Willy Wonka and the Myth of the Lazy Poor
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 01. 2022
- Get a whole month of great cinema for free at mubi.com/justwrite
Twitter ▶ / sagehyden
Let's talk memes.
Credits:
Edited by Alex Calleros
Music:
“Electric Mantis - Daybreak | Majestic Color”
ow.ly/G7gg30iypqm
Hall of the Mountain King Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
11:47-11:52 just a warning for people sensitive to flashing lights. There’s a glitch that makes green flash a few times.
(I haven’t gone any further, but just be careful in case)
Hey this video wormed into your recommended too didnt it
Ah thanks for the head's up!!!
@@Basilica_1 yep
I'm not normally sensitive and that f'ed me up. What is up with that?
I was REALLY surprised the flashing lights were from a glitch and not the 'psychedelic nightmare tunnel' from the original movie...
Grandpa Joe is also 96 years old, so I've got some concerns with any kind of economic justice system that requires him to be a productive member of society...
Both my grandma's are above 90 and they still live alone, do the house chores, cooking, groceries etc. Joe (and the other 3) could perfectly help at home, ot at least, not be a charge for the mother
@@vilwarin5635 That does kind of depend on the elderly person's health. However, given that Charlie goes to school and his parents work three shifts a day, I don't see how the grandparents would still be alive if they didn't do some food preparation and/or housework on a regular basis.
@@paulelkin3531 bruh op said society not house chores
@@vilwarin5635 bruh op said society not house chores. And no one give af about your grandparents
@@JFLOProductions If you double check, my previous comment was replying to Vilwarin. My point being that (A) we shouldn't assume the elderly can take care of themselves and (B) based on the evidence it appears that Joe does help at home.
At no point am I disagreeing with OP's point.
Gene Wilder is simply too likable to dislike Wonka.
Just like Obama.
@@motor4X4kombat Obama's the most likable war criminal that ever presided the US.
that's uh... kinda the point.
@@matheusvillela9150 It’s funny how that’s a genuine achievement
Just came here to say this. It's gene wilder. He's just so watchable.
The schtick with the cane when Wonka walks out for the first time and then suddenly does a somersault was Gene Wilder's idea. He wanted to show the audience that Wonka was not someone to be trusted. He had it right.
" He wanted to show the audience that Wonka was not someone to be trusted. “
False, Wilder specifically said it was to make the character mysterious enough that you didn’t know what was true and what was not
the mystery of the character was meant to ensure that audiences would be thinking more about his actions and etc
it wasn’t to state he was untrustworthy.
@@mckenzie.latham91 So... Untrustworthy-unable to be relied on as a truthful guide. An enigma that makes it impossible to evaluate his honesty. Presenting a veneer that may or may not reflect his character.
@@carsonwall2400 Yeah and look how well it worked
it’s why people always refer to this film as the gene wilder gem
the character of wily sonja being elevated to a chambering ad interesting guide and or figure that people adore
whereas the tim burton film is always referred to as “the one where johnny depp dresses and acts like a child molester”
That was part of why Roald Dahl allegedly hated not only the 1971 movie, but Wilder himself. He really, REALLY disliked the direction Wilder took Wonka in, particularly because one of the conditions Wilder allegedly had for taking on the role at all WAS that he be allowed to play that particular scene in that way.
@@mckenzie.latham91 True, but it shows that it's a bit more complex than just the movie flat out praising Wonka. As captivating as Wilder's performance is, you have to admit that something feels... off about him. Like you don't know for certain whether he's playing a sick game or genuinely wants to find and heir to his business empire. That intro scene sets up that tone for the character.
Also, the Wilder's Willy Wonka totally killed those children. He *says* they're fine, but the movie establishes him as a lying liar.
No one can know the secrets.
Well, in the book they were supposed to die. But the publishers had that changed.
It's supposed to be up for interpretation I think
The movie even has a creepy guy warning Charlie that this is a slasher movie.
"Nobody ever goes in... and nobody ever comes out!"
I only trust Depp’s Wonka because at the very least we see that the ‘losing’ kids are all alive and mostly well. You could argue for trauma, but not really because it didn’t seem like any of them besides Veruka were really upset with the situation they landed themselves in. Violet is straight up ecstatic to be a contortionist blue girl.
"If you want to view paradise, simply look around and view it" -- the guy who hasn't looked outside in years
He's talking about the paradise he built
Or he's talking about your outlook on life...
It never says that paradise was outside....he's talking about the Chocolate Room that has everything made of candy.
Indoors is my paradise
I think the point is that you deliberately choose to see the world as something beautiful regardless of its state.
I would also add that public perception to the 71 adaptation is more positive due to Gene Wilder's charming charisma on screen. Not sure we'd have the same perception if played by another actor.
Very true.
That being said, apparently the Monty Python members expressed an interest for the role for both the 71 and 05 versions, and I think Michael Palin or Eric Idle could’ve worked well. Maybe if Burton had gone with either of them and let their natural whimsy shine through, instead of whatever the hell Depp was going, people would more fondly remember the 05 version.
There’s a difference, Willy Wonka was meant to be charming in the 1971 version and he’s meant to be awkward and distant in the 2005 version.
We live in a age where Gregory house from house is loved and cherished as a character
i don’t think it would be that different.
@@ethanhart129 He's meant to be charming, but also not someone to be trusted. Wilder specifically played him to come off as untrustworthy, that's why when you think about the things he does, he's always a little crazy.
@@Pluveus I would argue not necessarily untrustworthy which has a negative connotation, more like hard to read
the idea being that people would be more interested in a character they couldn’t figure out and or know what was real or what wasn’t
it was to make the character interesting and mysterious
which is why the film worked so well.
Nobody in Charlie's family was portrayed as lazy in the book. Father worked for a pittance in a toothpaste factory. The grandparents are all super old and in pain, and the family doesn't have the resources to help them. Grandpa Joe rallies when Charlie wins the ticket, because someone needs to go with him, and the excitement of having won gives him the spoons to get up out of bed. Charlie is poor but morally upstanding and loving - which he learned from his family. This is why he is Chosen by Wonka as his heir. He and his grandfather stand in contrast to the selfish/spoiled rich and middle class children that make up the rest of the winners.
Which is what makes the 1971 film a bit problematic, haha.
My experience with middle class people is exactly that. Many are entitled AF. There's a few good ones though. My friend said it best: a vegan diet is the ultimate expression of privilege. No underprivileged person could survive on such a diet.
@@erickolb8581 Except when you take into consideration that meat is very bad for a planet and don't forget about factory farms.
And that other cultures (such as India) have vegan food, and their people survive.
@@kittykittybangbang9367 Who cares about the world when you are struggling to survive? When you are comfortable, that's when you can afford to be moral. Also, it's not so black and white, with the sheer amount of water used for nuts, deforestation for crops, and instigated conflicts such as the skirmishes over Avocado in Mexico (I kid you not, the farmers hire mercinaries to fight the Cartel)
Mr Salt - "great dad, shining example of hard working man"
APPARENTLY.. despite his spoilt brat of a daughter...
All of this is true. But I wish you had touched on why Roald Dahl wrote it that way in the first place. His books are all about how adults are the worst. Wonka is our hero because he is the last holdout - refusing to become an adult - refusing to become a cynic.
Wonka isn't our hero, though; Charlie is.
He's choosing Charlie because he doesn't want to become the villain, i thought
@@FreeViewBlog Charlie is the protagonist. Both are heroic characters in the thematic context of the novels.
To be fair, its easy to hold off becoming a cynic when youre literally at the top of the economic hierarchy.
Poor people cant afford to retain their "childlike wonder"
@@stratecaster547 "Poor people can't have fun" is such a tired narrative. I grew up and am still below the poverty line, I have multiple friends who have gone through homelessness either in childhood or as adults. Allowing yourself to feel amazement and wonder is 100% a choice that you make. Circumstances make it more difficult, often be wearing a person down to the point where they're so tired that they just don't want to put the energy into feeling the way that they used to, or by filling them with some nonsense impression about how it's naive and childish. Either way, it's all inside.
Even many of the people who escaped from actual hellholes like concentration camps managed to maintain their ability to feel wonder and amazement. They chose not to let the awful things that happened to them steal their ability to feel positive emotions. You can do this too. Maybe not every single day, but when you have the energy to recognize how much of your worldview is being deliberately shaped by yourself, you can change it. You can will yourself to make the best of it, allow yourself to feel happy again. I know it's difficult. Like I said, I didn't have economic prosperity, and I'm loaded with a bunch of disabilities and mental illnesses in addition to that, one of which being a *thick* depression. I still allow myself to feel wonder and amazement and escape to flights of fancy, and I allow myself this pleasure because why would I want to perceive misery all the time?
Nobody has to. Everybody can escape sometimes. If you drink, if you do recreational drugs, if you spend your days watching CZcams video essays on pop culture, you're already attempting it. You're just spending an awful lot more in the ways of money and health than people who learn how to shut off the cynical parts of their brains manually.
In the book, the Bucket family is extremely poor - Wonka actually allows Charlie and Grandpa Joe to drink from the chocolate river because he notices how thin and malnourished they are.
So I always thought that the reason that Joe was bedridden was because he had given up - he's old, frail and depressed. Why bother to find the energy to get out of bed?
@@bored_person Chocolate is actually one of the first things you want to give someone whom is suffering from hypothermia so it's not as "unhealthy" as you might think.
@@Edax_Royeaux Interesting.
@@bored_person If it's Dark Chocolate and not milk chocolate, it can actually be somewhat good for them, such as narrowly improving their vision, improved blood pressure, and antioxidants. Still not as good as say an apple or a stalk of broccoli, but better than anything else you'd find in a candy factory.
Plus, the sugar can give them the energy to get through the rest of the tour.
@@bored_person Just the sugar and fat mixed into most chocolates. One could just as easily mix ground cocoa beans with rice or oatmeal.
@@nathanlevesque7812 then that's not really chocolate.
I feel like you missed a point by saying "everyone was obsessed with chocolate". They weren't obsessed with chocolate. No one could give a fuck about the chocolate. They wanted the golden ticket. They wanted an opportunity to see inside the factory, to learn about the intellectual property that Wonka had been keeping hidden. Four out of five of the kids would have exploited that intellectual property based on human greed. The lottery was for Wonka as well, to find his successor. And in the book, he says that if he didn't find the "Charlie" the first time, he would have sent out five more tickets. Wonka was taking a big risk because he wanted to preserve the ideals of joy and childlike simplicity his product gave.
Yeah the book’s/movies’ faults aren’t so much that they promote unethical business practices, more that they uncritically use them as an excuse to explore a giant, mysterious, magical candy factory that almost functions as its own ecosystem, and deliver a moral about selfishness vs selflessness.
If he didn't get sued to oblivion first
They did want the golden ticket, but not to see inside the factory: they wanted the lifetime supply of chocolate. So yes, they were obsessed with chocolate.
It’s only the 70s version that added the gambit about Intellectual Property being a secondary Test to the kids. And we don’t KNOW what they would’ve chosen; we only see “Slugworth” talking to them. And of all the kids only Charlie had any real temptation-Veruka was already rich and just wanted the Golden Ticket because it was Special, the other kids just wanted the chocolate, in the Tim Burton Mike was less interested in the chocolate and more interested in proving he was smart. Violet has absolutely zero patience for her dad’s campaigning in the 70s (although she really should’ve listened to him about that contract…) and in the Tim Burton one again, there’s NO Gobstopper Gambit, only the Heir Hunt so she really only wanted to Win and try to get any sort of approval from her mother. (Which since there’s No Intellectual Property Gambit in Tim Burton’s, he doubles down on the what the FACTORY would mean for Charlie. Which, well. It’d mean his family’s no longer struggling. It’s why he agrees so readily when told he “won”, then instantly says “screw you then” when Wonka tries to make him abandon his family.)
But: tl;dr: all the kids cared about were the tickets, the day trip, and the chocolate. Except 70s Charlie. As Charlie’s the only one who really Gets It with what that sort of invention could mean (it’d save his family, let his mother finally relax, let him finally have a childhood).
@W Shiflet Veruca’s dad gave her anything she wanted already so she wasn’t there for the chocolate either
I always interpreted the modern hatred of Grandpa Joe as an analog of Millennials' anger towards Baby Boomers. The idea that Grandpa Joe does not participate in the younger generations' hard work but still passively benefits from it, and even feels entitled to it. It's not that he is poor, but he is ungrateful.
In other words, it's left to the viewers interpretation.
I'm a millennial and I think people who are mad at Grandpa Joe are fucking stupid. It's not his fault he's in the situation that he's in and they shouldn't be hating themselves using him as a proxy.
It is a pretty good example of how young people have been tricked into blaming the elderly for problems that were created by capitalism and punish both groups I suppose
@@joshisikillukid To be fair, the boomers took the capitalism that was enshrined by The G.I. Generation (I will never not hate typing that), railed against it for a bit with the hippie movement, then immediately began to benefit from it. After all, it's mostly boomers that are still in power. I think being mad at the people in power from now back to antiquity is the proper response, though especially post-industrial revolution.
And, being a straight, cis, white, male, when I say people in power, I mean white men.
If that's their "logic", Millennials be dumb AF. I worked full time for 37 years; how the hell is my hard-earned pension "benefiting" from younger generations? Holy crap...
“If only this family of six had one of the elderly men breaking his back working, then maybe they’d only be in crippling poverty instead of being horribly impoverished! This is all Grandpa Joe’s fault for being lazy!”
The old film really brings out the Tory in people
Once glance of an old infirm man bedridden with hunger and depression and suddenly everyone turn into Enoch Powell
I mean currently the family has 1 bread winner, it could have 2. At the very least he could help at home Instead of lay in bed all day.
@@jakobinobles3263 Haha victorian workhouse go brr
@@jakobinobles3263 We need to be topical, for god’s sake! Send Charlie to the _cobalt_ mines, it’ll make waves on Twitter!
Lmfao
Maybe it's just me, but I always found Wilder's version to be pretty creepy. Probably more so than Depp's version because he _almost_ blends in as normal. Makes him even more uncanny and dangerous.
Me too, Gene Wilders version of Wonka always seemed like he was gonna snap at any moment and didn't seem to have any of that "pure imagination" to me. He just felt like a business man, i could not see him coming up with any of his ideas.
Especially at the end, you notice that he really has a darker side than he lets on. I recently reread and analyzed the book with my fourth grade class, and Wonka in the source material has that same level of disturbance. The Depp version has the audience critique Wonka, whereas the Wilder version is just a bit too normal beside the few breaks of anger or delight in the children.
Yeah wilder in the movie definitely reads as a sociopath
That and Depp's Wonka is more just a weird guy who's a bit mentally messed up, rather then someone that comes off so Normal if not cheery
Uncanny valley for the … win? (If you like being creeped out 😏)
Maybe it just speaks to what sites I frequent most, but I've never seen someone glorify Wonka. Every discussion I've ever seen about him both online and offline is about how his factory is full of safety violations, his "employees" are paid pittances through his abuse of their lack of knowledge of western economics, and he's not only okay with kids being horribly disfigured while they were under his care, but he actively plotted to disfigure them. There's also about a 20% chance that someone claims that Dahl wrote the book as a satire of the prevalence of workplace safety hazards and abusive employment practices.
I think ppl notice those issues but often glorify Wonka anyway bc there is a disconnect at play...at least with Gene Wilder's take.
Im fairly certain that Wonka gave Charlie the factory becuase it was on the brink of collapsing due to the endless count of labor and safety violations that he wanted Charlie to be legally liable for. He wanted a fall guy.
@@stratecaster547 that’s a robot chicken sketch
@@nathanlevesque7812 I think it is because of the acting. A bad charasmatic character's actions are often forgotten or excused. Take a lot of video game characters. Mainly Rockstar's. But there is also the point of it being a fictional piece. Like, if the CEO of Nestle was a character, he would probably be interesting to watch because he is so outlandishly evil, but him being real makes are empathetic part of ourselves upset because bad things is happening to real people by a real person.
@@mckenzie.latham91 And a Legal Eagle video.
“Sure Grandpa Joe is in his 90s but he should still work tirelessly”
*Willy Wonka literally pretends to have a disability and everyone claps*
Idk I use a cane to get around and I fucking love that scene
@@ceering99 which one?
i think the one where wonka does a roll when they fall over and show they dont need a cane
@@emperorza5777 the Gene Wilder one. I've heard that that scene was actually his idea, but could be wrong.
It is shown throughout the movie that Joe is a capable man. He could be helping around the house. A leech and burden upon his family without needing to be one.
It baffles me how you never really look at it from Charlie's mother's perspective. It is common in real life for men to feign incompetence in order to foist more housework on women. So maybe the reason people hate Grandpa Joe more than Wonka is because we've actually dealt with Grandpa Joes in real life whereas Wonka is mostly abstract to most people. It's similar to why people hate Professor Umbridge more than Voldemort- we all have a real life history with Umbridge types whereas Voldemort is mostly fantasy.
This is EXACTLY it.
If it were Only “hating old, poor, disabled, mentally ill persons” then there would be a LOT of hate for all of Charlie’s Grandparents. There’s not. The only one who infuriates everyone is Grampa Joe…who could help care for his wife, inlaws, and Charlie if he cared to do so. Nobody’s saying anything about Joe “should be employed” either; only that it’s utterly Unfair that Charlie’s Mother has to pull Double Duty of being the only breadwinner (aside from Charlie’s supplemental income but it can barely buy a loaf of bread with a week’s wages) + needing to care for the household aside from what Charlie can do to help.
Grampa Joe feels strongly about how “Charlie SHOULD have a childhood!” but…apparently not about how he’s essentially taking advantage of his daughter; instead he’s angry at her for “Charlie Working Too Hard”.
Charlie’s grandmothers truly are bedridden, yet they quite frankly do more to help the household by knitting Charlie’s scarf (and presumably doing most of the mending) which…you KNOW their hands are arthritic to hell. Grampa George is possibly as guilty as Grampa Joe…except it’s Joe we see as Fully Capable To Stand, Actually (with his muscle atrophy from staying in bed all day and presumably never getting up Ever…being mild to non-existent.) We know the least about Grampa George but. Yeah. Joe’s the one who stands and doesn’t ever need to stop to rest once the tour begins.
So…since men *really are often Just LIKE That* (and other men have called men out on this sort of toxic masculinity…)
@@anonymousfellow8879 based on the real world actor for grandpa George being mostly blind from I believe a chlorine gas attack during the war him not doing much could likely be contributed to that. Heck he might be drawing some form of stipend from the government due to his war induced disability.
@@novaiscool1
Didn’t know that about the actor. However there’s no indication this is the case for the *character.* The *character* is Seeing (and makes multiple Sight Observations) even if the actor is not.
This is a critique about the character, not the actor. The actor did just fine and is very enganging
But I’m sure if she was a house wife he work his butt off to take care of all those ppl in the house till he got old
Also, Umbridge's methodology is nonsensical for the most part. There's a military axiom that says: "the importance of the mission is inversely proportional to the intelligence of the unit commander."
Good point about the ending in the '71 version, it even has a twist in the newer version, where Wonka doesn't even want Charlie to see his family as he feels that will make him less creative and productive.
'71's ending will never not be jarring, I almost prefer the '05 because at least it didn't give me emotional whiplash 😅
Nah the 71 versons is better, gene wilder plays the character as a person who is both mysterious but genuine, and someone who isn’t taking the crap of the parents or the kids.
meanwhile the 2005 version with johnny depp, has Depp more in his own world, and his mannerisms and vocal patterns remind one of sexual molesters.
Agin this class biased interpretation leaves out the fact that Grandpa joe serves as the constant temptation of charlie in the film/book
Wonka wants charlie to run the factory as it has been run (and run well) so that everything keeps going, whereas as he says, if a grownup took it over they’d change everything to fit their way, not the way the factory should be run.
also isn’t the everlasting gobstopper literally said to be for poor kids with little money, so the gobstopper lasts longer so they can have it longer and not have to worry baout not being bale to keep buying one all the time?
Apart from preferring Gene's interpretation of the character to Johnny's, I vastly prefer the Burton version
@@mckenzie.latham91 Isn't the question to ask then "Is it right for the factory to be run as Wonka does? On the back of an exploited immigrant worker force."
@@HobGungan The Burton version is insanely popular in my country for some reason.
"In his only display of cinematic self restraint". Best line in this video.
I always saw Grandpa (1st movie) in the light of an entitled man rather then a lazy poor. He lets his daughter, do all the work to run the household, but when the ticket comes into the family, he still sees himself as the head of the household, or the patriarch, and thus feels entitled to that boon. I think a lot of us have interacted with men like that.
My understanding was that grandpa Joe wasn’t bed ridden, the grandparents stayed in bed to preserve heat and save the family on heating
No he was bedridden due to his old age. The book is in a fantastical reality, which gets more fantastical the more Wonka is involved. The idea is that Grandpa Joe is so overjoyed by the knowledge of returning to Willy Wonka's incredible factory (a place which he loves), that he regains the ability to walk, almost like magic. It also ties into the book's theme about childhood, so the tired old man regaining joy and energy fits pretty well.
I thought grandpa Joe was the only one that did get out of bed, for short periods of time, he was the most active of the extremely old grandparents.
But it was a long time since I read the book or the older movie, probably in the later 70's.
A version with a black Charlie wouldn't be a half-bad idea! Just got to publicize the heck out of how that was the original plan.
There's a great film theory episode about what the odds are of all five ticket winners being white kids and whether the contest was rigged.
@@BGBigMax rigged election!!!!!!1111
Sorry, had to do that :D
And the real shocker is that five CHILDREN won them, not taking race into account. Regardless of race, kids don’t have the income that adults have.
I would live to see this
Even if it was terrible
Just for the Boomer Rage
@@zaczane I'm pretty sure most of the people raging would be teenagers in their edgy phase, but yeah same, I would love to see their rage
Grandpa Joe in the 71 flick is very clearly Charlie’s id to counter Charlie’s superego, his mother. Joe does nothing but complain in the beginning of the film and says he would try to get out of bed “if the floor weren’t so cold”. When Charlie comes home with bread, his mother wants to know where he got it but Grandpa Joe is quick to say, “Who cares, he has it!” He even uses some of the money Charlie makes to purchase tobacco so that the rest of his family has to eat cabbage soup.
Charlie’s whole inner conflict is voiced through Grandpa Joe telling Charlie they should steal the gobstopper or sneak the fizzy lifting drink.
Willy Wonka is supposed to represent success, not just financially, but also the success of finding satisfaction and joy in what you do. Grandpa Joe represents the cynicism and selfish shortcuts that prevent us from being truly happy.
I think the Grandpa Joe hate resonates with people because Willy Wonka is just so eccentric, whereas Grandpa Joe represents the friend or family member who gives you terrible advice or tells you to do bad things. A lot more people have a Grandpa Joe in their lives than a Willy Wonka.
"A lot more people have a Grandpa Joe in their lives than a Willy Wonka."
This is a very important sentence because in the inverse case when talking about trying to support the lower class, even in the case where it would benefit literally everyone if the change was made. Theres often a comment about "that guy" that people talk about whenever this comes up, the story changes every now and then but they are often annoying, have poor hygene, or simply an a-hole. Often ignoring the fact that "that guy" is also surrounded by other, similarly economically challenged people that arent "that guy" in the same neighborhood.
This is why the meme spreads, because simply enough everyone wants to be rich but have never really met a rich man in person, only seeing the effects of their wealth(indirectly) and their advertising around them(directly).
I really enjoyed the new one specifically because they called out how weird and creepy Willy Wonka is. They also did a much better job of capturing the fantastical nature of the book.
I watched the original one as a kid and I remember disliking the whole movie, but specially disliking Willy Wonka. He was nonsensical to me, I specially remember the one scene he gets angry at Charlie. It's one of the only scenes that stuck with me and made me remember the film badly.
Some years later, I was still a kid when Burton's version came out and I loved it! Every second of it was an improvement to me. But specially Willy Wonka. It made so much sense he was weird and distant, he spent half of his life alone in a factory, except for the oompa loompas. How could he not be awkward?
@Chandler Burse wdum super obvious??
The guy is almost considered a shut in all of the movies because he doesn't want to be copied
Thats ultra weird in all of the cases
@@antonco2 I was the opposite.While I liked Burton`s version a lot as a kid(since it came out when I was like 5),I decided to watch the movie with Gene Wilder at 23.And I realized why it worked much better for me.The message was loud and clear in saying adults suck,which was Dahl`s sentiment.While it omitted admittedly important parts of the story,the core message and Wonka felt a lot more personified in the old version.
@@AirAnimeAngel Yeah, your opinion seems to be the popular one. I can respect it even though I don't agree with it
@Chandler Burse - ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ wasn’t a remake. It was a separate adaptation to the book.
I feel like there may be a small group who view Joe as a member of the “lazy poor,” but a much larger group is angry at how ungrateful he is to everyone. He complains about the food his daughter makes, says he’d get up to help if the floor wasn’t cold, steals, insults people, encourages Charlie to steal, allows his underage grandson to work to make extra money when he is entirely mobile, repeatedly prioritizes himself over Charlie, and just continually shows that he’s a bad person. He’s not a leach on the world, but he is a leach on his widowed daughter and her son. A lot of people have a relative who reminds them of Grandpa Joe, which is why he’s one of the internet’s Big Bads.
Wonka is like a charming-but-sleazy used car salesman. Everything he says and does seems great, but he’s a scumbag. I’ve never seen anyone uphold him as a good person or role model. It’s just that Gene Wilder was so magnetic, so you get reeled in.
This feels kind of unfair. In The original movie, Grandpa Joe actually declares that he is going to quit tobacco over the insistence of his family because he doesn't think he has a right to buy it when his family is so poor. In the context of the scene, he clearly does not want to be prioritized over the well-being of his family. He also gives up the money he has been given for tobacco in order to buy Charlie a chocolate bar. Grandpa Joe was a flawed character, but he definitely wasn't wholly ungrateful. On some level, it's very clear from the first moments of his song that Joe fully believed he wasn't mobile. Again, very flawed, but it's a comedy. Grandpa Joe is dedicated to his grandson at his own expense.
@koboldcatgirl he does he gets up and walks fine despite having been in a bed for 20 years he also walked around the factory for hours meaning his legs completely functional keep in mind there are people in there 90s who worked far more labouring,dangerous jobs who can walk fine
"He pays them with coco beans"
Actual currency in the Aztec empire.
Warm factory lodgings or fighting each other for leaves??
This naive idea "own habitat is better" is just racist - for all we know, they'd be cannibals eaten each other in the desert!!
Many an ex con will tell you the "outside" is hard
Prison provides 3 meals a day, bedding, clothes and other structure
The devil makes work for idle hands
At least you have people to talk to etc etc
I doubt "Oompa Loompa Land" is "Rodeo Drive"
Cool. This isn't the aztec empire.
I honestly viewed Grandpa Joe as just an old man wanting to share one last big adventure with his grandson. And especially with how old he's supposed to be in the novel, it'll probably be the last big thing they get to do together. So the reason he got up so quick and easy was likely an adrenaline rush, because he gets to have this moment. I'll also say that I didn't mind the fizzy-lifting drinks scene because I felt it kept Charlie from falling into the "perfect infallible child protagonist" trap. He messes up, and then redeems himself.
Only other thing he's saving energy for is to carry his wife's coffin!!!
@@darrengordon-hill boomer humor
Also, he "just gets given" the factory because he's more loyal to Wonka's business than he is to his impoverished family (refusing to give away Wonka's secrets in exchange for getting his family out of poverty).
@Chandler Burse Enslaving and exploiting people to sell addictive poison to children isn't success under any sane system. death to capitalism!
@Chandler Burse In the books it's outright stated that he has their children working for him, and even in the movies the agreement is clear, all they get paid in is chocolate, if you only get food and shelter, or in general get paid less than your labour is worth, you are a slave. by the end of the movie or book, Charlie becomes a villian, taking up the role of capitalist exploiting workers.
@Chandler Burse unless it becomes a worker co-operative, or some other form of anarchist workplace he's exploiting workers, and Willy Wanker wants Charlie to continue doing things the same way, which includes exploitation and OHS violations.
@Chandler Burse Unless he ended the capitalism and other hirarchies of the factory it's still evil.
@Chandler Burse Corporations shouldn't exist, fuck giant companies, and hyrarchy is a form of discrimination and power imbalance, inequality is a bad thing. I oppose the USSR and such, they were state capitalism, and not anarchism. workers should own and control their means of production.
This may sound weird,, but I've always had a soft spot for the Tim Burton version, I have a lot of fond memories for this film. (=
Same!
The 70s version is hilarious in that lead up to Wonka, and Gene Wilder is undeniably brilliant. But I still really appreciate Burton's version and have never hated it.
It being so weird particularly in Wonka's case makes total sense as an alternate take, and I do generally like the tone of the film, with the snowy outsides and the incredible fantastical interior of the factory. The soundtrack is damn lovely too.
I hoped to see someone say that because I teally liked it too but I've never seen the old one (I'm french) so I can't really compare.
There are things to like in each version IMO. I prefer Gene Wilder to Johnny Depp and I prefer the eerie and direct lyrics of the Oompa Loompa songs in the 70s version to the more modernized pop numbers in 05. But Tim Burton's fantastical cinematography and the expanded lore about Wonka's dentist father and journey to Loompaland are really cool. Both movies tell the story in interesting ways IMO.
It’s still the second best of the two movies where a rich Johnny Depp mentors a poor Freddie Highmore in England (if you haven’t seen Finding Neverland, highly recommend).
It's not weird at all. I love the Tim Burton version, especially the songs and the visuals, which I think are just better. The original version only had one song I liked.
I don't know about this take, if people REALLY were going for the whole "Poor people lazy and bad", wouldn't they be meme-ing the entire family and not just Grandpa Joe?
That version of grandpa joe is the easier target cause he’s unpleasant and does some selfish things, while the rest are almost saintly in their poverty
Grandpa Joe gets up and moves around like nothing was ever wrong with him. The other three remain bedridden.
@@optimusprime4542 well yeah but that can be attributed to "almost everyone in the film is an asshole except Charlie because he is supposed to be the Good Kid who gets the factory" not "DURR POOR PEOPLE BAD"
They make rich people look even worse.
It's easier to make a point with more specific examples. Grandpa Joe is much more prevalent throughout the film, and a more problematic character than the whole family. The people who already believe that poor people are lazy and bad are going to pick him out as an example, and ignore the hardworking mother and other (seemingly older and sicker in the 1971 version) grandparents. If you wanted to make the point that they were bad, using the whole family would hurt your case.
I always figured Grandpa Joe only got out of bed because Charlie asked him to. Like, depression can wear down a lot of things and impede your mental and physical abilities...but one of the few things that can override that is the desperation and determination not to disappoint a child that's counting on you. Charlie asked him to get out of bed, so he did.
Grandpa joe is 91yrs old. Its amazing he is alive at all. Im sure his doctor would have prevented him from dancing like that if he had have been there. Just cos you can, doesnt mean you should.
@@satsumamoon uncle Joe was most likely in pain for weeks following the film, but he still got up and did it because he loved Charlie.
If anyone is using Grandpa Joe as a point about the "lazy poor", they can have four fingers pointing back at them. And those three fingers are Augustus Gloop (gluttony), Veruca Salt (avarice), Violet Beauregarde (vanity) and Mike Teavee (anger).
Yeah it’s kind of funny that the video ignores all of the other kids. They all come from more wealth than what Charlie has. It’s actually heavily implied that poverty is part of what makes Charlie so good-hearted, whereas excess is what makes the other children so selfish. Which I guess is it’s whole other can of worms but the video doesn’t even acknowledge that.
Isn’t Joe like super old? I always felt those memes were odd. Like, imagine asking your retired grandfather to unretire and get back to work.
I always saw it as commentary on how poverty exists and puts pressure on people to provide for their parents and children simultaneously.
*greed, envy, wrath
So… gluttony, greed, pride, and wrath.
JESUS WEPT!!!
Mr Salt is a great example of a man....
2:54 It tried to be as faithful to the book as possible, and yet added in all that stuff with Christopher Lee as Wonka’s Dad which wasn’t in the book.
As kid I thought it was an unnecessary addition - though, to be fair, as a kid I just wanted the book in film form 1:1.
As an adult I just want a film studio to have the balls to finally adapt the Great Glass Elevator...
@@FreeViewBlog The makers of the 71 film wanted to, just Dahl hated their film so much he refused to let them make the sequel. Either way, now Netflix has bought the rights to the entire Dahl catalogue, we might get an adaptation from them.
@@FreeViewBlog The Great Glass Elevator has some phenomenal stuff in it. But it would need some tweaks to be adapted today that I think can be done pretty easily. Everything happening at the president's office is a rooooough read these days.
@@BenCol wtf ???????????? OH JEEZ NO
@@PogieJoe it doesn't have to be THE president, he can be a made-up us president as long as he is presented as such
Publisher: Stop using black slaves because it's disrespectful
Also Publisher: We don't want a black kid to be the main character
Wow the lack of self awareness 🤣
Were you not paying attention when he said it was the NAACP who was compaing the Oompa Loompas to slaves or do you just not know what the NAACP is?
I think it was a different publisher each time
It was the NAACP who brought up the first concern, not the publishers.
my only thing is that I'm pretty sure people HAVE made memes pointing out how wonka endangers children and has slaves.
I love that you pointed this out. I remember the first time I heard the "grandpa joe" argument. I laughed at first but it always sat uncomfortably with me and I wasn't sure why. The only thing I could really fault Grandpa Joe for was the fizzy lifting juice. Lazy though? He's clearly elderly and the thing that gets him out of bed isn't greed but hope. He has something to look forward to, probably for the first time in years. The world we are shown in the movie is fast paced, cold, and impatient for results, from teachers hurrying kids to answer, to the shop owner hurrying the patrons to make their purchases. Mike TV, Violet Beauregard AND their parents talk a mile a minute. Mr. Salt is a bit slower, but that's because he fully expects his money to buy whatever results he wants. The two times it doesn't is the two times we see him frenzied, first when 5 days of his factory workers unwrapping chocolate bars 'from dawn to dusk' doesn't produce a golden ticket, making Veruca unhappy, and so he angrily threatens to fire everyone while offering a 'one pound bonus' in the paycheck to whoever finds it and 2. when Veruca throws a fit and goes down the trash chute. He starts off calm, realizes he can't easy talk his way to his daughter's safety and so he goes head first down the chute after her. That world is fast paced and demands quick results.
Given that info, what kind of work can Grandpa Joe do? He's in his waning years. He SHOULD be unemployed because he should be retired. We see how hard Mrs. Bucket (and the 'girls' at Mr. Salt's factory) work. Mrs. Bucket is doing laundry late at night, even on Charlie's birthday. How many years can she do that before she's worn out and in bed herself? 20, 30 years? Enough time for Charlie to grow up, have kids and for those kids to be about Charlie's age? Grandpa joe isn't lazy. He's worn down.
And every single adult that has any position of economic power is awful! Every one! Including Wonka! What I liked most about Wilder's Wonka is that he made that character a little bit hard to read, a little bit unpredictable, and a little bit terrifying. You're never fully comfortable with Wonka. His very first act on screen is one of deception. You're told from the very start not to fully trust him. He was no more the good guy than anyone else, he was just slightly more charismatic in an otherwise dull world. As a kid, I always thought that Wonka gave up the chocolate factory because he realized he was becoming like the adults around him and thought the factory would do better in the hands of someone that hadn't lost the joy in the world yet... which, in that world, *had* to be a child, a sweet and honest one.
Thanks for the different perspective on this :) I appreciated it.
yes exactly!!! I thought similarly but I couldn't really articulate it tysm
The book treats Joe’s ability to walk as a miracle, like he was bedridden and when Charlie got the ticket, one miracle led to another. It’s a sign of the family’s luck starting to change for the better, that culminates when Charlie wins the factory
Gene Wilder does such an amazing job as Wonka that we all love him, but I think it's pretty clear he's the bad guy. I think people like Wonka like they like Loki, his charisma carries him. Heck , he's straight up murdering children, he uses slave labor, and I'll never forget his mental breakdown. But his performance is the kind that people will never forget. Much like Charlie Chaplin, you just can't recreate such art.
i have always wondered if wonka was in some ways a sympathetic devil figure. he leaves out temtations but never directly harms people, he allows people's flaws to harm them instead, and seems to relish in punishing the "Sinners". but when he finds someone who does a single basic act of kindness, he entirely flips because he sees someone who's trait is compassion rather than the dark traits he exploits to harm people. to run his fantastic land of temptations, he needs someone pure so that they dont become absorbed by it. its not a one to one, but especially in the 70's the idea of the sympathtic devil/prometheus archetype was kind of here and there.
I noticed something while watching this.
Wonka in the old movie is presented as a quirky and eccentric genius.
But interestingly, when you actually look at his character, it’s someone who has manipulated an entire population to adoring a good, but ultimately unnecessary and unhealthy product to absurd degrees (like an overblown caricature of commodity fetishism), and is CONSTANTLY lying, obfuscating, manipulating, and controlling his guests and spectators (from the very first scene of his, in fact). And is completely uncaring of the possibly gruesome fates of those who deviate from his ideas of correctness, doing the bare minimum to prevent fstalities. In fact, he seemed to almost expect it to happen.
While it’s framed as just eccentricity, with mildly different framing, the same actions and setting could make him seem like a dangerous, coniving, psychopathic maniac and cult leader. He’s basically a Bond villain, framed as a good guy.
So, I guess when Grandpa Joe sings "I've got a golden ticket", and then looks directly at Charlie and smiles warmly... Yeah, he is DEFINATELY talking about the ticket itself...
Grandpa Joe betrayed Jesus for candy
As one should.
I would too
Never understood why people read Grandpa Joe receiving a vigorous renewal of life at the joy of this fantastical situation as him simply having refused to do things prior. He's an old man. He's a bit crass in Willy Wonka when we meet him and he engages in arguably unethical behavior when they get to the factory, but it's not like he's never thinking about his family. Not to mention, he has a right to think about himself too. He's not *just* a member of a family unit, just like Charlie is more than the poor child of bedridden grandparents and impoverished parents. If I'm remembering correctly the stated "prize" was a lifetime supply of chocolate (we later find out it's control of the factory itself, so technically correct), so when Charlie is denied this prize after having made it all the way to the end over some pretty minor, petty behavior that was not really Charlie's fault (Joe of course having egged him on, which is reasonable considering their life situation), Joe is rightfully outraged Wonka would crush Charlie's dreams and go back on his word. He tries to convince Charlie to sell off the gobstopper specifically because it would be worth a small fortune for his family in this facsimile of our world compared to the giant nothing-burger Wonka had just served them seconds prior.
It's Charlie's innocence that prevents him from taking advantage of Wonka, even when it would benefit his family. Charlie is a good boy *because* of his innocence in this story. He's not tainted by materialism, or cynicism, or greed. His life situation is such that he doesn't really have the opportunity to even experience them. Joe is a cynical old man who understands how harsh the world really is for the average person. His innocence long since snuffed out, his body aching, his spirit diminished. That is, until his grandson walks in with the modern day equivalent of winning a $1 billion lottery jackpot. If you looked at Charlie returning the gobstopper from the same perspective, can you really say it's the morally correct decision to continue to allow your family to wallow in poverty to protect the business interests of a wealthy demigod who swayed you in with promises of grandiosity only to rip it from you? Charlie is a pure of heart protagonist in the '71 film. We're meant to read him that way. If we were to read the story in the most cynical tone possible, why wasn't Charlie mugged by the crowd of people scrambling to take his ticket for themselves instead of cheering him on? We know from cutaways people are literally willing to kidnap and hold others ransom over the *chance* at these tickets. Why would Charlie still decide to go to the factory if he knew the ticket was worth a fortune to someone else and he need only sell it?
Wish fulfillment. The surface plot of the story is wish fulfillment. Charlie is the bestest good boy because he's untainted by the world so his good deeds are rewarded from the most unlikely of places. Grandpa Joe felt more real to me than anything in the Burton remake. Even his childish "and me?!!?" during their ride in the glass elevator. You can choose to read that as greed and self-interest, or his childish whimsy and innocence being reignited due to the fantastical circumstances.
Wonka is essentially a god, who can create anything, do anything he wants regardless of how society works, and judges who shall be saved and who shall be damned. And it's presented as a good thing because he's benevolent. But it's made possible because he's very, very rich.
Yeah. He's sort of a hypothetical good rich person. Anyway though, the only reason he's rich in the first place is to justify the book taking place in a huge, nearly magical candy factory. Him being godlike is a logical progression of that idea (ie, candy factory so huge it functions as its own ecosystem with its own citizens, therefore, the factory's owner is basically like the place's god). The bad kids and Charlie leave the normal world and enter that god's domain, where those who live in excess are punished and those who live in poverty are rewarded.
A point of the book is that it's removed from reality, especially once Charlie actually goes to the factory. I guess it depends on how much we can suspend our disbelief when we know how real-world rich people actually act.
Here's my take (take it with a grain of salt, as I've only ever seen the Burton-Version of the Story, also a long time ago) BUT:
Because Joe is the character you're supposed to like, it is funny and unexpected to paint him as a bad guy buy pointing out his obvious flaws.
Wonka on the other hand is obviously at least questionable in what he does. Pointing something like that out is less surprising making for fewer people to reconsider their belief in a funny way and thinking "Yeah, now that you say it, you're actually right. I've never thought of that before".
Either way, the message you painted with this video is very true and important in my opinion. This is just another possible way to look at the question as to why Grandpa Joe as a bad guy took of as a Joke while Wonka was rarely joked about in that way. Because it's just more obvious...
I think this take on Wonka applies quite a bit to the 71 version too. There's this air of deceitfulness and untrustworthiness to Wonka's character, which is evident from the moment he introduces himself. Gene Wilder himself suggested that Wonka be introduced walking with a cane, only to let go of it and do a somersault, showing off his energy and agility, which shows right away to the audience and the characters that Wonka isn't what he seems, and you can't fully trust him
I watched this movie before the Internet even took off, and I can promise you, we all thought Grandpa Joe sucked long before meme culture. I wasn't seeing him as the lazy poor; I was seeing him as the lazy relative.
Isn’t Joe like super old? I always felt those memes were odd. Like, imagine asking your retired grandfather to unretire and get back to work.
I always saw it as commentary on how poverty exists and puts pressure on people to provide for their parents and children simultaneously.
@@FraserSouris Yeah I don't understand this at all - "Why aren't Charlie Bucket's elderly and infirm grandparents clearly well into retirement age up and working? " Uh... because they're elderly, infirm, and retired?
@Chandler Burse He isn't able to help around the house, he's bedridden! If you're referring to him getting up and dancing, and later being able to walk around, after the golden ticket, that's all part of the fantasy. It's to show how magical the golden ticket is.
I can confirm from experience that disabled people are called lazy ALL THE TIME. I can't work; i spend 90% of my time lying down because sitting causes excruciating pain (and walking more than about 50 feet means falling down, hence the wheelchair, because my right leg hates me)
The meds I'm on mess with my thinking, and i sleep a LOT (in 1 hour increments...)
What the hell COULD i do?
Plus, SSDI? I PAID for that! I got my first job at 16, and worked CONSTANTLY until i was 32 and just COULD NOT. I often had TWO jobs (sometimes 3, and for a very hazy 6 months, had 4)
But I'm "lazy". The pain, the inability, none of it matters.
So was my grandmother, at 94 and RETIRED on a pension she'd also paid for.
Just. HATE. This whole meme. Grandpa Joe was fricken *96 years old*. We actually generally expect people, if they aren't DEAD, to be RETIRED at that age!
I get this, but at the same time i could understand someone thinking i am faking if i go from being in a wheelchair to dancing around in just 5 minutes. (I too depend on a wheelchair and have trouble sitting up for long periods of time.)
I think society's obsession with proving disabled ppl are fakers is rooted in fear. They do not want to believe that they too could be rendered helpless through no fault of their own. They would rather believe that as long as they are "good" nothing bad will happen, and if something bad happens to someone they deserve it.
Its an incredibly childish and simplistic view that is deeply ingrained in most people. It allows ppl to not have to feel uncomfortable feelings, which makes it hard to let go of.
I got hit by a DUI driver at 29... I'm 41 now and everytime I sign up for disability they've never ever argued medical just age...
They amazingly say during hearing "No jobs for this person." Yet the judge from Arkansas that was only on monitor has amazingly found a job code, but evidently it is super secret and nobody can even find this job code or a description.
So then I was pushed to sue the state or start over again... I search for an attorney to sue the state looking in and out of state, and all said you'd need to pay "X" to even get started... So, my poor ass could only restart and be told 4 more times the same things again.
I made a person stop using this meme because I'm disabled.
"Yeah I can dance and then I'm done after two minutes. So I can express how happy I am for you but that's no strength for doing laundry or cooking so uh who's selfish now?"
She's never brought up Grandpa Joe ever again. Subsequently she's also just shut up and done her research on disability more so uh... Ableism thy name is Grandpa Joe memes.
it is sad how common this is. I know a dude that bully someone who had back problems to get work just so the person can throw out their back. They didn't even understand they did something wrong. All they saw was a person who wasn't working.
@@johnnyguillotine1673 i hate to say this - beg borrow or STEAL to get that lawyer. It really does make the difference.
I was actually declared 100% disabled back when i was 22.i had SEVERE PTSD (i mean, i still have, I've just done 20 years of work, so it's only "moderate" now) as in, i PUNCHED my manager because she came up behind me a tapped my shoulder, freaking me the fuck out. I was denied over and over, and gave up after a while, just got jobs where i wouldn't be put in those situations.
When the physical disability happened, i once again restarted the process, hoping because it WAS physical, it'd be easier. Nope, same bullshit, every. Fucking. Time. I owned 15 year old car (that didn't work)? Denied. I didn't have an Rx for the *specific* wheelchair i was in? Denied. I was in pain management? Denied (okay, that one was new, and still confuses me)
I got a lawyer, a 100 fee up front (he took 1/4 my eventual "lump sum") and i got SSDI *in less than 6 months*
But I'd been having surgeries and was bed ridden otherwise for the prior almost 7 years, so i got THE MINIMUM. Still. I got Medicare with it, so worth it.
I think it's BUILT IN anymore, that one must MUST *MUST* have a lawyer. Problem is, if you have ANY assets, you can't apply (in theory you can own 1 house and 1 car, but those are AUTO REJECTS. You have to appeal them *even though Social Security Admin explicitly says you may own 1 of each*. "Luckily", I'd lost my house. I cashed out my 401k to live on - i took a HUGE loss - and drained my savings and had to have effectively NOTHING to actually apply, when i became physically disabled.) How the fuck one is supposed to get a lawyer, when one ALREADY has zero money/ assets JUST TO APPLY...i was about to try giving plasma, when a friend offered to pay. I gave that friend 20 books as collateral, because, well... books are sacred to me, i didn't want to just take the money. Sigh.
It's awful and heartless and is DESIGNED to be difficult (Blake Congress, dipping into the well of the SSA to pay for things, so despite running with EXTRA most years, it's completely broke) oh, and Reagan for pushing for Congress to be ALLOWED to do that...
In short, I'm sorry, I've been there, it sucks more than VACUUM... but, get a lawyer however you can.
Good luck😭
Really good essay. The '71 movie is good because of Gene Wilder, but I always liked the Burton version for being closer to the book. I just didn't care for Johnny Depp's Michael Jackson take on Wonka, and I wish there was a way to have that whimsical and arrogant version in the film instead. Wonka's confidence and success is what's admired, not so much his shady practices- which is a 1-to-1 comparison for how we treat popular businessmen. It was this close
Still, the fact remains that Charlie's only character flaw in the entire movie was that he listened to Grandpa Joe
As children, these books are just fuel for playful imagination. But as adults, we analyze the author's intent and fit it into our world views and politics.
"Willy Wonka" is about Willy Wonka, Wilder literally wouldn't have had it any other way. It's a little different story, different beats, different messages, great stuff in its own right. Even as a kid I felt there was something off about Joe and that I wouldn't have liked him very much as my own grandpa. But I _was_ poor, and I _did_ know people like him. So it's good to point out what to think critically about...but that doesn't mean Joe's portrayal is 100% wrong. Also, Wilder _very_ much did not want adults to feel comfortable with Wonka himself. Methinks he and the director went about as far with their satire of capitalism as one could in 70s filmmaking. Couldn't tell you how Dahl felt about that, Dahl was a strange and unpleasant creature anyway.
Dahl hated it and would stand outside theaters asking people to not see it.
You know how the ending is jarring? They were going to make it a series. The Amazing Glass Elevator would have been the second movie. When Dahl realized his vision would not go through as planned, he refused to sign off on the second book... So you have that jarring ending instead.
Dahl notoriously hated every movie of his books that he lived to see, though.
Honestly the scenes at the beginning of the ‘71 version are why I still love watching it. (Like the one where the guy tries to make the machine that can predict where the tickets are.) 😆
As I’ve grown older, I’ve seen how this movie is somewhat of a commentary on society at large with the wealthy and privileged being the ones who are able to find the tickets because of their ability to purchase so much more of the bars than everyone else. The fact that Charlie even gets the ticket is a miracle and only happens because he’s able to buy one when nobody thinks there are tickets left to find.
There’s also something to be said about how *none* of the winners of the golden tickets are non-white.
Burton's film is underrated. The only reason the first film adaption is remembered fondly is because of Gene Wilder's phenomenal performance. There. I said it.
This
Say it again cause it's true. Gene Wilder is the only thing the movie has going for it. And he's amazing. He's great.
His presence saves the film, the script, and drags the other actors who are stuck with awful lines to move forward. Without him, the movie entirely falls apart. The music isn't even that great... And shots fired, he's not the greatest singer (good not great) so most songs don't stick unless covered years later by other artists.
We're worse off without Gene Wilder in the world but we still have his work.
I don't tell people to see the '71 anymore. Just go see the newer one unless you're studying Wilder's work/you're a fan of his work. Don't bother.
Kinda weird how a poor kid inherits a business model that strives from enslaving a bunch of foreign workers.
I saw both versions. Each has their strong points. The reason the 1971 version works is because it’s a satire and because of the memorable music. The reason the newer version is unique and special is because of Johnny Depp and of course Tim Burton. Yet there’s a “magic and optimism” that the 1971 version has because of the humor and the performance of the cast, particularly Gene Wilder. Also, much of that “magic” is because the movie reflects some of the upbeat elements of the 1960s. The early 1970’s were the zenith of the ‘60s and the post-WWII era. As the 1970’s moved along, movies like Willy Wonka and a few Disney movies marked the end of truly G rating movies for General Audiences (meaning appropriate for all ages, and prime time quality). As the ‘70s progressed wholesome entertainment in movies began to fade away. Especially that upbeat “magic” element.
Also, unlike the movie, the book version of Charlie didn't really care if he got the golden ticket or not. I never liked that the original film made Charlie out to be this victim and that, if you're good and nice enough, you'll get whatever you want in life.
Charlie wa never a victim, that’s rubbish.
the original film was making a point that Charlie is such a good and caring person but that because of his situation with his mother and grandparents etc that he is losing his childhood trying to support them
My favorite line from the film on that subject comes from grandpa joe talking to the others
“a little boy needs to have something to dream about, to hope for”
it’s not about being nice or good enough to be rewarded.
charlie is a good person, and a thoughtful person, and that’s what wins out in the end.
Charlie didn’t expect to get the candy, and he wasn’t going to take the 10k from slugworth, he gave the candy back because it was the right thing to do
and that’s what proves to wonka charlie is the most honest and best person to succeed him.
@@mckenzie.latham91 yup exactly, I think the problem with "adult" analysis of Charlie and the chocolate factory is that since we are older we are more cynical. When I was a kid, I just was like Charlie was good and did the right things and was rewarded for it. He wasn't selfish like the other kids, who all succumbed to their vices. But yes Charlie should have committed corporate espionage because capitalism is bad 🙄
Also, one of favorite scenes is when Charlie is in school and they learn about percentages and the assumption is that everyone has bought 100s of Wonka bars and everyone is shocked and look down on Charlie for only buying 2. He wants the golden ticket more than anyone else, but I think less because of greed and more to fit in. If you want to critique conspicuous consumption you can, but a kid isn't thinking in terms like that. Although a modern version is how some kids would mock others for not having premium skins in fortnite.
Okay... so...
I don't know how old Joe is in the books, but the actor was 64 while working on the film.
While the remake, the actor was over 75.
So... let me be clear... there are people who say the elderly should work? Or else they're just lazy?
In the books the grandparents are supposed to be in their 80s/90s and are too malnourished to really get out of bed. It makes sense to have younger actors playing them and the chocolate factory giving Joe a bit of mental strength to get up.
Someone in the comments section is also suggesting that Grandpa Joe should take care of himself and his wife instead of "being a burden" on his daughter. Says a lot about what people think of the elderly.
It’s not that they should work but at least help around the house. If they lived in that hard of poverty, everyone in the household needs to help provide. One thing about the Burton version is that in the end while the dad is fixing the roof, Joe is on the group just mildly sweeping and helping. Grandpa Joe is one of the few who has their mind together and is physically capable to move around. If he is that capable, he should at least help do light cleaning, help with the cooking or help feed the other elderly in the house instead of sitting back and letting the rest of the busy family do all the work.
@@gridlock1637 The Burton version takes time to show you just how infirm they are instead of the '71 version going "LOL LOOKIT THESE OLD PEOPLE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THEY DIE!" Burton's version shows they have names. Personalities. Character.
...Pretty sure we're just waking up to realize the Burton version is just the better version sans Gene Wilder who actually thought about his character and "hey this guy is deceptive and I should put thought into every action I do".
never thought i'd say this... but i kinda want to watch the burton version again. Your video brought up a few interesting points and i might have to give it another chance... i mean its been 16 years since i saw it last lol
The oompa loompa songs are fire in Burton's version. It is worth You Tubing those alone if you don't get around to watching the whole film.
Apart from Johnny Depp as Wonka, I actually really liked Burton’s version.
I adore the ‘71 version, don’t get me wrong. But there’s a sort of awkward dark tone that Dahl was known for that I think was translated pitch perfectly by Burton. Also fun fact the Oompa Loompa songs took the lyrics verbatim from the book. I also think that that version Grandpa Joe was simply adorable lol
Charlie was a bit boring, but in fairness he’s kind of like that in the book from memory
@@someonerandom8552 omg someone who doesnt hate the burton version of willy wonka??? WHERE ARE YOU PEOPLE
It's the superior film. Yes the other one is cheerful and sunny and cutesy but, and hear me out... Charlie and the Chocolate Family is not a story about that. It's about poverty, holding onto hope, and family. Gene Wilder is, in my opinion, the better Wonka. But Burton's film has better writing, the attention to detail, and the understanding of why Dahl wrote what he did.
There is a common ablest myth that goes "o he could x, so why not xy. he just faking" and ignores that just because a person can do something in sprints does not mean they could keep up that level of activity 40 hours a week, every week, forever.
“If you aren’t greedy, you will go far.”
Willy: “Huh, what was that boys?”
I think we're inclined to root for Wonka because a) it's Gene Wilder, of course, and b) the Golden Ticket winners besides Charlie are all absolute jerks, and Wonka is the Trickster who serves 'em up a heapin' hot plate of Karma.
"Well, he uses slave labor? Yeah, let's not sugarcoat it." Missed opportunity. XD
You had me up until the very end if I’m being honest. You’re thesis ended up being “We shouldn’t criticize Grandpa Joe because he’s a silly character in an absurd comedy. Instead let’s criticize this other silly character in this absurd comedy”. Why do we need to make a villain out of a movie that intentionally has no villain? You explained why we shouldn’t place this cynical critical logic on a character, then unironically did it with another character.
Except... Wilder intended Willy Wonka to not be trusted. You are supposed to watch the movie knowing that Wonka cannot be trusted. He is deceiving you. It's a genius piece of work and good acting. If an actor tells you "please view this as this way for maximum enjoyment" and you go "well you can't tell me what to do, I'll watch it like your serial killer is a big ol teddy bear" then... okay you're going to enjoy it less. Enjoy it less.
@@jamie1602 Just because Willy Wonka is not to be trusted, that doesn't mean he is the villain. Take Slugworth for example. The movie basically holds a giant neon sign up saying "DON'T TRUST THIS MAN" but at the end it turns out he's a nice dude. At the end of the film when Wonka is giving the Factory to Charlie, we aren't meant to see that as a nefarious plot for child labor, we're supposed to see it as a whimsical gift for Charlie proving himself to be worthy.
This is the thing about Just Write's newer stuff. I don't mind politics getting into stories, it's necessary and inevitable, but in this case, it feels like they're getting in the way of good analysis.
I would like to point out that Wonka stipulating that Charlie becoming 'owner' of the factory as long as he runs it as Wonka wants, is 1) not true ownership and 2) is a lot like a tycoon giving their CEO position to someone while 'stepping back' to sit on the board of directors for the same company and manipulate it from afar so as to keep their hands clean and put forth less effort while still getting paid to basically sit in a meeting 1-2 times a year.
It’s to be safe from all the osha violations
I love the Tim Burton version because of how faithful it is to the book. My elementary school library had every Roald Dahl book so they were my childhood. The only parts of the movie I don't care for were the stuff not in the book. Like the dentist stuff
Suppose Grandpa Joe actually wasn't able to go with Charlie. Who would have? Would one seriously suggest Mrs. Bucket leave three bed-ridden disabled elderly people alone for an unknown number of hours, and/or miss out on a day's pay?
To me, if Grandpa Joe couldn't go on the trip, Charlie couldn't have gone either. And we wouldn't have a movie.
No, I don't hate Grandpa Joe. But he is an idiot for trying the soda.
She leaves them each day anyway, and is one days pay really that bad in the grand scheme of things?
Miss out a day’s pay? Agree that’s bad. Leave the elderly? She already does it every single day…
Mr Bucket could have, I'm pretty sure he's unemployed when Charlie finds the ticket and even offers to go
@@AliciaB. I'm typing about the '71 film, where there isn't a Mr. Bucket.
@@JohnZ117 so the point made in the video still stands : the 'evilness' of grandpa joe has a lot to do with the fact that his character and the story in general, as portrayed in the '71 film, deviate quite a bit from the source material
12:00 ahhh such a missed opportunity
These are just movies. And deeezz are just memes. Annndd, THIS is Just Write. Sorry.... Moving on
Giving the factory to Charlie sounds like a tax avoidance trick
I genuinely thank you for spending several minutes talking about the 2005 version and how good it is, because I adore with all my heart and it deserves more attention.
I *try* not to overthink memes but ... Definitely still doing that. Also, worth mentioning .. is that invisible Illnesses are still stigmatized horribly. Just because you have the energy to sing and dance around for 10 minutes doesn't mean you have the energy to work 40 hours a week. And people don't want to acknowledge that entirely too often.
I remember hating the Burton remake when I was younger SPECIFICALLY for its character assassination of Wonka... and then never thought about it again. You've made me reconsider this for the first time in nearly 20 years (wow, I'm old) and now I'm almost intrigued to rewatch it.
One of the bits about the 71 movie is that Quaker Oats had wanted to make Wonka brand chocolate bars. They financed the movie with a plan to sell Wonka bars in stores upon the movies release. Which explains a few decisions, like how people were so absurdly obsessed with chocolate in the film, as much of it was just commercials for the product. That could even explain why Charlie asks for just a Wonka Bar instead of Chocolate Scrumdiddlyumptious or whatever in the 71 film. The grand irony is, Quaker Oat’s Wonka Bars ended up selling very little, as they had to recall the entire stock do to manufacturing errors.
Aside from Grandpa Joe being able to get up the bed the entire time I don’t dislike him. That whole bed thing was from the book anyway so can’t complain the filmmakers for putting that there.
FINALLY SOMEONE MADE THIS VIDEO 10/10
This just goes to show how audiences can get sucked into the projected "awe" of a character--enough so to be distracted from that character's unsavory deeds.....
This seems a very timely video.
Willy Wonka is pretty much God in the Wonkaverse so naturally he's callous and capricious.
One of my Pathfinder characters is a Bard based largely off of Wonka's character.
His alignment? Lawful Evil.
Thank you for making this just because a person is rich doesn’t mean they’re not a parasite.
Don't forget grandpa Joe also somehow sneaks out to buy Wonka bars for Charlie. It'd have to be during day when the stores are open so I can just see him sneaking around like Jeez I hope I don't run into Charlie. Btw, do the four of them just shit and piss the bed? That poor mom.
Bedpans. Presumably
@@janusznasiruddin9380 come here Charlie I got a chocolate ticket for you
@@janusznasiruddin9380 recently rewatched. Yes, there are visible bedpans on and near the bed. Horrifying.
@@TylersTrying I know you don't mean anything bad but as someone who cared for an elderly parent who became incontinent, it's not horrifying. It's gross, sure. Not horrifying. When you love someone, you manage it.
Burton's movie is actually pretty underrated. It's messy, like most of his movies, but I like how off-beat it is, and how it's pretty much a late capitalism nightmare.
which is why it fails
the whole point dhal wrote of the factory was because of the child like whimsy and experience it was for a child to see inside a chocolate factory that was itself unique and magnificent.
it’s not supposed to be a critique of capitalism, its supposed to be a morality story about what makes good kids and bad kids and how to not lose that childlike wonder.
@@mckenzie.latham91 It's a different approach, I like it for what it is. I don't think it's intended exactly as a critique of capitalism, but there's definitely a malaise present, and I find it intriguing. An adaptation doesn't have to be faithful to be good.
what's really interesting is that it has virtually nothing to do with the form of ownership of production. this could have happened in a completely fantasy setting, in the USSR, or whatever.
the problem is universal in economics. the local economy displays the classic "resource curse" (just like with old "company towns", or when nowadays Amazon, Walmart, or the governments shows up [eg. with a prison] and initially offers great wages, thus pushing out the competition).
if a community becomes too dependent on one form of economic activity then any exogenous shock (bad weather destroys the crops, no one wants to buy whatever they are selling as it happened with the coal and rust belt, or the natural resource source simply gets exhausted) will wreak havoc on that community.
*of course* if all the profits of the local economy stay there (because it's a worker owned coop for example), then they might have more "savings" to better handle this shock. but without planning and foresight it doesn't matter. (because spending the profit on the right thing is a coordination problem, politics, and that's the hard part. in a capitalist setting the community uses taxes to provide this safety net against such shocks, but if the politics is bad and the unemployment system is inadequately funded ... just as in a socialist economy, if too much of the economic surplus is spent on crazy projects instead of increasing the efficiency of the economy ... then you get things like the "famous" enterprise of cultivating subtropical plants in the USSR)
As someone who only ever watched Burton's version I was so confused people were hating on the grandfather.
It's really weird to leave ableism out of this conversation. Grandpa Joe isn't just hates for being poor, he's hated for "pretending" to be disabled.
If you are too disabled to work, you are not only a worthless leech if you're poor, but a drag on society and on abled people. Unless it's visibly obvious, you WILL be accused of faking a physical illness. One of the reasons "calling out" malingering is so tantalising is because you get to invade disabled people's privacy while skirting around the guilt you would usually feel about bullying oppressed people, even claiming you're fighting FOR us.
Fakers are offensive to the population mostly because they get to reap the supposed benefits of being disabled without having to suffer. Anyone who isn't working, no matter the reason, must suffer, because otherwise you'd have to face the horrible reality that labourers suffering is largely due to artificial hierarchy.
By the way, Joe haters (Jaters) often use his sudden improvement as proof he was faking. This isn't supported by the movie - as you point out, he's portrayed sympathetically and the recovery as being miraculous. However, in addition to that, it is actually true that an individual can be bedridden and recover significantly like this almost instantaneously. It is very similar (perhaps not unintentionally) to a depiction of Functional Neurological Disorder - a chronic illness where the patient experiences pain, fatigue, memory issues or other symptoms due to brain dysfunction rather than any physical cause. It's very common, especially in older people, and recovery is highly dependent on whether the patient is able to believe they CAN get better. Being trapped in poverty due to unemployment with your closest companions being three other elderly people who are bedbound due to age-related causes is a recipe for FND. Medical literature notes how fast improvement can be just by being diagnosed, literally instantly improving a great deal for some patients.
Now, even in a quick FND recovery - unlikely, considering how long it would have been present - in real life, anyone spending 16 hours a day in bed would have atrophied muscles, even if we imagined he was up and about when everyone was asleep. There's no way he was abled at that point, even if it was self-inflicted, so it has to be exaggerated either way. It makes more sense that his disability was functional and the hope he experienced was enough to start his recovery, and since he believed he had instantly recovered, he just kinda did.
Grandpa Joe is just a bit of an are because he's a judgey dude who steals stuff.
Lmao I totally forgot about the first half of the ‘71 version and how weird it is
The 2005 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory film was one of my favorite childhood films until a few years ago when it just sort of crept to the corners of my mind to stay as a bad remake I only thought was good because I was a kid at the time, all because of the internet. Don't listen to stupid internet people talk about what is good and what is bad. Decide for yourselves! Use differing critical opinions to inform what you should give a chance rather than what you should ignore based on what you want from your movies! It was a genuine joy to hear someone else praise my own little childhood treasure for two minutes, even secondarily. So many films out there are called bad and are denied any audience, even the audience that would love the film despite its problems. Here's hoping we all find our perfect niche films, and other works of media, for that matter.
Other people criticizing something you love doesn't mean you can't love it. Your comment just baffles me.
@@purplespectre Nah that's not what I'm saying at all, I'm just saying that people should try shit that has problems if they think they might like it.
Should I be grateful that I'd never heard of this "Lazy Grandpa Joe" meme until now?
Never saw the first movie, only the newer one and i absolutely loved all of it.
Didn‘t even know about the Grandpa Joe meme and i‘m kinda happy about it, because in the new movie he‘s really sweet and you‘re so happy for him when he becomes so hyped and encouraged again after the factory visit. 🥰
Not to mention, Wonka was playing the white savior card with the whole “ I saved these Oompa Loompa people from beasts that would eat them “
and even IF he saved them, thats no excuse for enslaving them for the rest of their lives
@@happytofu5 right, exactly. The slavery undertones naturally flew under my radar as a kid but the more I think about it now, the book and these movie adaptations have the slavery undertones paired with the white savior wonka to cover it up and I’m not okay with it because the fact that wonka excuses it by talking about how he rescued them from a dangerous environment is NOT okay
you didn't address all of the other reasons Granpa Joe receives hate.. like encouraging Charlie to disregard the rules in Wonka's factory. And besides, in the system Granpa Joe is apart of, whether you agree with its politics or not, the family must be attended to financially. I think everyone in the original Wonka movie is pretty crappy. They're all crappy people.
The "burden on his loved ones" is far more damning than the accusation of laziness.
Before central heating, which tended to arrive much later in urban Britain than in the U.S.,people who couldn't work or couldn't find work would tend to stay in bed, the warmest place in the flat, especially when they couldn't afford coal or much.
As for the Oompa-Loompas, "Futurama" (for its equivalent) had the best line in the flat declaration: 'They think they have a good union but they donʼt.'.
Seize the means of production, redistribute chocolate
The factory should be collectively owned by The Oompa - Loompas.
I'm not sure why Willy Wonja needed to look for an outsider unless he thought new ideas were needed and didn't credit the OLs with any originality.
I knew where you were going as soon as you framed the hate towards Grandpa Joe the way you did and suggested there was someone else in the film to be angry with and I wholeheartedly agree.
it’s all a load of bullshit, the grandpa joe hate and the willy wonka hate
Dhal did not write the book to promote billionaires, he didn’t write it to critique capitalism
he wrote a genuine morality story about not losing childlike wonder and how children can be corrupted or tempted from that ideal by the failures of their parents and or their flaws
bad habits that never were curtailed like always chewing gum
spoiling children into greedy brats
Not putting boundaries and values in kids and letting the tv babysit for you
Not making sure your kids ar ehelahtl and not gluttons etc. etc.
I think alot of people don't realize the gold ticket grandpa joe is referring to is a metaphorical one and not Charlie's. Hes basically saying this is opportunity for him to do something again because a man his age cant do any labor so if they win he at least contributed to help the family.
It's so strange to me that anyone thought that, I think even as a kid I understood that grandpa joe regaining the ability to walk was part of showing just how alluring (and possibly magical) the chocolate was. also apparently I don't remember the burton version at all because I didn't even remember that the oompa loompas weren't orange in that version I need to rewatch that one because it sounds like it was very different from the classic one
Let’s not forget one thing about the Oompa Loompas in the 2005 movie: they CONSENTED to having Wonka take them to the factory. He told the tour group that because they loved cocoa beans so much, he offered their leader to let the tribe work in the safety of the factory in exchange for their beloved beans. I thought that it was a nice addition that made Wonka appear to view them as people rather than a means to increase profit.
In the 71 version Wilder’s Wonka literally states that the oompa loompas lived in constant fear from the various predators that were gobbling them up daily
and when he offered them a safe haven in his factory they came to live with him.
and what’s better is in the 71 version it is implied that the oompa loompas always were the factory workers and always worked at the factory, and very few humans ever set foot in there which built the mystery and success of the company
whereas in the depp version he fires all of the human workers including grandpa joe
There are a couple of editing mistakes with green flashes
That last line though... Amen brother.
The point isn't looking at these very old people and saying "boy they sure are lazy...except when it comes to chocolate!" What decisions did they make through their entire lives that led them to this incredibly impoverished position? So 4 elderly people have NOTHING? Not a scrap? No shred of any contribution from their entire lives? That's the real tragedy. They wasted their lives.
I personally like thinking of Joe as a hidden antagonist in the first film. It makes it much more interesting on multiple levels.
I kind of love the absurdist comedy of the first half of this movie, it's genuinely brilliant to watch each time. Aside from that and Gene Wilder's amazing performance though, I think it's basically just nostalgia holding the movie up.
I'm not a huge fan of same aspects of the Burton one, but it is the superior movie overall.
Its the more expensive movie, but nothing about it really stands out as better from a writing and acting pov.
Just saw the Broadway show on tour and lemme tell you, they find a medium that works. Its portrayed that the mom is gonna go with charlie but cant take off work so he can’t go. So grandpa joe says he can and forces himself to stand and walk. And it becomes a weakness for them as they tour the factory. Also Joe calls out wonka every 2 seconds about the whole child endangerment/murder thing
The last part of the video is pretty much the exact argument I always argued for why i veiw Wonka as the villain. The whole Wonka replacing paid labor with slave labor (I don't care how the story frames it, it's still slave labor) and from what I remember, Wonka strait up asks Charlie to strait up abandon his family so he can inherit the factory. Abandon his family who slave and sacrificed so much for him to have a good life for Wonka who enslaved hundreds and abandoned thousands (there's no way a company of his size, firing all its employees didn't have a crippling effect on the economy and working class).