Talk:Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Transwiki the Quotes section

I'm putting the Quotes section here for someone to transwiki into Wikiquote: -- Chris ^Ccool2ax _contrib. 16:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Quotes

Willy Wonka

• You LOSE!! Good DAY, sir!!
• Invention, my dear friends, is 93% perspiration, 6% electricity, 4% evaporation, and 2% butterscotch ripple. [A reference to Thomas Alva Edison's aphorism.]
• A little nonsense now and then... is relished by the wisest men.
• [softly singing, then shouting, on the famous boat ride] There's no earthly way of knowing which direction we are going. There's no knowing where we're rowing, or which way the river's flowing. Is it raining? is it snowing? is a hurricane a-blowing? Bah! Not a speck of light is showing, so the danger must be growing. Are the fires of hell a-glowing? Is the grisly reaper mowing? YES! The danger must be growing, for the rowers keep on rowing and they're certainly not showing any signs that they are slowing! STOP THE BOAT! [In the documentary, Wilder's co-actors indicated that they were unnerved by his performance in this scene, thinking that perhaps Wilder had lost his mind completely.]
• [singing] There is no life I know to compare with pure imagination. Living there, you'll be free if you truly wish to be.
• [singing] If you want to view paradise, simply look around and view it. Anything you want to, do it. Want to change the world? There's nothing to it.
• If the Good Lord had intended us to walk, he wouldn't have invented roller skates.
• Hurry! We have so much time and so little to do! Wait a minute. Strike that. Reverse it. Thank you.
• We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams.
• Don't forget what happened to the man who got everything he ever wanted. He lived happily ever after.

Taglines

• It's everybody's non-pollutionary, anti-institutionary, pro-confectionery factory of fun!
• It's Scrumdiddlyumptious!
• Enter a world of pure imagination.

Don't forget "Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker". --Grinning Idiot 13:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Giant Geese

"The squirrels of the book are replaced with giant geese in the film. "

• uhh... I don't remember any giant geese in either the book or the film... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.95.21.52 (talk • contribs) October 29, 2006 (UTC)

(Hint) Veruca Salt gets her comeuppance in ... what scene? ;) David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 20:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

The geese sat high above the egg chutes that sent down the bad eggs.Cbsteffen (talk) 03:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)Cbsteffen

Way too much trivia in article

I have removed a great deal of fancruft from this article. Most of this material, and there is more still in the article, is better suited for fan sites, if it can't be found there already. There is no reason to have speculations about who would have played the characters if the ones decided upon hadn't in an encyclopedic article. --Goldrushcavi 04:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

It says in the trivia section that Peter Ostrum (Charlie) turned 14 during filming of the movie. Ostrum was born in 1957; it says elsewhere on the page that the movie was filmed in 1970. Either Ostrum turned 13 or the movie was filmed in 1971 (although 1971 was also the year of release). 02:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge

Regarding deletion for being trivia cruft. I have seen entries which include pop culture references for many important and influential movies and books. However, these details are usually contained in the main article for the work. Perhaps it should be moved into the main article for the movie Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory rather than continue to exist as a standalone article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.23.37 (talk) 00:00, May 7, 2007 Moved by David Spalding from the mergefrom source discussion page.

Keep separate. I thought (due to inexact MERGE tags) that this page was being proposed merging INTO the cultural references page. I retract my comment for the time being.... David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 17:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge. I rarely see a separate "in popular culture" article, usually just a subsection. Although it can be quite extensive, I think we don't need a separate article. Valley2city 02:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• Merge. Notable notes are the only thing that belongs in the main article. A cluttered list of every little mention of Willy Wonka in TV and so on, isn't notable. RobJ1981 05:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Willy wonka 1971.jpg

Image:Willy wonka 1971.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

burping

I would like to suggest to link the definition of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burping to the use of "burping" in this article, as help for non-native english speakers, as even Leo.Org does not know about it... hemmerling (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The Daily Show

Jon Stewart commonly says "I said good day" with or without the "sir." I know that's a quote of Wonka's. But does anyone know if he's specifically referencing this movie? In which case it should be added to the References in other media section. Or is he referencing some other work, or perhaps something that also inspired the Wonka line? --67.188.91.95 (talk) 05:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The line is pretty generic. Fez from That 70s Show uses it in most episodes. If Stewart says it with Wilder's emphasis than I would suppose it is a reference (I've never heard him say it so I have no clue)68.60.111.239 (talk) 20:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Second cut?

A recent showing of the movie on an ABC station leaves out the entire boat ride sequence. Is this a common occurance to show the movie this way, or are they losing their mind at ABC? --Deuxsonic (talk) 01:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the soccer moms are at it again.

Archiving this talk page

Would anyone mind if I set up archiving for this talk page? It could be set to 90 days.--Rockfang (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Question about the boat ride scene

When the show the movie on TV do they cut this part out? I wonder because, the scene is rather frightening for children (and some adults, lol!) and you'd think they'd cut it from tv. Also, would showing a chicken getting it's head cut off get the film a PG-rating if it was made today? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.37.139 (talk) 05:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I watched a little bit of this movie on ABC family and they did not cut it out.--Xasitchaine (talk) 22:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Decent changes reversed

I made a few changes to this page a while back which were perfectly decent: a bit of tidying up and clarification here and there - for instance, pointing out that Wonka was angry when, in his office, he told Charlie and Grandpa Joe that Charlie doesn't get his lifetime chocolate supply any more, and changing the last sentence of the first paragraph to say "Charlie's hopes are dashed when news breaks out that the final ticket has been found by a Paraguayan millionaire" - and absolutely no deletion of any content. Why have some of these changes been reversed? Bluebird207 (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hate to say it, but you really shouldn't get too attached to any changes you make here...there've been a bunch of edits since the last ones you made, I couldn't say why specifically yours were reverted, and if the overall article quality has been improved (I'm not claiming it has) then it doesn't matter in any case. If you feel you can make positive contributions to the article, I say go ahead and put your edits back in. If not, then don't. But I did see a lot of the edits were plot-related, and I'd warn that according to WP:FilmPlot the plot summary here is already bloated. I'd recommend trimming it down, if anything. Doniago (talk) 18:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Dahl's Objections to movie

The article notes that Dahl was not happy with the movie, but does not state what he was unhappy with. Anyone know if he made public statements about what specifically upset him about the film? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.10.215 (talk) 22:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Peter Stuart as Winkelmann

Severely doubt Peter Stuart is the musician this was redirecting to. He only appears to be notable for appearing in a couple of his dad's films (this being one). Any takers? MartinSFSA (talk) 12:13, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler's involvement in production

I read somewhere, a while back, that in pre-production they had to get dwarves from outwith Germany to play the Oompah Loompahs as there simply weren't any German dwarves of the appropriate age in the country, having mostly been euthanised.

If someone could find and cite this I think it would make an interesting addition to the 'Production' section... --78.101.179.31 (talk) 09:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Removal and redirection

Someone deleted the "The Rowing Song" page and redirects it to the page about the movie. Why was this done? This page doesn't mention in detail anything about the actual song.--173.58.145.118 (talk) 21:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I would recommend asking the editor who made the change, as evidenced here. Doniago (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The Rowing Song article had been tagged as unsourced for +1 years, contained no useful encyclopedic information about the actual song, and featured only a list of WP:TRIVIA pop culture references. Same goes for the (I've Got A) Golden Ticket article. Both articles are merely songs part of the soundtrack, which is already content merged into Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory#Soundtrack. Sottolacqua (talk) 15:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Parody or Coincidence?

• In cartoon epsiode of Robotboy Augustus travels the world for the perfect chococlate bar. At ruins of World Greatest Chocolate factory a Willy Wonka-like owner cries out that they dont have the perfect chocolate bar!! Parody of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory or just coincidence? Also-with the exception of Verucca Salt and Violet Beureguard-all the other contest winners are "dropped" from the tour in the order of who won the tickets.
  • Parody for sure. Hyenaste ^(tell) 03:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

"with the exception of Verucca Salt and Violet Beureguard-all the other contest winners are "dropped" from the tour in the order of who won the tickets." So, you mean the other 2? Derekbd (talk) 19:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Musical?

Let's stop the edit warring over whether or not the film is a musical. The current sourcing in favor of it as a musical is IMDb; I recommend a stronger source be provided. Thoughts? Doniago (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

An IMDb page is not by any means a reliable source, so it should not even be used at all. I've removed it and replaced it with a citation needed template for the time being (my edit was not a revert). My problem with the assertion that this is a musical film is that the 2005 film adaptation is not considered as such, even though it contains similar plot-related songs. We need a reliable source indicating the 1971 film as a musical film. — CIS ^(talk | stalk) 15:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

This film is clearly a musical film in every sense of the definition. "Several songs sung by the characters are interwoven into the narrative. The songs are used to advance the plot or develop the film's characters." A reference is not required to classify this film as a musical film, and other similar films (Grease, Moulin Rouge!, etc.) do not contain such a reference. User:CrazyInSane is simply engaging in vandalism and an edit war, which appears to be a long-term pattern for this user.[1] [2] [3]. Sottolacqua (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

This article is not about the 2005 film, so the classification of that wholly separate film as a musical/non-musical has no bearing on the classification for this film. Sottolacqua (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

As a victim of accusations of disruptive editing myself (not that any of them ever stuck), I'm not a fan of the argument that since an editor has warred in the past they are warring in the present, and I don't intend to review CIS's history without stronger evidence that it's pertinent. Frankly based on -this article's- editing history both of you appear to be at fault...this should have been raised here sooner per WP:BRD. As a de facto third party in this discussion, my questions are-

1. Is there reliable sourcing (more reliable than IMDb) to establish this film as a musical? Previously I might have accepted "by definition", but CIS appears to be challenging that argument and their argument deserves a fair hearing. There's also WP:VERIFY to consider.
2. Is there discussion available as to why the 2005 film is not considered a musical? While that may not have bearing on this film's status, the arguments that were made could be relevant to this discussion.

Let's try to keep this civil and leave editors histories out of the discussion please. WP:AGF. Thank you. Doniago (talk) 15:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your comments, Doniago, I appreciate you indicating that my edit history is completely irrelevant to this discussion. I was going to note that myself, but the fact that Sottolacqua even brought that up in this discussion made me not even want to respond to him/her. As for your first point, all mentions I can find of the 1971 film as a "musical" are from non-reliable sources, and some also mention that it could be considered a black comedy film as well, which we should also consider if we want to call it a musical.

To your second point, I was not able to find any discussion at Talk:Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (film) or its archives about the "musical" label. As for why some believe this 1971 film is a musical, I'm not sure. It has roughly the same amount of interwoven songs as the 2005 film, all of which are sung by only one person (or all of the Oompa Loompas together, for both the 1971 and 2005 films), so that does not ring of a "musical" to me. A musical film is when the entire cast engages in song and it is a much larger element of the plot. So until a reliable source can be found for a musical film and/or black comedy status, I don't think we should label it as such. The film's IMDb page does classify "Musical" as one of its genres, but aside from IMDb not being a RS, anyone can submit film information to them and their guidelines for accepting and publishing it are rather lenient. — CIS ^(talk | stalk) 16:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

All of the songs are not performed by one character; (I've Got a) Golden Ticket is performed by both Peter and Grandpa Joe. Songs being performed by more than one person should not be a qualifier used in determining if the film is a musical. Most musical numbers in Funny Girl (film) are performed only by Fanny/Streisand. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

• reverse of DVD package categorizes film as "effervescent musical"
• AMC Filmsite.org Musicals - Dance Films
• Netflix categorized as musical

There are news articles on Yahoo and Examiner.com that review this film as a musical as well. Sottolacqua (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd be hesitant to call Netflix a reliable source, but I think the AMC site probably passes the reliability test; I'd support the inclusion of musical with that as a source. Note - I am -not- a reliable sourcing expert. Doniago (talk) 16:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)