Pink Poogle Toy Forum

The official community of Pink Poogle Toy
Main Site
NeoDex
It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2025 7:01 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Do you like the old Oompa Loompas or the new Oompa Loompas?
Poll ended at Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am
The new ones 44%  44%  [ 14 ]
The old ones 56%  56%  [ 18 ]
Total votes : 32
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:38 pm 
PPT God
PPT God
User avatar

Posts: 1916
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:26 am
Location: Lost somewhere in the vast expanse of my mind...
The old ones were freaky...and hopefully the new ones aren't [I haven't seen them so I don't know...] but the old ones just scared me...as they did when they appeared on somebody's sig...


Image
Ooh. It's pretty. :D See all the pretty presents? They can be yours if you vote for me. Yet, none of you know me. T_T How sad. There's no way to get the pretty presents then. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:40 pm 
Way Beyond Godly
Way Beyond Godly
User avatar

Posts: 5797
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 4:42 am
Location: Outside on your boulevarde scaring small children. Um... or in Illinois.
Um... can't support the mangling of the original Oompa Loompas, so obviously the old. ;)


Image
CLICK IT!
Thanks to Laq. :o


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:34 am 
PPT Student
PPT Student
User avatar

Posts: 477
Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Hidden Village of Konoha
IM so glad someone mad a topic of this! THE OLD ONES! the new ones are weird they have anntennes on their heads and dont look like they came form a forest at all they also look creepy *shivers*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:18 am 
Beyond Godly
Beyond Godly
User avatar

Posts: 3007
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 5:08 pm
Location: You're FACE.
I haven't seen the new movie, but I've seen the oompa loompas in it, and I like the old ones much better. I will always picture oompa loompas being orange-faced green-haired pudgy midgits. ^_^


Image
Zero set 13 of 26


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 11:39 pm 
PPT Trainee
PPT Trainee
User avatar

Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:31 am
Location: Maureen! at the Market (The disco was full.)
I like the new ones. The old ones didn't have cool jumpsuits.


<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v140/kitsuneh/mausetb.gif">
<b>Set by me :D</b>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 5:56 pm 
Honorary Member
Honorary Member
User avatar

Posts: 2918
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 3:20 pm
Location: Paducah, KY
You know, the original Oompa Loompas (meaning in the original version of the book) are rarely seen or heard about these days due to being very politically incorrect. Later versions of the books had different versions of the Oompa Loomps.
But, I can tell you this. The original Oompa Loompas were not short orange men with green hair and white overalls. So please, please, don't refer to them as the originals and complain that Tim Burton changed them. If you must refer to them as anything, refer to them as the 1971 film version Oompa Loompas. They are a product of the screenwriter's imagination, not of the author's.
The new movie is not a remake of the old one. It is it's own version of the book. The screenwriter had never seen the 1971 film when he wrote the screenplay for the new movie. It's based entirely on the book. As it should be.
For the record Roald Dahl was still alive when the 1971 version was made. And he hated it. He hated the way his book got mangled.


Image
Love is blindness. -- Set by my Secret Santa =D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2005 8:19 pm 
PPT God
PPT God
User avatar

Posts: 1013
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 3:04 am
Location: T3h England
Well said Sapphire, I'd also like to add something.

I think the new film was actually made from a small loophole, Dahl, after seeing the film, legally made it so none of his other books could be made into movies. He may have forgotten to not allow CatCF to be remade.


Image
set by whhattisthiss. Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:57 pm 
PPT God
PPT God
User avatar

Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:34 pm
Location: FLA, represent.
The new ones. They have amazing choreography XD


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:27 pm 
Way Beyond Godly
Way Beyond Godly

Posts: 8715
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 9:10 pm
Location: Cleveland, Georgia
Gender: Female
Can't say either, really. Never watched it, never read it.

I'm so cool. XD


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:33 pm 
Way Beyond Godly
Way Beyond Godly
User avatar

Posts: 5797
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 4:42 am
Location: Outside on your boulevarde scaring small children. Um... or in Illinois.
Sapphire Faerie wrote:
You know, the original Oompa Loompas (meaning in the original version of the book) are rarely seen or heard about these days due to being very politically incorrect. Later versions of the books had different versions of the Oompa Loomps.
But, I can tell you this. The original Oompa Loompas were not short orange men with green hair and white overalls. So please, please, don't refer to them as the originals and complain that Tim Burton changed them. If you must refer to them as anything, refer to them as the 1971 film version Oompa Loompas. They are a product of the screenwriter's imagination, not of the author's.
The new movie is not a remake of the old one. It is it's own version of the book. The screenwriter had never seen the 1971 film when he wrote the screenplay for the new movie. It's based entirely on the book. As it should be.
For the record Roald Dahl was still alive when the 1971 version was made. And he hated it. He hated the way his book got mangled.


You make a great point, but they're still the original as far as movies go. :)


Image
CLICK IT!
Thanks to Laq. :o


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:41 pm 
Way Beyond Godly
Way Beyond Godly
User avatar

Posts: 8491
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 6:44 am
Location: New Zealand Weapon: HaaH Sword Species: Human Alignment: Chaotic Neutral
I thought the shiny (latex?) suits were kinda odd, but both the Orange '71 Oompa Loompas and the new ones are creepy and amusing in their own ways.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:15 pm 
PPT God
PPT God
User avatar

Posts: 1003
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 5:22 pm
Location: Tenterhooks
Sapphire Faerie wrote:
You know, the original Oompa Loompas (meaning in the original version of the book) are rarely seen or heard about these days due to being very politically incorrect. Later versions of the books had different versions of the Oompa Loomps.

Yeah, I have one of those editions. I'm not normally one to call things offensive, but that... that was offensive. "Oh, I saved them from dooming themselves to a life of eating caterpillars and beetles, and they're so happy working in a factory and moonlighting as test subjects for freakish products while paid only on chocolate..." If they kept that story of Wonka's in the new book, changing their appearance barely helps.

However, their songs are pure genius. I haven't seen the new movie, but they should totally keep the Mike Teavee chant in its entirety. (Though it isn't a musical, so there's not a prayer, alas.)

Sapphire Faerie wrote:
For the record Roald Dahl was still alive when the 1971 version was made. And he hated it. He hated the way his book got mangled.

Yes! Someone agrees with me, and it's Roald Dahl! Poor special effects aren't usually enough of an issue to care about, but these, especially that twisted mockery of the candy landscape... ugh. Wonka may be crazy, but he's not depressed, he's manic and slightly homicidal. The Oompa Loompas were witty, not insipid. And what was up with Slugworth, Undercover Tester of Virtue? Anyway, the whole thing had a severe lack of the Roald Dahl Bounce.


Do what you will; but I will hinder it if I may.

-- Eowyn of the Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:28 pm 
PPT God
PPT God

Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 1:04 am
Inexistence wrote:
Well said Sapphire, I'd also like to add something.

I think the new film was actually made from a small loophole, Dahl, after seeing the film, legally made it so none of his other books could be made into movies. He may have forgotten to not allow CatCF to be remade.


Umm...what about James and the Giant Peach? It's a Dahl book, isn't it? And it was made into movie back in 1996. I'm not familiar with any of the books or movies, so maybe there was a reason that it was an exception? *shrug*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:31 pm 
PPT God
PPT God
User avatar

Posts: 1003
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 5:22 pm
Location: Tenterhooks
Yes, and they also filmed Matilda in the '90s, and what they did to it made the old Charlie movie look like a faithful representation. I suspect an heir who has gone the route of Dr. Seuss's wife or A.A. Milne's son.


Do what you will; but I will hinder it if I may.

-- Eowyn of the Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group