CATCF Question #7 - The Original Movie

by Roald Dahl

Moderator: Liz

User avatar
Liz
ONBC Moderator
Posts: 12971
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:13 pm
Location: The Left Coast

Status: Offline

CATCF Question #7 - The Original Movie

Unread postby Liz » Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:16 am

Image
Ooops! Wrong Willy.

Image
That's Better.

In The Pied Pipers Interview Dahl says of director, Mel Stewart, director of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, “Oh, what a mess that man made of Charlie!” Those of you who have seen the movie, what do you think?

Image
You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

User avatar
Veronica
Posts: 5951
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Ohio

Status: Offline

Unread postby Veronica » Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:28 am

I wouldnt describe it as a mess. Its a cute film & I loved as a child. I think it was the era of why they didnt make Willy as dark of a character. What they did do was considered scary at times. I think that Genes version of Willy is dark but when they made it a muscial changed on how you felt. He was abosolutely insane. they did change the story alot. they didnt give Charlie a father in that movie. I dont know why they would do that. the squirl part was replaced with Geese. I figured it was because it was too costly to make fake squirls or have live ones. there were more changes but cant think of them at the moment. Can anyone else think of what was different in the old movie from the book.
Everything is always okay in the end,
if it's not, then it's not the end.

Today is a gift....Have Fun!

User avatar
es
Posts: 9964
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: den helder,aan zee

Status: Offline

Unread postby es » Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:36 am

well, i liked the movie on its own,at that time i dint read the book so its a bit hard to compaire(since i havent seen the movie in ages and the book recently)
didnt they make up a whole new plotline about slugworth asking the kids for a recipie?also i think charly did a bad thing in the movie,i believe something with the stuff you had the burb before you could go down.
like veronica i couldnt understand why they let charlys parents out of the story.
al in al i tought it was a sweet movie specially for that time but a different tone to it,greetings,
es

User avatar
Liz
ONBC Moderator
Posts: 12971
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:13 pm
Location: The Left Coast

Status: Offline

Unread postby Liz » Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:44 am

Veronica wrote:I wouldnt describe it as a mess. Its a cute film & I loved as a child. I think it was the era of why they didnt make Willy as dark of a character. What they did do was considered scary at times. I think that Genes version of Willy is dark but when they made it a muscial changed on how you felt. He was abosolutely insane. they did change the story alot. they didnt give Charlie a father in that movie. I dont know why they would do that. the squirl part was replaced with Geese. I figured it was because it was too costly to make fake squirls or have live ones. there were more changes but cant think of them at the moment. Can anyone else think of what was different in the old movie from the book.


I can't because I've never seen the movie and don't plan to until after I see the Burton version. I have friends, though, who've indicated that the movie scared them--the kind of movie that gives you nightmares afterward.
You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

User avatar
Veronica
Posts: 5951
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Ohio

Status: Offline

Unread postby Veronica » Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:51 pm

es wrote:well, i liked the movie on its own,at that time i dint read the book so its a bit hard to compaire(since i havent seen the movie in ages and the book recently)
didnt they make up a whole new plotline about slugworth asking the kids for a recipie?also i think charly did a bad thing in the movie,i believe something with the stuff you had the burb before you could go down.
like veronica i couldnt understand why they let charlys parents out of the story.
al in al i tought it was a sweet movie specially for that time but a different tone to it,greetings,
es


they have you believeing it was Slugworth but it was Willy testing the kids.
Everything is always okay in the end,

if it's not, then it's not the end.



Today is a gift....Have Fun!

User avatar
fansmom
Posts: 2059
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:50 pm
Location: Olney, Maryland

Status: Offline

Unread postby fansmom » Tue Mar 08, 2005 2:17 pm

As es said, in the movie, Charlie does a bad thing--just like the other kids, he disobeys WW's instructions, but unlike them, he doesn't suffer any consequences.

The book says it's a morality tale. If Charlie breaks the rules and gets away with it without a good reason, it's not a morality tale. That seems like a pretty fundamental difference to me.

User avatar
lumineuse
Posts: 5991
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Erie, PA, USA

Status: Offline

Unread postby lumineuse » Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:11 pm

I can't remember the movie that well. I did think Gene Wilder seemed a little dangerous in an insane kind of way. And I remember trhinking the whole thing was rather pointless, maybe for the reason that es and fansmom pointed out.
"Oh, good!........ No worries, then."

User avatar
es
Posts: 9964
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: den helder,aan zee

Status: Offline

Unread postby es » Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:13 pm

Veronica wrote:
es wrote:well, i liked the movie on its own,at that time i dint read the book so its a bit hard to compaire(since i havent seen the movie in ages and the book recently)
didnt they make up a whole new plotline about slugworth asking the kids for a recipie?also i think charly did a bad thing in the movie,i believe something with the stuff you had the burb before you could go down.
like veronica i couldnt understand why they let charlys parents out of the story.
al in al i tought it was a sweet movie specially for that time but a different tone to it,greetings,
es


they have you believeing it was Slugworth but it was Willy testing the kids.

really?i totally forgot that part,a well it was a long time ago,thanks for telling me!
greets,
es

User avatar
axelsgirl
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:54 am
Location: Oregon

Status: Offline

Unread postby axelsgirl » Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:01 pm

The first movie seemed kind of light and silly to me. As it should be for kids, I guess. Gene Wilder was deffinatly weird in a dark way, he seemed to be encourging the kids to do wrong by telling them "Oh, no, stop" in a very unconvincing way. I remember how he would open his eyes real wide and it just made him look wacko!
As for the story line it was changed from the book , too. Didn"t Dahl have a say into what went into the screen play? :-?
"Yeah, well, let's keep on truckin'!"

User avatar
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
Posts: 10378
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Austin

Status: Offline

Unread postby DeppInTheHeartOfTexas » Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:34 pm

fansmom wrote: As es said, in the movie, Charlie does a bad thing--just like the other kids, he disobeys WW's instructions, but unlike them, he doesn't suffer any consequences.


Could that be what Dahl meant when he said the really messed up Charlie?

I saw Willy Wonka many years ago as an adult and I thought it was VERY creepy. That boat ride... :freaked: Adults I talk to now that saw it as children loved it so there is must be a difference in perception based on your age. From what we have seen, I like Tim's sets better and I have to say I am glad it won't be a musical. :yuck2:
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!

User avatar
Veronica
Posts: 5951
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:42 am
Location: Ohio

Status: Offline

Unread postby Veronica » Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:38 pm

lumineuse wrote:I can't remember the movie that well. I did think Gene Wilder seemed a little dangerous in an insane kind of way. And I remember trhinking the whole thing was rather pointless, maybe for the reason that es and fansmom pointed out.


the test was whether they would sell out to slugworth. thats why charlie still won at the end
Everything is always okay in the end,

if it's not, then it's not the end.



Today is a gift....Have Fun!

User avatar
lumineuse
Posts: 5991
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Erie, PA, USA

Status: Offline

Unread postby lumineuse » Tue Mar 08, 2005 7:42 pm

Veronica wrote:
lumineuse wrote:I can't remember the movie that well. I did think Gene Wilder seemed a little dangerous in an insane kind of way. And I remember trhinking the whole thing was rather pointless, maybe for the reason that es and fansmom pointed out.


the test was whether they would sell out to slugworth. thats why charlie still won at the end


Could be! It's been a long time since I saw that movie. I don't want to watch it again now, until After I've seen CATCF.
"Oh, good!........ No worries, then."

deppraved
Posts: 5002
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:24 pm

Status: Offline

Unread postby deppraved » Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:00 pm

I want to comment but have never actually sat down and watched the whole movie. I was a little bored with the bits I have seen, and wasn't crazy about it or the music. I have no idea why. Too corny maybe?

User avatar
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
Posts: 10378
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Austin

Status: Offline

Unread postby DeppInTheHeartOfTexas » Tue Mar 08, 2005 11:12 pm

deppraved wrote: wasn't crazy about it or the music. I have no idea why. Too corny maybe?


It was corny and creepy and sometimes that works but the mix wasn't right for me. It seemed to go too far one way and then too far the other. I did think Gene Wilder did a good job though. I think this Willy Wonka character will be completely different, but we would expct no less!
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -

Wow! What a ride!

User avatar
Caitlin
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 3:59 pm
Location: AZ

Status: Offline

Unread postby Caitlin » Tue Mar 08, 2005 11:20 pm

fansmom wrote:As es said, in the movie, Charlie does a bad thing--just like the other kids, he disobeys WW's instructions, but unlike them, he doesn't suffer any consequences.

The book says it's a morality tale. If Charlie breaks the rules and gets away with it without a good reason, it's not a morality tale. That seems like a pretty fundamental difference to me.


Why would they change the movie to make him break the rules though? Is it trying to send out obligatory messages to children to always be good, don't listen to strangers, don't lie, don't steal, don't cheat, etc.? After reading the book again, I don't understand why they had to change it in the screenplay. I thought it taught kids a good enough lesson.
Could the change be echoing something that was going on during that time that the movie was made, or am I just searching for patterns that don't exist?
"Do you like avocados?" -Sam
"Life would be a whole lot more interesting with a bunch of Willy Wonkas running around."


Return to “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest