I've read the book three times recently, and I've seen the movie several times, and I'd say the Gene Wilder version is very faithful to the book (other than sort of glossing over how poor Charlie was, and an ending with a twist of conflict that is not in the book at all).

There's really not that much satire in the book, and the chocolate factory isn't really portrayed as a dark and scary place. I found the story to be pretty straight-up - almost a purely child-like perspective. Good is rewarded, bad gets its just rewards, end of story.

Should be interesting to see where Burton takes it.

Most of Roald Dahl's books have a pretty dark undertone to them, and I didn't find Charlie and the Chocolate Factory to be a major exception...Wonka uses Oompa Loompas as test subjects, Charlie's grandparents are all very odd...

There's a potential Tim Burton may do something really wonderful with this one--assuming he can get out of the rut he's been in the last few years.

But Wilder did a wonderful job as Wonka, and it'll be difficult or impossible to replace him. Besides, for most people, the first movie pretty much defined what the Chocolate Factory should look like. Futurama did a spoof in one of ther episodes, and between the songs and the orange/green "grunka lunkas", it was clear they weren't spoofing the book. It'll be hard to overcome the memories of the first movie long enough to create something both original and faithful to the book.

Consider: were you to make a new movie version of "The Wizard of Oz," would you give Dorothy ruby slippers, (as in the movie), or silver ones (as in the books)? Personally I'd do silver, but I can just see all the complaints from people who saw the movie and never read the books.