Comments on: Gene Wilder Likes Johnny Depp, Just Not As Willy Wonka

By: David

David — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:16:04 +0000

I loved the original version, and like aspects of the new films (the first half hour is the best part of the movie), but for me Gene Wilder will always be Willy Wonka. He brought a genuine humanity to the role with humour and inspired zaniness, whereas Depp’s Wonka with pasty white skin and bobbed haircut was just too weird. Depp is a wonderful actor, but the portrayal was too Burton-esque. I think both films have a lot to offer, but I grew up watching the original version, and for that reason Gene Wilder will always be my favourite, and preferred, Willy Wonka.

By: ethan kuhn

ethan kuhn — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:33:13 +0000

i think gene wilder has a right to flame against johnny depp. they took away the only great legacy that gene wilder had for children, there used to be a day when you could show a picture of gene and a child would say “hey thats willy wonka.”

i dare anyone to type in willy wonka on a search engine and see which pictures you get. i think that they both played willy well in there own ways, but even the depp fans have to addmit that was pretty unfair.

i dont think anyone has a right to call wilder pathetic after what he has been through. true, his movie may not have been closer to the book as depp, but i felt a better sense of trust in a more wise and moralistic wonka then this big immature goof ball.

and one comment about johnny depp. he has been slipping up lately on his roles though. he says that he doesnt want to sell out yet we willing admitted that the new wonka movie was ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. a bit hypocritical if you ask me.

By: k

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:25:50 +0000

I know that the Depp version was closer to the book.

But here’s a secret…I didn’t really like the book.

Therefore, I like the Wilder version on its own merits.

By: crazymom

crazymom — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:15:26 +0000

Gene Wilder will always be Willie Wonka.

um, and say what you will, but Adam West will always be Batman (albeit a cheesy, campy Batman, but Batman just the same).

By: D

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:01:24 +0000

Johnny Depp brought an entirely different element to the film, both were great, just different. That’s life, sometimes you just need to accept that.

Also, I completely agree with Charlotte’s statement about Dahl’s book being retold *accurately*. This is what Burton did - he really is a fabulous director.

By: Charlotte

Charlotte — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:17:52 +0000

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was not a “remake” of Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. The Depp/Burton version was a retelling of Dahl’s book, NOT the silly version made by Gene Wilder. I could never stand the Wilder movie and was happy to hear that it would finally be retold correctly. The new movie had quality actors, which can’t be said for the kiddie movie made by Wilder. Wilder’s version was a box office flop…Tim Burton’s version was a big hit when it was released.

By: rachel loves johnny

rachel loves johnny — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:49:08 +0000

well i love johnny and admit its pretty creepy. i love gene as willy. but i love johnny more hehe

By: kathy

kathy — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:23:12 +0000

When I first saw Gene Wilder I thought it was stupid,but that my opinion.I like the Johnny Depp verison.He was funny.I don’t know where they think Johnny look like Micheal Jackson.

By: Mary Jean

Mary Jean — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 22:42:20 +0000

The two movies are so totally different that it’s hard to compare. Wilder plays Willy so differently from Depp. I know Dahl was not happy with Wilder’s characterisation of Willy. I think Wilder should keep his “I’m better than he is” comments to himself. I agree with CalGal, his comments do make him seem “small.” Anyway, isn’t this old news-were these new comments by Wilder? I loved Johnny Depp as Willy Wonka! He is truly a remarkable actor. Think of all the different characters he has played-amazing!

By: k

Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:02:03 +0000

Oh, hey, that’s cool. When I do dismayed, I usually do :S so I was a bit confoozed.

And as for others…Maltin did review the movie…after all, that’s his job. And like I said, I didn’t say I was being objective, just opinionated. I know the newer version was truer to the book, as I’ve read the book and reviews (plus followed the storyline at themoviespoiler.com).

I also know the bit at the end was added to try and give Depp’s interpretation of the character some sort of heart or explanation of why he is the way he is, and as a sort of warning for the parents in the audience. I just didn’t think it was necessary.

Knowing those things, I made a decision not to see the movie.