YMMV / Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Book/General

• Accidental Aesop: So, you're touring a factory with the kids? Keep your eyes on them at all times and make sure they know to be on their best behavior. While it's debatable how much the kids deserved their punishments (see entries below), being allowed to act that recklessly in a real-world factory would have led to incredibly dangerous consequences; it would be significantly gorier if Augustus Gloop fell into an industrial chocolate mixer instead of a chocolate river, for example.
• Accidental Innuendo:
  • While it's less prevalent than it is in the movie (see below) the book still manages it at least once:
    Oh, the joy of being able to cram large pieces of something sweet and solid into one's mouth!
  • In one of Dahl's writings for Playboy, "schnozzberry" was used as a euphemism for "penis."
• Adaptation Displacement: In the U.S., the story and characters are better known from the two film adaptations, especially the 1971 version, than the source novel these days. It was actually to the point that people accused the 2005 film of making stuff up when it was actually restoring things that were in the book but left out or changed for the 1971 film.
• Alternative Character Interpretation:
  • Mr. Willy Wonka is either a genius, a monster, or a combination thereof. As he is an Interpretative Character, every major adaptation takes him in a different direction. The 1971 film portrays him as a traditional Trickster Mentor, while the 2005 film presents him as a strange recluse who refuses to grow up — and serves as a foil to Charlie, whose poverty and responsibilities leave his childhood almost joyless. The 2013 musical presents him as a Sugar-and-Ice Personality Anti-Hero, whereas its 2017 retool makes him closer to a straight-up villain. Each of these provides fodder for unique Alternate Character Interpretations, but questions that can apply to most any reading/viewing include:
  • Is Charlie merely a patsy, intended to inherit the responsibility for the multiple acts of child abuse, unsafe working conditions, and slave labour committed in Mr. Wonka's factory?
  • Could Mr. Wonka be an example of Asexuality? His devotion to a field of work most would consider only a hobby and the fact he didn't get married and chose to find an heir rather than have children suggests he might be a Celibate Eccentric Genius.
  • Is Mr. Wonka an Aesop Enforcer and Chessmaster, deliberately steering the unknowing brats towards their various fates as a Radish Cure of sorts or a way to Scare 'Em Straight? Each is taken out of the running when they go to steal or use something that clearly isn't safe but they still want, all playing right into their various vices — which Mr. Wonka is likely aware of, having presumably followed the press coverage of the contest. It would also explain why the Oompa-Loompas seem to know so much about the kids (a question actually broached in-story in the 2005 film). In adaptations, Mr. Wonka usually seems to be decidedly unconcerned with rescuing or stopping the kids, so...
  • This Cracked article gives some good points as to why Burton's Wonka may as well be a Serial Killer, considering his characterization is strikingly similar to multiple tropes associated with slasher flicks.
  • In a related issue, are any or all of the tickets intended to fall into the hands of the kids who find them, that they may be punished or rewarded as appropriate? Depending on which version one's reading/watching, the possibility may be unaddressed, teased, lampshaded, and/or confirmed.
  • So, Grandpa Joe has spent decades in bed, being waited on hand-and-foot by his daughter-in-law, while his son slaves away to earn the pittance that the family exists on. As soon as his grandson gets some good news, though, he's straight out of bed and taking the opportunity to be Charlie's escort. Which raises the question: Did the good news really jolt some life and vigor back into Grandpa Joe, or is he actually a lazy individual? The most recent major adaptation, the 2013 musical, outright declares it to be the former (as explained in "Don'cha Pinch Me Charlie" and the 2017 Retool framing it as finally getting the "call to arms" he's been waiting for), while the latter take was spoofed in a February 2017 Saturday Night Live sketch. When there was a vote on the matter on Roald Dahl’s fans’ Facebook page, the positive interpretation of Grandpa Joe won very narrowly, getting just barely over 50% of the votes.
• Aluminum Christmas Trees: Many would find the bit about Mr. Wonka closing down due to industrial espionage to be over the top. Many would also be surprised to learn what a cutthroat industry candymaking really is.
• Angst? What Angst?: The Golden Ticket tour group learns how dangerous Wonka's Factory can be — not to mention how nonchalant their guide is — when Augustus Gloop winds up sent to who-knows-where via the pipes, but it doesn't dampen their enthusiasm for the rest of the tour, even as further members are eliminated in similarly absurd disasters. No matter what they witness, no one ever asks to leave if they aren't directly affected by events, and the Audience Surrogate is having the time of his life. Granted, the disasters are all played for Black Comedy and the victims are all repulsive brats and coddling parents. The 2013 stage adaptation plays with this trope a little, again for laughs — even though the party is horrified by what happens to Augustus (and in this version it's suggested he might not survive), when the impatient Mr. Wonka asks them "Anybody want to go home?" not one answers in the affirmative! As the party further dwindles, though, anxiety creeps into the wonder of those still standing...
• Anvilicious: The fates of the bratty kids. Lampshade Hanging in the 2013 musical tweaks this: "True, we lost a few children along the way...but we all learned something and that's the important thing!" according to Wonka.
• Applicability: The novel has enough of this going on that Lucy Mangan's Milestone Celebration retrospective Inside Charlie's Chocolate Factory devotes two sidebars to examining the Marxist and Freudian interpretations, albeit with tongue planted firmly in cheek. Let's not even get into the adaptations...
• Base-Breaking Character: Grandpa Joe. As an elderly, ninety-six-year-old man who is too weak to leave his bed for decades, one group thinks him suddenly being able to leave his bed and become Charlie's parental guardian after hearing that Charlie has found a golden ticket, makes no sense and implies that he is a lazy, Manipulative Bastard. Another group thinks that it isn't that important, especially since Joe's newfound energy is far from the only fantastical thing that happens in the story.
• Can't Un-Hear It: Try reading the novel and getting to the Oompa-Loompas' songs when one of the Four Bratty Kids gets eliminated after watching the 2005 film. You’ll probably hear those exact versions of the songs in your head, even for parts that were left out of the movie.
• Common Knowledge:
  • Some people think that Grandpa Joe was only pretending to be too frail to help the younger Buckets, due to him going from being bedridden to being able to take the factory tour. In the actual book, he genuinely was frail, but regained his strength from happiness alone.
  • A few people have thought that Violet's catchphrase was "I want it now!", having confused her with Veruca.
  • Due to both movies painting Augustus as German, Veruca as British, and Mike and Violet as American, viewers have mistaken those for their nationalities in the book — their nationalities are unstated in the book.
  • The idea that Mike Teavee dressed as a cowboy — he actually wore a windbreaker with a picture of the Lone Ranger on it, not a full cowboy outfit.
  • Some think the naughty children die, perhaps because they only saw the 1971 movie, in which they're never seen after getting punished, or because they took the Oompa Loompas' song about Augustus being made into fudge too seriously and/or misremembered the incinerator Veruca landed in as being lit. In the book, they're described as being a bit beaten-up, but very much alive.
• Designated Villain: Mike and especially Violet have the potential to be seen this way due to Values Dissonance; in the source material, they are considered "bad" primarily because they are addicted to television and chewing gum, respectively. Most 21st-century adaptations deliberately give both of them more unlikable personalities so that they do not end up Unintentionally Sympathetic.
• Diagnosed by the Audience: A large number of readers and viewers interpret Wonka as autistic or otherwise neurodivergent. His life-defining passion for candy-making is often read as a special interest, his various idiosyncratic movements and gestures (e.g. skipping and twirling while he walks) are interpreted as stims, his rapid, long-winded speeches are interpreted as infodumping, and his image as an oddball is widely noted as paralleling how neurotypical people often view autistic folks. His portrayal in the 2005 film ramps this up, with his fidgeting, his difficulties socializing (to the point where he needs cue cards to carry conversations), his childish image, and his preference for heavy clothing also being cited as relatable to autistic viewers. His conflict with his father in the film is also noted as paralleling how many autistic people are abused by their parents, especially when their special interests are seen as undesirable.
• Draco in Leather Pants: Aside from Veruca, the bratty kids get some fans who see them as not being as bad as intended. Mike Teavee, however, gets it the worst. With the way people review the book version of him, you'd think his only "sin" is watching television, which is not seen as bad nowadays. In reality, he has a pretty violent mind and prideful nature. Throughout the tour, he is constantly trying to get attention on himself by trying to seem smarter than he actually is. He also has Troubling Unchildlike Behavior, with the specific shows he obsesses over being gangster shows with lots of shooting and killing, and his new interview shows him both threatening them to shut up and mention not only how cool the shooting is, but how he wishes he could do it himself.
• Escapist Character:
  • Charlie Bucket is poor but virtuous and has as warm and loving a family as one could wish for. They suffer quite a bit early on... then he not only gets the rare chance to visit the factory he's always wondered about plus a lifetime supply of sweets, but also winds up becoming heir to the place! True, life as Willy Wonka's guest (and, in the sequel, sidekick) is sometimes terrifying — but so long as you follow the rules, it's never, ever boring.
  • Willy Wonka himself: A Renaissance Man extraordinaire, possessed of remarkable wit and intelligence, he doesn't just live in The Wonderland but created it. Moreover, while the real world can be a harsh place for the good and too-comfortable for the bad, in his world, be it by chance or plotting, Laser-Guided Karma prevails. For anyone dispirited by just how unfair the world can be, this is a deeply satisfying fantasy.
• Everyone Is Jesus in Purgatory: Marilyn Manson, a longtime fan of the 1971 film, expressed interest in playing the role of Willy Wonka in the 2005 film, and has a theory that Wonka is Satan, tempting and leading the damned souls (the children) into Hell!
• Fandom-Enraging Misconception: Feel free to debate the merits of the two movies or any other adaptation, but remember that the novel came first.
• Fandom Rivalry: The fandom has many rivalries within it over the novel and its adaptations, making it an inter-media example.
  • Is the 1971 film a wonderful, tuneful Pragmatic Adaptation that makes Charlie truly earn his happy ending and has become just as iconic a story as, if not more so than, the book...or is it an Audience-Coloring Adaptation that violates his noble character, has drippy songs, and unfairly overshadows the novel and all other versions of it, including more faithful ones? Notably, Roald Dahl hated the film.
  • Is the 2005 film beautiful, lavish, Truer to the Text and worthy of Dahl's novel... or is it a soulless parade of weird imagery that derails the wonderful character of Willy Wonka to push a Loners Are Freaks/"family knows best" message that is the antithesis of Dahl? Is it admirable for trying to do things differently than the '71 film, or inferior for precisely that reason?
    • The rivalries get even more heated over how the '71 film impacted the '05 film's public perception. Attackers will cite that the first film has become such a cultural touchstone that trying to re-adapt its source material would only lead to failure (consider that there hasn't been a straight adaptation of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz for film after the 1939 film's success.) Defenders appreciate the Truer to the Text approach and agree it would be a lot more acclaimed if it weren't in the first film's shadow.
  • Is the 2013 West End musical a darkly lovable Pragmatic Adaptation, clearly created by people who wanted to preserve Dahl's spirit and humor, that steps out of the shadow of the film versions even with a Bootstrapped Theme and some Internal Homages, and finally remembers that Charlie is the central character, not Willy Wonka...or is it just another flashy spectacle lacking drama and heart, with a boring first act and frantic second one, and songs that don't hold a candle to those of the '71 version (most people agree they're at least better than the '05 one)? Many people who don't like this show state that they would have preferred a straight Screen-to-Stage Adaptation of the '71 film, but Dahl's estate likely wouldn't have allowed the former option, because he hated that version. (The closest thing to that they've been willing to authorize is the 2005 show Roald Dahl's Willy Wonka, but that's a children's theater piece rather than a "legit" musical.)
  • Is the 2017 Broadway retool of the musical, which subbed in several of the 1971 songs, drastically rewrote the libretto, and dropped the scenery porn, a superior take that truly celebrates imagination or a cheap cash-in on the brand name that doesn't work as a loose adaptation of the '71 film or as a fresh take on the novel?
• First Installment Wins: Raise your hand if you didn't know the book has a sequel! Even Inside Charlie's Chocolate Factory barely acknowledges its existence. (It doesn't help that it was a case of Money, Dear Boy for the author.) Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator does have its fans, but even said fans agree, it doesn’t match the first book.
• Friendly Fandoms: A lot of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory fans also tend to be fans of Matilda due to both books being written by the same author.
• Genius Bonus: Mike Teavee claims that hair toffee is useless for kids because "kids don't go bald." Actually, they can; in addition to potential cancer diagnoses, there's alopecia, a condition which causes hair to fall out, and even stress or genetics can cause hair loss at a young age. No wonder Wonka wasn't even bothering to listen to Mike because the kid is a bit of an ignoramus.
• Hilarious in Hindsight: Among Wonka's many products are sugar-coated pencils for sucking in class. Could they be the predecessors to Honeydukes Sugar Quills?
• Iconic Character, Forgotten Title: To an extent. Willy Wonka is the standout character and the first and most famous adaptation, a 2005 American stage musical featuring that first adaptation's songs, and a defictionalized candy brand are named after him rather than poor Charlie. But other adaptations use the original title without any trouble.
• It Was His Sled: Between all the adaptations and parodies, The Reveal that the Golden Ticket contest is a way for Mr. Wonka to find an heir has become this; some adaptations (most obviously the 2005 film) pull Not His Sled twists to compensate.
• Just Here for Godzilla: Many fans of the novel and/or adaptations are Just There for Willy Wonka and complain that he and the factory don't get enough "onstage time" in favor of that boring poor kid and his family. Go to any theatre message board discussing the 2013 musical and there will be complaints that boil down to this and wonder why the 2017 Broadway Retool didn't change that. Some versions, including said retool, try to address this by giving Mr. Wonka a King Incognito identity as someone who befriends Charlie, and even revealing his Zany Scheme and true identity to the audience at the top of the show...but this kills the mystery the novel and other adaptations build up around him and his world.
• Karmic Overkill: The bad kids' fates can be considered this. Chew gum constantly? Get turned into a giant blueberry. Watch too much TV? Get shrunk and then stretched out in a taffy pull.
• Memetic Mutation:
  • Inside Charlie's Chocolate Factory briefly discusses two that are certainly not limited to the Internet: "'Willy Wonka' is now shorthand for any kind of innovator or eccentric genius.[...]Having a Golden Ticket is synonymous with getting an access-all-areas pass to anything desirable." The former's memetic status is reflected on this wiki with Mr. Wonka becoming a Trope Namer — one of the few remaining ones that's named after a specific character.
  • Willy's Chocolate Experience ^ExplanationA Glasgow event based on the Chocolate factory became infamous in early 2024 due to the very low quality of the event, the script apparently being written by AI, and an original character named The Unknown who appears behind a mirror to scare unsuspecting visitors.
• Memetic Psychopath: This interpretation of the Oompa-Loompas became popular in early 2019, primarily for their habit of singing cheerful songs about the horrible fates of bad children in mortal peril - although contrary to popular belief, none of the kids actually die. It's also very popular (perhaps even more so) to interpret Wonka as this for the shared reason of putting kids (bratty, but kids nonetheless) in highly traumatizing (and most certainly lethal if this wasn't a kid's book) situations and the additional implication from a modern glance that he literally enslaved a whole race to make his candy.^note It doesn't help that the Oompa-Loompas were originally a tribe from Darkest Africa.
• Moe: Charlie himself is a kind and selfless Nice Guy who remains sweet and kindhearted despite his poor financial state.
• Nightmare Fuel: Potentially the fates of the other kids. For those and more, see this page.
• Ron the Death Eater: Grandpa Joe is demonized by fans as an evil asshole who makes Dolores Umbridge look like a saint. In the book his worst "crime" is being lazy: spending years in bed (instead of helping Charlie's poor parents) and then being suddenly able to walk when Charlie gets the Golden Ticket. And even to call him "lazy" is unfair, as he's ninety-six and a half years old and genuinely too weak to get out of bed until sheer joy gives him new strength when Charlie finds the ticket.
• Self-Fanservice: For a rare non-sexual example, fanart depicting Augustus often portrays him as less fat and more chubby rather than obese.
• Signature Scene: Violet Beauregarde's transformation into a giant blueberry is perhaps the most consistently talked-about scene in the overall franchise. It's featured in nearly every poster of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory and, for better or worse, spawned a fanbase dedicated to blueberry inflation, often gaining new members every time a new adaptation is made.
• Slow-Paced Beginning: The first third of the book is devoted to backstory and Developing Doomed Characters, but once the tour begins, wheeeeeee! Also applies to all adaptations, which easily split into two halves — the first set in the mundane world, the second in the absurd one.
• Squick: Augustus Gloop goes for a swim in chocolate intended for eating. A few days later someone in the world will be eating chocolate that a fat boy has been swimming around in for a few minutes. The novel both addresses this and makes it worse with Mrs. Gloop yelling that Augustus will be spreading his cold into the chocolate!
• Strawman Has a Point:
  • Many adult characters, namely the parents of the naughty children and to a lesser extent the non-Joe grandparents, are meant to be seen as annoying killjoys for believing Willy Wonka is insane. Considering he brushes off serious situations with jokes and has employees from a place that sounds made-up (and the geography teacher doesn't know about it), they have a point for thinking that.
  • Mike Teavee is meant to be an obnoxious brat, and he does have a bit of an attitude problem, but he does occasionally have a good point, such as, "If you hate gum so much, why do you make it?".
• Toy Ship: Though many fanworks age them up a few years, shipping the kids happens pretty often.
• Unintentionally Sympathetic: By 21st-century standards, the first four children's respective vices don't quite justify them being placed in highly traumatic situations, even when they are self-inflicted. This is why most 21st-century adaptations give some of them, especially Violet and Mike significantly nastier personalities. Granted this is Roald Dahl we are talking about...
• Values Dissonance:
  • The Oompa Loompas were originally an African Pygmy tribe who lived in squalor and ate bugs before Wonka came along and had them work in his factory for chocolate rations. The racist overtones of this portrayal were enough to result in a feud between Dahl and Eleanor Cameron after the latter published an article critical of the book in 1972, ultimately resulting in Dahl rewriting the book to give the Oompa Loompas white skin and golden-brown hair in reprints. Similarly, the 1971 movie hastily changed them to orange-skinned green-haired Fair Folk.
  • The Prince Pondicherry story wouldn't fly in the twenty-first century for being a negative portrayal of a minority, being that he's the only Indian character in the entire story, even if he's merely depicted as an Upper-Class Twit with no common sense. "Pondicherry" is also a place-name, not a person's name (referring to a region of India that was ruled by the French) and was presumably chosen because it sounds amusing to Western ears, and also for Alliterative Name. The fact that the Burton film adapted this scene does not help matters very much.
  • Violet's primary vice being gum chewing has aged poorly, so starting with the 2005 film (and to an extent earlier adaptions) the character is tweaked in adaptations to make her the proudest or vainest of the kids, with the gum chewing habit endemic of the larger issue. The 1971 film even has the Oompa Loompas briefly acknowledge the benefits of gum-chewing when they sing Violet out.
    • The 1971 film makes fewer changes than later adaptions, but even here, she's shown to be much ruder than she is in the book, and is also established to have other bad habits like picking her nose.
    • In the 2005 film, she is a Competition Freak who has to be a winner in everything she sets her mind to, hence her becoming a world-champion gum chewer.
    • In the 2010 opera, she is vain and obsessed with being thin. She chews rather than eats.
    • In the 2013 musical, she is an airheaded starlet who, with her dad's help, parlayed her "talent" for gum chewing into a multimedia Cash-Cow Franchise.
    • In the 2017 Tom and Jerry version, Violet keeps her Gum chewing as her primary vice... and the film decides to show her chewing with her mouth open or playing with it. She's also much more openly disrespectful towards both Wonka and her own father in this version.
  • Mike's interest in television being sufficient to warrant being labelled a "bad" kid has also aged poorly, being a clear reflection of author Roald Dahl's intense dislike for television. Notably, Dahl was still portraying television-watchers as automatically unpleasant, unintelligent people morally inferior to book-readers as late as Matilda, published in 1988 near the end of his life. The majority of post-1971 adaptations give him more obsessive tendencies towards his interest, as it has become accepted that television is only bad for those who watch it continuously at the expense of their health, and often add in additional vices.
    • The 1971 film, while focusing on Mike's TV obsession, also emphasizes his greed through his willingness to sell Wonka's secrets to Slugworth.
    • The 2005 film portrays Mike as a caustic Insufferable Genius who's obsessed with Shoot 'Em Up games. Away from his electronic devices, this ends up translating into an obsession with violence (as shown when he smashes some of the food in the Chocolate Room and then justifies himself to his father by saying that "[Wonka] said 'enjoy'") and an inability to appreciate the wonderland that is Wonka's factory - both of which were implied in the book, but the movie calls more attention to them. Ultimately, the film emphasizes that Mike's arrogance is what drives him to send himself by television - he's trying to prove that Wonka is wasting a perfectly good teleporter on chocolate, only to find out that Wonka has a good reason for not sending a person through it.
    • The 2010 opera, while downplaying Mike's intelligence, shows him as a wannabe Sociopathic Soldier.
    • The 2013 musical indicates that Mike was already a juvenile delinquent in the making, with his parents keeping him glued to a screen at all times so he doesn't cause havoc in the real world. It also plays up Mike's arrogance and lack of a sense of wonder, much like the 2005 film did.
  • Augustus Gloop's status was subject to considerable criticism by the time of the 2005 film, due to weight and body-shaming being far more sensitive issues in the 21st century. That doesn't keep that film and later adaptations from sticking with a straight Fat Idiot / Fat Bastard portrayal, though, probably because the primary reason he's fat is because he's greedy and overeats. The 2010 opera's portrayal of Violet as obsessed with physical beauty and thinness can be seen as an Author's Saving Throw, not only updating Violet's character but providing a counterbalance to Augustus by portraying obsession with weight loss as just as much of a vice as overeating.
  • While Willy Wonka's bringing in Oompa-Loompas to run the factory was done for somewhat valid reasons — many of his original workforce proved disloyal and kept selling his secrets to his competitors — nowadays it would be viewed in a very different light. Depending on one's political leanings, either it would be viewed as Wonka exploiting people who had no concept of the value of money for his own gains, or it would be seen as him putting his former workforce out of a job and bringing in cheap foreign labour, again largely for his own gains. The fact that they live on site also raises further questions.
• Values Resonance: Gum chewing may not be seen as a vice anymore, and Mike's plot thread leans on New Media Are Evil, but by and large the obnoxious behavior of the brats and their parents' willingness to indulge them are timeless issues that are easy to adapt to whatever The Present Day is, which might be a reason the story has been consistently popular and frequently adapted for 50+ years.
  • While attitudes towards gum chewing, addiction to television and video games, and childhood obesity might change over time, there's at least one kid whose behavior comes across as obnoxious, unquestionably wrong, and deserving punishment (ditto for the parents for causing it) in any culture or society before and after 1964: Veruca Salt, to the point where she's easily most well-known out of the Four Bratty Kids.
  • The negative effects of Mike's excessive TV watching have become more relevant with the rise of "iPad kids" in the 2020s, young children whose parents let them watch YouTube videos unsupervised on smart devices, sometimes for hours on end. While it keeps them quiet and out of trouble, it also runs the risk of them finding and watching inappropriate material without their parents' knowledge (and there are producers who specifically make inappropriate videos geared towards kids). Many kids are so addicted they don't know how to entertain themselves without smart devices. For more or less the same reasons, Mike's parents let him watch as much TV as he wants which makes him violent and obsessed with toy guns, and he is so addicted to TV he can't even appreciate the wonders of the chocolate factory.
    Oompa-Loompas: Oh yes, we know it keeps them still,
    They don't climb out the window sill,
    They never fight or kick or punch,
    They leave you free to cook the lunch
    And wash the dishes in the sink —
    But did you ever stop to think,
    To wonder just exactly what
    This does to your beloved tot?
    IT ROTS THE SENSES IN THE HEAD!
    IT KILLS IMAGINATION DEAD!
    IT CLOGS AND CLUTTERS UP THE MIND!
    IT MAKES A CHILD SO DULL AND BLIND
    HE CAN NO LONGER UNDERSTAND
    A FANTASY, A FAIRYLAND!
• Vanilla Protagonist: Charlie's Nice Guy lack of vices sets a contrast when he's surrounded by the colorful brats; he's their foil. There's also the eccentric Mr. Wonka.
• What Do You Mean, It's for Kids?: It may be the most beloved Black Comedy in children's literature, Sweet Dreams Fuel and Nightmare Fuel at once. For years it was a near-fixture on lists of banned/challenged kids' books.
• The Woobie: Charlie is a good, selfless kid who's been dealt a lousy hand by life and deserves a break. He's particularly woobie-ish in the 1971 film (see that version's YMMV page) and the 2013 musical (see below).
• Woobie Species: The Oompa-Loompas, if one doesn't regard them as just exceptionally tiny humans (their children are only a few inches tall). Their lives might be Happiness in Slavery now, but it's still a substantial improvement on their previous existence in Loompaland...
• Woolseyism: A mild case. Veruca Salt's surname was changed to Paprika in the Hebrew translation because "Salt" doesn't have a meaning in Hebrew and young readers wouldn't understand there's a connection between the name and the dad's business.

Individual YMMVs:

• Tom and Jerry: Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory
• Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory
• Wonka

Specifically the 2005 film

• Accidental Aesop: When Charlie remarks on how unfair it is that Veruca got a golden ticket without getting it on her own steam, Grandpa Joe delivers two such lessons to his grandson. First, life isn't fair, especially when money is involved. But that's okay, because Second, you've just got to let other people's own bad decisions ruin themselves.
• Awesome Music:
  • All four of the Oompa Loompa's songs are very catchy and well-done, as expected from being Danny Elfman creations. Special points to the fact that they also use the same lyrics from the books, and for using different styles to match each of the children's personalities (Augustus' being a tribalistic marching band-like tune, Violet's being funk/disco, Veruca's being a soft rock ballad, and Mike's being hard rock).
  • Screw it, Danny Elfman’s score fires on all cylinders during this movie, with the main titles theme being the most memorable.
• Base-Breaking Character:
  • This incarnation of Willy Wonka. He was hated by critics (who still mostly gave the film positive marks), since Johnny Depp's performance couldn't be compared to Gene Wilder's, with some viewers also hating his Large Ham personality that tried too hard to be funny and just came off as awkward. Many critics also found Depp's performance tastelessly close to Michael Jackson in look and demeanor, especially in the wake of his molestation trial that concluded just a month prior. Additionally, many despise what a raging Jerkass he can be, and dislike his apathy towards the children, which doesn't make any sense since he invited them over to make one of them the heir to the factory. However, he has a fanbase of nostalgic viewers who found his mannerisms charming, finding the comparison's to Wilder's Wonka unfair and thinking his new backstory justifies his awkwardness, makes him an effective Jerkass Woobie and a good Foil to Charlie.
  • Mrs. Beauregard. She has her fans who find her sexy, but a great amount of people despise her for being a horrible mother, whose only concern after her daughter turned into a giant blueberry was that she would be unable to compete.
  • This version of Charlie himself. Some fans like him for his Nice Guy nature and find him to be just as likable as his book and 1971 counterparts while some fans hate him for being a Flat Character with no personality outside of being a Nice Guy.
• Broken Base:
  • Fans of the book cannot decide which version is the superior adaption, this or the 1971 film. The Stuart adaptation invokes more nostalgia, deviates from the book, and takes more risks with mixed results. Whereas the 2005 film follows much more closely to Roald Dahl's work, many perceive it as a soul-less parade of neverending, exceedingly weird imagery (it IS a Tim Burton film, after all!) which ruins Wonka's mysterious character with a forced Daddy Issues-themed backstory. This has led to a pretty heated Fandom Rivalry regarding which one is the better movie.
  • In regards to the Adaptation Expansion, particularly Wonka's new backstory which shows his father was a domineering, strict dentist who denied the young Wonka any candy whatsoever out of obsessive concern for the health of his teeth. Eventually, Wonka re-encounters his estranged dad with Charlie's help and both reconcile. Those who like this new element claim it helps add a whole new layer to Wonka and greatly humanizes him beyond being, in Burton's words, "just a weird guy". Those who dislike it, however, claim the Daddy Issues-themed backstory feels too clichéd and ruins the mystery behind Wonka, which has always been a staple of the character ever since the original Dahl novel. Granted, even the most ardent detractors of this have been a little forgiving on it because Sir Christopher Lee's acting as a stern, cold, nightmarish dentist is simply top-notch.
  • Even fans of the 1971 film admit it's version of the Four Bratty Kids, with the exception of Veruca Salt, were subpar, lackluster and Unintentionally Sympathetic takes on their original counterparts. The 2005 film showcased their brattiness and horrible natures properly, except again for Veruca Salt, because Julie Dawn Cole embraced that spoilt girl's character so well it left a Tough Act to Follow.
• Common Knowledge: Grandpa Joe was not "Changed" to be "more sympathetic" - he's actually behaving the same way he did in the original source material.
• Critical Dissonance: the film was well-liked by critics. Audiences, however, who were less likely to be familiar with the original book, instead considered it to be a badly-done remake of the classic 1971 film version (despite not being a remake of said movie), and gave it mediocre reviews.
• Crosses the Line Twice: Wilbur telling a young Willy that he won't be there if he leaves home and tries to come back makes for an effective Tear Jerker moment that's not played for laughs. On the other hand, when Willy does come back and finds that the entire house is literally missing...
• Draco in Leather Pants: Violet and Mike. Even if they are both openly antagonistic, much more so than in the 1971 film or the book, their fans claim that they are just normal kids who never did anything wrong. In Violet's case, she's usually portrayed as suffering heavily under her Stage Mom.
• Ending Fatigue: The Adaptation Expansion results in a Not His Sled situation (Charlie initially turning down the offer to be Wonka's heir) that draws out the film's conclusion by at least five minutes.
• Ensemble Dark Horse:
  • Christopher Lee as Dr. Wilbur Wonka gets only a few short scenes, but he makes the most of them and is one of the most remembered parts of the film, even by its detractors. He takes all of the Dracula, Count Dooku and Saruman mannerisms and transposes them onto a dentist. Just imagine Christopher Lee throwing his resonant basso into the word "Lollipops."
  • A good amount of people also like Grandma Georgina for her Non Sequitur lines providing lots of funny moments (i.e., "I love grapes!").
• Estrogen Brigade: Johnny Depp's Willy Wonka has a small fangirl following, who think he's hot. Considering that Johnny Depp himself is a Real Life example of this trope, this should be a given.
• Fandom-Enraging Misconception: Don't refer to this movie as a remake of the 1971 film! Even Gene Wilder made this mistake. It's a Truer to the Text adaptation completely unrelated to the 1971 film.
• Fandom Rivalry: Between the fans of this movie and those who prefer the 1971 film. Fans of the Burton film and Roald Dahl purists don't think very highly of the Stuart film, perceiving it as a barely faithful take on Dahl's book which takes way too many liberties with the source material and is filled with overly corny musical numbers that don't help to advance the plot at all. The fact that Dahl himself as well as Tim Burton have expressed their distaste with the 1971 movie is commonly cited as well. While fans of the Stuart film do recognize the Burton film is more accurate to the book, they feel it just doesn't evoke the same sense of wonder and amazement as the previous movie, has a particularly unlikable portrayal of Willy Wonka and is dragged down by a shoehorned Daddy Issues conflict regarding Wonka and his father, Wilbur. That said, there is a subset of fans who appreciate both films equally.
• Harsher in Hindsight: Mr. Bucket losing his toothpaste factory job to a robotic machine is a prime example of technological advancements that would eventually render certain occupations useless for employment in the future.
• Hilarious in Hindsight:
  • Mike Teavee, during his musical number, ends up in a parody of Psycho. Freddie Highmore later played Norman Bates in Bates Motel.
  • Mike Teavee's Italian dubber Alex Polidori went on to dub Timothée Chalamet's Willy Wonka in Wonka.
• Jerkass Woobie:
  • The big example of this turns out to be Willy Wonka, due to his backstory.
  • Violet is more of a domineering Alpha Bitch than in most adaptations, but it's made abundantly clear that her brattiness is the result of years of psychological abuse by her hideous Stage Mom, who is the true Hate Sink of her arc. This (and the fact that her punishment was to turn into a giant blueberry, unable to move) has likely contributed to Violet being one of the most popular characters of this adaptation. It also helps that's she's portrayed by AnnaSophia Robb, who's had a far more successful career than the other child actors (with the exception of Freddie Highmore, and even his career slumped until he moved into television work as a young adult).
• Memetic Molester: Willy Wonka looks and sounds like Michael Jackson. While Wonka's been the subject of creepy jokes before, resembling one of the most famous examples of this trope ramped this status up big time.
• Memetic Mutation:
  • "Good morning starshine! The Earth says 'Hello!'"
  • "HEY, LITTLE BOY? MY CHOCOLATE MUST BE UNTOUCHED BY HUMAN HANDS!"
  • Dr. Wilbur Wonka saying "LOLLIPOPS." has tracked some memetic popularity, for how utterly committed Christopher Lee's delivery of that silly sounding word is.
  • As noted in Memetic Molester above, comparing Johnny Depp's version of Wonka to Michael Jackson has recently become popular due to their similar appearances. Not helping is that the movie came out the same year Michael Jackson was on trial for child molestation and acquitted.
• Misblamed: Tim Burton has been hated for adding the sub-plot about Wonka’s childhood, when it was really the writer^note John August’s doing.
• Narm: While the group is riding the glass elevator through a gigantic room with Oompa-Loompas firing explosive candy at each other from cannon turrets, Mike asks what the point of this room is; Charlie, staring in wondrous awe, replies, "Candy doesn't have to have a point. That's why it's candy." While the movie as a whole treats candy like Serious Business, Charlie's attempt to wax poetic about it falls squarely into Ice-Cream Koan territory. Wonka looking at Charlie with quiet approval, like he's just conveyed some sort of profound wisdom, heightens the idea this scene was meant to be taken seriously, and in turn actually makes it even sillier.
• One-Scene Wonder: Arthur Slugworth, who only appears once but makes an impression thanks to Philip Philmar’s creepy performance.
• Rescued from the Scrappy Heap: This iteration of Grandpa Joe isn't nearly as unlikable as he is in the 1971 film. He's much friendlier towards every participant and has a more sympathetic reason to want to go to the factory. Also unlike his 1971 counterpart, he does help Charlie's family around the house, and while in the factory he at no time suggests that he and Charlie should steal anything. He's basically just a sweet, adorable old man who loves his grandson.
• Retroactive Recognition:
  • Before playing Lewis Robinson, Jordan Fry played Mike Teavee.
  • Freddie Highmore may be this to those unaware he was a child actor before his well known adult roles in Bates Motel and The Good Doctor.
• Special Effect Failure: When Violet turns into a blueberry it's quite obvious when AnnaSophia Robb is replaced by a CGI version of Violet, and the change can be quite jarring, especially in the close-ups on her face.
• What Do You Mean, It's Not Political?: The conversation between young Wonka and his dad, where the dad says he doesn’t want Willy to eat chocolate because he read in a medical journal that some kids are allergic, sounds suspiciously like a parody of anti-vaxxers.
• WTH, Costuming Department?: The very pale makeup used on Johnny Depp combined with his flamboyant a outfit and hairdo infamously made people think of Michael Jackson. Making matters worse is his use of a high pitched character combined with the character attracting young kids to his home. Given this was a time where Jackson was a very controversial figure, many found the look questionable and creepy.

Specifically the 2013 West End musical

• Americans Hate Tingle: U.K. reviews ranged from straight-up pans to "fun but not as good as Matilda" to raves. U.S. critics universally panned it, since many of them looked at it in relation to the 1971 movie instead of the book or the previous Dahl musical. This may or may not be a reason why the 2017 Broadway production had an extensive Retool, given that stage adaptations of extremely popular children's stories have a tendency to be Critic-Proof — but it wound up making matters worse!
• Applicability: As noted above under Alternate Character Interpretation Douglas Hodge, who originated the role of Mr. Wonka in this show, regarded him as "almost autistic". Indeed, Mr. Wonka does have several traits overlapping with high-functioning autism/Aspergers (sometimes Literal-Minded, often brutally honest, thinks logically, fully devoted to his craft, no close friends, extremely energetic) and in this adaptation is also a Motor Mouth who Hates Small Talk, and, as played by Hodge, is prone to extravagant arm/hand gestures. With all that in mind, his "I Am" Song "Simply Second Nature" — and his quest to find someone who has a similar creative spirit and understands his way of thinking to become his successor — becomes even more poignant than it already is in context. (And cold though he can be at times, the brats and their parents, via insults and looking down on his motivations, come off as picking on someone who is trying to be a good host and sincerely hopes they'll appreciate his work.)
• Critical Dissonance: As noted above, a lot of professional critics thought it merely okay or panned it outright — and everyone compared it to not only the film adaptations, but the other Roald Dahl musical on the West End (as well as Broadway by that point), the highly-acclaimed Matilda. Nor is there much love for the show on musical theatre message boards. Nonetheless, it lasted three-and-a-half years in London, breaking West End one-week sales records twice over in 2013 and setting house records for Theatre Royal Drury Lane more than once, with its final run of performances over Christmas 2016 the most successful of all. This trope didn't extend to Broadway, where the show flopped with both critics and audiences.
• Ensemble Dark Horse: Mrs. Teavee. Not only does she survive the longest (sans the Buckets and Mr. Wonka) on the tour, she also provides a great deal of comedy throughout the show with her alcoholic Stepford Smiler tendencies. She also gets a surprising, funny resolution to her character arc: she comes around to Mr. Wonka's way of thinking and is happy Mike's been shrunk.
• Friendly Fandoms: At least on Tumblr, there's some overlap between this show's fanbase and that of Matilda. Beyond the obvious connection of being Roald Dahl adaptations, they also share a choreographer, their respective book writers touched base with each other on the challenges of adapting Dahl, and owing in part to the need for West End shows to triple/quadruple cast child roles a few child actors wound up logging time in both productions. One adult actress, Lara Denning, played Miss Honey in Matilda and Mrs. Bucket in this show.
• Magnificent Bastard: Willy Wonka, as per usual, is the wonderfully eccentric, world-famous chocolatier seeking to leave his factory to someone who believes in his craft the way he does. Having faith that Charlie Bucket would make a fine heir, Wonka sets things up to ensure that Charlie obtains a Golden Ticket, while feigning annoyance with him once they properly meet to hide his intentions. Throughout the classic trek through the factory, Wonka happily showcases his numerous inventions and creations, while being comically disinterested in the safety of his guests, with no less than three of the bratty kids having their lives put in danger. In the show's finale, Wonka secretly tests Charlie by first scamming him out of a lifetime's supply of candy to see his humility, then by leaving him alone in his precious Imagining Room to witness his creative character. With Charlie having proven himself the perfect successor, Wonka congratulates him and assures him he'll do wonders before leaving for the real world to bring forth new creations.
• Memetic Mutation: "When Veruca Says" exploded in popularity in 2020, being a popular choice for Tiktok users to lipsync to. The original London recording has become the most-used version of the song, though the Broadway recording has also been used as well.
• Pandering to the Base: "Pure Imagination" was incorporated into the score at the behest of the show's producers because so many people thought it would be an adaptation of the 1971 movie. So to keep them from feeling too let down that it wasn't...
• Replacement Scrappy: Poor Alex Jennings, the first replacement Willy Wonka. As early as his Olivier Awards performance of "Pure Imagination" in May 2014, a month before he took the stage at Theatre Royal Drury Lane in the role, he was getting unfavorable comparisons to Douglas Hodge from fans. Once updated show trailers were uploaded to the show's official YouTube channel in July, the bulk of the viewer comments were lamenting the change. Those who saw both performers were split on which actor did a better job with the characterization (Jennings' icy-yet-still-playful approach versus Hodge's extravagant-even-for-Wonka hamminess), but general consensus was that Hodge^note who has a side career as a Singer-Songwriter was the better singer.
• Rewatch Bonus: Knowing The Reveal throws a lot of business involving the tramp/Willy Wonka into a new light.
• Suspiciously Similar Song: "When Veruca Says" sounds similar to "Sing!" from A Chorus Line.
  • Those familiar with Shaiman-Wittman's Smash songs have compared "Strike That! Reverse It!" to "Cut, Print, Moving On"; that they were working on both projects at roughly the same time — the series aired its Grand Finale shortly before previews for the stage show began in London — doesn't help.
• They Changed It, Now It Sucks!: There was real disappointment in some corners of the fandom over Alex Jennings and later Jonathan Slinger choosing to play Willy Wonka as clean-shaven rather than following Douglas Hodge's precedent of a prosthetic makeup-based neatly-groomed mustache and chin tuft combination (though understudies followed said precedent). This is partially because Mr. Wonka does have a goatee in the source novel and illustrations thereof — sometimes with a mustache added — a detail both movie adaptations, and from there pop culture in general, ignore in favor of clean-shaven Wonkas.
• Tough Act to Follow: An unusual case, in that it's with regard to other adaptations of the same story and/or the other work of the source material's writer rather than having the same creative team as a previous hit^note Though both this and Matilda share a choreographer. Considering the status of the 1971 film and the critical acclaim given to the other Roald Dahl musical on the West End, Matilda, this was inevitable. While critical reception was mixed, the show was able to stick around for three-and-a-half years (by far the longest run enjoyed by a West End musical that wasn't an American import since Matilda) — and even though it's not quite as beloved as the '71 movie, it's far less hated than the '05 film. Note that this only applies to the original West End staging, not the Broadway Retool (see below), which was widely condemned from its first preview performance onward and was the basis for all subsequent productions.
• Visual Effects of Awesome: All the projections, the Department of the Future sequence (particularly the perfect timing of the dancers with the television images in "Vidiots"), the Great Glass Elevator gliding out over the first few rows of the stalls (though some viewers think it wobbles too much)...even the simple trick that sends a paper airplane flying up to the balcony gets oohs and aahs.
• What Do You Mean, It's for Kids?: For a megabudget family-friendly musical rivalling/exceeding the Disney stage productions, there's a lot of potential offstage (if lovingly described via the songs) Death as Comedy here — visited upon children no less. Nigel Planer (who originated the role of Grandpa Joe) explained to the Daily Mail: "There were contingency plans if it scared children too much; if it was too dark. But after a few days of previews it became apparent kids love that. They laughed as they watched Veruca Salt going down a grinder. Kids find that funny. They’re nasty, kids, aren’t they? I think they enjoy someone telling it like it is; we soon realised we could be as gruesome as we liked." This has Lampshade Hanging early on: When Charlie asks to hear the story of Prince Pondicherry (who, in this version, died in the melting ruins of his chocolate palace), Grandpa Joe quips: "Oh, you like the scary ones, don't you Charlie?"
• The Woobie: Charlie, the most rounded version of the character since the 1971 film: A Cheerful Child prone to daydreaming who works so hard to make the best of his meager situation, a light in the lives of his toiling family, who wish they could give him the life he deserves but just can't (as seen in "If Your Mother Were Here") — really, they're all woobies. In any case, a lonely kid who has dreams that he can't attain is a sad sight indeed, and watching him fall into a blue funk as each Golden Ticket is found is heart-tugging. Even when he gets his golden chance, the poor, shy kid keeps bringing up the rear come tour day, lost in the shadows of the limelight shed on the other finders. This makes The Reveal that Willy Wonka, the man the boy admires more than any other, was secretly looking out for him all along quite touching and gratifying.

Specifically the 2017 Broadway staging

• Alternate Character Interpretation: Does Willy Wonka take a shine to Charlie because he's a good, creative kid, or because the boy's an Extreme Doormat who 1) will put up with emotional and physical abuse if there might be a reward for it (however meager it might be) and 2) is such a Wonka fanboy that he can look past the horrible things he does to others? It doesn't help that they go effectively into business together at the end (whereas in London the boy becomes a Grade-School C.E.O. immediately), since Wonka has already shown he's willing to take credit for Charlie's ideas with the "Liquid Sunshine" rebranding.
• Author's Saving Throw:
  • The Pandering to the Base changes (see below) were intended as this, but opinion greatly varies as to how well they work.
  • The removal of the Scenery Porn was also pitched as this to better celebrate the concept of imagination, but it may or may not be a money-saving Deliberate Flaw Retcon.
  • The further revisions for the U.S. and Australian tours may be another case of this. Changing out some of the setpieces and adding new and more projected backdrops seems to be a response to complaints that the show didn't have enough Spectacle in New York, while replacing "What Could Possibly Go Wrong?" with "That Little Man of Mine" may have been because audiences weren't amused by lyrics like "And then we tweet before we think" and "And though he may be malcontent/Someday he might be president" that were seen as digs at President Donald Trump.
• Broken Base:
  • Which is superior — West End or Broadway?
  • There seems to be a near-even split, applying to professional critics and ordinary showgoers, between those who prefer having the Four Bratty Kids played by adults and those who wish the original London production's conceit of casting actual kids had been retained.
• Esoteric Happy Ending: Charlie not only becomes the new Candy Man and his family is moved into the factory, but he has a father figure again in Willy Wonka...a misanthropic jerk who allowed his minions to murder two little girls, left Augustus to an Uncertain Doom, and allowed Mike Teavee to remain shrunken. What happens when the brats' parents let word of this get out to the press and authorities? While this trope could also apply to the original West End version, it at least played up the Black Comedy and Fairy Tale morality, had a much more sympathetic Wonka, and wasn't as extreme with regards to Violet and Veruca's fates.
• Just Here for Godzilla: To judge from the BroadwayWorld.com message boards, a lot of adult theatergoers only saw this show in New York for Christian Borle (a two-time Tony Award winner) as Willy Wonka.
• Pandering to the Base: The heavy revisions from London are almost entirely motivated by pandering to fans of the story who 1) regard the 1971 film adaptation and its songs as definitive and/or 2) don't want to wait until the story's halfway point for Willy Wonka to show up.
  • Three more songs from the 1971 film — "The Candy Man", "I've Got a Golden Ticket", and "The Oompa-Loompa Song" — are incorporated into the score.
  • Mr. Bucket suffers Death by Adaptation and the grandparents besides Joe are Demoted to Extra solely because that's what the movie did.
  • Willy Wonka shows up in the show's opening scene and maintains a King Incognito masquerade as the candy shop owner in Act One.
  • "Pure Imagination" is moved to the Chocolate Room scene because that's where it turned up in the movie, coming at the expense of "Simply Second Nature", a song that was crucial to understanding Mr. Wonka's life philosophy and the show's larger theme of "creation".
• Special Effect Failure:
  • Vulture's scathing review noted it had "effects that would hardly have seemed special 20 years ago. When Wonka, who has spent much of the first act in disguise as a candy store owner in order to give Borle something to do, reveals himself as the grand wizard of chocolate, the transformation scene involves a crowd gathering around him while he takes off his overcoat." (In London, the coat vanished in full view of the audience as he stood in the doorway.)
  • The final stage of Violet's transformation into a blueberry is represented by Eugene running across the stage carrying a large purple-velour covered ball that is not even as big as Violet looked as she stumbled off stage once she began transforming.
• They Changed It, Now It Sucks!: Those on the pro-London side of this show's Broken Base regard the changes made to the show in the transition to New York City as for the worse, and even some who prefer the Broadway version would have liked to have the Scenery Porn kept in at least.
• Unfortunate Character Design: These Oompa-Loompas all have identical white longjohn suits and red wigs and their first number has them brandish knives and cleavers. Let the comparisons to Chucky the killer doll roll in!
• Unintentionally Unsympathetic: This Willy Wonka was intended as a delightful Karmic Trickster ala Bugs Bunny, to go by Christian Borle's comments, but he's such a misanthrope towards everyone that when combined with his lack of sympathy for what happens to the bad kids he's a lot closer to The Bully. The book tries to justify this by emphasizing that finding out that some of his workers were actually spies was a Cynicism Catalyst for him, but it's really hard to sympathize with someone who teases a hungry child with the possibility of a free candy bar and takes pleasure in getting his guests hurt in an invisible maze.

---