Parent reviews for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

If you don't want your second-grader to be desensitized to obscure, rough "humor" than understand PG is more than a suggestion. Children, at this age, are literal thinkers. Inserting images and statements as a 'no-biggie', can have a negative effect. It doesn't make them wiser, smarter, stronger, it, ultimately makes it harder. Don't rush it; just let them watch it later in life, it's not going anywhere.

in the scene where people buy chocolate bars, there is a moment when the model, whose dress was made of chocolate bars, is shown without the lower part of the dress, only in Underwear and stockings

Johnny Depp did a fantastic job thought he definitely portrayed a very different Wonka here than in the book or the original movie. However I enjoyed it! I always thought Wonka was a bit creepy, in fact the whole story is a bit creepy. But I thought this movie very well made and the cast was perfect

I really like this movie, but am i the only one who noticed a statue in the palace made for the Indian prince? The statue was shown from a side view, and i could very clearly see bare breasts. It's quite a quick scene but was i seeing things? Also for any families who may not be happy with kiss scenes, there are 2 in the start between married couples.

I'm just going to say right off the bat: I much prefer Gene Wilder's version. However, this movie does a fair job at telling the story. The kids have been updated, and each represent a different style of parenting: Violet is taught to be self-centered and ruthless, driven by a desire to beat her perceived competition. Mike is arrogant and raised mostly by technology, etc. It's kind of cool to see these characters, instead of just mostly being annoyed at and tolerating them, like in the old version. I do have a couple criticisms though: Johnny Depp, though amazing, is REALLY cringy in this movie. The dark clothing and over-applied makeup make him look CREEPY. Though I must say, I do like the addition of the flashbacks, I can understand that they might not be suitable for children to watch. Also, Charlie. He is TOO NICE in this version. One thing I loved about the old version is that Charlie acted like a kid. He could be nice and polite, but other times, he could be rude and greedy. But this Charlie acts like a miniature Jesus, never doing anything even remotely wrong. No swearing, no snide comments, nothing! Look, I'm not advocating for the misbehavior of children, but no child acts THAT perfect. It's unrealistic. In terms of appropriateness, it's all pretty tame. One woman shows some cleavage, though the camera never lingers. There's a couple uses of "idiot", "stupid", "loser", one use of "retard" (not speaking of a person, as a joke). One scene showing a woman sipping alcohol, but it's just a few seconds. All in all, a pretty decent family friendly movie!

I think this movie has a lot of lessons to be learned, but they need to be discussed with the children. The movie has a few creepy scenes and in my opionion is not suitable for children under 10. My 8 year old asked me to switch it off after the blueberry.

This version is absolutely awful.

The lower-then-it-should-be rating for this film which caused my daughter some needless anguish is presumably down to the fact that a significant chunk of those leaving their ratings and reviews here are sex, cigarette and drug petrified puritans who are happy to laugh off a scene with a fat foreigner slowly drowning before being jammed stuck and terrified halfway up some ghastly tube (it's ok, he's only going to be "boiled a bit"), because after all there's no heavy petting in this movie or, perish the thought, no glimpse of disgusting nudity and much less - shudder - any display of tobacco. This site is being seriously undermined by obtuse people. And when that affects my daughter, I baulk.

This is the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. They ruined a classic!!!!!