unsinkable Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 ***Scroll down to Post 13 for a picture if you don't feel like clicking the link. Thanks, idnib!*** http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/charlie-and-the-chocolate-factorys-new-book-cover-is-creepy-pictures-201478 Looks more like a cover for Mommy Dearest or the Stepford Children Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That's a misfire. It's not Doll Veruca and the Chocolate Factory. Honestly, it looks like Peguin has fired their designers and farmed out the work to someone who gets $10 to slap a cover image on self published ebooks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candicane Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That's definitely strange, and makes it seem extremely 'girly' imo. Veruca doesn't even have that big of a role, either. Very strange decision, and creepy. She looks so fake! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
displace Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 I think it is confusing and strange. I don't like it really for the novel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Yeah, what's that about? Charlie and the Chocolate Factory = real life Barbie girl?! I never even thought of Varuca Salt as being ultra-coiffed, anyway. Maybe I was too influenced by the Gene Wilder movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRG Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 I don't like that at all!! I'm glad I have a couple of copies of the older editions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted August 9, 2014 Author Share Posted August 9, 2014 LOL! Can you post a picture of the new cover so people can see it? I'm a picture posting failure lately (Ah, for my glory days of posting Ryan Gosling WTM pictures! Glory days...They pass you by in the wink of a young girl's eye...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypamama Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That's beyond creepy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaceful Isle Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Toddlers and tiaras gone bad?? :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/charlie-and-the-chocolate-factorys-new-book-cover-is-creepy-pictures-201478 Looks more like a cover for Mommy Dearest or the Stepford Children or like it's about JonBenet Ramsey. The text says that it focuses on the children but it focuses on one child - and not even a major one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annie Laurie Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That's been one of my 10 year old's very favorite books for years. I'm glad he never saw that cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted August 9, 2014 Author Share Posted August 9, 2014 Thank you, idnib! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbel Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That is just weird and sends an odd message about the content or at least the main character of the book. Unless the book has been rewritten and Charlie is now a girl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 According to the article I read, Penguin denies it is either Violet Beauregarde OR Veruca Salt. Well, then, what the heck is she? An Oompa Loompa?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forget-Me-Not Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Yeesh. Stepford Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 According to the article I read, Penguin denies it is either Violet Beauregarde OR Veruca Salt. Well, then, what the heck is she? An Oompa Loompa?! Willy Wonka's secret love child, conceived with his estranged lover. She's back and she wants her factory. I would read that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plain jane Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Willy Wonka's secret love child, conceived with his estranged lover. She's back and she wants her factory. I would read that. *snort*. Hahaha. I would too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Willy Wonka's secret love child, conceived with his estranged lover. I have a hard time believing that Stepford Wife sitting next to the blonde girl would get involved with Willy Wonka! But if Penguin is saying she is neither Violet or Veruca, and is obviously not Charlie or Willy Wonka, what on earth is she doing on the cover? Why not put a picture of, say, a penguin or something? I just don't understand the point. And she looks like a Child of the Corn to me. ETA: Okay, I found this from the Independent: The child is not supposed to represent Veruca Salt or Violet Beauregarde, two spoilt girls from the book, but the “twisted†family relationships portrayed in the 1964 novel. .... The new cover shot, by Sofia Sanchez and Mauro Mongiello comes from a French fashion magazine feature called “Mommie Dearestâ€. I found the photos at http://noirfacade.livejournal.com/217055.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daffodil Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 That's just odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerileanne99 Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 or like it's about JonBenet Ramsey. The text says that it focuses on the children but it focuses on one child - and not even a major one.That was exactly my thought! So very creepy.This isn't the JonBenet picture I was thinking of, but pretty close. Yuck:( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_JonBenét_Ramsey ETA: this one...http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/jonbenet-ramsey/images/31618279/title/jonbenet-ramsey-photo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerileanne99 Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 DP from phone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest inoubliable Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 o.O Weird... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bagel270 Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Very creepy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinder Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 That cover is just wrong! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truscifi Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Um. No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trulycrabby Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 That book cover should be titled: "The Billionaire's Stepford Wife's Baby." :ack2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catz Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 That is really gross. Makes you wonder if some ped*philes were involved in doing that photo shoot and selecting that. Ick ick and more ick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artichoke Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 This cover is worse than the blonde on the cover of Anne of Green Gables. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Absolutely revolting. :ack2: And entirely irrelevant to anything in the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerka528 Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Such a turn off to the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mimm Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Wow, talk about a cover that in no way communicates anything about the story inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocelotmom Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 That is really gross. Makes you wonder if some ped*philes were involved in doing that photo shoot and selecting that. Ick ick and more ick. My thought was Lolita and the Chocolate Factory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 That is really gross. Makes you wonder if some ped*philes were involved in doing that photo shoot and selecting that. Ick ick and more ick. I found the other photos published together; they were all pretty creepy -- the theme was "Mommy Dearest." It also shows the photo before it was cropped. (I linked it before: http://noirfacade.livejournal.com/217055.html ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soror Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Horrible, horrible choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storygirl Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Ewww! And what boy is ever going to be willing to pick up that book to read? I can't imagine a more terrible choice. It doesn't represent the story, and it is creepy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reign Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 I'm actually really mad about this! How stupid. What could all the people who signed off on this be thinking? I'm super jealous that the British got to keep the original drawings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hillfarm Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 THIS would be my one exception to allow my dd to tear the cover off of a book! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Χά�ων Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 WHY ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom in High Heels Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 WTF is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckymom Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 Someone needs therapy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Elf Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 This is a terrible shame. I wouldn't be surprised if sales dropped. I wonder what the process was for choosing a photo from that theme (I saw the pics that Stripe posted). None of them say Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to me. There was nothing wrong with the original illustrations. I thought they fit the wacky books much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.