Sam Mendes to direct "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" - maybe this time we'll get it right!

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni2706014/

It was fun dreaming about a Sam Mendes-directed James Bond movie (Michael Shannon as Jaws!), but now that the 007 franchise has been postponed indefinitely, the Oscar-winning director has been scrambling to find another gig. He's said to be doing ads for the new iPhone, and he was first choice to direct Robert Downey, Jr. in the Wizard of Oz prequel, Oz the Great and Powerful. But here's an option you might not have expected: Mendes will direct a new version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, according to Deadline.

Unfortunately, though, this is not another case of rebooting something Tim Burton ruined with his own remake. Rather, this Willy Wonka production is for the stage, a musical show from songwriters Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman (Hairspray) and playwright David Grieg to open in London and later move to Broadway. Can I start the campaign for Michael Shannon as the iconic candyman?

_________________________________________

Maybe 3 times is a charm? That Gene Wilder version of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" pretty much tossed the book and made their own version - a version so bad that CATCF author Roald Dahl disowned it and would not give them the rights to do a sequel with "Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator". In fact the director ended up renaming the movie to "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory".

Tim Burton/Johnny Depp's version of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" almost got the book right. I definitely love this version better because of how they stuck to the book but for some bizarro reason Burton took a nose dive at the end and pretty much killed any chance of having a "Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator" sequel. Plus for some bizarro reason Burton felt he needed to decipher Willy Wonka's eccentrics by giving Willy a horrible father who was a dentist that hated sweets.

Maybe Sam Mendes will read the book and give us a book that sticks with the plot line AND leaves an opening for a sequel with "Glass Elevator"

Oh that's right. Hollywood has run out of movie ideas.

As an aside, I think the 1971 Gene Wilder version is the best and superior to the Depp/Burton version. Much like "The Shining," just because the author doesn't believe it to be a faithful adaptation doesn't mean it isn't the superior product.

Dahl put alot of time and effort into writing a classic children's book. The fact that he does not like the original speaks volume. I mean sure other folks might find it charming but for us CATCF purists we side with Roald Dahl.

I'm not sure what Dahl would have thought of the Tim Burton Classic - he probably would have been like the rest of us and been disappointed with the father backstory.

Why on earth Hollywood feels compelled to remake Gene Wilder movies is beyond me. First Willie Wonka, then The Producers. What next: a version of Blazing Saddles starring Robert Pattison? My brain whimpers.

BTW, the only director who could do a Chocolate Factory remake I'd actually pay money to see would be Guillermo del Toro. The man is weird in a good way.

It did seem that the parts that bothered me were all things Burton added to the story. Most of the father scenes looked like they were added after the rest of the film was shot, and they were just duct-taped between sequences. Depp staring psychoticly at the camera and muttering "Papa," or the Hall of Flags joke, the weird redemption ending (which also related to the father, since Wonka was dealing with issues related to his father)... the whole thing dragged the film down. Other than that, I thought it was a fantastic film. I think Freddie Highmore and Annasophia Robb are two of the best child actors ever.

I thought the same thing - the father scenes were almost an afterthought Burton opted to add in as fillers to the movie. I think if they were removed it would have been a perfect adaptation of the movie.

However, even with the horrible father backfiller parts of the movie I still enjoyed it better than the Gene Wilder adaptation. When I saw Charlie Bucket's home and how the family was portrayed in the very beginning I felt like Burton lifted everything straight out of the original book. I had tears of happiness in my eyes when I saw that.

It had more of the kid's fantasy about it than Wilders', and I agree that the cabin, and all the visual scenes, were just goosebump-inciting.

Wow. I'm agreeing with you! Remember this day! :rofl:

And the Cowboys, but that's just geographical. :)

a la "Little People Big World of the Chocolate Factory". Or maybe "Little Chocolatiers". Shit...it's been done!

<>

No bad John Boehner tan with Deep Roy's Oompas!

They were definitely thinking of our age group when they did it!

And I do like that he modernized it. Mike TeeVee was addicted to Internet and Video Games, which made much more sense than the original book where it was just TV (no internet or video games back then). And Violet was not just a champion gum chewer she was a super type-A kid that tried to excel at everything - again fitting for today.

or books to consider, and maybe start with something new and fresh??? PLUS, NO ONE IS GOING TO BE able to do Wonka as good as Wilder or Depp. They were each very good at being unique and true to their version of the character.

:shrug:

Better than chocolate, kid.

I loved the book as a kid, and also loved the original movie. The second movie was closer to the book in many ways, but "closer to the book" != "better as a movie." The daddy dentist subplot was really bad, though.

I would like to see a Great Glass Elevator movie, because I loved that book as a kid, too.

I read that book as a kid and was appalled at the treatment Dahl gave the Oompa-Loompahs: ignorant black natives who needed rescuing from the jungle so they could find a meaningful life as factory drones. Bah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory#Controversy_and_original_story

Responding to criticisms from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Canadian children's author Eleanor Cameron, and others for the book's portrayal of the Oompa Loompas as dark skinned and skinny African pygmies who worked in the factory for cacao beans, Dahl changed some of the text, and Schindelman replaced some illustrations (the illustrations for the British version were also changed). That new version was released in 1973 in the US. In the revised version the Oompa Loompas are described as having funny long golden-brown hair and rosy-white skin. Their origins were also changed from Africa to fictional Loompaland. Other minor changes appeared in the new version, notably the replacement of pre-decimal with decimal money.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'm not saying it wasn't bad, it's just alot of literature during that era had some stuff that was very definately un-pc. I remember that book too - our school had the first edition version of it. But today to get that version of the book it's about $500 give or take pretty rare edition.