Which of these ticked you off the most? Let us know in the comments below! For more content like this, click here: th-cam.com/video/uwuu8-5yjXY/w-d-xo.html Don't forget to play our Live Trivia (www.watchmojo.com/play) games at 3pm and 8pm EST for a chance to win cash! The faster you answer, the more points you get!
I don't see anything wrong with the remake of the Lion king, Willi Wanka, and Pinocchio, for the Lion king they just did them more realistically. it's not like a real Lion could make those expressive looks like they do in the original, for Willi Wanka Jonny Depp was just playing a more different Wanka nothing wrong with that, and for Pinocchio at least for me I like his Father more on the remake played by Hanks, then the original.
Also while Wilder's version is called Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory it mainly revolves around Charlie, Depp's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on the other hand revolves around Willy Wonka. It's so weird that the main name of the movie is not what the movie revolves around. Also Depp pulling the movie to be about Wonka defeats the whole story as it's about a poor boy getting it all and not about a bitter strange adult who fears dentists. Depp's version has no flair and feels flat and one demential.
No mention of how they totally ruined the Robocop story with the remake? They threw out the most interesting part of the story, Murphy trying to recover his humanity after his memories were wiped and they tried to make him an automaton.
I was mixed on Charlie. IMO it righted some things the first got wrong about the book, but i found Depp’s portrayal a bit too weird, plus adding a backstory took away a lot of the character’s mystery.
I see alot of Charlie Chocolate Factory love here. I think the thing with Depp's Wonka was that it lacked the nuance and groundedness of Wilder's. It was weird and quirky for the sake of it and nothing else. Despite the eccentricities, Wilder's Wonka still felt like a real person and not a caricature.
Wilder’s strayed too far from the source material and lost what the book was about. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a cautionary tale for kids that misbehave, the focus of the book was Charlie not Wonka. Dahl believed the Wilder film lacked substance. He hated the whole film. The Depp/Burton version is closer to what Dahl was aiming for.
@@andrewft31Yeah, because I remember the part in the book where they had Wonka's childhood growing up. I read the book and watched the Wilder version, and aside from the musical numbers, no father in the movie and one or two other scenes, (Charlie and Joe floating in the air wasn't in the book), it is very similar to the book. Point out to me where the Wilder version "strayed from the source material". From everything I heard, Roald Dahl was a miserable old turd anyway.
Agree. Plus, what they did alter, wasn't needed; example, showing what Norman was doing while peeking in at Marion. I saw the movie at the theater with my mother while I was in school. Awkward 😣
Maybe it's because I like both versions, but just as "The Muppet Christmas Carol" isn't a remake of the Alastair Sim version of "A Christmas Carol," (or the 100 other versions of the story,) "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" isn't a remake of "Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" - they are both adaptations of the same source material.
Gaston leaving Maurice for dead in the remake is stupid, but Gaston helping Maurice was actually good because he wanted to get Maurice’s approval, so help him out even if you don’t believe him. I liked that idea, hated leaving Maurice for dead.
Fun fact; karate was developed from Kung Fu (modern name White Crane/Pak Hok Pai, originally Fist of the Lion’s Roar). As an instructor in White Crane, I agree it should be called Kung Fu Kid, and that all the flip fighting was completely unnecessary when they could have just had two martial artists in a martial arts fight. It’d be nice to see that in a movie again.
*I Am Legend* also randomly changed from thinking vampires to mindless zombies for some reason, but then gave the zombies the same characteristics as vampires (strength, aversion to sunlight). And by ignoring the entire "Legend" portion of the name, missed out on a _spectacular_ ending.
I didn't know that either. I know they been planning to in the last three years without luck....so yeah, this has surprised me. Yes, so far all of Hitchcok's films have seen off every horror creator going, including Stephen King and the one who remade Pinocchio. Nobody can do it and yet to find out it has happened, I am not sure how to feel about that
@@hokutology1718 yes they did - it may have been a Made for TV thing starring the late great Christopher Reeve (AKA Superman) after his horse injury which landed him paralyzed in a wheelchair. So, when he played Jimmy Stewarts character he was already in a wheelchair. You will have to google it because off hand I don’t remember what actress played his ‘gal pal’ she was probably someone known at the time. RIP - there will never be a better Super man
OMG. I watched the originals so many times and loved them. I saw the trailer with Steve Martin and groaned so much. I only ended up watching the film because a friend insisted on showing it to me. It was so dumb. I don't know how Sellers did it, but he completely made the character by being so clumsy, hilarious situations and still solving the case by the end. The remake just made him unbelievably stupid in a really not funny way. You just can't compare them.
They really didn’t need to remake Planet of the Apes, but I didn’t hate the 2001 remake. I enjoyed Heston’s cameo and the nostalgic use of some of the more icon lines. It was just kinda fun. The ending wasn’t supposed to make sense. It was obviously left open for a sequel, which of course never materialized because it flopped at the box office.
I don't think the Psycho peephole change was so shocking. That's what a creeper would do. They just didn't show it in 1960 because it was 1960. Hitchcock had to fight to show a toilet for crying out loud.
I think Jumanji should have been in here... I grew up with the old classic, and loved the slight comedic but serious tone in the 90s movie...The new ones rely too much of slap-stick comedy and avoid the spirit of the old one.
Wonka being recast isn't a bad thing, because it's two different versions of the movie. The Wilder version has less to do with the book whereas the Burton version had more involvement with the book AND Roald Dahl's widow to boot.
I actually thought Johnny Depp’s portrayal was better in some ways. Sure he wasn’t charming, but he made a perfect eccentric weirdo/mad genius, which is kind of what you would expect of a mysterious reclusive chocolatier who’s owns and operates a borderline magical factory staffed by Oompa Loompas. Don’t get me wrong, Gene Wilder was a classic, but I think this was a valid direction to take the character, kind of like how every iteration of the Joker is done from a different angle.
keep in mind the TIM BURTON'S BERSION is NOT necessarilly a remake and more of a mostly faithful adaptation with some creative changes in its own superior right
Depp's Wonka was more faithful to the book.Wilder has the advatange of nostalgia from those who most likely never read the book. Wilders Wonka seems...unstable. His blow up at the end seens to imply that hes not unfamilar with portraying himself in an acceptable manner. He knew Charlie and Grandpa Joe decided to test tbe fizzy lifting drink..and never once made any mention of it until his rage blow up at the end. Depps Wonka wasnt hiding anyrhing. The overuse of CGI was a big downside to the Burton version, but its more faithful and its Wonka doesnt come across as someone who probably has bodies in the basement
For Halloween I do understand the view point against Ron Zombie's remake. The original does a good job of showcasing Michael's menace because it offers no reason for his motives. But I do like Zombie's remake because I do like his take on Michael's motives.
Disney is doing its level-best to alienate as many people as possible with its remakes. Thankfully, at the rate they are going, they will bankrupt themselves before they ruin all of Walt's work. Oh yeah, Capt Marvel isn't a woman either.
The original Willy Wonka was disowned by the author. The Johnny Depp version was praised by the author's family for being more like the book. I prefer the Depp version as well. Aside from that, I agree with all of your picks.
If you disregard the book (many people who go to films haven't read the source material) the first was better overall. More heart, better songs, more palatable and less icky/creepy.
@@SWLinPHX and you probably liked the Lord of the rings 2 & 3, and the Hobbit. I walked out on LOTR 2, never bothered with 3, and 30 minutes into the Hobbit I cancelled the stream. Too bad I never really like the Harry Potter stories. I heard that the movies were spot on the books. Hey, I know, let's redo Citizen Kane with Meryl Streep in the lead role! Authors create a masterpiece. Hollywood ruins it.
@@Rkenton48 Uh, no. Never saw them. But you've obviously missed my point. Not everyone goes to see a movie based on their familiarity with the book and even those who do, if the movie is good enough or memorable or beloved even it will do good. Is this a discussion on how good a film is or how faithful it is to the book?? Again, look at "The Shining": the famous author disapproved yet it became a classic that endures to this day. But King's own remake of "The Shining" as a TV miniseries was quickly forgotten.
I actually didn’t mind Freddy’s new look in the remake. What really bothered me was switching him from a child murderer to a kid diddler, and the “maybe he was innocent” angle they were going for. And as for the peephole scene in the remake of Psycho? From what I understand, that was actually more source accurate to the original novel and something that Hitchcock wanted to include in his version but wasn’t able to due to the level of censorship of movies at the time. I don’t know if that’s 100% true or not, but it’s what I’ve heard.
Dishonorable Mentions: - Changing motivations around (Lady and the Tramp) - Captain Hook's backstory (Peter Pan and Wendy) - Everything!!! (Tom and Jerry and Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory) - No plot focus (The Mummy 2017) - Rushed plot and making King Kong a bad musical (Mighty Kong) - Casting Matthew Bored-wick as Harold Hill (The Music Man 2003) - Not changing anything (both Psycho and Lion King) - Disgusting imagery (The Shaggy Dog 2006) Any I missed?
Introducing first the idea that remake Freddy was a child *molester* as a human and then worse, teasing he was innocent of his crimes when they killed him made an already questionable remake pretty icky.
He’s also more manipulative, and at least he actually brings his gun to the castle (which he didn’t in the cartoon, for some reason). I also like that LeFou has character development, and turns on Gaston in the end.
I did not like the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. And I really wish people would give the whole who's Wonka is better debate a rest. But I know once the movie, Wonka comes out at Christmas, it's gonna get worse.
@@karenburton8444 I don't peculiarly like that excuse (mainly because I'm Italian, we have diffrent voices for many actors, and not always, especially in older movies, the dubber remained consistant, so I am more open in such stuff. And then my hypocritical self is angry when an animated Joker isn't dubbed by the usual guy that dubs him since Mark Hamill). Yeah, nobody can top Englund, but they aren't try to top him, they are trying to re-tell an old story to a new audience that isn't used to the og stuff. In that they did a good job. Perfect? No. Improvable? Yes. Yet enjoyable? Yes.
I personally like Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy... Yes, the story for that movie was fricken terrible! But whereas Robert came across as a child murderer, Jackie came across more like a child molester, something that Robert was supposed to be but never really felt like cause of the time the original came out. Maybe a little in FvsJ, but that was about it. Jackie's Freddy just made my skin crawl every time he opened his mouth!
Goldar Being a Smelted Gold Giant Kaiju Power Rangers (2017) I kinda prefered the armored Wizard Of Oz primate Goldar from Mighty Morphin Power Rangers (1993-1995)
The Day the Earth Stood Still: Updating the setting. The original film's dawn-of-the-nuclear-age setting is vital to its plot and its themes. A remake that maintained that setting could have been quite interesting, even with Keanu Reeves in the lead, but movie execs have this idea that audiences won't be able to relate to a movie unless it's set in "modern day" (whenever that happens to be).
Cartoon Gaston I had a hard time believing that he would go full psycho after just being an arrogant jerk. It's like Hans in Frozen, there's almost no buildup. You can't have something like that come out of nowhere. Also, it's incredibly stupid having something that isn't even a remake on the thumbnail. Tim Burton's Charlie & the Chocolate Factory is NOT a remake. There's a difference between a remake (like Total Recall with Colin Farrell) and a new adaption of the same book. Book movie versions of Wonka act wildly out of character at times. Depp has the childlike demeanor, Wilder has the snark, but neither one really gets the character as such.
The animated Beauty and the Beast, Gaston could actually be considered the hero of another story. He was willing to work hard all day to support a family. He viewed the Beast as a threat to his home and was willing to risk his life to fight what he perceived as a threat. Gaston was obviously not without flaws, but if the audience's sympathy hasn't been made pro-Beast, Gaston would very much be a hero.
I really don't know what people have aganist the remake of "Charlie and the choclate factory", it's a fine movie and I really don't see the problem with the new Willie Wonka design
Having Mulan magically gifted right from the getgo instead of her journey and training to overcome herself and get better and solve issues with her witts instead of supernatural 'chosen one' powers...
Look at this stuff Isn't it neat Wouldn't you think our collection's complete Wouldn't you think we're the company The company who has everything Look at this vault Legends of old How many of our movies can be resold Looking around here you think, sure They've got everything We've got Marvel and Star Wars aplenty We've got Frozen and Pixar galore You want sequels? We've got twenty But who cares? No big deal I want more I want to be where the reboots are I wanna make, wanna make some money Taking advantage of What are we calling it? Nostalgia For original ideas you don't get too far Creativity is required for an imagination Why make things that are What's the word again? New This can't be stopped Our will shall be done It's way too late we've already won That's going to be We'll get that money We'll remake your world What would we give If you could relive all of our movies How would they pay Spending a day to watch something bland Betcha we can do it again Later on with the Pixar movies Lightning McQueen Live-action machine Starring the Rock We're ready to make what's already there It might be sacred, classic tradition To be honest, I guess we don't What's the word? Care Our time's arrived We're second to none Our company will truly be number one Our legacy We'll get that money We'll remake your world ...and that's DISNEY world! Show less
The common denominator here is NONE of these movies needed to be remade. They are timeless and are as enjoyable to watch today as when they were made. We didn't need a CGI chariot race or an updated Oldboy. We need new stories, not re-dos.
My son and I got to see part of the remake of "Total Recall" being filmed in Toronto. They had the flying cop cars Attached to huge trucks with arms moving them up and down while driving under the Gardiner Expressway. We were on our way to the Rogers Centre to see former Blue Jay and Hall of Famer Robbie Alomar get his number retired, and see our Jays beat Texas 7-3. What a great day.
For Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocalate Factory they had Roald Dahl's wife as a consultant, so that they could get a film that was more accurate to the book. This video is redundant. Timothy Chalamet is a far worse casting than Johnny Depp. Depp did an excellent job with what he was given, and he still kept the character of Willy Wonka eccentric. Just in a different way from Gene Wilder.
It's really fascinating to see how remakes of iconic movies can sometimes misstep in their changes. Deviations from the originals-like modifying characters, plots, or even visual aesthetics-usually lead to widespread criticism. As a viewer, it's intriguing to compare these changes and understand the importance of staying true to certain elements when recreating classic films. While remakes offer the opportunity to modernize and reinvent, they can also risk losing the very aspects that made the original films so beloved.
That is what makes the Chocolate Factory interesting, the Burton/Depp version is more faithful to the book where as the Wilder version has very little in common with the book.
@@andrewft31 Both versions have their own charm and appeal, showcasing different interpretations of the original story. It's a prime example of how remakes can offer contrasting experiences while still capturing the essence of the original story in their own unique ways.
This is why Classic Movies should stay Classic, and NEVER be Remade, especially all that Crap Disney is doing right now with their Renaissance Era Movies.
I’m not a person who drones on and on about “ONLY Robert Englund can play Freddy!” This argument is dried up and tired, but the remake didn’t help anyone’s belief on this. I still believe with the right actor and script, Freddy CAN be well-played by another actor. Watch a fan film, and see for yourself. There are several interpretations of the character that are GREAT.
Very good as usual, Mojo. It's funny because in almost all of your remake examples, you could have piled-on even more negatives. I laughed when I saw 'Pretty Much Everything' for Pinocchio. But felt you went easy on some others. I recall Rollerball in early 2000s as one of the first examples of Hollywood portraying men and women in the same playing field of physical competition as equals. I can remember my friends and I, who are athletes, walking out afterwards and saying how ridiculous it was. The first thing any serious opponent would do is violently take out the females. They would be relatively easy targets of elimination. Not sexist, just true.
17:37 What bothered me most about it is, if they were just honest about it it the marketing, The Kung Fu Kid probably would have been a hit. “We remade it, but changed it”
I saw Clash of the Titans (2010) in theaters in 3D. The 3D glasses were useless, the only thing really 3D was the preview for Nightmare on Elm Street of all things.
The original Planet of the Apes innovated a cinematic depiction of the twist ending in the book which was far more resonant. Some intellectuals still consider the book's version more powerful, however. The idea was that the planet of the apes was indeed a different planet that was once ruled by humans in the past like Earth until apes eventually took over, but readers finally learn that the same thing happens on every planet in the universe, including Earth in the future. This is a theme of fate and psychological horror too cerebral to really convey with a movie. The remake only proved it by trying to be more true to the source material. The first adaptation had already found the best possible approach.
But suppose there was no book. Only these 2 films would you still like the newer one better? I've noticed that usually the ONLY reason why anyone says they prefer the remake is because it's closer to the book.
Did watch mojo not watch the Poltergeist remake? This is the third worst movie remake list I've seen that I've posted on how they should've had Poltergeist on the list. There's plenty that Poltergeist did wrong, but I think the most obvious change that should've have happened was showing the spirit world. What made the original so good was the lack of visuals of the spirit world. It makes you leave it up to your imagination. The remake removes the imagination from the equation. Not only that, it's just a creapier version of the house that looks like it was underwater for years.
While I liked both versions of "Chocolate Factory", I wished that the remake hadn't give so much attention to Wonka's backstory with his strict father, since it took away from what made the original such a classic, in my opinion.
The book focused very little on Wonka and mostly on Charlie… this is why Dahl disliked the Wilder version, too much Wonka. Burton only made changes Dahl’s widow agreed to and that made sense.
@@SolCresta3405 Well it's pretty much the same story told of the same source material. Whether Tim wanted to base it on the 1971 film or not surely it's still a remake.
@@Gmackematix And I’m sick and tired of all the shit Charlie got. Yes, it’s different, but for a Tim Burton movie and for a movie released in 2005, my most hated year, I didn’t mind it that much. It’s much maligned.
While I was watching the remake for Nightmare on Elm Street, I thought maybe they were going to throw in a twist, where Freddy was actually innocent, but became the victim of a mob. I think that would’ve made for an interesting remake with a fresh take on the character, and they could’ve had Freddy murdering the parents in their sleep instead.
I can't believe Wes Craven's The Last House On The Left didn't make this list. That should have been a number 2. The original was so over the top,it freaked me out for the longest time. I could barely watch the remake(as much as I like Aaron Paul) that was just the worst. Imo.
WatchMojo, in general, I avoid remakes because it becomes Nothing like original. As Walt Disney himself said, “You can’t toppings with pigs”. . In my opinion, if the box office failure of the remake of “Ben-Hur” doesn’t teach people to stop making remakes, nothing will. Since we both like “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”, I took my daughter to see the remake. When we left the theater, I asked her, “What did you think of it?”. She asked, “Would you be mad at me if I said I hated it?”. I said, “Me, too”.
Have to disagree about Willy Wonka remake. Loved it. And I'm stating that I'm looking forward to the Willy Wonka movie coming out later this year. ^^ Am really interested in the exact story of how Willy became Wonka. ^^
@@AlexisStreamswell I think it’s it own thing it’s a prequel showing how Willy became the famous chocolatier he is in the two films I’m very much looking forward to seeing it
@@therunawaykid6523 Now i'm confused cuz in the trailer Wonka says Scratch that reverse it which is something gene wilder would say but they kinda recreated the india scene with wonka and his girl friend
while I've got mixed feelings about Rob Zombies Halloween remake, it's certainly not where the "sister plot point" was established. That was in Halloween II in 1981
Absolutely. I don't understand anyone saying that Laurie being Michael's sister isn't cannon. Marion, the nurse, literally SAYS she is when she is sent to bring Dr. Loomis back.
What about going to Paris in Beauty and the Beast. I mean wtf would the Enchantress give the prince such a nice gift when she was supposed to be harshly punishing him? Wasn't the whole point of the mirror that it was his only insight to the outside world?
Never seen it and I won’t ever and the rubbish of the apes remake and only the good remake he did was the departed the remake of an Japanese movie I don’t know what that movie is called but never seen the original one and that remake was awesome and was a awesome choice to win best picture and best Director for Martin schoose
I honestly don't know where the hate for Johnny's performance as Willy Wonka comes from. His version was very enjoyable and Tim's remake was absolutely delightful, even better and more faithful to the novel than Gene's movie ☝🏻☝🏻
The Burton film was truer to the novel (minus that whole “father was a dentist” scene), and Gene Wilder performed a better Willy Wonka. My mom actually didn’t like Wilder or Depp, because neither of them were unhinged enough! But Wilder was more unhinged than Depp.
@@tombstonerforever9374 Depp was…quirky. What this video failed to mention is that this movie was released after a slew of other Depp-Burton movies and audiences were getting fatigued.
I actually really don't like Gene Wilder's Wonka. Sure, he's more of a businessman, but... he's mainly an asshole. I don't a wacky, chocolateer magic man, I see a downright psychopath hustling people to sell his dying business to. Depp gave us a childish, awakard, yet awkwarldy genius Wonka. I love that.
Everyone complains about Depp's version of Willy Wonka vs. Gene Wilder's. I mean, Gene Wilder's version was good, but as someone who LOVED the book, Depp's version is almost spot on from the book's version. But I know I'm in the minority.
@WatchMojo Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is NOT a remake of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. It's another ADAPTATION. The story was a book first in 1964 and a movie second in 1971, then another movie in 2005. Even Tim Burton admitted that he loved the book and hated the 1971 film. He even requested the screenwriters of his film to not watch the 1971 film because he wanted his film to be its own thing that it is.
Remake of the 1971 film or remake of the 1960s book, it's still a remake. A remake with less memorable music, a creepier Wonka and an unncessary Willy Wonka backstory bolted on in my opinion. If Roald Dahl disliked the 1971 version, I suspect he'd have hated the 2005 version even more.
@@nickcopeland6915 Yeah, but Harper Lee never struck me as pretentious as many other authors. I think J K Rowling was happy with the Harry Potter films as another example.
@@Gmackematixs not a remake of anything, its an original ADAPTATION of the book. Learn what words mean. Because you clearly didn’t read what the op commenter said. The depp film isn’t trying to remake the first movie at all. Also Dahl hated the 70’s film because it wasn’t accurate to the book, the 05 one however was accurate to the book. So he would probably prefer it if anything
I disagree a LOT with Pinocchio: listen you all guys... No, listen guys that of Pinocchio ONLY know the original Disney version and NEVER EVEN FLIPPED a page from Collodi's book... it's hypocritical saying "he's too innocent" or "he does nothing bad". Yeah you're right, this Pinocchio was asked and asked to step off the right path, the original he wasn't even given the option. THE REMAKE CHOOSES! THAT'S THE ONLY IMPROVEMENT THAT MAKES THE REMAKE BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL! Visually? Ok, yes, the original is a winner by far, but storytelling? I MUCH prefer the ones where the protagonist MAKES his own mistakes, REALIZES by his own that something is wrong BEFORE shEEt hits the fan and not WHEN, whose conscience CARES for his job and does something concrete, to the one where he's too innocent because, Walt..? "Nobody would have seen themselves in the bratty/naughty version that is book Pinocchio" Yeah, you're right, clearly the second most popular book of all time has nothing to do about relatability that the protagonist has with the reader. The remake isn't perfect, but it IS fixing the things wrong with the original movie while respecting the original source material, however I agree, it doesn't give justice to the top-notch good parts of the original, but THAT is the only REAL problem.
Pretty much got em all A few snubs 2 spocks/attempting to merge timelines Star Trek Overly brash humor: Death at a funeral Making the characters more gray: Cape Fear Removing redeeming qualities: The Bad News Bears Recasting real comedians as characters of themselves: the three stooges (a biopic with plenty of their physical comedy would have worked WAY better) Making her more generic ,single white female/the roommate
I liked the darker aspect of Depp's Willy Wonka, especially since the book was darker. Some of his affectations were annoying, but the whole point was he was an abandoned child (over candy!) and kinda got "Stuck." I just don't think it deserved the hate it got. Then again, I'm a HUGE Burton fan! I think he was perfect for this story! I also saw the original when I was a kid and I don't know why they think kids like musicals, but that's what was annoying in the 1st one - too many songs! Otherwise I loved it!
One could add the 2014 remake of Robocop. While it had cool science fiction effects and action, it lacked the wit and dark humor of Paul Verhoven's 1987 original.
To be fair it's a whole nothing burger for the psycho remake. It's arguably one of the worst remakes just because it doesn't remake anything, rather than just recreate. There's no reason to watch it over the original.
One of the worst is mulan having super powers whole movie is broken, and the message about sacrifice, hard work, determination and resiliance is gone, awfull movie
Why is the Johnny Depp version of Willy Wonka universally hated on? in my opinion it was one of my favorite movies from my childhood and I thought he did an amazing job It honestly just shows the depth that Johnny Depp has as an actor
One word. Purism. People hate remakes, or anything that is somehow called a remake, just for being different from the “original”, as if said “original” was perfect. It’s especially notable in the hate on Disney remakes.
Because people refuse to think that the newer version of something can be better. The Depp version is ironically more accurate to the Dahl book, yet that’s why people seem to dislike it. When usually people hate a film adaptation of a book BECAUSE its not accurate to the book
@@dhenderson1810 movies financial success has nothing to do with how good an actor is. A great actor can be in bad movies and bad actors can be in great movies. Just look at The Room, it has awful acting yet people love it
The second Willy Wonka was more fitting to the real Roald Dahl story and he was insulated by the first film cause it wasn’t the direction he had in mind when he came up with the book “ Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator “ That was of his choosing I am a huge fan of his - that’s why I know about that
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Which of these ticked you off the most? Let us know in the comments below!
For more content like this, click here: th-cam.com/video/uwuu8-5yjXY/w-d-xo.html
Don't forget to play our Live Trivia (www.watchmojo.com/play) games at 3pm and 8pm EST for a chance to win cash! The faster you answer, the more points you get!
Love your content❤❤❤❤❤
I don't see anything wrong with the remake of the Lion king, Willi Wanka, and Pinocchio, for the Lion king they just did them more realistically. it's not like a real Lion could make those expressive looks like they do in the original, for Willi Wanka Jonny Depp was just playing a more different Wanka nothing wrong with that, and for Pinocchio at least for me I like his Father more on the remake played by Hanks, then the original.
How come there's no mention of Death race on your list?
i disagree 1998 Godzilla was a good movie, i understand its not everyone's cup of tea but still it wasn't that bad
i thought i am legend was a good movie without knowing its meaning, the heart wrenching scene with Nevel and Sam was heart breaking
Depp's version of Willy Wonka was more insane and malicious.
Wilder's rendition was mysterious and playful
I saw a preview of an upcoming prequel movie of Willy Wonka, called "Wonka." Let's hope it will be as good as the 1971 classic.
@@dreamguardian8320 I fear it will be about Depp's Wonka.
Also while Wilder's version is called Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory it mainly revolves around Charlie, Depp's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on the other hand revolves around Willy Wonka. It's so weird that the main name of the movie is not what the movie revolves around.
Also Depp pulling the movie to be about Wonka defeats the whole story as it's about a poor boy getting it all and not about a bitter strange adult who fears dentists. Depp's version has no flair and feels flat and one demential.
@@Excanda The trailer made it perfectly clear that it's specifically a prequel to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
@@TCgamerboy2002 ok. I stand corrected. Wonka is clearly Wilder's Wonka.
No mention of how they totally ruined the Robocop story with the remake? They threw out the most interesting part of the story, Murphy trying to recover his humanity after his memories were wiped and they tried to make him an automaton.
Loved Robert Englund as Freddy, and nobody can do what he did for the franchise
Yeah I agree Robert is just too iconic to replace
Agreed.
same for Kane Hodder as Jason
Agree
@@marlonclark1896I second that. Him and Robert Englund were THE horror icons I grew up watching.
I was mixed on Charlie. IMO it righted some things the first got wrong about the book, but i found Depp’s portrayal a bit too weird, plus adding a backstory took away a lot of the character’s mystery.
Agree. At least in the remake, they got what many expected the Great Glass Elevator should've been. (which the first movie was changed and renamed)
I see alot of Charlie Chocolate Factory love here. I think the thing with Depp's Wonka was that it lacked the nuance and groundedness of Wilder's. It was weird and quirky for the sake of it and nothing else. Despite the eccentricities, Wilder's Wonka still felt like a real person and not a caricature.
Wilder’s strayed too far from the source material and lost what the book was about. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a cautionary tale for kids that misbehave, the focus of the book was Charlie not Wonka. Dahl believed the Wilder film lacked substance. He hated the whole film. The Depp/Burton version is closer to what Dahl was aiming for.
@@andrewft31 well God rest his soul. Wilder and the first one was still better.
A lot of fanboys love Depp, and won't accept any criticism of him, warranted or not.
@@andrewft31Yeah, because I remember the part in the book where they had Wonka's childhood growing up.
I read the book and watched the Wilder version, and aside from the musical numbers, no father in the movie and one or two other scenes, (Charlie and Joe floating in the air wasn't in the book), it is very similar to the book.
Point out to me where the Wilder version "strayed from the source material".
From everything I heard, Roald Dahl was a miserable old turd anyway.
and yet Depp's is more in line with the actual source material
It would have been funny if the Number 1 choice for Psycho was “Not changing anything”.
It should really have been "remaking it for no reason, since we already had a great version". I could say the same about Get Carter.
Agree. Plus, what they did alter, wasn't needed; example, showing what Norman was doing while peeking in at Marion. I saw the movie at the theater with my mother while I was in school. Awkward 😣
Maybe it's because I like both versions, but just as "The Muppet Christmas Carol" isn't a remake of the Alastair Sim version of "A Christmas Carol," (or the 100 other versions of the story,) "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" isn't a remake of "Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" - they are both adaptations of the same source material.
Gaston leaving Maurice for dead in the remake is stupid, but Gaston helping Maurice was actually good because he wanted to get Maurice’s approval, so help him out even if you don’t believe him. I liked that idea, hated leaving Maurice for dead.
The casting wasn’t good either. Should’ve been someone much more imposing in looks as well as attitude.
@@jasonstraight1320 yeah. Luke Evans isn’t that intimidating tbh
The whole remake was garbage
@@KittenUndercover I like the song Nevermore (even though it is from the broadway musical) and the song with Maurice while working
@@DustinGuidrozEvermore is not from the Broadway musical that was a similar song called if I can't love her.
Remakes need to stop , go back to the good ol' days where movies we're original or came from books
Stop remaking good films. Remake shitty ones, but better
*were
Yes , thank you. @@michaelpalmieri7335
I agree with this list because Hollywood spin their version of classic movies and fans are still hating them
True.
Fun fact; karate was developed from Kung Fu (modern name White Crane/Pak Hok Pai, originally Fist of the Lion’s Roar). As an instructor in White Crane, I agree it should be called Kung Fu Kid, and that all the flip fighting was completely unnecessary when they could have just had two martial artists in a martial arts fight. It’d be nice to see that in a movie again.
*I Am Legend* also randomly changed from thinking vampires to mindless zombies for some reason, but then gave the zombies the same characteristics as vampires (strength, aversion to sunlight). And by ignoring the entire "Legend" portion of the name, missed out on a _spectacular_ ending.
I can’t believe that they actually remade psycho. Hitchcock original still holds up 63 years later now
I didn't know that either. I know they been planning to in the last three years without luck....so yeah, this has surprised me. Yes, so far all of Hitchcok's films have seen off every horror creator going, including Stephen King and the one who remade Pinocchio. Nobody can do it and yet to find out it has happened, I am not sure how to feel about that
It was a true abomination. They must have asked about 30 actresses who said NO before Ann Heche agreed to play Marion Crane
And they changed absolutely nothing about it except the actors and gave it color
Agreed, there's a reason nobody has tried to remake Vertigo or The Birds. I think someone tried with Rear Window, though.
@@hokutology1718 yes they did - it may have been a Made for TV thing starring the late great Christopher Reeve (AKA Superman) after his horse injury which landed him paralyzed in a wheelchair.
So, when he played Jimmy Stewarts character he was already in a wheelchair. You will have to google it because off hand I don’t remember what actress played his ‘gal pal’ she was probably someone known at the time. RIP - there will never be a better Super man
Dishonorable mention:
Child's Play - Making the doll an evil robot by enabling security features
Agreed.
The Pink Panther - Steve Martin tried his best as Inspector Clouseau, but it leaned so far from it's Original version it lost all of it's charm.
Seller's made the harater
@@mattalan6618
What's a harater?
OMG. I watched the originals so many times and loved them. I saw the trailer with Steve Martin and groaned so much. I only ended up watching the film because a friend insisted on showing it to me. It was so dumb. I don't know how Sellers did it, but he completely made the character by being so clumsy, hilarious situations and still solving the case by the end. The remake just made him unbelievably stupid in a really not funny way. You just can't compare them.
They really didn’t need to remake Planet of the Apes, but I didn’t hate the 2001 remake. I enjoyed Heston’s cameo and the nostalgic use of some of the more icon lines. It was just kinda fun. The ending wasn’t supposed to make sense. It was obviously left open for a sequel, which of course never materialized because it flopped at the box office.
I don't think the Psycho peephole change was so shocking. That's what a creeper would do. They just didn't show it in 1960 because it was 1960. Hitchcock had to fight to show a toilet for crying out loud.
I think Jumanji should have been in here... I grew up with the old classic, and loved the slight comedic but serious tone in the 90s movie...The new ones rely too much of slap-stick comedy and avoid the spirit of the old one.
Wonka being recast isn't a bad thing, because it's two different versions of the movie. The Wilder version has less to do with the book whereas the Burton version had more involvement with the book AND Roald Dahl's widow to boot.
I loved the Gene Wilder version of Willy Wonka and the Johnny Depp version. Now I can't wait to see the Timmothee version.
I like the Depp version of Wonka better because he’s truer to the books. But Wilder’s is great too.
I actually thought Johnny Depp’s portrayal was better in some ways. Sure he wasn’t charming, but he made a perfect eccentric weirdo/mad genius, which is kind of what you would expect of a mysterious reclusive chocolatier who’s owns and operates a borderline magical factory staffed by Oompa Loompas. Don’t get me wrong, Gene Wilder was a classic, but I think this was a valid direction to take the character, kind of like how every iteration of the Joker is done from a different angle.
keep in mind the TIM BURTON'S BERSION is NOT necessarilly a remake and more of a mostly faithful adaptation with some creative changes in its own superior right
By WatchMojo's logic Denis Villeneuve remade Dune from David Lynch.
Depp's Wonka was more faithful to the book.Wilder has the advatange of nostalgia from those who most likely never read the book. Wilders Wonka seems...unstable. His blow up at the end seens to imply that hes not unfamilar with portraying himself in an acceptable manner. He knew Charlie and Grandpa Joe decided to test tbe fizzy lifting drink..and never once made any mention of it until his rage blow up at the end. Depps Wonka wasnt hiding anyrhing. The overuse of CGI was a big downside to the Burton version, but its more faithful and its Wonka doesnt come across as someone who probably has bodies in the basement
yep. I like both for their own take but yes having some parts of the book appearing in the remake was good. (such as the Great Glass Elevator)
Depp came across as ped.
For Halloween I do understand the view point against Ron Zombie's remake. The original does a good job of showcasing Michael's menace because it offers no reason for his motives. But I do like Zombie's remake because I do like his take on Michael's motives.
I am surprised only two of Disney's remakes were added. There's a lot more than that.
Like the Little Mermaid for example or Mulan or the f*cking "Snowwhite" movie, which should be named: "Off White and the seven diversity hires
Disney is doing its level-best to alienate as many people as possible with its remakes.
Thankfully, at the rate they are going, they will bankrupt themselves before they ruin all of Walt's work.
Oh yeah, Capt Marvel isn't a woman either.
The original Willy Wonka was disowned by the author. The Johnny Depp version was praised by the author's family for being more like the book. I prefer the Depp version as well. Aside from that, I agree with all of your picks.
If you disregard the book (many people who go to films haven't read the source material) the first was better overall. More heart, better songs, more palatable and less icky/creepy.
@@SWLinPHX and you probably liked the Lord of the rings 2 & 3, and the Hobbit. I walked out on LOTR 2, never bothered with 3, and 30 minutes into the Hobbit I cancelled the stream. Too bad I never really like the Harry Potter stories. I heard that the movies were spot on the books. Hey, I know, let's redo Citizen Kane with Meryl Streep in the lead role! Authors create a masterpiece. Hollywood ruins it.
@@Rkenton48 Uh, no. Never saw them. But you've obviously missed my point. Not everyone goes to see a movie based on their familiarity with the book and even those who do, if the movie is good enough or memorable or beloved even it will do good. Is this a discussion on how good a film is or how faithful it is to the book?? Again, look at "The Shining": the famous author disapproved yet it became a classic that endures to this day. But King's own remake of "The Shining" as a TV miniseries was quickly forgotten.
@@Rkenton48what a weird flex
Was it fuck? 🙄 you only like it because that waste of eyeliner Jonny depp is in it 🙄
I actually didn’t mind Freddy’s new look in the remake. What really bothered me was switching him from a child murderer to a kid diddler, and the “maybe he was innocent” angle they were going for.
And as for the peephole scene in the remake of Psycho? From what I understand, that was actually more source accurate to the original novel and something that Hitchcock wanted to include in his version but wasn’t able to due to the level of censorship of movies at the time. I don’t know if that’s 100% true or not, but it’s what I’ve heard.
Dishonorable Mentions:
- Changing motivations around (Lady and the Tramp)
- Captain Hook's backstory (Peter Pan and Wendy)
- Everything!!! (Tom and Jerry and Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory)
- No plot focus (The Mummy 2017)
- Rushed plot and making King Kong a bad musical (Mighty Kong)
- Casting Matthew Bored-wick as Harold Hill (The Music Man 2003)
- Not changing anything (both Psycho and Lion King)
- Disgusting imagery (The Shaggy Dog 2006)
Any I missed?
Introducing first the idea that remake Freddy was a child *molester* as a human and then worse, teasing he was innocent of his crimes when they killed him made an already questionable remake pretty icky.
#20 is not a bad change. Sounds like something his character would do.
He’s also more manipulative, and at least he actually brings his gun to the castle (which he didn’t in the cartoon, for some reason). I also like that LeFou has character development, and turns on Gaston in the end.
I did not like the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. And I really wish people would give the whole who's Wonka is better debate a rest. But I know once the movie, Wonka comes out at Christmas, it's gonna get worse.
Wait... the worst problem in Nightmare's remake is... the REALISTICALLY BURNED face?
Ah, the problem isn't how it seems, but how it looks. Ok, ok.
Wasn’t the right person playing the part.
@@karenburton8444 I don't peculiarly like that excuse (mainly because I'm Italian, we have diffrent voices for many actors, and not always, especially in older movies, the dubber remained consistant, so I am more open in such stuff. And then my hypocritical self is angry when an animated Joker isn't dubbed by the usual guy that dubs him since Mark Hamill). Yeah, nobody can top Englund, but they aren't try to top him, they are trying to re-tell an old story to a new audience that isn't used to the og stuff. In that they did a good job. Perfect? No. Improvable? Yes. Yet enjoyable? Yes.
The remake was better
I personally like Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy... Yes, the story for that movie was fricken terrible! But whereas Robert came across as a child murderer, Jackie came across more like a child molester, something that Robert was supposed to be but never really felt like cause of the time the original came out. Maybe a little in FvsJ, but that was about it. Jackie's Freddy just made my skin crawl every time he opened his mouth!
Actually I love both versions of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Goldar Being a Smelted Gold Giant Kaiju Power Rangers (2017) I kinda prefered the armored Wizard Of Oz primate Goldar from Mighty Morphin Power Rangers (1993-1995)
That would’ve been better, I did enjoy the new version of Rita though since they made her a competent villain
I thought Charlie and the chocolate factory was a free adaptation of the book instead of a remake of the previous adaptation.
I view the 2021 West Side Story the same way. Just another adaptation of the 1957 Broadway musical than a remake of the 1961 film adaptation.
The Day the Earth Stood Still: Updating the setting.
The original film's dawn-of-the-nuclear-age setting is vital to its plot and its themes. A remake that maintained that setting could have been quite interesting, even with Keanu Reeves in the lead, but movie execs have this idea that audiences won't be able to relate to a movie unless it's set in "modern day" (whenever that happens to be).
Cartoon Gaston I had a hard time believing that he would go full psycho after just being an arrogant jerk. It's like Hans in Frozen, there's almost no buildup. You can't have something like that come out of nowhere.
Also, it's incredibly stupid having something that isn't even a remake on the thumbnail. Tim Burton's Charlie & the Chocolate Factory is NOT a remake. There's a difference between a remake (like Total Recall with Colin Farrell) and a new adaption of the same book. Book movie versions of Wonka act wildly out of character at times. Depp has the childlike demeanor, Wilder has the snark, but neither one really gets the character as such.
17:32 Fun fact: Sony considered changing the title to "The Kung Fu Kid", but this idea was nixed by producer Jerry Weintraub.
The animated Beauty and the Beast, Gaston could actually be considered the hero of another story. He was willing to work hard all day to support a family. He viewed the Beast as a threat to his home and was willing to risk his life to fight what he perceived as a threat. Gaston was obviously not without flaws, but if the audience's sympathy hasn't been made pro-Beast, Gaston would very much be a hero.
What ticked me off the most was an ad about every four minutes !! Gone elsewhere.
I really don't know what people have aganist the remake of "Charlie and the choclate factory", it's a fine movie and I really don't see the problem with the new Willie Wonka design
Remaking any good movie is stupid. If the movie is already good and widely available, why remake it?
I liked Rollerball. 1. Because it was the only version I've seen and 2. Paul Heyman. 😊
Having Mulan magically gifted right from the getgo instead of her journey and training to overcome herself and get better and solve issues with her witts instead of supernatural 'chosen one' powers...
Look at this stuff
Isn't it neat
Wouldn't you think our collection's complete
Wouldn't you think we're the company
The company who has everything
Look at this vault
Legends of old
How many of our movies can be resold
Looking around here you think, sure
They've got everything
We've got Marvel and Star Wars aplenty
We've got Frozen and Pixar galore
You want sequels? We've got twenty
But who cares? No big deal
I want more
I want to be where the reboots are
I wanna make, wanna make some money
Taking advantage of
What are we calling it? Nostalgia
For original ideas you don't get too far
Creativity is required for an imagination
Why make things that are
What's the word again? New
This can't be stopped
Our will shall be done
It's way too late we've already won
That's going to be
We'll get that money
We'll remake your world
What would we give
If you could relive all of our movies
How would they pay
Spending a day to watch something bland
Betcha we can do it again
Later on with the Pixar movies
Lightning McQueen
Live-action machine
Starring the Rock
We're ready to make what's already there
It might be sacred, classic tradition
To be honest, I guess we don't
What's the word? Care
Our time's arrived
We're second to none
Our company will truly be number one
Our legacy
We'll get that money
We'll remake your world
...and that's DISNEY world!
Show less
(On hercyles' "Gospel truth") And if you're thinkin' "that's impossible", that's the disney truuuuuuth
The common denominator here is NONE of these movies needed to be remade. They are timeless and are as enjoyable to watch today as when they were made. We didn't need a CGI chariot race or an updated Oldboy. We need new stories, not re-dos.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is *NOT* a remake!
Yeah it is.
@@vanessastegall It’s just a more faithful adaptation to Roald Dahl’s book!
@vanessastegall it's not. It's true to the book and who the Author intended Wonka to be.
@@sociald4515 Then why is WatchMojo being stupid again?
@@SolCresta3405 🤣🤣🤣
My son and I got to see part of the remake of "Total Recall" being filmed in Toronto. They had the flying cop cars Attached to huge trucks with arms moving them up and down while driving under the Gardiner Expressway. We were on our way to the Rogers Centre to see former Blue Jay and Hall of Famer Robbie Alomar get his number retired, and see our Jays beat Texas 7-3. What a great day.
For Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocalate Factory they had Roald Dahl's wife as a consultant, so that they could get a film that was more accurate to the book. This video is redundant. Timothy Chalamet is a far worse casting than Johnny Depp. Depp did an excellent job with what he was given, and he still kept the character of Willy Wonka eccentric. Just in a different way from Gene Wilder.
Johnny depp did great as Willy.
I also love that they casted Christopher Lee as Willy’s father
@@soramembrino82 Exactly!
@@Ori_Kohav Same here.
Even as an adult, I relate myself so much with Depp's Wonka.
I didn't like the bit with the singing dolls
same
@@marlonclark1896 it was really creepy and I could have done without the demonic downpitched singing
@@carlycarmine3858 it’s a Tim Burton film adapting a Roald Dahl book.. it’s supposed to be creepy 💀
@@KingOfGaymes I know, but that bit was borderline terrifying
When Phoebe is a video narrator, it’s best to have her re-dub her lines from earlier videos, as her stock audio is a problem I have with her.
Exactly what I was thinking. In the add ins it sounds like she recorded them while her family was sleeping and she’s trying to be quiet lol
It's really fascinating to see how remakes of iconic movies can sometimes misstep in their changes. Deviations from the originals-like modifying characters, plots, or even visual aesthetics-usually lead to widespread criticism. As a viewer, it's intriguing to compare these changes and understand the importance of staying true to certain elements when recreating classic films. While remakes offer the opportunity to modernize and reinvent, they can also risk losing the very aspects that made the original films so beloved.
That is what makes the Chocolate Factory interesting, the Burton/Depp version is more faithful to the book where as the Wilder version has very little in common with the book.
@@andrewft31 Both versions have their own charm and appeal, showcasing different interpretations of the original story. It's a prime example of how remakes can offer contrasting experiences while still capturing the essence of the original story in their own unique ways.
This is why Classic Movies should stay Classic, and NEVER be Remade, especially all that Crap Disney is doing right now with their Renaissance Era Movies.
I’m not a person who drones on and on about “ONLY Robert Englund can play Freddy!” This argument is dried up and tired, but the remake didn’t help anyone’s belief on this. I still believe with the right actor and script, Freddy CAN be well-played by another actor. Watch a fan film, and see for yourself. There are several interpretations of the character that are GREAT.
That remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street was so bad that it literally gave me nightmares 😅
Thank You for the List and Video 😀
Karate Kid in 2010 remake should change the title "Kung Fu Kid"
Ha! Before the countdown started, Beauty and the Beast was the first that popped in my head. Then again, it was for the entire movie.
Are you seriously still complaining about Charlie & The Chocolate Factory?!
Well, not as much as before. There are some videos relating to remakes where they don’t include it as much.
Very good as usual, Mojo. It's funny because in almost all of your remake examples, you could have piled-on even more negatives. I laughed when I saw 'Pretty Much Everything' for Pinocchio. But felt you went easy on some others. I recall Rollerball in early 2000s as one of the first examples of Hollywood portraying men and women in the same playing field of physical competition as equals. I can remember my friends and I, who are athletes, walking out afterwards and saying how ridiculous it was. The first thing any serious opponent would do is violently take out the females. They would be relatively easy targets of elimination. Not sexist, just true.
I think the lesson here is never try to remake a movie that starred the great Charlton Heston.
Dreamworks: “Are you sure about that?” (Presents The Prince of Egypt)
@hunterolaughlin the one exception:)
@@ilovegarradors Dreamworks: “Thanks.”
17:37 What bothered me most about it is, if they were just honest about it it the marketing, The Kung Fu Kid probably would have been a hit.
“We remade it, but changed it”
Happy Guillermo won Oscar for his adaptation of Pinocchio 🤥
I saw Clash of the Titans (2010) in theaters in 3D. The 3D glasses were useless, the only thing really 3D was the preview for Nightmare on Elm Street of all things.
3D will never beat stop motion, which is why the 1981 movie of Clash of the Titans will always be better.
The rob zombie Halloween is actually pretty good
The first one is good
It's the redneck, white trash version of the story. Plus rape. That really added something to the plot.
Correct. Very entertaining. Added new stuff while keeping it like the original old one.
😂
The original Planet of the Apes innovated a cinematic depiction of the twist ending in the book which was far more resonant. Some intellectuals still consider the book's version more powerful, however. The idea was that the planet of the apes was indeed a different planet that was once ruled by humans in the past like Earth until apes eventually took over, but readers finally learn that the same thing happens on every planet in the universe, including Earth in the future. This is a theme of fate and psychological horror too cerebral to really convey with a movie. The remake only proved it by trying to be more true to the source material. The first adaptation had already found the best possible approach.
I came on here to say something about this! You said it all and honestly better than I could have so props lol
The 2005 Charlie and the chocolate factory is superior to the old one and is actually way more accurate to the book.
But suppose there was no book. Only these 2 films would you still like the newer one better? I've noticed that usually the ONLY reason why anyone says they prefer the remake is because it's closer to the book.
Did watch mojo not watch the Poltergeist remake? This is the third worst movie remake list I've seen that I've posted on how they should've had Poltergeist on the list. There's plenty that Poltergeist did wrong, but I think the most obvious change that should've have happened was showing the spirit world. What made the original so good was the lack of visuals of the spirit world. It makes you leave it up to your imagination. The remake removes the imagination from the equation. Not only that, it's just a creapier version of the house that looks like it was underwater for years.
While I liked both versions of "Chocolate Factory", I wished that the remake hadn't give so much attention to Wonka's backstory with his strict father, since it took away from what made the original such a classic, in my opinion.
The book focused very little on Wonka and mostly on Charlie… this is why Dahl disliked the Wilder version, too much Wonka. Burton only made changes Dahl’s widow agreed to and that made sense.
It’s NOT a remake, Trina…
@@SolCresta3405 Well it's pretty much the same story told of the same source material. Whether Tim wanted to base it on the 1971 film or not surely it's still a remake.
@@Gmackematix And I’m sick and tired of all the shit Charlie got. Yes, it’s different, but for a Tim Burton movie and for a movie released in 2005, my most hated year, I didn’t mind it that much. It’s much maligned.
@@Gmackematixy that logic, then Dune Part 1 is a remake of Dune 1984.
Much as I dislike the Nightmare remake, I do love Freddy's "Why are you screaming" line.
Sorry i refuse to take any Tim Burton slander !😠✋🚫
While I was watching the remake for Nightmare on Elm Street, I thought maybe they were going to throw in a twist, where Freddy was actually innocent, but became the victim of a mob. I think that would’ve made for an interesting remake with a fresh take on the character, and they could’ve had Freddy murdering the parents in their sleep instead.
Johnny Depp was great as Willy Wonka. It was more like the books
Yeah I love both films
The new one was more book accurate, as in it didn’t butcher the characters and remove important parts
Came here to say this!
I can't believe Wes Craven's The Last House On The Left didn't make this list. That should have been a number 2. The original was so over the top,it freaked me out for the longest time. I could barely watch the remake(as much as I like Aaron Paul) that was just the worst. Imo.
Tim Burton’s Willy Wonka is truer to the book and incredibly good.
People keep bashing on that film and think it's way better than the 70s version imo.
Burtons Wonka seems like he wouldn't be allowed within 100yards of a public school or playground. I blame Depp for that mostly.
WatchMojo, in general, I avoid remakes because it becomes Nothing like original. As Walt Disney himself said, “You can’t toppings with pigs”. . In my opinion, if the box office failure of the remake of “Ben-Hur” doesn’t teach people to stop making remakes, nothing will. Since we both like “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”, I took my daughter to see the remake. When we left the theater, I asked her, “What did you think of it?”. She asked, “Would you be mad at me if I said I hated it?”. I said, “Me, too”.
Have to disagree about Willy Wonka remake. Loved it.
And I'm stating that I'm looking forward to the Willy Wonka movie coming out later this year. ^^
Am really interested in the exact story of how Willy became Wonka. ^^
i'm curious does the 2023 willy wonka combine both movies into one movie or is it its own thing a prequel to both movies
Totally agree yeah I’m looking forward to Timothy chalomets wonka as well and Hugh grant as an Oompa Loompa 😉
@@AlexisStreamswell I think it’s it own thing it’s a prequel showing how Willy became the famous chocolatier he is in the two films I’m very much looking forward to seeing it
@@therunawaykid6523 Now i'm confused cuz in the trailer Wonka says Scratch that reverse it which is something gene wilder would say but they kinda recreated the india scene with wonka and his girl friend
@@AlexisStreams
I think it's a prequel. Oo.
while I've got mixed feelings about Rob Zombies Halloween remake, it's certainly not where the "sister plot point" was established. That was in Halloween II in 1981
Absolutely. I don't understand anyone saying that Laurie being Michael's sister isn't cannon. Marion, the nurse, literally SAYS she is when she is sent to bring Dr. Loomis back.
I think godzilla's look was good especially in the animated series
What about going to Paris in Beauty and the Beast. I mean wtf would the Enchantress give the prince such a nice gift when she was supposed to be harshly punishing him? Wasn't the whole point of the mirror that it was his only insight to the outside world?
The Italian Job remake was amazing
Never seen it and I won’t ever and the rubbish of the apes remake and only the good remake he did was the departed the remake of an Japanese movie I don’t know what that movie is called but never seen the original one and that remake was awesome and was a awesome choice to win best picture and best Director for Martin schoose
Trust me, the asylum was worse. There's no way Maurice would have been released, even IF Gaston tried to do so.
I honestly don't know where the hate for Johnny's performance as Willy Wonka comes from. His version was very enjoyable and Tim's remake was absolutely delightful, even better and more faithful to the novel than Gene's movie ☝🏻☝🏻
The Burton film was truer to the novel (minus that whole “father was a dentist” scene), and Gene Wilder performed a better Willy Wonka. My mom actually didn’t like Wilder or Depp, because neither of them were unhinged enough! But Wilder was more unhinged than Depp.
@@alexandraphelps4020 Wilder was scary but I know Depp as Willy Wonka more.
@@tombstonerforever9374 Depp was…quirky.
What this video failed to mention is that this movie was released after a slew of other Depp-Burton movies and audiences were getting fatigued.
@@alexandraphelps4020 Johnny Depp's actually seemed like he cared about Joe and Charlie. He had more of a heart and did the weird part well.
Here here!
When Phoebe and Emily do the narrating, it sounds much better.
Johnny Deep did an excellent job as Willy Wonka
Agreed
Yeah. And I thought Tim Burton did amazing directing it
Sure did.
He was great but not awesome Like wilder
I actually really don't like Gene Wilder's Wonka. Sure, he's more of a businessman, but... he's mainly an asshole. I don't a wacky, chocolateer magic man, I see a downright psychopath hustling people to sell his dying business to.
Depp gave us a childish, awakard, yet awkwarldy genius Wonka. I love that.
Everyone complains about Depp's version of Willy Wonka vs. Gene Wilder's. I mean, Gene Wilder's version was good, but as someone who LOVED the book, Depp's version is almost spot on from the book's version. But I know I'm in the minority.
@WatchMojo Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is NOT a remake of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. It's another ADAPTATION. The story was a book first in 1964 and a movie second in 1971, then another movie in 2005. Even Tim Burton admitted that he loved the book and hated the 1971 film. He even requested the screenwriters of his film to not watch the 1971 film because he wanted his film to be its own thing that it is.
Remake of the 1971 film or remake of the 1960s book, it's still a remake. A remake with less memorable music, a creepier Wonka and an unncessary Willy Wonka backstory bolted on in my opinion. If Roald Dahl disliked the 1971 version, I suspect he'd have hated the 2005 version even more.
@@GmackematixAuthors always hate movie versions of their books.
@@dhenderson1810 Not always. Harper Lee really liked the film adaptation of To Kill a Mockingbird.
@@nickcopeland6915 Yeah, but Harper Lee never struck me as pretentious as many other authors.
I think J K Rowling was happy with the Harry Potter films as another example.
@@Gmackematixs not a remake of anything, its an original ADAPTATION of the book. Learn what words mean. Because you clearly didn’t read what the op commenter said. The depp film isn’t trying to remake the first movie at all.
Also Dahl hated the 70’s film because it wasn’t accurate to the book, the 05 one however was accurate to the book. So he would probably prefer it if anything
I disagree a LOT with Pinocchio: listen you all guys... No, listen guys that of Pinocchio ONLY know the original Disney version and NEVER EVEN FLIPPED a page from Collodi's book... it's hypocritical saying "he's too innocent" or "he does nothing bad". Yeah you're right, this Pinocchio was asked and asked to step off the right path, the original he wasn't even given the option. THE REMAKE CHOOSES! THAT'S THE ONLY IMPROVEMENT THAT MAKES THE REMAKE BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL! Visually? Ok, yes, the original is a winner by far, but storytelling? I MUCH prefer the ones where the protagonist MAKES his own mistakes, REALIZES by his own that something is wrong BEFORE shEEt hits the fan and not WHEN, whose conscience CARES for his job and does something concrete, to the one where he's too innocent because, Walt..? "Nobody would have seen themselves in the bratty/naughty version that is book Pinocchio" Yeah, you're right, clearly the second most popular book of all time has nothing to do about relatability that the protagonist has with the reader.
The remake isn't perfect, but it IS fixing the things wrong with the original movie while respecting the original source material, however I agree, it doesn't give justice to the top-notch good parts of the original, but THAT is the only REAL problem.
Mulan becoming a mary sue
I don’t hate everything modern Disney makes, but that remake has nothing on the 1998 original.
Pretty much got em all
A few snubs
2 spocks/attempting to merge timelines Star Trek
Overly brash humor: Death at a funeral
Making the characters more gray: Cape Fear
Removing redeeming qualities: The Bad News Bears
Recasting real comedians as characters of themselves: the three stooges (a biopic with plenty of their physical comedy would have worked WAY better)
Making her more generic ,single white female/the roommate
I liked the darker aspect of Depp's Willy Wonka, especially since the book was darker. Some of his affectations were annoying, but the whole point was he was an abandoned child (over candy!) and kinda got "Stuck." I just don't think it deserved the hate it got. Then again, I'm a HUGE Burton fan! I think he was perfect for this story!
I also saw the original when I was a kid and I don't know why they think kids like musicals, but that's what was annoying in the 1st one - too many songs! Otherwise I loved it!
One could add the 2014 remake of Robocop. While it had cool science fiction effects and action, it lacked the wit and dark humor of Paul Verhoven's 1987 original.
I always knew the psycho remake will always be on number 1 as the worst, does watchmojo hate this movie so much?
To be fair it's a whole nothing burger for the psycho remake. It's arguably one of the worst remakes just because it doesn't remake anything, rather than just recreate. There's no reason to watch it over the original.
@@aldairreynoso2564 the only thing the remake has going for it is that its in color
One of the worst is mulan having super powers whole movie is broken, and the message about sacrifice, hard work, determination and resiliance is gone, awfull movie
Why is the Johnny Depp version of Willy Wonka universally hated on? in my opinion it was one of my favorite movies from my childhood and I thought he did an amazing job It honestly just shows the depth that Johnny Depp has as an actor
I agree I loved both films and also catcf was more in line with the book also love how we we see a child wonka and his dad
One word. Purism. People hate remakes, or anything that is somehow called a remake, just for being different from the “original”, as if said “original” was perfect. It’s especially notable in the hate on Disney remakes.
Which is why, other than the "Pirates Of The Caribbean" franchise, Depp hasn't been in a hit for over 15-20 years.
Because people refuse to think that the newer version of something can be better. The Depp version is ironically more accurate to the Dahl book, yet that’s why people seem to dislike it. When usually people hate a film adaptation of a book BECAUSE its not accurate to the book
@@dhenderson1810 movies financial success has nothing to do with how good an actor is. A great actor can be in bad movies and bad actors can be in great movies. Just look at The Room, it has awful acting yet people love it
The second Willy Wonka was more fitting to the real Roald Dahl story and he was insulated by the first film cause it wasn’t the direction he had in mind when he came up with the book “ Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator “ That was of his choosing I am a huge fan of his - that’s why I know about that
I’ve never seen this original Italian Job but the remake was an incredibly fun movie to watch. I really enjoyed it and it’s highly rewatchable.
Feel the same way, saw it in the movies and loved it. Critics ruin everything these days imo
To be fair, none of the OG slasher icons should have been remade when they were