Willy vs. Charlie

          VS.       

  Last night I took Kasey to see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for her birthday (which is today- she's 5).  As a fan of the original, which I've seen countless times and own on DVD, I was interested to see what Tim Burton would do to it.  Normally I'm against remakes, but I can make an exception for this one because it was a book first and someone like Tim Burton should be allowed to get his hands on a magical candy factory and not worry that someone did it first more than 30 years ago.  I've decided there's only one right way to do this and that's the Breakdown, sports column style:

SPOILER WARNING: This article can only be done properly by discussing things in detail and I must assume that if you have read this far, you have already seen both.  Otherwise, proceed at your own risk.

1) WILLY WONKA 

  Arguably the most important role in the film.  This is the hardest call to make for me and I now realize that I don't know which way I'm going to lean on any of it.  Both Johnny Depp and Gene Wilder bring things to the role that I like.  Depp comes off as the more eccentric of the two, with more of a dislike for the children, while Wilder is more schizophrenic in his treatment of the children.  Wilder definitely seems more happy that they're there and tries to be more of a showman while Depp acts more shy and reserved- like a person who hasn't seen anyone but Oompa Loompas for fifteen years.  Both styles work for me.   

EDGE:  Even

2) Charlie Bucket

  I went in to this thinking that "Willy Wonka" might have an unfair advantage because I've seen it so many moretimes and I can still recall details like the genuine sense of wide-eyed wonderment Charlie has upon entering the factory.  But this was Peter Ostrum's only role so how much of it was acting and how much was real excitement to be on a movie set?  Freddie Highmore, on the other hand, does a solid, consistent job- even coming recommended to the part by Depp himself.  The Charlie role seems a bit smaller to me in "Charlie", which makes it even more impressive that Highmore can make you care about him.  I like that the script drops little hints that Charlie "gets it" and would be good at running the factory, while Ostrum's Charlie is just a wide-eyed nerd.  

EDGE: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

3) Grandpa Joe

  Finally, one that's no contest.  Jack Albertson brought so much warmth and heart to the role of Grandpa Joe that it would have been impossible for me to like anyone else in the part.  Don't get me wrong- David Kelly is an adorable old man, but he just didn't bring as much to the table as Albertson.  Albertson not only has the private "one more chance to win" moment with Charlie, but Charlie also comes across as his very reason to get out of bed and be alive.  (Kelly hops out of bed and dances at the chance to go to the factory, almost like it has nothing to do with Charlie.)  The love and protective feelings Grandpa Joe has for Charlie come shining through in Albertson's performance, while Kelly is just kind of along for the wild ride.

EDGE: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory

4) Charlie's family

  I like Charlie's mom better in "Willy".  But that's it.  The rest of the family are lumps on a log and Charlie's father is absent entirely.  In Burton's film, the other three grandparents are actually characters and we get to see why Charlie would care so much for them.  It's the other grandfather that tells Charlie to use the Golden Ticket instead of selling it and he, along with the non sequitur-spewing grandmother, got some of the biggest laughs in the theater.

EDGE: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

5)  The Kids

  Okay, so if thisis a reimagining of the book, and not a remake of the first film, why are the other four kids in the new one CLONES of the children from the first?  Augustus Gloop is exactly the same so you can't compare them, though the new one gets a good laugh with "Want some chocolate? You should have brought some!".  The new Violet is given a little more depth and a reason to be chewing the gum so I liked her a little better.  The original Veruca was a million times better.  She was obnoxious, spiteful and argumentative- not just a spoiled brat, like the new one.  In "Willy" it is Veruca who tries to call Wonka on all his nonsense, while the new film gives that part to Mike Teavee.  Speaking of which, I did like the new Mike Teavee better as he was given some smarts and wasn't just some video game loving nutjob.

EDGE: Even 

6) The Oompa-Loompas

  In "Charlie" I liked that the Oompa Loompas looked human and weren't freaky orange midgets.  I liked that the musical numbers weren't asides and Willy was enjoying them, while the kids questioned how the names of the children could already be in the rehearsed numbers.  All that was great.  But it's not enough to surpass what is arguably the most famous part of the old film.  Who among us cannot sing along in their deepest voice to the old Oompa Loompa song?  It gets in your head and stays there for days.  The closest "Charlie" gets to that is the "Meet Willy Wonka" song which isn't even perfomed by the OLs.  I liked the musical numbers in the new film, but the old one is just untouchable in this category.

EDGE: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory

7) The Chocolate Factory

  Of course the special effects are going to be better in 2005 than they were in 1971- it almost isn't fair.  I think the old film did a pretty good job considering the era and the fact that the budget wasn't all that big.  But when you hear that Tim Burton is making Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, the first thing you think is that the actual factory is going to be awesome.  On looks alone, the edge has to go to "Charlie"; my only hesitation is that there seemed to be a little more time spent inside the "Willy" factory.  Burton's film races past everything by boat or glass elevator while the original takes the time to stop and lick the schnozzberries.

SLIGHT EDGE:  Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

8) The differences

  Here's what I found ironic.  The film entitled Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory gives us a lot of Charlie Bucket, while the film with Charlie's name in the title gives us the story of Willy Wonka.  In the original film, Wonka is an eccentric candy maker and that's all we know.  In "Charlie"  we meet Wonka's father, learn Wonka's motivations and history and in the end, the lesson learned belongs to Willy.  It's not better or worse- it's just different and I liked the way the story played out in both films. 

  Gone from the new film are the Slugworth and Gobstopper subplots, the sign-in and shrinking entrance, the edible wallpaper, the carwash ride and Charlie and Grandpa floating to the ceiling.  In their place is Wonka's flashbacks and a longer conclusion to the story.  With a gun to my head, I'd have to say I liked knowing Wonka's backstory a little more than the extra factory parts I mentioned.  The little scenes I mentioned from the first one, while classic, don't add much to the overall story and obviously, are easily dropped.

EDGE: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

The Verdict   

 Adding up the score, it seems I liked the new "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" just a little bit more.  But that is no knock on the original- I still love it.  If "Charlie" is an A, then "Willy Wonka" is an A-.

  (As for Kasey, she says she liked the new one better.  I suppose it's true since she paid attention the whole time last night and kept asking questions, while she turned the Willy DVD off halfway through.) 

WINNER: