No wonder Roald Dahl hated the movie

To be perfectly fair it did stick pretty closely to the book and was certainly relatively faithful when comparing it to most novel to film adaptations. The major difference was the whole Slugworth subplot, the fizzing lifting drink scene, the tunnel scene and Wonka freaking out at Charlie at the end.

Whether you like the subplot where Charlie and Grandpa Joe broke the rules or not is fine but I see what the filmmakers were going for: Charlie wasn't perfect, he was conflicted between doing what was moral and what was good for his family but in the end he did do the right thing. In the end that might be the more realistic approach.

Who cares what the creator thinks they shouldn't have sold them or it there rights 1971 film is a classic

I don't get the hate about this move!!! So what it didn't mirror the book? The REMAKE didn't follow the book to a T either! I read the book and nowhere did they have anything about Wonka's daddy issues!! As for the point about them taking out the father, so what? He wasn't really a main character so it didn't take anything away from the story. Both movies have subplots except the 71 versions subplot about Slugworth/Wilkinson and the Fizzy Lifting drinks actually added to the movie and made Charlie the not so perfect child like the book and remake made him to be. He made a mistake just like a normal child would but he had the right heart condition and that's all that mattered to Wonka.

He hated it so much that he gave back all the money he got for it and demanded his name be removed from all the credits for it, and never accepted any of the residuals that came from the movie for decades after it as released.

Just kidding. He bitched about the movie all the way to the bank.

I think this is a case of a movie improving upon a book.

I think Roald Dahl's biggest complaint was that Charlie and Grandpa did something they weren't supposed to in the movie, whereas in the book, they obeyed Mr. Wonka and didn't mess with anything in his factory during the tour. It seems fairer in the film to show that Charlie and his grandpa weren't perfect little angels, and it explains why Mr. Wonka was so upset at the end of the movie towards Charlie.

I'm not sure what else would have made him upset, unless it was all the changes made to the movie. There are some book authors that really hate it when every little detail is changed. The best examples would be the guy who wrote "The Neverending Story," and P.L. Travers. In some ways, they are justified, because their vision of the story has been changed in a way that is humiliating and feels wrong when interpreted on the big screen.

I'm still mystified as to why Gail Carson Levine hasn't sued Miramax for the butcher job they did to her "Ella Enchanted" book.

Dahl wrote the screenplay. He wrote the songs. Actually READ the screenplay and actually read the BOOK. Dahl PUT the fizzy lifting drink into the screenplay (READING IS FUNDAMENTAL). In fact, since we can conclude that Dahl's screenplay which HE WROTE was actually followed, it was just the director that sucked... while Burton's movie has NOTHING in common with the book (that is, if you can actually READ) and completely rewrote all the characters.

Charlie was never "the good guy" he was simply not the rotten kid like everyone else. Charlie did NOT offer to sell his ticket so the family wouldn't starve.

All your complaints are in the screenplay that Dahl himself wrote.

I generally don't like changing stories either. You can say the Johnny Depp one was closer to the book, but what was that crap at the end with his father the dentist (Christopher Walken)?