User Score
6.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 517 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JackB.
    Mar 29, 2008
    0
    A shocking and unnecessary remake. What a complete and utter piece of tripe. Tim Burton and Johnny Depp should be ashamed of themselves.
  2. Bman
    Oct 28, 2005
    3
    Depp aint no Gene Wilder. What a pile of tripe.
  3. KatherineB
    Oct 30, 2005
    2
    This movie is still horrendous. I would call it "scum," but I'm too nice of a person. In my earlier review, I pointed out positive aspects of the movie. Well, really, I pointed out aspects of the movie that weren't as devastatingly horrible as Depp's performance. The Oompa Loompas are bad, the writing is bad, the acting is bad, and the aesthetic elements are only enough to This movie is still horrendous. I would call it "scum," but I'm too nice of a person. In my earlier review, I pointed out positive aspects of the movie. Well, really, I pointed out aspects of the movie that weren't as devastatingly horrible as Depp's performance. The Oompa Loompas are bad, the writing is bad, the acting is bad, and the aesthetic elements are only enough to entertain those who aren't yet old enough to understand that movies aren't all about pretty pictures and sing alongs. The only reason I give it a 2 now is to appease Nick R. And I do **think about [my] score**. Expand
  4. Dec 8, 2012
    3
    This movie sucked. It completely changed from the original movie which I love, and the books. I have no idea why this movie was even made. WHY!? WHY DID THEY MAKE IT?!!
  5. Sep 3, 2010
    3
    I simply can't wrap my mind around how this movie has such high critical scores. Personally, I think Tim Burton is a visionary genius, but he can only work with stories that his type of directing specializes in: outcasts. In this movie, Wonka isn't an outcast, he's just weird and even creepy at times. All this balanced out by not-so-great songs and a cast that simply can't beat theI simply can't wrap my mind around how this movie has such high critical scores. Personally, I think Tim Burton is a visionary genius, but he can only work with stories that his type of directing specializes in: outcasts. In this movie, Wonka isn't an outcast, he's just weird and even creepy at times. All this balanced out by not-so-great songs and a cast that simply can't beat the original. Not the worst film, but overrated at the very least. Expand
  6. AmmonL.
    Dec 15, 2005
    3
    Johnny Depp's characterization of Willy Wonka looked bad to me in the previews, so I just saw this on video. Be warned: if you didn't like Depp's Wonka in the trailers, you likely won't like him anymore after seeing the movie. I've heard Depp's Wonka compared to Michael Jackson in his mannerisms, and that's an apt comparison. They both seem very odd, and Johnny Depp's characterization of Willy Wonka looked bad to me in the previews, so I just saw this on video. Be warned: if you didn't like Depp's Wonka in the trailers, you likely won't like him anymore after seeing the movie. I've heard Depp's Wonka compared to Michael Jackson in his mannerisms, and that's an apt comparison. They both seem very odd, and like someone you wouldn't want to have your children around- even supervised. Aside from Wonka, the Oompa Loompas aren't fun, the songs are forgettable, the adults are brainless, the children are pretty decent and so are the squirrels, but not enough to make this even an average movie-going experience. Expand
  7. Mar 26, 2011
    0
    Tim Burton takes the original mediocre movie and makes it worse, the acting sucks and the characters and acting is crap there is no reason to see this movie at all.
  8. Aug 29, 2014
    3
    I held higher hopes for Tim Burton on the reigns for this remake. Johnny Depp also gives a disappointingly creepy turn as Willy Wonka. Yes, there are some tasteful visuals but not much more.
  9. SpiroA.
    Nov 29, 2005
    2
    If you love Tim Burton flicks and haven't read the book or seen the Wilder movie, you will probably like or even love this movie. If you've read the Dahl book, seen the original movie with Wilder, and or dislike Burton flicks (as I do), you will probably be disappointed or outright disgusted. Burton's perverse rendition is a disjointed freak show that relies on quirkiness If you love Tim Burton flicks and haven't read the book or seen the Wilder movie, you will probably like or even love this movie. If you've read the Dahl book, seen the original movie with Wilder, and or dislike Burton flicks (as I do), you will probably be disappointed or outright disgusted. Burton's perverse rendition is a disjointed freak show that relies on quirkiness and cinematography over character development and plot. The movie does nothing to distinguish itself and pales in comparison to the original. It also assininely changes important storylines from the book and the Wilder flick to it's detriment. The movie left me thinking, "Hmmmm... some of the lines were funny, the sets were neat, and some of the acting was okay, but overall this really sucks". I gave a 2 rating only because of the quirkiness and cinematography (both Burton staples). If you dislike Burton, love Wilder, and/or Dahl, this movie will piss you off and leave you puzzled and empty. Otherwise, rent it and it may amuse you. Expand
  10. LolaR.
    Jul 16, 2005
    2
    Warning Will Robinson do not go see it. Bad - Bad - Bad.
  11. AlK.
    Jul 18, 2005
    1
    Disgusting movie compared to the original. They completely ruined it. The music was horrible and lost the classic Oompa Loompa song. The cheap director also reuses ONE character for every oompa loompa. The modernized oompa song is dispicable. The so called "comedy" was not funny, and the acting was very poor on behalf of Charlie. The grandfather also has very poor acting. The reason Disgusting movie compared to the original. They completely ruined it. The music was horrible and lost the classic Oompa Loompa song. The cheap director also reuses ONE character for every oompa loompa. The modernized oompa song is dispicable. The so called "comedy" was not funny, and the acting was very poor on behalf of Charlie. The grandfather also has very poor acting. The reason behind Willy's "fear" b/c of his father is just plain stupid. This movie was horrible and I would pay $6.50 to you just NOT to see it. Ever lasting gobstopper? It's the size of a baseball. Lame. Expand
  12. michab.
    Jul 19, 2005
    1
    This is the worst movie ever I hate it an i like The O.C Better.
  13. MaryH.
    Jul 23, 2005
    2
    Mr. Depp's acting talents seem to have disappeared in this movie, lending no charm or depth to the role of Willie Wonka. What should have been a high point of the film, was barely tolerable. After the first half hour I was looking at my watch hoping it was a short film. And keep in mind that I am a great fan of Tim Burton, Johnny Depp and the story of Willa Wonka! So the Mr. Depp's acting talents seem to have disappeared in this movie, lending no charm or depth to the role of Willie Wonka. What should have been a high point of the film, was barely tolerable. After the first half hour I was looking at my watch hoping it was a short film. And keep in mind that I am a great fan of Tim Burton, Johnny Depp and the story of Willa Wonka! So the disappointment was triple! Expand
  14. Docta
    Jul 23, 2005
    2
    Aweful in so many ways. If I ever see the guy who plays the Oompa Loompas I'm gonna kick him in the nuts.
  15. JDFitzmaurice
    Jul 26, 2005
    2
    Wow, what a dissapointment. I was really looking forward to Tim Burtons take on Dahl's twisted story and Johnny Deep's take on the sugar mogel himself but this film in no way met my expectations. Firstly the settings although fantastically Burton like held no charm or appeal. The factory itself was not the magical world of wonder a child like Charlie would want to make his own Wow, what a dissapointment. I was really looking forward to Tim Burtons take on Dahl's twisted story and Johnny Deep's take on the sugar mogel himself but this film in no way met my expectations. Firstly the settings although fantastically Burton like held no charm or appeal. The factory itself was not the magical world of wonder a child like Charlie would want to make his own more like a sterile house of horror. Charlie himself was likeable and Dave Kelly was a loveable rogue as Granpa Joe but the rest of the children and parents were just not so unlikable that you looked forward to their demise, unlike the kids of the book who made the reader want to tear out pages. In fact on the contrary it was like Wonka was running some sick torture factory for his hapless guests. Now to Wonka, I love Johnny Depp but this was far and away his worst performance. Instead of portraying Wonka as a charismatic madman we were presented with none other that Michael Jackson, sure he was creepy and odd but like Jackson had no redeemable characteristics. As a huge fan of the original it was always going to be hard to watch a remake but I really thought Burton would nail it, unfortunetly I came out feeling like a nasty child who had just met his demise in the evil factory. Expand
  16. AndrewWD
    Aug 3, 2005
    0
    Unbelievably bad. I can't even scratch the surface of this movie's failings in this short review. I love the original, but this version is truly horrible. Awful, awful, awful.
  17. DonaaB.
    Sep 11, 2005
    1
    This movie was disgusting!!! A shameful attempt of a remake! This movie has nothing catchy about and no interesting songs. The old movie is a million times better. This movie was just plain stupid. Don't waste your money.
  18. TheElusivePossom
    Sep 2, 2005
    3
    It's no secret that Roald Dahl despised the original book-to-film adaptation of his classic children's novel of the same name, but this rehash of that popular classic would surely make him turn in his grave. Johnny Depp certainly makes the character of Wonka his own, which turns out to be a bizarre and often irritating abomination lacking any of Gene Wilder's aimiable It's no secret that Roald Dahl despised the original book-to-film adaptation of his classic children's novel of the same name, but this rehash of that popular classic would surely make him turn in his grave. Johnny Depp certainly makes the character of Wonka his own, which turns out to be a bizarre and often irritating abomination lacking any of Gene Wilder's aimiable charm. Helena Bonham Carter, however, plays a very lovely mum, and the majority of the film's laughs are gained from Violet Beauregarde's mum's face - every expression is comedy gold! The film's plot seems stunted and wayward, with classic scenes from the original (the bubble room) omitted in favour of visiting a room full of killer CGI squirrels. The film is also littered with unnecessary insights into Wonka's childhood, all of which failing to draw the wacky chocolateer out of being 1-dimensional. On top of all this, the conclusion is extremely poor and overly sugar-sweet. See it if you love Mr Depp; otherwise buy a box of Milk Tray and stay at home. Expand
  19. Pooch
    Nov 7, 2005
    2
    This movie was possibly the worst idea to come out of Tim Burtons hatfull of worst ideas. Remaking the classic movie, WIlly Wonka and the Chocolate Facotry, and giving it a new name, trying to knock it off as being different, what a horrible idea. They tried to make it a little darker by including Wonka's childhood, but that ended up sucking a big one. It was a bad idea to make this This movie was possibly the worst idea to come out of Tim Burtons hatfull of worst ideas. Remaking the classic movie, WIlly Wonka and the Chocolate Facotry, and giving it a new name, trying to knock it off as being different, what a horrible idea. They tried to make it a little darker by including Wonka's childhood, but that ended up sucking a big one. It was a bad idea to make this movie. Period. The classic movie has now been ruined for me, since I have seen these new cheap knock-offs for Oompa Loompas. The Oompa Loompas used to be my favorite part, and now I just want to slice my wrists open everytime I hear their name mentioned. The music sucked too. Expand
  20. ShaneJ.
    Nov 8, 2005
    3
    It just didn't have the same fun factor as the first one. Also, Depp seemed like he was just trying way to hard to be wierd. The movie was just not as good as the orginal.
  21. Filmgirl
    Dec 2, 2005
    3
    What a disappointment! What's with those stupid Oompaloompas???? What's with Johnny Depp? He is one creepy dude.... Miss this one, trust me!
  22. DV8
    Dec 5, 2005
    3
    Oh my god... I hate Tim Burton's visions of, well, just about everything. I realize that this movie stays closer to the book than Willy Wonka does, but all the symbolism, all the mystery about Willy Wonka are completely obviated, and the movie withers as it becomes sentimental and preachy.
  23. PrudenceK.
    Jul 14, 2005
    0
    Johnny Depp scared me. This is the worst film of the year or the best. I HATED IT!
  24. JeffreyT.
    Jul 15, 2005
    3
    The wit and morals are gone. What's left is a wonka who couldn't invent the leaver if he had a diagram, and yet we are to believe he's the best at everything candy.
  25. SethA.
    Jul 15, 2005
    0
    Do the Brits know that nothing they do is funny to Americans? Anyway, I just could not get into this insipid film. Oompa Loompas? What? Even in dreamworld this made no sense. The only thing that was somewhat cool was Johnny Depp. He had a weird pedophilic quality that made this way more credible and added a darkness that simpler minds would never pick up. Too bad about the rest of the movie.
  26. AdamS.
    Jul 16, 2005
    0
    Who cares about the book? This is a movie. A horrible, horrible movie! It doesn't even have the decency to be totally awful. We get excellent direction and a first rate actor (Depp), but bad everything else. Listen people; A great book does not always make a good movie (White Oleander, Beloved), and this should have stayed off the silver screen.
  27. Yawgmoft
    Jul 16, 2005
    2
    This movie is not dark, this movie does not follow the book, please stop posting lies... and the reason why we can "dare" to give this movie under 5? Because it was horrible, Depp sucked, and CGI candy isn't magical.
  28. ChipR.
    Jul 17, 2005
    3
    Very disappointing. I couldn't wait for it to end. Hated the "modern" Oompa Loompa sequences. This movie is nothing compared to the original. Where is Gene Wilder when we need him?
  29. ArgenisP.
    Jul 24, 2005
    1
    How can they do this to such a classic. Where is the soul. The story line does not make a case for a heart warming ending. The attack of the clones all over again, dwarfs with no personality. The songs suck. Only the first one was catchy. The kids acting was good. and the chocolote river was really the star this time around. I believe, if they had today's special effects for the How can they do this to such a classic. Where is the soul. The story line does not make a case for a heart warming ending. The attack of the clones all over again, dwarfs with no personality. The songs suck. Only the first one was catchy. The kids acting was good. and the chocolote river was really the star this time around. I believe, if they had today's special effects for the first movie it will be 100 at metacritic. What can i say I hated it. Expand
  30. KatherineB.
    Jul 27, 2005
    1
    I'm a huge fan of the original Willy Wonka, but I can honestly say that's not a factor in my score. This was the first movie I've ever gone to where I've actually wanted to get up and leave. The beginning of the movie seemed promising enough. The Bucket family is wonderful; Freddie Highmore is so talented and, well, adorable. Grandpa Joe is endearing and Grandma I'm a huge fan of the original Willy Wonka, but I can honestly say that's not a factor in my score. This was the first movie I've ever gone to where I've actually wanted to get up and leave. The beginning of the movie seemed promising enough. The Bucket family is wonderful; Freddie Highmore is so talented and, well, adorable. Grandpa Joe is endearing and Grandma Georgina is hilarious. Helena Bonham Carter is is good as Mrs. Bucket. The beginning of the movie--meaning the part prior to entering the factory--is somewhat drawn out, but still very enjoyable. The aesthetics are wonderful; the design of the Bucket family home is creative and well executed. The most amusing part of the movie is when the children and their escorts first arrive at the factory and are greeted by a somewhat perverse spectacle of dolls. Think of the Duloc greeting in Shrek. Surprisingly, the movie actually goes dowhill after the guests enter the factory. Parts of the factory come across as too pristine and almost sterile. The candy room is attractive, but lacks the level of fantasy that's expected by most viewers. Augustus Gloop, Violet Beauregard, Mike TeeVee, and Veruca Salt are played by four relatively unknown young actors. They are all relatively successful at creating their own quirky, irritating characters. Violet Beauregard and the competitive Mrs. Beauregard are probably the most entertaining of the four pairs. Johnny Depp is one of the biggest disappointments of this movie. The character of Willy Wonka is supposed to be a somewhat sinister, twisted, and internally unfulfilled character, but Depp's performance is unable to emote the complexity of the troubled Willy Wonka. Willy Wonka comes across as shallow; every single one of his lines is emotionless and monotonous. The Oompa Loompas are disappointing. None of the fault lies in the actor, who seems to do his part well. The songs, however, are overproduced and basically indiscernable. The fact that the film follows the book more closely is nice, since the story is in fact quite different than the one told in the original movie. This movie will most likely bore anyone over the age of 10. The visual and aural elements are only enough to entertain the youngest of viewers. Expand
  31. TimD.
    Jul 30, 2005
    2
    Let me take a stab at the reason a lot of people really hated this film...there was really no emotion to it. Nothing was really very funny or shocking or exciting. You knew what was going to happen. No surprises. The theatre was full of kids and it was just eerily quiet. This movie had no soul.
  32. HollyM.
    Aug 22, 2005
    2
    Even my 12-year-old daughter disliked this nasty and montonous film, though she loved the Roald Dahl book. Why Depp chose to play Wonka as vacuous, mean-spirited, and decidedly creepy is a mystery. The racist overtones of the brown galley-slaves rowing the big white people were hard to ignore. Only the warm and quirky scenes in the Buckets' cottage--and especially the wonderful Even my 12-year-old daughter disliked this nasty and montonous film, though she loved the Roald Dahl book. Why Depp chose to play Wonka as vacuous, mean-spirited, and decidedly creepy is a mystery. The racist overtones of the brown galley-slaves rowing the big white people were hard to ignore. Only the warm and quirky scenes in the Buckets' cottage--and especially the wonderful Freddie Highmore--kept me from assigning the movie a '0.' Expand
  33. LaurenA
    Aug 4, 2005
    3
    The saving grace to this film was simple the story line itself. The Gene Wilder version was simply better, for lack of more eloquent wording. Depp's performance seemed distant, and lacked the sheer love that Wilder brought to the screen. Furthermore, the Oompa Loompas, or should I say Oompa Loompa, was quite possibly the fall out for this film, the idea to digitally recreate scores The saving grace to this film was simple the story line itself. The Gene Wilder version was simply better, for lack of more eloquent wording. Depp's performance seemed distant, and lacked the sheer love that Wilder brought to the screen. Furthermore, the Oompa Loompas, or should I say Oompa Loompa, was quite possibly the fall out for this film, the idea to digitally recreate scores of other wordly creatures was a huge flop for this film. Burton, as expected brought a dark edge to this film that wasn't completely called for. How can you turn something so fantastic and imagination-filled into something completely and eerily sinister. It just seems as though a lot of the talent of the child actors and actresses was wasted, especially when they found Freddie Highmore, who could quite possibly be the perfect Child star for Charlie. Expand
  34. EmilyD.
    Aug 8, 2005
    2
    Creepier than the Michael Jackson trial. It had none of the original charm and magic of the original, it just became much like an acid trip. The random musical numbers brought by the oompa loompas were painful, and Johnny Depp's incarnation of Willy Wonka was so pedophilic it could give even parents nightmares.
  35. Richard
    Jan 20, 2006
    2
    Very disapointing movie. Depp's performance was good. But the mood of the movie was very dark. For the target audience, Kids it think, some of the content was questionable and I am pretty liberal. We had to turn this one off and send the kids to bed.
  36. RichieT
    Oct 29, 2006
    0
    Burton's worst since Big Fish.
  37. guy!
    Jul 14, 2007
    0
    Our chocolate is now bitter thanks to this movie. It was so bad, I couldn't bear the first 30 minutes. Glad I had the option of turning it off on TV rather than sitting through it in the theater with my little brother. Seriously, why did we try to remake this movie? the old one was 10x better. In this one, the acting was terrible, they cut out vital parts, and worst of all, they Our chocolate is now bitter thanks to this movie. It was so bad, I couldn't bear the first 30 minutes. Glad I had the option of turning it off on TV rather than sitting through it in the theater with my little brother. Seriously, why did we try to remake this movie? the old one was 10x better. In this one, the acting was terrible, they cut out vital parts, and worst of all, they wasted J.D. WHY DID THEY WASTE J.D.?!?!?! I mean look at him, what did they do to his face?! Enough said. By all means, avoid this movie. Expand
  38. joe
    Jul 29, 2009
    0
    Just awful. Depp was the worst he's ever been. It was very hard to sit through the whole thing. Don't watch it.
  39. BlakeT.
    Nov 13, 2005
    2
    If you have always wanted to see Jack Sparrow try to do Willy Wonka, this is the movie for you. Otherwise, you'd be better off spending you money at the dentist.
  40. EricS.
    Nov 14, 2005
    3
    Not a very good rendetion. too off base from the orginal. too Tim burtonEY for this show.
  41. PamelaA.
    Dec 22, 2005
    1
    Well what can I say? This movie left a sour taste in my mouth!! Is that Michael Jackson or Johnny Depp playing Willy Wonka? The movie was DARK and depressing and the colorization was totally FAKE and looked cheap. The movie was NOT funny AT ALL. The Oompa Loompas SUCKED and the songs were terrible. The ENTIRE time I watched this despicable film I got the same feeling you get when someone Well what can I say? This movie left a sour taste in my mouth!! Is that Michael Jackson or Johnny Depp playing Willy Wonka? The movie was DARK and depressing and the colorization was totally FAKE and looked cheap. The movie was NOT funny AT ALL. The Oompa Loompas SUCKED and the songs were terrible. The ENTIRE time I watched this despicable film I got the same feeling you get when someone scratches their fingernails across a chalk board. This movie is the BIGGEST disappointment of the year to say the very least. I give Charlie and the Chocolate Factory a big thumbs down. Stick with the original with Gene Wilder as Mr Wonka. However, I will recommend Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for anyone who suffers from insomnia as this movie is guaranteed to put you right to sleep that is if it doesn't bore you to death first! Expand
  42. MelissaM.
    Dec 27, 2005
    0
    What a horrible remake! . They took no time to develop the characters and it lacked the imagination of the original. Dep came off as shallow and psychotic, whereas Gene Wilder was brilliant, executing a wonderful blend of eccentricity and character. Do not waste your time on this horrible, horrible remake. And how did this movie get such high reviews? Makes you wonder if the industry doesn
  43. KurtM.
    Dec 7, 2005
    1
    This movie is so lame and cheesey. Depp is in fact kind of Michael Jackson like in this film. Rent the original.
  44. MisterBeasley
    Jul 15, 2005
    2
    This dull rehash of all Mr. Burton's themes and Mr. Elfman's cg score is made all the worse with Mr. Depp doing Cher channeling Mister Rogers. eeccchhh...thank god for F. Highmore who eclipses everyone else even when he's silent. geeee can't wait for the mess of Corpse Bride. no more Burton movies EVER!
  45. CraigW.
    Jul 15, 2005
    3
    Horrid. I really wanted to like this film but... I was looking forward to a close adaptation based on the book, but the filmmakers made a huge mistake that destroyed it: Willy Wonka is played as an emotionally crippled cross between Pee-wee Herman and Michael Jackson. The story includes a made up background for Willy to explain his neurosis. In the end Charlie actually helps Willy Wonka Horrid. I really wanted to like this film but... I was looking forward to a close adaptation based on the book, but the filmmakers made a huge mistake that destroyed it: Willy Wonka is played as an emotionally crippled cross between Pee-wee Herman and Michael Jackson. The story includes a made up background for Willy to explain his neurosis. In the end Charlie actually helps Willy Wonka to see his problems and face up to them. (gag!!!) Is there a more corny plot twist that could have been made by the worst of the Hollywood hacks? The sets, costumes, and special effects are everything you would expect from a Tim Burton movie. The film deserves some credit for this. The 1972 Gene Wilder version did much more with less. The magical sense of limitless imagination of the book is captured much better in the earlier movie. I think the irony here is that is the 1972 film did not have the budget or special effects capabilities of this new movie. Maybe because of constraints, the filmmakers had to be creative. The essence of Willy Wonka is creative inventiveness. This new version replaces this essence with a sense of artistic suffering and self importance. Collapse
  46. VictorB.
    Jul 15, 2005
    0
    Candy may not have to have a point, but movies do. I hated this movie and I loathe the original. Depp is the only mildy bright spot in this mess. My personal opinion though, I never liked WIlly Wonka. I would've rather do my math homework than watch that when I was a kid. This was different but still stupid, inane and pointless. A waste of money, film and time!
  47. BrettK.
    Jul 15, 2005
    0
    15 minutes into this movie my eyes glazed over and I went into a zombie like trance through the rest of it. I can't remember the last time I've been so indifferent towards a movie. I'm pretty sure it's the worst movie I've ever paid to go see in theatres. It was weird (somehow in a boring way), unentertaining, and a little bit of annoying. The original was pretty 15 minutes into this movie my eyes glazed over and I went into a zombie like trance through the rest of it. I can't remember the last time I've been so indifferent towards a movie. I'm pretty sure it's the worst movie I've ever paid to go see in theatres. It was weird (somehow in a boring way), unentertaining, and a little bit of annoying. The original was pretty bad and this isn't much of an improvement. Expand
  48. OliverJ.
    Jul 15, 2005
    1
    Roald Dahl doesn't deserve to be portrayed as an idiotic and obnoxious storyteller. He was better than that. Thank you Tim Burton for reminding me how great the original story is.
  49. NealW.
    Jul 17, 2005
    3
    Johnny Depp is too creepy for words. I'd rather watch The 700 Club.
  50. SH
    Jul 29, 2005
    2
    My love for the original film was mostly due to Gene WIlder's brilliant performance as the whip-smart, rude, and slightly sad yet hopeful Willy Wonka. I was also a huge fan of the orginal book (and all of Dahl's work for that matter). WIlder was faithful to the book's Wonka. Depp, on the other hand, was simply trying to hard. He looked confused half the time, and had My love for the original film was mostly due to Gene WIlder's brilliant performance as the whip-smart, rude, and slightly sad yet hopeful Willy Wonka. I was also a huge fan of the orginal book (and all of Dahl's work for that matter). WIlder was faithful to the book's Wonka. Depp, on the other hand, was simply trying to hard. He looked confused half the time, and had serious father issues. The Willy Wonka of lore is practically infallible (which, while not necessarily realistic, is very enjoyable to watch). Burton and Depp's Wonka had me thinking too much about his past. But WIlly Wonka is one of those characters whose past doesn't matter... he is what he is and that's all that he is. Expand
  51. GeneH.
    Jul 29, 2005
    2
    Definitely a disappointment, given how much I like Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, and the Willy Wonka story. The Gene Wilder version is far superior. Depp comes across here as shallow and meaningless - Freddie Highmore easily out-acts him - and the musical numbers for the most part fall flat. What a shame.
  52. KenG
    Aug 25, 2005
    2
    The story always had a mean-spirited element to it, but Depp's creepy, and charmless performance, magnifies the mean-spirit feel even more, so the movie comes off as nothing but mean-spirited, with a little drabness thrown in. There is no humor, charm, or sense of wonder, or magic to counter-balance the mean-spiritness, as there was in the Gene Wilder orignal.
  53. LouisH.
    May 15, 2007
    1
    This movie was a freak-show on screen!!! It's movies like this that influence little kids to be like present-day Micheal Jackson when they grow up. It ruined J.D's reputation; I mean what did they do to him in this movie???! He is now king Dor-quad!
  54. RichardC
    Jul 24, 2007
    0
    Worst movie ever!!! First off Depp's acting sucked and I mean truly sucked. It was almost like watching a grown man imitate a little boy, but in a perverted way. This is a remake of Willy Wonka, if not it would have been named something else like Willy Wonka 2 or something. Plus you can not beat the original movie, because the performances were classic and subtle. Please Please do Worst movie ever!!! First off Depp's acting sucked and I mean truly sucked. It was almost like watching a grown man imitate a little boy, but in a perverted way. This is a remake of Willy Wonka, if not it would have been named something else like Willy Wonka 2 or something. Plus you can not beat the original movie, because the performances were classic and subtle. Please Please do not waste your time watching this garbage. I would say it is worst then Epic Movie. Those of you who thought it is cute, it is not. The only good thing about this movie is the scenery and special effects. Please don't encourage these Hollywood idiots to remake these movies, instead let's try to make something original that is good. Original pieces are almost always better then remakes. Expand
  55. Eric
    Dec 17, 2005
    1
    I've tried twice to get through this movie. How in the world did so many critics score this a 100? It is absolutely abyssmal. Depp is completely wrong for the Wonka part, the Oompa Loompas are terrible, the songs are lousy, and the humor is nonexistent. I'm glad I only rented the DVD - if I'd actually paid $8 in a theater to see it, I'd have to consider filing a I've tried twice to get through this movie. How in the world did so many critics score this a 100? It is absolutely abyssmal. Depp is completely wrong for the Wonka part, the Oompa Loompas are terrible, the songs are lousy, and the humor is nonexistent. I'm glad I only rented the DVD - if I'd actually paid $8 in a theater to see it, I'd have to consider filing a lawsuit against the theater and/or the filmmaker for both my $8 and pain & suffering. Expand
  56. May 31, 2016
    3
    Yay another Tim Burton mediocre movie! Oh wait that is all of Burton's movies! This movie is really bad. How do you make an actor like Johnny Depp look so bad? You cast him in a Tim Burton picture.
Metascore
72

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 32 out of 40
  2. Negative: 1 out of 40
  1. Here's a film about kids and for kids that has not lost touch with what it is like to actually be a kid.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    70
    Entertaining and fabulously imaginative in many ways, this second bigscreen rendition of the late author's modest morality tale on the wages of unbridled excess sports excesses of its own.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Schickel
    60
    This is rather a thin tale, not much thickened by Burton's direction or Depp's playing. There's a distance, a detachment to this film. It lacks passion.