Ormerod said:Going back to Neal's post, If you watch all Tim Burton films, he over exaggerates elements, and makes bits worse. I realised he killed some of my favourite scenes from the original (The boat ride through the tunnel).
Johnny Depp (like I mentioned in my previous post) really burnt the biscuit for me. I loved Gene Wilder as Wonka, he was off the wall and obscene. Depp just played a trippier version of him. He didn't look good as Wonka either.
Okay, I'm going to rant here a little...
Those of us who have read the books aren't allowed to have a solid opinion because how closely a film follows the book is irrelevant to how good the film is. I do agree actually.
However, Depp didn't play a "Trippier version of Wilder's Wonka" - he played Wonka as he was written in the book. Also, the tunnel scene was much closer to the source material than the Wilder version.
This is where the problem is - people are allowed to say "This is better in Willy Wonka", but people aren't allowed to say (or are frowned upon for saying) "but this was better in Charlie because it's the way it was meant to be".
If Charlie was a remake of Willy Wonka - then it's a valid argument. As both are based on a single source reference though - the book - then people have to be allowed to use the book as a valid argument too. Gene Wilder does NOT play a better Willy Wonker. Willy Wonker is a character in a Roald Dahl novel and was written in a very particular way.
Gene Wilder played the character of Willy Wonker but got it wrong. Now, you can say you think that you prefer the Gene Wilder portrayal, but he was not a better Willy Wonker. I hope you get what I mean? Depp played the character very closely to how he was meant to be player - Wilder was well off.
You can't slate Depp (or Burton) for getting things right. You can slate them for making a poor film though that was right