YOUR REMAKE SUCKS! AND… YOU STILL OWE ME FIZZIE LIFTING DRINKS!
(Gene Wilder)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: ravenfaye
-
-
Copy & paste this:
-
'Razzi Sez:
pepper on Her Voice Sounds like a Buffal… creekerjess on JACK-OFF: The Memoir of Jack… CosplayHoratio on “Requiem for a Dream… KMK on Which Great Witch Or Wizard Ar… Karmin Carr on Monster Movie Sizes sailoryue on Jack Black neoritter on American Idol singer Symone Bl… owlsaint on Disney, Why U So Lazy?! iheartraikkonen on Bed Intruder Got Dem Lovesick… iheartraikkonen on “Requiem for a Dream… 
Cheezburger Company Blog
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Downton Tabby
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
All dat flight school training waz sooo wurf itz...
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
I Tend to Find Everything from Detroit Terrifying
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
King Penguin Hug
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Handsy. Pawsy?
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Reader Squees: Chickzilla
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
Floating Away
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Women, Pegged
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
His Ex Got Impaled? Haddaway to Go!
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
My Unborn Child Totally Looks Like The Punisher
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Guns Can Be Girly Too
If Style Could Kill - OMG Style!
The Lady of Broccolishireham
Holy retarded face…
No kidding!
Unfortunately, the remake holds to what the author intended. It follows the book almost completely.
Yeah. When I was reading it to my kids last month, they especially liked the cod freudian issues between Wonka and his father that WERE NEVER IN THE BOOK BUT COMPLETELY DOMINATE THE FILM AND MAKE IT INTO “ONCE AGAIN TIM BURTON CAN’T GET OVER HIS CHILDHOOD TRAUMA – THE MOVIE!”.
“Almost completely” my arse.
LOL and so true.
I like both movies, but I appreciate them as completely different movies. The story is essentially the same, but comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges really.
My main problem with the Gene Wilder version is that they made it a damn musical. Even as a little kid, I firmly believed that nobody other than the Oompa Loompas should be singing.
Also, I think it’s interesting how both filmmakers approached the Oompa Loompa issue…it’s difficult to deal with without getting into issues of colonialism, racism, and slavery. I mean, in the book, you have this tribe of “noble savage” types who are happy to come to England and work and live in a factory and get paid…in food. Hmm.
I liked Depp’s characterization of Wonka, but I agree that there was no reason to bring all the daddy-issue-backstory into it — added nothing.
Meh, I didn’t mind the other singing. In fact to this day I still get “I’ve got a Golden Ticket” stuck in my brain.
With you on the colonialism/racism issue though. Sure I didn’t notice that as a six year old but now – yikes.
I wouldn’t mind getting paid in food. Candy and chocolate, especially.
Yes.
Sure they get paid in food, but they also get free reign to tell stupid customers just how retarded they’ve been and pretty much laugh at their misfortune. That’s one hell of an awesome job perk.
Not just tell them, but in song and dance!
Also in the new one there was one guy who’s job it was to watch TV. Granted it was a magic TV with a screaming tiny child in it but perks are perks
Yeah, I like both versions. I like Charlie and his family more in the remake, though, honestly.
I really can’t compare the Willy Wonkas, though. I like both. The funny old grandpa-like Gene Wilder version and the neurotic parent-hating Johnny Depp version.
Funny I said almost. I guess I forgot that meant utterly and not almost. The new movie was still closer to the book than the first. I like the first better, but it was still closer to what the author intended in my mind.
At the very least, the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie wasn’t changed just enough so that they could get around copy write laws. So, no. It is, in fact, not a remake at all.
Aside from Tim Burton’s “father issues” spin on the story, the events in the factory and leading up to it follow the storyline in the book much MUCH more closely than the Gene Wilder film. I appreciate them both for what they are, but the Tim Burton version does fall more closely in line with the Roahd Dahl story. As for what issues Tim Burton may have with alleged childhood trauma, that’s what’s great about being an artist is having the freedom to color a story the way you see fit. He pulled it off well. He’s Tim Burton. geez.
The songs are word for word from the book but shortened, much of the dialogue is also directly from the book. The only thing they added was the daddy thing…still MUCH MUCH closer to the book than the “original.” The “remake” reflected the darkness of Roald Dahl’s work much better =)
The stuff in the factory, yes, the whole subplot with Willy and his dad? Not so much. And considering how the altered the end of the film to deal with that subplot… ~_~
And I’m saying this as someone who actually likes many aspects of the film… I just skip all the daddy issue crap.
Aww i wouldnt say the remake sucked but it cant touch the original even with Jonny Depp in it (i know, shame on me!) Its just Gene Wilder…i dunno, the man gas a voice like chocolate silk…mmmmmm
Normally I like Depp, but Johnny Jackson was the worst part of the remake. Especially when compared with the triumph and the glory that was Gene Wilder.
Johnny who?
I think *THINK* its maybe a play on Michael Jacksons name (being that Jonny is so creepy in this movie) but i could be totally wrong and just over thinking the whole thing
Nope, you got my drift.
Johnny Depp played the role brilliantly. Willy Wonka is SUPPOSED to be creepy!!!
Then you would agree Gene Wilder also played it brilliantly?
I totally agree with you. The pale skin, the shy high pitched voice, the love of children, the childlike behavior… yeah pretty much everything but the Javier Bardem haircut (from No Country for Old Men) was Jackson-esque
*HAS*
Oh, do you like it? I’m not partial to desserts myself, but this is excellent.
You just made a yummy sound, so I thought you liked the dessert…;-)
Mr. Wilder is in a class by himself, whether Wonka or Waco Kid. Or Doctor Frankenstein.
Sorry. FronkenSTEEN.
agreed
I had a huge crush on Charlie when the movie came out. He and I were the same age. And now we live only about 45 minute apart! :O
The actor who played him, I mean.
Isn’t he a horse vetrenarian now?
I’m WET! I’m HYSTERICAL and I’m WET!
The producers! I love that film… Never seen the remake… Does it suck too?
ive not seen the original producers but i liked the remake. ive bot nothing to base it on tho. its still worth a watch
Matthew Broderick can’t hold a candle to Gene Wilder (kind of a no duh). If you’ve seen the original first, the remake is a bit like a wet sock. I’m hope the Broadway version with Broderick/Lane was better than the film.
*I*, not I’m.
You know, originally I thought the same thing. I was really disappointed in his Leo Bloom. However, if you watch both of them close together… because of the changes to the story, Leo Bloom kind of changes a bit as well. I think he starts out lower but grows more. I think Broderick fit THAT Leo Bloom. He wouldn’t fit Leo Bloom as the character was in the original movie.
I didn’t care for the story changes, I felt it took away from the tight feel of the original, but it’s all up to personal preference. It was the “Blue blanket” scene that turned me off to Broderick’s version. Wilder is a hard act to follow, but the remake’s blanket scene sunk that ship…I just didn’t find it funny. At all. Though I will give the remake credit that it does pick up steam toward the end.
The new one felt more like a Broadway show. It was very stylised and very “showy”.
Also the lesbian in “Keep it Gay” was hi-larious
Its a lot different. No LSD, Liebkind is Hitler, quite a few changes.
I like them both, though. Just as I can appreciate the two Willy Wonka movies as different movies, you have to appreciate the two Producer movies and different films.
However, since both versions of The Producers are still brainchildren of Mel Brooks, they are both great.
well i loved the original. the loompa songs made sense, and you could understand what was said, unlike the new one with Elfman and Burton team runnin’ it. Score: Wilder 120104829295920930; Depp 1
The Burton film wasn’t a remake at all. It was a different adaptation of the book.
I agree it was a different adaptation. A bad adaptation.
Technically, it’s called a ‘re-imagination’. But, ‘different adaptation’ works just as well.
Gene Wilder FTW!!
He’s an Epic actor…
I think Wilder did a much better job with the character. He was mean but still somewhat likable. But Depp’s character is just plain creepy. Also, the Oompa Loompas in the remake have no individuality; they seem to all be a copy of the same actor.
Yeah it was one guy playng all the oompa loompas!
Yeah, Wilder’s Wonka ws unsettling, while Depp’s Wanka was icky.
I find the entire Wilder movie dark, depressing, and emotionally uncomfortable to watch. Might have to do with Wilder’s Wonka (hm, that sounds very sexual) being much more adult and purposefully menacing than Depp’s. The Depp version is less disturbing, more entertaining (sorry, but I love the Veruca Salt song), and doesn’t engage the viewers’ emotions as much. Both have their good and bad points, just depends on what sort of movie you’re in the mood for.
This. I like both versions for different reasons.
Neither Wilder nor Depp did it right. Now Christoper Lloyd on the other hand… that’s how you portray Willy Wonka:
http://www.gobstoppermovie.com/trailer.html
Now THAT’S creepy
This is exactly what I’m talking about. It’s not the telling of the story,it’s how you tell it. Thank You.
Too bad it wasn’t a remake. Depp did Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Wilder did a movie based on Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Too bad the “remake” was actually a lot more creative. Nothing against the original, but Wilder did not do enough with the character of Willy Wonka, and those Oompa Loompas were SCARY AS ALL HELL.
I think I prefer the newer version. Plus, it has a “2001: A Space Odyssey” reference. Instant win for that.
lol i agree altho almost everything seemed to have a 2001 reference for a while
tho not as obvious as the one in charlie and the choclate factory
Easily the most amusing scene in the movie. I was the only one in the theater who was laughing (laugh suppression: epic fail.)
The original shouldn’t of even been called Charlie and the chocolate factory. It should of been called, “Let’s turn our backs on a great book and make a horrible version of it -and the chocolate factory.”
Hell, I’m just glad they haven’t done a movie version of The Great Glass Elevator. Even as a grown-ass woman, I do NOT want to see the Vermicious Knids. They scared the everlovin’ crap out of me as a kid just reading about them. (Ok, the illustrations didn’t help…)
It’s kind of not. It’s called “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”.
Just sayin.
The original had popular appeal, the remake was artistically conceived to challenge. It tests how open people’s minds are.
I didn’t like the new one, but then again, I also didn’t like the book, so that may have something to do with it.
I actually am a fan of both versions, for different reasons. Though yeah I coulda done without the daddy issues. :\
Agreed all around.
i liked the book, liked the first version of the film and loved the second version of the film. My biggest gripe with the second one was that it was set in anywhere USA. The book was set in England (from what i could glea from it) but i suppose if a british company was to remake an older american film they would probably change the setting. Aside from that but films are good for different reasons. The songs are better in the second one, Charlie isnt as annoying as he is in the first one. But in the first one the choclate factory looked more believable. I am a big burton fan however so i may be ever so slightly biased lol
Also the whole wonkas dad bit i think was more to highlight why willy wonka is so daft on sweets and everything else. Also i read Tim burtons biography and i dont remember much about him having problems with his dad. In fact not much family problems at all. Still its a film so completly open to interpretation. this is jsut my take on it
wtf? the remake was better than the original in some ways (danny elfman’s new songs for hilarious)
PWND by Gene Wilder…
They could have used real sign language instead of that embarrassing fakey stuff. That was painful to watch.
Liked both of them. Love Johnny and Burton together, (although, Johnny’s Wonka is pretty creepy) Johnny’s pretty much the crush of my life, but yeah, the whole daddy thing was kinda pointless. I’ll always love Gene Wilder, he always seems like such a gentle soul to me. Sounds corny, I know. And I will say the first one does edge out the second, though. IMO.
Although the welcoming song in the remake made me cry I was laughing so hard. “Willy Wonka, Willy Wonka, the amazing chocolateer…” Something about seeing creepy puppets catch fire makes me laugh hysterically.
True, I will completely admit that was one of my favorite moments…
The remake… I liked it better. Good day, sir.
ha ha ha, I always say ‘Good Day Sir’ to my boyfriend when I want him to be quiet! I got it from the movie! Ahhh, the hilarity!
Way too true. Original Willy Wonka movie is awesome, and belongs on Once Upon a Win. The new one completely sucks, and belongs on Failblog.
I made this one, and all I can say is I GOT ON A FAIL BLOG MAIN PAGE!!!!:p
You’re an idiot. The remake fits almost perfectly to the book. The old movie made up the fizzy bubbles, so really you’re the one who sucks.
Have a good weekend. Crab ass!
The fizzy lifting drinks WERE mentioned in the book.
Thank you.
=D =D =D =D
oumnomnomnom
Just for the record. It was just suppose to be funny.
It was funny
I liked them both. *shrugs*
Too bad it wasn’t a remake. Seriously, learn definitions before badmouthing things. They are both completely individual of each other.
On a lighter note, both were good but Wilder was far too nice and ‘father figure’ like, something Wonka wasn’t AT ALL, and Burton tried too hard with the childhood thing in his. Either way, the second adaptation (note the lack of the word remake) was far truer to the book and thus, as an adaptation, was much better.
Now personally, I didn’t like the first one at all. But they each did have their own points, the first was just a little too goody-goody for me. Plus, Dahl wasn’t exactly “sane” himself..and I do use that term loosely. So, I would wager that if Dahl could see the versions, the second would’ve been much preferred.
But, that’s just my two cents.
Can ANYONE here explain to me the significance of the scene in the first movie where the group is traveling on the boat through that tunnel (I can’t remember the name of it) and Wilder is getting somewhat manic in his tour guide narration…and in the background a chicken gets its frickin’ head cut off.
Talk about a WTF moment…anybody remember that but me? Me and my mushrooms?
It was the 70′s? I don’t know.
I remember it! Then they’re on about rainbow drops that make you spit it 7 colours or something like that! Wierd!!!
Like I said the 70′s. Also Oompa Loompa’s make it extra trippy(people on acid looking at blonde headed people in blacklight) NOT KIDDING. Remember the lickable wallpaper. BTW Gene’s Wonka is pretty messed up. Everyone remembers him giving Charlie the factory,yes. Listen to some of the things he says through out the movie. Very dark at times.
Wow,it seems a lot of people like to analyze a joke. Here it is in a nutshell. Yes I’ve read Charlie and the Chocolate Factory as well as many other Roald Dahl
books including the more adult ones. I found Burton’s execution of it weak. Which made me sad because I love Burton and Roald Dahl . As far as using “remake” I was going on the picture posted and that maybe Gene Wilder’s Willie Wonka would take offense that he wasn’t the one and only WONKA, so he would use the word “remake”. Now that I’ve analyzed it I just killed it. I do have to say it got voted on enough times to make LOL Celebs main page, so some get the joke. I give thanks to those who got it. It’s a big surprise when you check in here to see your LOL posted.
At first I wondered why I missed this gem until I saw the date posted… (formerly happy now sad).
At any rate, thanks for the post and I totally agree with you. But your explanation didn’t kill it, it was nice to see my thoughts so eloquently validated!
I thoroughly enjoyed the first adaptation purely because I thought Gene Wilder was hot. Then again, I was like 6 when I first saw it. Now, 99.9% of women think Johnny Depp is hot. I agree… but something about Gene, man. Not now, of course. He’s too old. Both movies, however, were great to me.
“… And you still owe my Fizzing Lifting Drinks!” Best part! ;D
Both the original author, Roald Dahl, as well as the actor, Gene Wilder, hated the original movie. Johnny Depp’s portrayal is much closer to the book. I don’t know if Roald Dahl or Gene Wilder liked the remake.
Roald Dahl couldn’t like or dislike the remake, he was long dead when it came out. :]
lol. epic win.
Wow, I actually LOL… that is first…probably a last if I keep surfing this site.
a*