I've seen the 1971 film "Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory" many, many times. I love that movie. To me, it's a masterpiece. Yes, it has a couple of lame songs (but the unforgettable "Oompa-Loompa" song more than makes up for the bad ones), and there are a couple of cheesy moments, but for the most part, the movie is excellent. I've also read the book that the movie is based on, "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory," which was written by the great Roald Dahl. I've read it twice, actually. I love the movie, and I love the book, but there are quite a few things different between the two. Roald Dahl himself actually wrote the screenplay adaptation, but David Seltzer (who wrote "The Omen") did an uncredited rewrite of the script, and Dahl was furious with the final product, reportedly hating the film. Having read the book, I personally feel that the movie is an excellent adaptation. Sure, it took liberties (the character "Slugworth," who was mentioned in a single line in the book, became a major character in the movie, and there was subplot where all the kids were tested to see if they'd betray "Willy Wonka" and give secrets to "Slugworth"), but it was similar in spirit, and it was a really great movie. Not to mention, Gene Wilder was absolutely perfect as "Willy Wonka."
When I heard that Tim Burton was directing a remake of "Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory," I was elated. If any other person was assigned to direct it, I would have been pissed, but Tim Burton is the one guy who could do it right. I'm not saying that because he's my favorite director, all you have to do is see the films he directed in the past (which include "Big Fish," "Sleepy Hollow," "Mars Attacks!," "Edward Scissorhands," "Batman," "Beetlejuice," and "Pee-wee's Big Adventure") to know that he's the perfect choice. It also helps that the film wouldn't be a remake of the 1971 film as much as it would be a different feature film based on the book it was based on.
Then again, I heard the same thing about "Planet of the Apes," which I consider to be Tim Burton's worst film to date. The difference is that the Roald Dahl book is filled with the sorta material that belongs in a Tim Burton movie. Although Burton has admitted that he's not a fan of the 1971 film, he IS a fan of Roald Dahl. In fact, he produced "James and the Giant Peach" (which was directed by Henry Selick, who earlier directed "Tim Burton's A Nightmare Before Christmas"... in "James and the Giant Peach" there's the appearance of a character who looks remarkably like "Jack Skellington"), a movie that combined live-action with stop-motion animation and was based on the book by Roald Dahl.
Shortly after it was announced that Tim Burton would be directing "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory," it was announced that Johnny Depp would star as "Willy Wonka." This was a big deal. For one thing, Johnny Depp has worked with Tim Burton several times before, and it just so happens that Tim Burton's best movies are the ones that star Johnny Depp ("Sleepy Hollow," "Ed Wood," and "Edward Scissorhands"). Secondly, Johnny Depp had finally become the movie star he deserved to be, having struck gold with his performance in "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl." And finally, Johnny Depp really is a great choice to play "Willy Wonka."
Walking into the theater, I had every reason to have high expectations. The reuniting of Tim Burton and Johnny Depp was enough reason, but on top of that, it was for a movie that was perfect for Tim Burton with a role that was perfect for Johnny Depp. So I sat back and watched "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory" with those high expectations, and I'm happy to say that, not surprisingly, those expectations were met. However, I gotta admit that right now, I would say that the 1971 version is better. That might just be nostalgia talking, though.
This new film really IS much closer to the book than the previous film, some of it seeming almost verbatim. The only differences are Johnny Depp's portrayal of Wonka (which I'll get to in a second), the fact that "Mike Teavee" is a video game junkie rather than a TV junkie, and the subplot about Wonka's father (which also hints at why "Willy Wonka" has those unusually perfect teeth in the film). Because of that subplot, the ending is also quite different from the book. The book's ending is there for the most part, but it takes a sharp turn at a certain point so that the subplot can be resolved. I think it works fine for the movie, so I'm not complaining, but the book's sequel, "Charlie & the Great Glass Elevator," picks up right where the "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory" book takes off. Actually, I kinda hope that they don't shoot that sequel, 'cause "Charlie & the Great Glass Elevator" isn't nearly as good as the first book.
Johnny Depp's performance as "Willy Wonka" is very good. I understand what he was going for, and he was really funny, but I definitely prefer what Gene Wilder did with the role. Johnny Depp plays it like a misunderstood eccentric who's pretty much a kid himself. A bit wacky, and perhaps a little mean-spirited, but for the most part, he's just a big kid who's kinda weird. Gene Wilder played him very differently. He was mysterious, irritable, and even borderline sinister. Neither interpretation is very much like the character depicted in the book (which is merely goofy and happy-go-lucky), but they're both certainly more intriguing.
Freddie Highmore (this is his second film with Johnny Depp, the first being "Finding Neverland") plays "Charlie," and I suppose it's a decent performance, but it's not a showstopper. Then again, it's not supposed to be. To be blunt, the character is rather dull (he was just as dull in the book and in the 1971 film). The other kids may have been pains in the asses, but at least they were interesting. Not including Freddie Highmore, Annasophia Robb, who plays "Violet Beauregarde," is the only one with any real acting experience, having starred in "Because of Winn-Dixie." All of the others (Julia Winter as "Veruca Salt," Jordon Fry as "Mike Teavee," and Philip Wiegratz as "Augustus Gloop") are making their feature film debut here, and all of them are quite good.
Even though Johnny Depp is the star of the film, I gotta take my hat off to Deep Roy (he was also in "Planet of the Apes" and "Big Fish"). He's the small actor who plays the Oompa-Loompas. All of them, though I'm sure there was some assistance via CGI. Since there were a whole lotta Oompa-Loompas, and some rather elaborate musical numbers in the film, he must have been VERY busy while making this film. He's great fun to watch, though.
The screenplay was written by John August, and this is his second time working with Tim Burton, since he also wrote the screenplay for "Big Fish." I think he did a great job, and the inclusion of the subplot about Wonka's father (I should probably mention that the father was played nicely by the always creepy Christopher Lee) works well. Still, I have to say, it lacked the wit of the David Seltzer adaptation.
I really liked "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory" a lot, but it remains to be seen if it'll be as durable as the 1971 film. I can watch that movie again and love it, even though I've seen it a whole lotta times before. Realistically, making comparisons is unfair, 'cause this film should stand on its own, and I think it does. Besides, if Roald Dahl was alive today, I think he'd be really happy with it.
Scale of 1-10: 9