Inappropriate new cover for 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory'...

[mrssmiling]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28703254
Really horrible in my opinion...do hope they have a rethink.

I'm not wild about it but it is for the adult market to stand alongside the kids version, not replace it.

That is just.. Odd

How does that relate to Charlie and the Chocolate factory?

To get the cross over from a children's book to an adults they could have used any design. They didn't have to use one of a young looking female.
They claim its to make is as a cross over to the adult market. How does having this cover do that? They see not changing the story are they?

I just don't see how that relates to the plot of the book in any way. What were they thinking?!

I've seen comments calling it 'creepy' and 'weird' and 'inappropriate' - and I want to say 'have you read Roald Dahl?!'

I'm not keen though - doesn't relate at all to the story.

"The image is not intended to represent either Veruca Salt or Violet Beauregarde, publishers say"

See, that would have been my first thought.

Not sure why they need an adult cover

The cover is utterly unrelated to the book? I don't see the point in it

It's supposed to represent the 'twisted parent -child relationships portrayed in the book' and I can see how it could represent a twisted parent-child relationship, but not really the ones portrayed in the book. I always thought Dahl was a bit snippy about people who didn't fall into a very narrow ideal. Augustus Gloop was greedy, Mike TV liked TV, Violet chewed gum, Verucca was very spoiled. Unlikable and ruined but not twisted, imo. Their parents didn't give the resources to cope with being in a chocolate factory with a lunatic but their transgressions were disproportionately punished. That was the twisted bit for me.

I remember reading an article by Dahl`when I was a child when he said what he thought was the appeal of his books.
He said something along the lines of "to a child all adults are enemies, so I make the adults enemies. The children read the books and think 'at last an adult who understands us'..." I thought then (as I still think) this is a strange outlook. Who is the first person a child runs to in trouble-almost always an adult. Really put me off the books, but it does explain the stories.

No surprise when I found out he wrote the screen play for Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. It is so him.

I being very dense I'm sure but I'm struggling to understand why children's books are re marketed for adults.

Nothing wrong at all with revisiting children's books, I regularly re-read Just William because they're brilliant. The whole enjoyment for me is that they are what they are. Repackaging them would dilute that and be sacrilege.

It's a marketing exercise. Penguin have chosen 800 book which are deemed to be 'important' and have given them fancy smantzy covers and people like me are to be found in Blackwells drooling over them. Loads of people will end up buying another copy of their favourite book because they like the new cover.

Not me, i would never do that and I definitely don't have four separate copies of Jane Eyre

I saw a great 1984 the other day, not sure if it is in the same series but I almost got it.

Incidently, which William's do you have? Mine are mostly the white spines with drawings and often William is wearing William's clothes but Ginger, Henry and Douglas are wearing jeans or tracksuits and I hate them. I have a few of the newer red ones that were based on the originals and a couple with photo covers from the TV series (70's?) which I'm not keen on.
If they brought out HB red covers like the originals I would buy them even though I have a full set and then some.

Jeans and track suits in a Just William book...? I feel like William's mother getting one of her heads

I must have around 10 original red cover books. Some were my dad's from when he was a boy and he's 74 now There are loads more I'd still love to own though, I'm a huge JW fan.

The illustrations in the books are at least half the joy for me. They're brilliant.

I've never thought anyone has ever really captured JW for TV or radio. Martin Jarvis has made a good attempt but it's still not quite right somehow.

Whenever it's been on TV William always comes across as a brat which he most def was not and misses the point completely.

Mine are like this. I have a few old ones of my Dad's but I don't think they are 1st editions or anything and they've all lost their dust jackets long ago. Mine are a travesty but they did do the whole series which is something. I mean, what do they think Ginger looks like in that yellow sweater? I agree the TV series haven't managed to capture it.

I don't get that cover at all.

It seems completely disconnected from the plot. And why show a young girl on the cover if it's not meant as a reference to Veruca Salt or Violet Beauregard?

I get the whole re-marketing for an adult audience concept, but that cover just doesn't fit with the story.

Lol yes that jumper is wrong. But to me the only mental image I have must be from the Thomas Henry illustrations.

My books are also minus their jackets and are rather bashed up, but I'd never part with them and do still read them when a William craving occurs.

Nice to speak to a fellow JW fan

It's a bit much perhaps but I think most adults who read CATCF realise the book is about over indulged children and parents/adults who take a shallow interest in them. I think Dahl was quite a strange individual in his choice if plot to communicate this idea.

I think this trussed up, "spoilt" child with the partly cropped out mother is one way of summing that up.

The image comes from this

I really like that photo actually. I just don't like the choice for this particular adult cover.

Don't get its relevance to the book at all. And to be honest, as someone who often buys old children's books, part of the charm for me is the old fashioned covers and illustrations. Maybe I'm not the adult market they have in mind though. They might be trying to attract adults who wouldn't normally buy a children's book for themselves, and be trying to remove any perceived stigma. Either way it's an odd cover.