'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' and 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang' celebrate 50th anniversaries

Both children's stories have been adapted for the screen and the stage.

'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' is by Roald Dahl and 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang' is by Ian Fleming.

What do the story of a young boy who tours a candy factory and a tale about a family who travel by flying car have in common?

Both “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” by Roald Dahl and “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” by Ian Fleming are celebrating their 50th anniversaries this year. “Charlie” tells the story of Charlie Bucket, a young boy who finds a Golden Ticket in a Willy Wonka chocolate bar that qualifies him to join a small group that will tour the mysterious Wonka factory (and, unbeknownst to him, become part of the search for an heir for Wonka). Meanwhile, “Chitty,” whose author Fleming is best known for the “James Bond” novels, follows inventor Caractacus Pott and his children. Caractacus builds a car that soon begins to have powers of its own like the ability to fly.

The two stories followed similar adaptation patterns, with “Chitty” being turned into a movie starring Dick Van Dyke that was released in 1968 and “Charlie” being adapted into a movie starring Gene Wilder and Peter Ostrum that came out in 1971. It was filmed again for a 2005 version starring Johnny Depp and Freddie Highmore. “Chitty” was also the basis for a stage musical that opened in 2002 in London and 2005 on Broadway, while a stage musical of “Charlie” opened in London in 2013. The show is still playing there.

Los Angeles Times writer David L. Ulin recently looked back at his memories of “Chitty” in honor of the anniversary, calling it “a terrific kid’s adventure… it is playful yet full of suspense…. [I]llustrations by John Burningham … alone are worth the price of admission: rough-hewn, slightly outsized, with a vivid and peculiar grace…. [T]he book holds up, 50 years after its original publication, [because of] its sense of the world as an inexplicable but also miraculous place.” 

Meanwhile, Guardian writer Lucy Mangan reminisced about “Charlie,” noting that it is “beloved of generations of children … and a furnisher of images and phrases that have entered the cultural lexicon forevermore.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.