was the advent of cable TV and home video. You see, as we've covered in the past, up until the 1970s, and especially with Disney, the only way to see most movies after their initial release were re-releases into theaters and occasional special screenings. However, in the 70s, movie studios saw the rise of cable TV as a chance to earn a bit of extra revenue, as unlike expensive theatrical re-releases, they could simply license their film libraries to television networks. It was also a chance for some films that may have slipped past mainstream audiences to have a second life, and Willy Wonka was no exception.
"NBC Movie of the Week presents Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory starring Gene Wilder and Jack Albertson."
Willy Wonka's first television debut was in 1974, and further broadcasts in the 70s were a huge part of how the forgotten film became less forgotten. But its popularity drastically rose in 1984, as then it was released on home video, allowing families to watch the quirky fantasy film over and over. Although, quick fun fact: Disney played a pretty significant part of this, albeit very unintentionally, as during the 1980s, they were incredibly picky on what they would or would not release on home video or for how long. So, within this new home video market, quality family films outside of Disney were fairly hard to come by, and Willy Wonka was able to fill that void.
It's also worth mentioning that by this point, Paramount Pictures had sold the rights of the film to Warner Brothers, and unlike Paramount, they did know how to properly market a movie. Adding to its surge in popularity was the acquisition of Wonka candy by Nestlé. So, between the film and delicious sugary treats, Willy Wonka was quite the pop culture icon by the 2000s. In fact, it was this rise in popularity that led to the idea of a remake from director Tim Burton.
"Please enter. Who are you? He's Willy Wonka."
2005 saw the release of Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and though many, like myself, still prefer the original book adaptation, it's actually much more faithful to the original source material. In fact, initially, Johnny Depp's hair, makeup, and costume was to be nearly identical to the illustrations of Willy Wonka in the novel. However, more than likely, it was deemed too similar to his appearance as Jack Sparrow, so they went with a different direction, and by different, I mean deeply disturbing. Going further, much like the book, in Tim Burton's version, Charlie has a father who also works at a toothpaste factory. Another example is the story of Prince Pondicherry and Willy Wonka, who builds him a palace made entirely of chocolate with disastrous results. They also finally got the chocolate river to look like, you know, a chocolate river, instead of dirty toilet water. The origins of the Oompa-Loompas were also more or less identical to the book; in fact, aside from calling their country Oompa-Loompa Land instead of Africa, their background was left intact. Speaking of the Oompa-Loompas, their songs with every demise, while in my opinion not nearly as catchy as "Oompa Loompa doompety doo," were heavily inspired by the actual poems in the novel. Veruca Salt's demise was also reworked, as the iconic golden egg sequence was actually written specifically for the Gene Wilder version. So, for Tim Burton's adaptation, the sequence is basically a carbon copy to how it appears in the book, in which he's deemed as a bad nut and is sent down the garbage chute.
Another incorporation by Tim Burton was the glass elevator tour through the factory and even the enormous mountain made entirely of fudge. However, by far the most drastic change from the Gene Wilder version to the remake had to do with the character of Slugworth, but for a very specific reason. You see, in Dahl's novel, he's only briefly mentioned in passing, as he was simply one of Mr. Wonka's competitors who steals a secret recipe. But the filmmakers of the 1971 version desired to give the film a stronger moral ending, so his character was expanded as a villain of sorts, offering Charlie a fortune to steal from Willy Wonka, who, of course, is able to resist temptation and prove his worth.
"Charlie, meet Mr. Wilkinson. Pleasure. Slugworth? No, no, that's not Slugworth. He works for me. For you? I have to test you, Charlie."
So, much like the book, Tim Burton's adaptation mentions Slugworth only in passing, and Charlie inherits the factory by, you know, being the only one left on the tour. But as a way to supply the Tim Burton version with some sort of villain and to partially explain Willy Wonka's obsession for chocolate, his father is portrayed as an overbearing, dentist control freak. Of course, spoiler alert, everything works out in the end, and the two reconcile, but it's by far the biggest departure from the original book and 1971 adaptation.
"The strange thing is, the first movie was Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. This movie is correctly titled Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, because Freddie Highmore is really the central character, right? And he and the people around him, the kids and his weird family, carry the movie along with a specialist, his weird but lovable family."
Much like the original, the remake also received generally positive reviews, and in some cases, was praised as even better than the original. But it definitely set fans of the book into one of two camps: those that prefer the Gene Wilder version and those that prefer the Johnny Depp version. Although, maybe you're like me and have found a way to appreciate both, as while the original adaptation is a timeless classic, the remake was a nice way to give fans of the book a more faithful adaptation. So, in this case, it seems we were able to have our cake, or chocolate, and eat it too.
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]