Yes you may use this
If you love the old one & hate the new one then turn & leave right now.
Last chance to turn & leave if you're a fan of the old one & hater of the new one.
Ok to put it simple for you all; only God knows how much I hate this movie.
Or another way of putting it; My hate towards this movie is like the the universe, ever expanding.
Now you can continue on reading this or not if the past two sentences weren't enough for you.
That’s it! I’m sick of it! I’m tired of all the fans of the old one waahhing to me on my opinion over the new Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. What? I like it & I say it’s better than the old one & stood closer to the book (and it is) & they can’t handle it!? If you like the old one, I'm fine with that. But those people that almost wanna murder me because I love the new one are the ones that pissed me off enough to make this stamp!
I don’t even know where to begin on how horrible this sad excuse for a book-adaption is! I fucking hate this movie, I HATE IT
!!! You wanna know how much I hate this movie? I wish I could grab a metal bat, go back in time & beat the living shit out of all the people who ruined this movie (including Dahl [but not as hard as I would beat everyone else]) & send them to the hospital. That’s hate right there. Or to put it simpler, only God knows how much I HATE
this movie. I would so rather watch some darker version of a kids movie/book/art/poem than some cheesy, plain kids story/movie/poem.
I hated this movie since I was a kid! I read the book, loved it, & heard there was a movie to it. My mom rented it, & I watched it with her. I was scared shitless by those Oompa Loompas, & then got pissed off on how far it was from the book. I even told my mom to tell off the people who made this movie. Looking back at it, it was stupid. But hey I was a kid then. I also don't know why Dahl would ruin his own book by making the plot & story so shitty & predictable! And then I decided to look at the movie again now that I was older to see if I could like it. No, I ended up almost coughing out my own lungs on how horrible the movie was (& I’ll explain everything on that movie shortly). No one
in my family, but my little cousin, Carmen, likes this movie. I honestly have no idea where the hell that Golden Egg scene, those horribly written songs & Oompa Loompa designs, & that fizzy soda scene came from (just to name a few unexistant scenes).
I saw the new one, loved it, & it stood so much closer to the book than that shit-fest 70s one. And no, I didn’t go see it & liked it because Tim Burton did it. I loved that movie (as well as all of his other previous films) WAAAAYYYYY before I became a Burton fan. In fact, I never even knew at the time the new one came out that it existed. My aunts rented it for the kids, & I decided to watch it with them. And wow, I ended up adoring it (this was way before I ever got into movies). It stays loyal to it's source, & even did a better job with the original ending.
And what really pisses me off about why people like the old one is because they always say the same shit; “OMG I’m a huge Gene Wilder Fan &…..” “Johny Depp is no Gene Wilder” “Gene Wilder made the movie so fun, wild, & unpredictable, & funny! Johnny Depp was acting like Michael Jackson he's not supposed to be acting like that!” “Gene Wilder…Gene Wilder….Gene Wilder”…Gene Wilder, Gene Wilder, Gene Wilder, Gene Wilder, Gene shut the fuck up about Gene Wilder! He isn’t a comedic God! That’s all I hear from you people, in fact, I think that’s the only reason you people love the old one, because of Gene Wilder! Like a movie for how it’s done, not for the actors!
Now lemme explain how horrible this movie is:Cast & acting :
I think the only person who wasn’t a miscast & bad actor was Gene Wilder, he played the character exactly as the book, but even so, he got boring & sooner started to look like some child molester. As for the rest of the cast & characters….where the hell did they get them from? Acting camp? No one in there seemed to have been taking their roles seriously. They were all taking their acting & characters like a joke. And that’s another thing, the characters & their acting. Charlie looked like some kid who already knew he was going to get what he deserved after he got that dollar. His grandfather sounded rude & arrogant. Augustus Gloop looked tall, skinny, & athletic; not the fat, repulsive boy he was described as. Violet looked more like Augustus. And in the scene where she begins to inflate is probably where she acts her worst. She began to say “I feel funny”
when she was ready to burst & yet before that, she showed no signs of pain throughout any part of that scene, she was smiling as she inflated! Veruca looked like some preppy school girl more than she did a spoiled one. And her father smiled when she fell down the bad egg chute…..what kind of dad smiles after seeing his daughter falling down a chute!? And let’s finally get to Mike. He looked more like & acted more like a fan of cowboy movies & more polite. Not rude, & smart-ass like he was described.
As for the Oompa Loompas, askmissa.com/wp-content/upload…
that is not an Oompa Loompa, that is something a constipated alien shitted out it's ass after eating a box of roseart crayons. www.reply-mc.com/wp-content/up…
That's an OOmpa Loompa, that is what they were described in the book, & that's what an Oompa Loompa should look like.
You have the right to pick whichever you like better, but this here is my opinion on why I hate the characters & the movie.
Willy Wonka - Gene Wilder Wonka twogirlsonebrain.files.wordpre…
Now, Gene Wilder played his role/character exactly like the book, well somewhat. But sadly, his look was boring, & looked rather like he'd just reached into his basement & grabbed whatever old rags he found to wear. And Wilder's performance became boring & soon started looking like some child molester. He sure was interested in those kids. Another thing, his performance was so bland at a certain point that I would have preferred some other actor like Dustin Hoffman to have played the role.
That being said, Gene Wilder's Wonka character is just unrealistically kind & accepting to the rotten kids (who aren't even rotten to begin with in this movie). I mean, he's way to nice to a spoiled brat, an over-achieving girl, a greedy & gluttonous boy, & an annoying -ass TV addict. At least Johnny Depp managed to be rude to those kids like they deserved to, & for a good reason, which brings me to my next point on Deep's performance nicely.
Johnny Depp Wonka 4.bp.blogspot.com/-an4vBH4Ni4o…
Johnny Depp's Wonka may have changed, mainly due to the subplot & background on him, but that was the point. Roal Dahl would have wanted that seeing that he also HATED how in the old one it focused so little on Wonka. But the other thing, this Wonka is almost like Michael Jackson in performance, because frankly, in the book he was described as almost insane. He is rude to the kids & to Charlie's grandparents, & for a reason. He has isolated himself from the outer world for so long, that it is hard for him to be nice to people he's never met, & plus, his father was an asshole to him. Another thing, he's rude & realistic, especially to the rotten kids (who actually ARE rotten in this movie), because they deserve it. At least Johnny Depp can act & keep someone entertained rather than the nostalgia fags who only like Gene Wilder's Wonka simply because it's Gene Wilder.
You can say the same to me because this Wonka is played by Johnny Depp, but no, I like this Wonka, because he's insanely funny, & extremely realistic in characterization. And you know what? when I first watched this movie, I didn't even know that was Johnny Depp playing Wonka, I really didn't. When I read in the Wikipedia credits to who plays what character, I was almost left astounded when I saw that Johnny Depp was Wonka, it didn't even look like him.
Charlie Bucket: www.templetoncc.com.au/charlie…
This insolent little prick deserves to have his head pounded by a brick. He is not only annoying, but an ungrateful, selfish moron who doesn't deserve to have won in the end. blogstruk.com/wp-content/uploa…
Now this Charlie right here is a better role model for kids, despite the fact that he could even be the new Jesus
While some kids may disagree with some of the things he says about parents, he gives good morals to others, & actually looks kindhearted & full of spirit.
Grandpa Joe: asset-server.libsyn.com/assets…
Ok, he may be somewhat of a good Grandpa, but this grandfather is rude & arrogant (& he can't sing either). www.alicia-logic.com/capsimage…
This grandpa Joe looks older & a little creepier, but he's nice, & funny.
Violet Beauregarde: 1.bp.blogspot.com/_0WwzBF2YaWU…
This Violet not only looks more like she could have been a better Augustus, but looks nothing athletic, determined, or confident, & is also a horrible actress. l.yimg.com/eb/ymv/us/img/hv/ph…
This violet not only looks like everything the old Violet wasn't, but also acts like it too, & not to mention she kicks ass.
Veruca Salt: 3.bp.blogspot.com/_ygnKxktO6tM…
I'll give the actress who played the old Violet credit for playing her character right, but the problem with the old Violet was that she looked nothing spoiled, instead, she looked like some preppy school girl. images.broadwayworld.com/photo…
The new Veruca Salt not only plays the spoiled brat role right, but she looks spoiled right away without a doubt, & not to mention that she pouts her mouth exactly like all spoiled girls do when they say "Want!"
Mike Teavee: www.humanforsale.com/images/mi…
Ok for real, this Mike looks nothing like a rude, smartypants, at all, nor does he look like a fan of video games & television, in fact, he just looks like a better Charlie Bucket for the old one. gb.cri.cn/mmsource/images/2005…
DO I have to say more? He's got that rude, smart-ass & tv obsessed look on his face, & even plays the role even better.
Augustus Gloop: unrealitymag.com/wp-content/up…
Ok first off, this kid doesn't look fat, at all, even with that plate of spaghetti. Secondly, this kid doesn't look repulsive, instead he looks more like a kid who goes to a very high class school. And third of all, he could have been a better Violet for the old one, because he looks athletic & slim. themomblog.ocregister.com/file…
The new Augustus looks repulsive & obese just by looking at him. Enough said.
Old Violet's Parent: moviemikes.com/wp-content/uplo…
Ok this guy doesn't look anything like Violet's father, in fact, he just look like Some Pee-Wee Herman reject. Honestly, who would believe that a girl like Violet would be caught with her dad? Let alone even a dad looking like that?
New Violet's Parent: www.2flashgames.com/photo/file…
She's hot, athletic looking, looks a lot like her own daughter, & you could totally picture her going with her own daughter to the factory.
Old Veruca Salt's parent: www.britmovie.co.uk/wp-content…
Couldn't find the right picture of Roy Kinnear so that one will have to do. Anyways, that guy right there looks nothing like a rich man, at all. He could be the dad for the old Violet for that matter! He's too big & the fact that he laughed when his own daughter fell down the egg chute just shows how much of a 'good dad' he is.
New Violet's parent: www.alicia-logic.com/capsimage…
This Mr. Salt looks fancy, wealthy, & rather comical. He's a well devoted father who panders to his daughter's every fucking needs & doesn't realize that until the end.
Augustus's old parent: s11.allstarpics.net/images/ori…
Ok she looks like the right role for Mrs. Gloop, & that's only because her own son doesn't even look like what he was supposed to.
Augustus's new parent: www.thelin.net/laurent/cinema/…
She's a perfect fit considering that she looks like her son & also is big, but she also plays her role perfectly.
Mike's old Parent: image2.findagrave.com/photos/2…
If anyone actually bought this character/actor as a geography teacher, then I feel sorry for you. She is better off playing the role of some house mother or another character in an Alfred Hitchcock movie. She looks nothing like a mother or a geography teacher.
Mike's new Parent: www.thelin.net/laurent/cinema/…
Ok now this guy not only looks like the perfect geography teacher, but can also be a geometry teacher. He looks rather nerdy & father-like. You can't go wrong with him.Effects:
The majority of them were advanced for their own time, but some of them were at their most laughable points. I think the worst scene was the TV room where they showed the particles/atoms moving above them. Last time I checked you’re not supposed to see particles in the air, no matter how fictional something is. The chocolate river was a terrible effect. Anyone that is smart could obviously see the water with a dirty brown food coloring. They could have used something to make it thicker.oliviadrab.typepad.com/.a/6a00…
WTF is that?! That's not an everlasting gobstopper! That is a bad piece of origami that a rock shitted out after its constipation! And I swear that thing could kill someone if swallowed & choke on or thrown at.
Sadly, as advance as the effects in the movie were for their own time, they are overshadowed by the effects in the new one. And don't come by giving me "The effects in the new one suck" or "The new one was nothing more than a cheap cgi fest!!" no, no, bull fucking shit.
The new one only used a handful of cgi effects, mainly on the glass elevator scenes, a handful on the squirrels, & a few others. The rest of the factory was all enlarged props & scale models, & that chocolate river was made of 192,000 tons of melted candy.Scenery
That is what a chocolate factory should look like. Tasty, lickable, mouth watering, & where everything literally looks eatable. billsmovieemporium.files.wordp…
wtf is is that?! That's not a chocolate factory, that's a stupid kids day care & a pedophiles dream lure, & Gene Wilder is the kids' child molester. The whole factory is supposed to be CANDY! The shitty 70s factory had FERNS & BUSHES, BRICK roads, giant inflated BALLOON lollipops, giant PLASTIC gummy bears, BEACH BALLS, & PAPER MACHE trees!Plot & story:
The movie's plot is predictable & the story is laughable. Now as for those of you complaining how the new one had Wily Wonka was the main character, I'm getting to that. Now, the old one had Charlie as the main character, which is how it was, but it had very little focus on Wonka, & that's one of the reasons Dahl really hated about the movie, the little focus on Willy.
Now the new has Charlie as the main character for the first half of the movie, & then for the next half, it focuses on Willy Wonka as the main character. Burton did that not only because that's usually what he does with a character played by Johnny Depp, but also because Dahl wanted more focus on Wonka. And I myself actually wanted to know more about Wonka as well.Music/Score
Ok that has nothing close to a chocolate nor factory-like feel to it, at all. It sounds like some over-dramatic shit, & has the sound of a marching band & some cliche drama film. And don't even get me started on those annoying, poorly written Oompa Loompa songs.
As for Danny Elfman's version of the songs & score, they're all well done. Sure some of the score sounds a little dark due to the added chorus, but that's what I like. Elfman captures the feel of any movie with his music. www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqjnmN…
That has both the factory & chocolate feel to it. Not only that but it has Elfman's signature dark chorus added to it, making it perfect.Faithfulness to its source:
It doesn’t even deserve to say “Based on the book by Rohald Dahl”. IDK where they got that Golden Egg scene, those Oompa Loompas, that floating, bubble scene, & those horrible songs.
The ending to the old one stood exactly like the ending in the book, yes I’ll admit that, but even then I still don’t like it anymore
I didn’t even like how it ended in the book; it was too cheesy for me. Burton’s one actually gave a lesson to kids, would they give up their family for some Factory & all the candy in the World? I don’t think so. Hell I would have, screw my life & family, I would’ve taken the deal anyways.
And as for those who are just gonna say ¨Oh, well that´s just your opinion & just because a movie doesn't stay close to the book doesn't make it bad, & just because the new one stays closer to the book doesn't make it better!¨ No, you can kiss my ass. I'm tired of you hypocrites saying all of that bullshit, but yet I see you all saying ¨I hate Disney movies because they don't stay close to the books!!¨. FUCK THAT SHIT! The old one sucks major ass, whether you compare it to the book or not. And the new one is far superior, ESPECIALLY compared to the old or not.
And all of you can go ahead & say I have terrible taste in movie or I don't know what a good movie is for hating this shitty movie, I'll not only know further I'm right, but also showing how stupid this movie's fanbase is, & I can clearly use those same terms against you for liking this shitty movie.
But what I am TIRED of hearing form these fans is that the new one sucks compared tot his one. NO IT DOESN'T! The new one is not a terrible movie, compared to the old one or not (even though the only one that DOES suck compared to one another is the old one). If you think one movie sucks because of comparing it to the other , then you, you fail at reviewing something. Watch a remake/readaption for what is is. When I watch a remake or whatever, I watch it & both compare it to the original version & then I see it as a standalone film, because the original source is one thing & this is another. I've seen SHIT films that are terrible whether you compare it to the original source or see it as a standalone movie (A Nightmare on Elm Street). But NOOOOO, you people just HAVE TO COMPARE the new one to the old one all the time don't you?! If the new one is a terrible movie, then Batman & Robin is superior to The Dark Knight.Shit movies I'd rather watch over this:
The Garbage Pail Kids Movie, The Return of Jafar, FernGully 2, Terminator Salvation, The Jungle Book, Chicken Little, Cars, Meet the Robinsons, Ratatouille, most of the shitty Disney straight to DVD sequels, Jaws 4, A Troll in Central Park, Bones, Amusement, & so many, many more!
My Final Score for this movie:
I can't believe they changed the title as well. I really hate that old film & the more people bag on me for hating it, I hate it even more (though I don’t know if I’s possible to hate more than I already do). Hands down, Burton’s version is superior in every way. This movie lands on #2 of the top 3 WORST musicals I have ever seen (the other two being Camp Rock, & Oliver), one of the worst kids movies ever made, tied with Eragon on my list of the worst book adaption movies I have ever seen in my life, & #1 on my list of the most hated movies list. This movie was so bad that Roald Dahl not only hated it, but refused
to sell the rights for a sequel. Thanks a lot Mel Stuart
Note: Don't bother sending me some critic's review or that Nostalgia Critic's review on this movie because I will NOT AGREE WITH THEM, & you'll just make me hate the old one more. And to all of you fantards of the old one who are gonna come by "Well you're wrong, the old one is still better", no, no I'm not. This movie sucks dick, in every way, even as a stand-alone film.
You have all the right to disagree with me, but if you deny how bad the acting was, then I'm sorry, I can't respect your opinion. You also don't have to change your mind about what you think about the old one after reading this. You can still like the old one if you want to.
Best bottom line review movies.yahoo.com/mvc/dfrv?mid=…
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rankings:Most Hated Films:
#1Worst Book Adaptions:
#1 (tied with Eragon
)Worst Kids Movies:
#1Worst movies I have ever seen:
#3Worst 70s movie:
#1Most laughable films:
Note: Just because it's #1 on my Most Hated Movies
list, doesn't mean I think it's worse than the others on that list. I just hate it more than others, not think it's worse than them.