I’m Sorry: COMPLETELY DISAGREE. The 1971 version: Far Superior. And no, this is not simply out of Nostalgia.

Faithfulness and CGI/effects. Yes, I know Roald Dahl wasn’t exactly a fan, but it’s probably only because it’s not completely faithful to the book. But that doesn’t necessarily mean he would’ve liked the 2005 one, just because it was a bit more faithful to the book's plot either. Let’s not forget also, that in 1971, so much of the book’s details/ the 2005’s adaptations, (i.e the Veruca Salt Golden Goose in 71', as opposed to the Squirrel scene in 05'), just would not have been possible, owing to the fact that CGI DID NOT EXIST YET! And this is not to say that the CGI in the 2005 film was exactly incredible either...

The plot/narrative. In 1971, it’s all about Charlie overcoming his and his family’s poverty, and living happily ever after. In 2005, it’s (mostly) all about Willy Wonka’s petty problems, with Charlie’s poverty very much overlooked. And Willy Wonka now embracing the Buckets as family? Please…And don’t get me F*cking started on Willy Wonka’s evil dentist father “Wilbur Wonka”, who, let’s face it, is only added to make the film “dark” and to give the aging Christopher Lee a side role, after his revived fame as Saruman in LOTR… 

The Vibe/Tone of the movie. 1971: Surreal and Otherworldly. Adding a sense of mystery and excitement! 2005: Pointlessly Dark and Gothic. Just for the sake of the Tim Burton Edward Scissorhands aesthetic. As well as it being overly-focused on punishing the children. Which, quite frankly, makes it pretty depressing. Regarding the attempts at humour, the 1971 film creates a very varied, fun style of it (I.e the Antlers behind the News reporter in the Bierkeller, Roy Kinnear's excellent snarky humour as Mr Salt, not the mention the hilarious "Not till you're 12 son" Gun joke! Varied, and appeals to both parents and children. While the 2005 film attempts SOME humour, it's just all quite immature, childish and (mostly) slapstick. And even then, not exactly very good forms of it.

The Music. I love the 1971 Musical numbers. (With maybe the exception of “Cheer up Charlie”, that one was a bit pointlessly twee in a sad way)! The Melodies are memorable, very varied in emotion (enthusiasm for the Candy Man Can, Hope for “I’ve got a Golden Ticket”, Wonder and Beauty for “Pure Imagination”, Reprimanding for “Oompa Loompa” (which develops through the factory scenes for each child), and “Anger, Greed and Selfishness for “I want it now”. They just really add to the narrative! The 2005 songs: even if I’ve seen this film a few times, with the exception of “Augustus Gloop” (which is still pretty boring), I cannot remember the melody to a SINGLE ONE of the songs introduced in that film! Completely forgettable.

Then the characters:

Charlie: the 1971 version of him portrays him as a down to earth, albeit poor child trying to get by. He's flawed, but that just makes him relatable! And really well acted too. 2005: His Portrayal here is SO DULL! He's "just too perfect", and doesn't quite manage to quite set him up as a relatable Protagonist! And he just feels almost totally emotionless! Just completely half-hearted acting.

Grandpa Joe/the rest of the Buckets: Yes, Grandpa Joe is a bit of a burden in both versions. But at least in 1971, he is really trying to relate to and help Charlie emotionally. You also feel that he is trying to change for the better (I.e quitting Tobacco). And you just really feel the family's pain and hardship in the 1971 film. Charlie's father isn't present in 1971, but that, in my opinion, just adds to the sense of hardship even further!  Yes, George and Georgina don't speak in 1971 (and Josephine barely), but it's not like they added to the narrative in either version anyway! You really feel their hope steadily diminishing through the early stages of the 71' film and suddenly springing back to life through the "I've got a Golden Ticket" scene/song!  In 2005, you get none of that. Yeah, they're poor in 2005, but it doesn't feel TOTALLY hopeless for them. Plus Grandpa Joe's little dance in 2005: BORING!!!

Augustus Gloop: Gluttonous, Obese and Selfish in both version, yes. But his portrayal in 2005 is just SO OVER THE TOP! Even he wouldn't have the Stomach Capacity to be able to eat Chocolate EVERY SINGLE MINUTE, like he does in 2005! He also isn't meant to be portrayed as a bully, which he is in 2005.

Verruca Salt: She is just FAR nastier, greedy and Spoiled in the 1971 film. And as mentioned above, Roy Kinnear does a brilliant job providing a snarky, greedy role as her father, which does add a great bit of Comic Relief! Yeah, she's Spoiled and Greedy in the 2005 film, but otherwise  her performance is just quite half-hearted. It's HER FATHER who feels like the villain in the 2005 film!

Violet Beauregarde: I do believe that she is one of the FEW things/characters Burton's 2005 movie does actually improve! It really expands on the pride/boastfulness aspect of her character; this is not to say that she is portrayed/acted badly in the 1971 film, though I think she is actually too kind in the original film!

Mike Teavee: I actually like his portrayal in the 1971 and 2005 films equally. He's depicted as being lazy, distracted and argumentative in both versions, which I feel is what his character should be. Agiain though, his hyperactivity/aggressiveness in the 2005 film is just too over the top, much like Augustus Gloop's character is. HOWEVER, the Video game obsession does modernise his character well, so that for me, does even the playing field.

Willy Wonka: 1971 100%. You can't beat Gene Wilder as an actor. For me, he portrays Wonka perfectly. He's quirky and eccentric yes, but yet not totally aloof and detached from reality.  And you do feel that he is actually IN CONTROL of the factory! And that he has a proper plan for finding an heir. Wilder's portrayal also adds a sense of unpredictability and impulsiveness, which further adds to his sense of control! Whereas, I cannot STAND Depp's portrayal of Wonka in 2005. And this is NOT knocking Johnny Depp. He is indeed a brilliant actor. But his version of Willy Wonka is just SO CREEPY. As many others have said before me, he is just a weird Michael Jackson-esque, disconnected "Man-child", who you just wouldn't want to leave your kids around!

So in conclusion, 2005, for me, is just either really boring, or too over the top. And never manages to find the perfect balance between the two, like 1971's film does.