Best version of Willy Wonka

TV, Movies, Sports...you can find it all in here.

Postby Blitzkrieg1701 » Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:25 pm

The older movie is more ICONIC, and the songs are more memorable, but as a MOVIE, the new one is better. It's more of an actual story than a long string of set pieces.
Image Image

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Purple"]For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this: that one died for all, therefore all died; and he that died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf. II Corinthians 5:14-15[/color][/font]
User avatar
Blitzkrieg1701
 
Posts: 1884
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 9:01 am
Location: Washington, DC (when I'm not in an alternate universe)

Postby animewarrior » Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:33 pm

>.> deep thread.
I've seen both versions and neither of them struck a terribly good cord with me.
But then again, I read the book first.

The original Wonka (Gene Wilder) was funny in that his complete disregard for the children's safety and general attitude. However, I thought that as Wonka the actor could have made the ending a bit more...sadistic? he just acted like a jerk at the end, realized that I must help the children and lightened up.

Tim Burton's version with Depp as Wonka (my favourite version) was more sarcastic and sadistic. As a pessimist I found this to be hilarious. Adding backstory with Wonka's dad made Wonka a more identifiable character in my mind. Charlie was represented better as well. I think Johnny Depp did a fantastic job!
(crazy and creepy as it is!)

And for the lolz factor:
Count Dooku: Wonka, I am your FATHER!
Wonka: ....NOOOOOOO!
---kudos if you get it-----
Status: Lurker.... but I'll be around.
~ The fainter the heartbeat the stronger the soul~

*They're just an incomplete group of people wishing to be whole; and to that end, they're desperately searching for something.* - Namine (Kingdom Hearts 2)
User avatar
animewarrior
 
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: ~Twilight Wonderland~

Postby Robin Firedrake » Sat Feb 28, 2009 1:36 pm

Ah yes. Can't remember the name but he's the guy who played dooku. He also played Saruman.
Image
User avatar
Robin Firedrake
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Greater Llewellynlland

Postby ShiroiHikari » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:02 pm

His name is Christopher Lee and he's hiding in your closet right now.
fightin' in the eighties
User avatar
ShiroiHikari
 
Posts: 7564
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Somewhere between 1983 and 1989

Postby Robin Firedrake » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:03 pm

I have no closet 8P
Image
User avatar
Robin Firedrake
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Greater Llewellynlland

Postby Radical Dreamer » Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:53 pm

Azier the Swordsman (post: 1292371) wrote:You think remake Wonka is creepy now? Could have been cast worse...

Johnny Depp

Marilyn Manson

Michael Jackson


This post was AMAZING. XDD

Also, Nate, you should totally watch Big Fish one day. It's unlike anything Burton has ever done (as far as I've seen) and is one of my all-time favorite movies. XD On that note, don't bother with Nightmare--I found it to be pretty disappointing after hearing all the hype.
[color="DeepSkyBlue"]4 8 15 16 23[/color] 42
[color="PaleGreen"]Rushia: YOU ARE MY FAVORITE IGNORANT AMERICAN OF IRISH DECENT. I LOVE YOU AND YOUR POTATOES.[/color]
[color="Orange"]WELCOME TO MOES[/color]

Image

User avatar
Radical Dreamer
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:00 am
Location: Some place where I can think up witty things to say under the "Location" category.

Postby ADXC » Sun Mar 01, 2009 6:16 pm

Yeah I agree with RD, Big Fish is a great movie, odd, but great.
User avatar
ADXC
 
Posts: 2569
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 9:21 pm
Location: ???

Postby bakura_fan » Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:03 pm

I only saw the first movie once. My parents rented it when i was like 8 or 9. I was quite bored with it. The whole movie was confusing to me. My husband loves the first movie to death, I love the second (but then I'm a big gothic tim burton/depp fan. lol.) and bought it. Most likely if I can find a dvd of the first one I'll buy it for my husband. :) most likely our future kids will see both.
:angel:

[color=DeepSkyBlue] "He lives in you. He lives in me. [/color]He watches over everything we see.
Into the water. Into the truth. [color=Yellow][color=DeepSkyBlue]In your reflection, He lives in you." - He lives in you chorus[/color][/color]
"Slow, love, slow. Time's so fast. Now goes quickly, see Now it's past!
Soon will come, Soon will last. Wait." [color=Yellow]- Wait (sweeney todd) [/color]

[align=center]My art page.

[align=center]Married to swordguy
:hug:



[/align]
[/align]
User avatar
bakura_fan
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: @ the mother-in-laws. ^_^

Postby GhostontheNet » Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:33 pm

Radical Dreamer (post: 1293245) wrote:On that note, don't bother with Nightmare--I found it to be pretty disappointing after hearing all the hype.
Come now, you're too harsh on The Nightmare Before Christmas. While it's never a good idea to take anyone's hype at face value (this is mostly because hype has a way of overinflating things way beyond what they was ever really intended to be), The Nightmare Before Christmas has several features that make it deserve its classic status:

1. It introduced a new generation to the magic of stop motion animation, effectively safeguarding the medium from the coming computer graphics explosion. This is good because, as Burton himself observes, stop motion animation has a distinctly physical and handcrafted look and charm that is very difficult to emulate on computers. As has been often noted, one of the difficult tricks of CG is getting the eye to accept that the CG object is actually occupying the space of the screen, and so at times stop motion animation may actually be more effective than even the most advanced digitally rendered image.

2. It produced a culturally acceptable outlet for feelings of fear, alienation, loneliness, and discontent. Where mainstream culture generally expects life to be bright, glossy, safe, and happy, no cultural icon for the rejection of these values and expectations as unrealistic is more instantly recognizable than characters and images from The Nightmare Before Christmas. Little wonder the film has produced such a perennial torrent of merchandise!

3. In a culture essentially deprived of ritual and myth, it highlights the incredible importance of the two holidays of Halloween and Christmas, which are at least two days that serve to alleviate this generally unmet need.

4. It defangs the monsters by showing their humanity, enabling us to perhaps make peace with the monsters hiding in our closets and underneath our beds. Living in a scary world, the importance of being able able to do this cannot be overestimated for both children and adults. After all, nothing bothers children nearly so much as our only half-believed efforts to reassure them that nothing is really wrong after all, and they have to do something with all this lingering anxiety. And as for the adults, while it's quite fashionable to pretend that we will eventually outgrow all of this, the truth is that the monsters only take on new forms as we grow older.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby Radical Dreamer » Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:46 pm

GhostontheNet (post: 1293456) wrote:Come now, you're too harsh on The Nightmare Before Christmas. While it's never a good idea to take anyone's hype at face value (which is mostly because hype has a way of overinflating something way beyond what it was ever intended to be), The Nightmare Before Christmas has several features that makes it deserve its classic status:

1. It introduced a new generation to the magic of stop motion animation, effectively safeguarding the medium from the coming computer graphics explosion. This is good because, as Burton himself observes, stop motion animation has a distinctly physical and handcrafted look and charm that is very difficult to emulate on computers. As has been often noted, one of the difficult tricks of CG is getting the eye to accept that the CG object is actually occupying the space of the screen, and so at times stop motion animation may actually be more effective than even the most advanced digitally rendered image.

2. It produced a culturally acceptable outlet for feelings of fear, alienation, loneliness, and discontent. Where mainstream culture generally expects life to be bright, glossy, safe, and happy, no cultural icon for the rejection of these values and expectations as unrealistic is more instantly recognizable than characters and images from The Nightmare Before Christmas. Little wonder the film has produced such a perennial torrent of merchandise!

3. In a culture essentially deprived of ritual and myth, it highlights the incredible cultural importance of the two holidays of Halloween and Christmas, which are at least two days that serve to alleviate this cultural deprivation.

4. It defangs the monsters by showing their humanity, enabling us to perhaps make peace with the monsters hiding in our closets and underneath our beds. Living in a scary world, the importance of being able able to do this cannot be overestimated for both children and adults. After all, nothing bothers children nearly so much as our only half-believed efforts to reassure them that nothing is really wrong after all, and they have to do something with that lingering anxiety. And as for the adults, while it's quite fashionable to pretend that we will eventually outgrow all of this, the truth is that the monsters only take on new forms as we grow older.



Oh, Nightmare was undoubtedly a new, innovative and very creative movie for its time, and I won't deny that it's an animated classic. I just didn't find it to be all that enjoyable, and certainly not what it had been made out to be to me for years. XD I only watched it for the first time about two years ago, which was a year or so after I'd heard every friend and acquaintance of mine telling me it was the "z-o-m-g best movie evar," so based on my expectations it kind of fell flat. I assume I'd have a better take on it had I seen it years prior, but I have a feeling it would've scared me to death as a little kid. XD

But yeah, it's definitely a classic and deserves to be mentioned as a good movie for its day. I'm just not a huge fan of it, overall. XD
[color="DeepSkyBlue"]4 8 15 16 23[/color] 42
[color="PaleGreen"]Rushia: YOU ARE MY FAVORITE IGNORANT AMERICAN OF IRISH DECENT. I LOVE YOU AND YOUR POTATOES.[/color]
[color="Orange"]WELCOME TO MOES[/color]

Image

User avatar
Radical Dreamer
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:00 am
Location: Some place where I can think up witty things to say under the "Location" category.

Postby GhostontheNet » Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:10 pm

Radical Dreamer (post: 1293461) wrote:Oh, Nightmare was undoubtedly a new, innovative and very creative movie for its time, and I won't deny that it's an animated classic. I just didn't find it to be all that enjoyable, and certainly not what it had been made out to be to me for years. XD I only watched it for the first time about two years ago, which was a year or so after I'd heard every friend and acquaintance of mine telling me it was the "z-o-m-g best movie evar," so based on my expectations it kind of fell flat. I assume I'd have a better take on it had I seen it years prior, but I have a feeling it would've scared me to death as a little kid. XD

But yeah, it's definitely a classic and deserves to be mentioned as a good movie for its day. I'm just not a huge fan of it, overall. XD
Yeah, The Nightmare Before Christmas definitely isn't another Citizen Kane, but it is a great movie for candy corn and sugar cookies. In my experience, whenever I play the film, reactions are generally quite positive for audiences both young and old, so I don't think it's time to shelve Jack Skellington and friends among the collection of dated relics just yet. Certainly it's not the kind of film to put out a general warning against, because as you yourself admit, a lot of people watch it and find it absolutely charming and enchanting.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby Kkun » Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:10 am

ShiroiHikari (post: 1292721) wrote:His name is Christopher Lee and he's hiding in your closet right now.


I wish.
I'm a shoe-in for hater of the year.
User avatar
Kkun
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 9:00 am
Location: The Player Hater's Ball.

Postby termyt » Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:34 am

He's welcome in my closet anytime. He might have saved Star Wars if only he had a bigger role. By far the most interesting character, thanks largly to his acting ability since he had little screen time or backstory, in the second trilogy.
[color="Red"]Please visit Love146.org[/color]
A member of the Society of Hatted Members
Image
If your pedantic about grammar, its unlikely that you'll copy and paste this into your sig, to.
User avatar
termyt
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: oHIo

Postby GhostontheNet » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:40 am

ShiroiHikari (post: 1292721) wrote:His name is Christopher Lee and he's hiding in your closet right now.
Ah yes, the actor who played Dracula from the old Hammer Horror movies, to say nothing of his other roles. It's amazing how age seems to have shifted his role from handsome rogue to stern and often sinister older authority figure. Yeah, having himself grown up on Hammer and classic horror movies, Tim Burton's casting of Christopher Lee in Sleepy Hollow, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and The Corpse Bride is a very clever decision on his part.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby Shiningmonk_e » Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:40 pm

I like the new version more. Marylin Manson though....I have no intention of seeing my 2nd cousin in a movie O_O (and yes we are related, which is creepy, though I have never actually seen him up close (nor do I want to))
"Who is this?" they said to Me
'That the wind and waves obey
Come, let's hang Him on a tree
That His reign should pass away'
But here I am I say to you
Though you turn away, it is My will
To love you for forevermore
Peace be still, peace be still
-Showbread-the Sky(alpha)
User avatar
Shiningmonk_e
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby rocklobster » Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:29 pm

I'm praying for you shiningmonk_e, anyone related to him definitely needs divine intervention!
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. I appointed you to be a prophet of all nations."
--Jeremiah 1:5
Image
Hit me up on social media!
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007205508246<--Facebook

I'm also on Amino as Radical Edward, and on Reddit as Rocklobster as well.


click here for my playlist!
my last fm profile!
User avatar
rocklobster
 
Posts: 8903
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:27 pm
Location: Planet Claire

Postby GhostontheNet » Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:34 pm

rocklobster (post: 1293960) wrote:I'm praying for you shiningmonk_e, anyone related to him definitely needs divine intervention!
Umm, you're joking, right? That's the thing, I think, about Marilyn Manson - a lot of people, not realizing his David Bowie-esque theatricality, take him far too seriously. The truth of the matter, however, is that "Marilyn Manson" is, like Ziggy Stardust, a character performing on stage, and as such is no more real than Darth Vader. Once we realize this, a lot of Manson's dry and ironic humor really comes through as we consider the life of a cartoon scapegoat and villain.

Oh, and by the way, Marilyn Manson's music is not Goth, it's Glam Metal. He just dresses with a lot of Goth stuff because our style has its roots in Glam rock performers like David Bowie and it suits his dark public persona.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby Tsukuyomi » Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:01 pm

Oh silly me :eh:I forgot to vote for which Willy Wonka was better xDD;
Image
User avatar
Tsukuyomi
 
Posts: 8222
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: I am a figment of your imagination... I live only in your dreams... I haunt you ~(O_O)~

Postby Tommy » Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:40 pm

Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.
FKA Tom Dincht

Check out my band if you've got the time.
http://encompass1.bandcamp.com/
User avatar
Tommy
 
Posts: 5745
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 12:00 pm
Location: Plymouth, Mass

Postby GhostontheNet » Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:10 pm

Tommy (post: 1294401) wrote:Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.
That's nice, now if you gave a couple of reasons why the original was better instead of gawking stupefied, you might actually have some content here. Anyway, if you look at the poll again you'll notice that the original is in the lead at 60% while Burton's film holds a respectable 40%.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby goldenspines » Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:11 pm

Tommy (post: 1294401) wrote:Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.


The world is full of wonderful mysteries. :D


I like the newest version actually, just because it didn't creep me out at much as the old version. But, I have to admit, the Oompa Lompa songs in the old one were the best.
Image
User avatar
goldenspines
 
Posts: 4869
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Up north somewhere.

Postby Scarecrow » Thu Mar 05, 2009 2:08 am

Tommy (post: 1294401) wrote:Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.


And the the fact that that the old movie is winning in votes blows mine. That's nostalgia for ya though :D
"Take me down, shake me out. Give me a brain, that I might know You better"
User avatar
Scarecrow
 
Posts: 1354
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: California

Postby Warrior 4 Jesus » Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:44 am

I actually found the Tim Burton version much creepier (besides the tunnel scene from the original).
User avatar
Warrior 4 Jesus
 
Posts: 4844
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: The driest continent that isn't Antarctica.

Postby Radical Dreamer » Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:05 am

Tommy (post: 1294401) wrote:Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.


GhostontheNet (post: 1294443) wrote:That's nice, now if you gave a couple of reasons why the original was better instead of gawking stupefied, you might actually have some content here. Anyway, if you look at the poll again you'll notice that the original is in the lead at 60% while Burton's film holds a respectable 40%.


Is there really a need to be so hostile about a movie? Think it over.
[color="DeepSkyBlue"]4 8 15 16 23[/color] 42
[color="PaleGreen"]Rushia: YOU ARE MY FAVORITE IGNORANT AMERICAN OF IRISH DECENT. I LOVE YOU AND YOUR POTATOES.[/color]
[color="Orange"]WELCOME TO MOES[/color]

Image

User avatar
Radical Dreamer
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 9:00 am
Location: Some place where I can think up witty things to say under the "Location" category.

Postby Tarnish » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:08 am

I never liked the original, even when I was required by law to do so. I thought it was annoying, obnoxious, and the Oompa-Loompas scared the everloving crap out of me.

I'm really not a huge fan of Burton's version, either, but if given the choice, I'd go for his anyday. At the very least, the visuals are more appealing and the Oompa-Loompas don't look and sound like the spawn of Satan.

Oh, and no friggin' tunnel scene.
User avatar
Tarnish
 
Posts: 954
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 9:00 am
Location: The foothills of the headlands.

Postby Whitefang » Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:56 pm

Tommy (post: 1294401) wrote:Not to put down the people that voted for it, but the fact more than half of the people here voted for the new movie blows my mind.


I'm actually surprised that the old Wonka is winning. I always had the impression that being truer to the books had given the new Wonka an edge over old Wonka. (note also that the question being asked, while related to asking, "which movie is better?", is actually, "Which version of Wonka is better", as far as I can tell.)

As for me, I liked cheery Gene Wilder and Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory myself. As strange as this may sound, Wonka was simply more realistic in the first version, and didn't have an excuse to do what he did (I don't know the psychological terms, but Johnny Depp's Wonka had some real issues!) In the end I feel that both movies tell a very different story, and they both have their merits. I guess I prefer the moral of, "do what's right and honest (in spite of revenge or potential gain)" over the moral of, "family is more important than one's work" (I'll be honest, that's probably not the moral, but I'm hard pressed to think of what it is off the top of my head).

Plus, how awesome was Wonka's office? Half of a safe, are you serious?
"It's not easy to act in the name of justice."

"Justice is not the only right in this world"
User avatar
Whitefang
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Paradise

Postby rocklobster » Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:04 pm

Tarnish (post: 1294498) wrote:I never liked the original, even when I was required by law to do so. I thought it was annoying, obnoxious, and the Oompa-Loompas scared the everloving crap out of me.

I'm really not a huge fan of Burton's version, either, but if given the choice, I'd go for his anyday. At the very least, the visuals are more appealing and the Oompa-Loompas don't look and sound like the spawn of Satan.

Oh, and no friggin' tunnel scene.


That's my main problem! The tunnel needs to be there! Don't you realize there's supposed to be symbolism in the story? The factory is supposed to be Heaven or Eden (your pick)and each of the children, with the exception of Charlie, represents a deadly sin. (Veruca, for example, represents greed). The tunnel, IMHO, represents Hell. Ever heard the old saying "You have to go through Hell to get to Heaven?"
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. I appointed you to be a prophet of all nations."
--Jeremiah 1:5
Image
Hit me up on social media!
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007205508246<--Facebook

I'm also on Amino as Radical Edward, and on Reddit as Rocklobster as well.


click here for my playlist!
my last fm profile!
User avatar
rocklobster
 
Posts: 8903
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:27 pm
Location: Planet Claire

Postby GhostontheNet » Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:39 pm

Yeah, I have to admit that as scary as the tunnel scene was in the original, I really missed it in Burton's version. Looking back, I'm surprised that scene even made it into the film with such raw footage like a chicken being decapitated and whatnot (I guess that must be because the scene is so skillfully edited that you don't really have much time to think about what's happening on the wall). According to Burton himself, the tunnel scene really freaked him out when he was a kid and he didn't like the way it resembled a really bad acid trip, so he decided not to do it. I guess its funny how, for all the precautions taken by parents and authority figures to prevent kids from seeing this stuff, it's the most traumatic images that have the most lasting impact upon us.
User avatar
GhostontheNet
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora, CO

Postby Nate » Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:23 am

rocklobster wrote:Ever heard the old saying "You have to go through Hell to get to Heaven?"

I totally and completely disagree with this statement but this is a thread for Willy Wonka, not philosophy, so I'll just leave it at that.
Whitefang wrote:I always had the impression that being truer to the books had given the new Wonka an edge over old Wonka.

See, I'm the kind of person that thinks complete and total devotion to the book doesn't make something better. Sometimes the movie can surpass the book by changing it. Fight Club comes off as the biggest example of this, and although I haven't seen it, I hear Ben-Hur is far better as a movie as well. Same with A Clockwork Orange. Same as book does not always a better movie make.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby Scarecrow » Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:42 am

I really hated the book so I didn't really care how closely either followed the book. I have to agree with whoever said Burton's was at least visually appealing. And I love Wonka's line "Good morning starshine! The Earth says 'Hello!'" :P

Anyway, I don't get the deal with the tunnel thing, lol. I saw this when I was little and I didn't get creeped out by Wonka or the tunnel at all. I thought Wonka was a jerk at the end though. But the tunnel... everyone makes a big deal about the tunnel. I even had to go back and re-watch that scene to see the big deal and I still don't get it. Maybe I just hated the movie THAT much when I was little that I just didn't care and now I'm just too old to get creeped out by something like that.
"Take me down, shake me out. Give me a brain, that I might know You better"
User avatar
Scarecrow
 
Posts: 1354
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: California

Previous Next

Return to General Entertainment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 345 guests