My daughter is a new fan of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. While she adores most of the movie (though, like me, has to have the creepy boat ride fast-forwarded through), I have discovered that much of the movie is confusing—maybe not for her, so much, but definitely for me in my older age.
Sure, I never questioned it as a kid, but what is up with the whole shaming kids for loving sweets when the company is, in fact, the sweet maker? Augustus Gloop is chastised for being greedy and “eating as much as an elephant eats,” but it’s the very makers of the candy singing it to him! How is that any different from the makers of tobacco calling their customers stupid for smoking? You could make the same argument with producers of guns or alcohol who maintain that their users need to “be responsible” with their products. This, of course, waives any responsibility that they might have to face as producers.
Though the message might have been to eat in moderation, it seemed to me that not only was Augustus a child and not completely responsible for his behavior, but he also ate what his parents provided him with. If anything, the Oompa Loompas should have been singing about his mother and father (which they mention in passing—though they themselves, of course, are not punished, as he is)—if not about their own sugar-laden products. Did they not just entice the entire world to buy as much chocolate as it could, after all, for a chance to come to the factory in the first place?
And how about the whole idea that Wonka is entrusting his whole factory to some random kid who found a golden ticket after eating a truckload of chocolate? All that’s going to prove is the kid loves candy (with the exception of Mike Teevee, who hates it), not that he or she is a good leader or kind to his or her workers or can even keep the company from falling under. That’s just sheer ridiculousness. But, since it’s for children and it’s magical and fun, that’s one I could let slide.
Then there was the fact that Charlie won at all. He returned the gobstopper; so what? He broke just as many, if not more, rules than the other kids and nearly died doing it. If the Oompa Loompas had a chance to sing about every other kid’s misbehavior, why not sing about Charlie drinking something Wonka specified not to drink? The ending, like the rest of the movie, made no sense—and it wouldn’t matter, since it’s a fun kid film, except for the fact that they introduced the concept of ethics in the first place with their holier than thou musical numbers.
I asked my daughter what she likes about the film and her response was an obvious one, much like my own at her age—it’s funny, she likes the candy, and how the kids turn into tiny versions of themselves or into blueberries. Well, that’s fine. But if she reads more into it—and eventually, like me, she probably will—we’ll probably have to have a conversation about some big discrepancies. And when that happens, I might just make up my own songs to sing.