這部《查理和他的巧克力工廠》比蒂姆·波頓的版本早了近35年，同樣改編自奇幻小說家羅爾德·達爾的名著，在這個歡笑與荒誕并存的人間，成人和兒童思維的巨大差異釀就了世事繽紛的奇特。這類故事不僅有著對兒童世界天真無暇的保護欲，更有強調健康家庭教育觀念的意識。如何在金錢帝國物欲橫流的社會依然維護孩子的幻想，是步入成人世界的大人與孩子之間最大的鴻溝。

故事整體沒有多大變化，都是四個深受成人規(guī)則毒害的孩子因難以控制的貪欲遭受懲罰的故事，只有保持誠實善良本性的查理得到了最后的褒獎。在蒂姆波頓的版本中，查理的爺爺是曾經巧克力工廠的員工，既曾經幻想的制造人，因外界的陰謀離開工廠后又返回故地；而威利旺卡更是多了身份的注解，以此解釋他行為乖張的源泉。而在《歡樂糖果屋》中，雖然這種完整版比不上后來者，但一顆童心所相信的事情本身就不是能用任何規(guī)則和理性解釋清楚的事情不是么。

威利旺卡接下來要嚼的這個杯子其實是蠟做的

扮演查理爺爺的演員基本上算是盲人

這些滅火泡沫對皮膚很不好，演員們拍完這段后身上難受了許久

不甚精美的特效給人很深的懷舊感，用其他故事懷念我們熟悉的年代感同樣可以制造新鮮，就像守著的依然是那臺需要拍一拍才好用的電視，有時候并非屏幕越大獲得的快樂就可以成倍翻增。那些簡陋的裝置因為不夠完美而給了人可以模仿的空間：幾張床單、幾個箱子、幾塊木頭，拼接起來就是一個完美的工廠。童年的我們因為全心全意的相信我們所幻想的，所以它們在那時的每一分每一秒都成了真。

作為家庭電影，《歡樂糖果屋》要比《查理和他的巧克力工廠》有更多的歌舞戲份，人們隨時隨地可以唱歌歡笑，繞著簡陋的屋子轉圈就以心滿意足，夢想的實現而讓癱瘓了二十多年的病人站立起來。其實我一直覺得這個故事最有意思的地方在于人們對威利旺卡工廠的向往和憧憬，所有的精華都在尋找那五張金紙里的世人百態(tài)中，不論是三十五年前還是三十五年后。成人雖然向往卻更多的摻雜了個人私欲和名望面子，最后基本上變成了金錢比拼秀；而查理一家簡單的期待才是人人熟悉的情感，撕開包裝前的忐忑和與家人分享的快樂一刻。都說老人和孩子脾性最為相像，已知天命的老人曉得人世間最為可貴的是什么，而未經人事的孩子對任何物質的誘惑不屑一顧，這樣一對尋寶早就得到了上帝的眷顧。

夸張和諷刺或許是能惹成人會心一笑的東西，而尋找細節(jié)上的幽默是孩子的專屬：記者無意中站在了墻上馴鹿角面前為觀眾現場直播；講課顛東倒西的老師搶起巧克力比孩子還瘋；工廠里工作的矮人長著橘色的臉和青檸的頭發(fā)；幸運之神一定會關注最乖巧的孩子；眼前任何事情都不會和危險掛鉤等等。滿足了腹欲后馬上要做的事情不就是分享快樂么，讓更多的人吃到巧克力，而不是讓這樣制造幻想的工廠倒閉。

小孩的世界什么最重要呢？天氣預報不是、政治也不是，最重要的，是童年無限的幻想。

一張零食中獎券是世界上最棒最棒的財寶。

奔向一個糖果零食筑成的世界。

我們在巧克力的河里航船。

吃下泡泡水，在空氣里游泳。

我們飛上天，向下數著像玩具一般的紅屋子。

最后，一個溫柔的聲音，告訴你，你將永遠幸福。

只要保持自由的幻想和希望，你就總是幸福的。

It seems British author Roald Dahl cannot suffer bratty, pettish kids gladly, in his beloved children story, CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY, he has no qualms about dispensing with those gluttonous, insolent, spoilt and/or TV-obsessed whippersnappers and their equally obnoxious parents at short notice, save for Charlie Bucket, the veritably virtuous poor kid who will receive a windfall.

In this film adaptation, directed by the journeyman Mel Stuart, an obligingly spirited Gene Wilder headlines it as Willy Wonka, the wacky, evasive entrepreneur of the chocolate factory, who creates a global brouhaha after announcing that there are five golden tickets hidden in the mass produced Wonka chocolate bars, and whoever discovers it will be granted with a factory tour and a lifetime supply of chocolate. Of course, if you don’t have a sweet tooth, that doesn’t really pique your interest, yet zillions of people are motived and many a comical skit is skewered together, before Charlie (Ostrum) finds his own ticket.

But before that, the film pulls out all the stops to make Charlie’s expected discovery as surprising as possible, not that he is the last one of the five beneficiaries, he must also come in for several letdowns before blissing out when he least expects, and the impression is that the golden ticket can make or break Charlie’s entire household, which includes his widow mother (Sowle, a ringer of Suzanne York), works as a laundress and four bedridden grandparents, among which grandpa Joe (Academy winner Albertson, avuncular and surprisingly fleet-footed) is his favorite, and becomes his chaperone to the much hyped factory tour.

Once Wonka materializes in the entrance of the factory to welcome the lucky ticket-holders, with a handspring gimmick notwithstanding, the movie’s momentum kicks off sizably, what awaits us is a rabbit hole composed of a candy garden, a chocolate river, and a handful of unwieldy contraptions (a psychedelic tunnel, among other things) that are inscribed with its 70s filmmaking hallmarks, including a striking instance of proto-blue screen FX, all enclosed within a vibrant vivarium-scale fantasyland that is the fruition of intensive work of the art production team.

As a musical fantasy set in a Podunk, Stuart’s film also boosts a colorful soundtrack including its dulcet Oscar-nominated score and the introduction of the song The Candy Man, but the sheer exploitation of those nameless dwarf actors as Oompa-Loompas doesn’t sit well with anyone with a sensitive disposition (Tim Burton’s remake has a less grating effect by employing Deep Roy alone and reproducing him through computer wizardry).

If it is galling to see those otherworldly homunculi are deployed only as labor force (I wish at least the actors' paycheck is gracious), for what it is worth, Wonka’s experiment to give decaying human morality another try turns out propitious in the end, and before the film becomes self-consciously cloying, we are quite content to vicariously drift aloft and not give a toss about what has happened to the other four hapless brats, presumably bogged down in a pool of sugary confections.

referential entries: Tim Burton’s CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY (2005, 7.6/10); Victor Fleming’s THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939, 8.2/10).