It seems that throughout the last couple of years we’ve been up to our eyeballs in Roald Dahl adaptations, not unlike Augustus Gloop in the chocolate river—although our experience hasn’t always been quite as sweet.
From the 2020 adaptation of The Witches to a more recent trend of Dahl biopics (such as last year’s To Olivia and the more family-friendly Roald & Beatrix: The Tail of the Curious Mouse) there have been hits and misses. These have usually strayed further towards misses in recent years. One complaint about some of these adaptations, especially the remakes, is that they seem watered-down, as though there is nothing that needs to be said that hasn’t already been within the books or original adaptations. On the flip side, some fans dislike the inevitable sacrifice of detail made when adapting Roald Dahl’s books for the big screen.
With this in mind, it’s little wonder that there are already Dahl lovers bemoaning the announcement of another Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptation, this time in the hands of Taika Waititi. This is on top of the already announced prequel film Wonka, directed by Paddington‘s Paul King and starring Timothée Chalamet. The past few years of film and TV haven’t given fans of the late author’s books much reason to be excited about a new adaptation on the horizon, especially a story that has already been adapted for the big screen twice. It’s easy to accuse filmmakers of beating a dead horse. Indeed, this may be the case, but there is also cause for optimism.
Generations of children have lapped up the incredible story of Charlie Bucket’s date with destiny in the chocolate factory. They have also been left in awe first at Mel Stuart’s charming Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971), and then Tim Burton’s trippy Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005). This new project, announced in 2020 and set to be adapted for Netflix, is set to be something else entirely.
For starters, it’s going to be animated rather than live action, which is something of a relief. You can make a strong argument that audiences experiencing a considerable amount of fatigue surrounding live action adaptations following the never-ending drudgery of more and more Disney remakes (the most recently announced of these is The Aristocats—as if we haven’t already seen just how wrong things can go when trying to make a live action adaptation of a story about singing cats). An animated version may be more reminiscent of the beloved Quentin Blake illustrations which have accompanied many of Dahl’s books.
In addition, this is supposed to be a series —two, at that, including an Oompa-Loompa-focused spin-off—as opposed to a film. Surely the biggest problem with adaptations is the failed attempt to squash a novel’s worth of content into a feature-length runtime, as demonstrated when comparing A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004) with the more recent Netflix series based on the same material. As long as the plot isn’t stretched too thin, a series could give the adaptation the room it needs to grow.
Finally, you have Waititi at the helm. The Oscar-winning filmmaker has agreed to be the writer, director and executive producer of both series. With numerous TV and movie successes under his belt, this should fill you with more confidence than any other choice imaginable. Waititi has a tendency to gravitate towards underdog characters; he loves nothing more than an unsuspecting hero, a somewhat ordinary character down on their luck. His past work can speak for this. JoJo Rabbit, Hunt For The Wilderpeople, Boy—all of them favour this kind of protagonist. What We Do In The Shadows, now filming its fourth season, is based on a film of the same name worked on by Waititi, and its’ heart lies in an ordinary human character who grounds his vampire housemates.
In this respect, Waititi’s imagination and style of storytelling is very often adjacent to Dahl’s. Look at the protagonists of Dahl’s work. many, such as Charlie Bucket, Danny (from Danny, the Champion of the World) and the unnamed protagonist of The Witches are all quintessentially working class and in some cases live in abject poverty. Some, such as Matilda Wormwood and James from James and the The Giant Peach) come from abusive home situations of one kind or another. Sophie from The BFG spends a large portion of her life in an orphanage. Part of the pull of Dahl’s books is that this array of protagonists sends the message that extraordinary and fantastical things can happen to anyone, regardless of background, and this keeps the stories enduring.
In fact, this may be why we see Dahl’s works adapted and re-adapted so many times. His stories still have a strong appeal today, and those who grew up with them want to add their own touch to them. It could also be that filmmakers worry about stories losing relatability over time, and adaptations are an attempt to ensure these stories remain accessible to a modern audience. That being said, books often feel more timeless due to not being visually grounded in a time or place the way that, say, a film we know is made in the 1960s or the 2000s is. While there is reason to be optimistic about these new Dahl adaptations, especially in Waititi’s capable, eccentric and heartfelt hands, you would be forgiven for wondering just how many more cinematic Dahl adaptations the world really needs.
Words by Casey Langton
Support The Indiependent
We’re trying to raise £200 a month to help cover our operational costs. This includes our ‘Writer of the Month’ awards, where we recognise the amazing work produced by our contributor team. If you’ve enjoyed reading our site, we’d really appreciate it if you could donate to The Indiependent. Whether you can give £1 or £10, you’d be making a huge difference to our small team.