Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
Animated Views Staff
Animated Views Staff
Posts: 5402
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Dacey » March 12th, 2011, 6:31 pm

I hate to say it, but having seen the trailer for this before "Gnomeo" recently, the animation doesn't look very good on a big screen.

The characters don't even blend into all of the backgrounds very well, looking "added" instead of actually there. And the shot of Pooh and Christopher Robin running into the sunset is just sloppy, with the duo looking like they're "shrinking" rather than moving.

And this comes from someone who showed up for the silly old bear's last three trips to the big screen (even though Disney is trying to delude themselves into thinking we forgot about them, which in the case of especially "The Tigger Movie" isn't even fair). But there is nothing here to get people excited. Instead of being the "New Pooh" we thought we might be getting, this looks like same old, same old.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 5402
Joined: October 23rd, 2004
Location: SaskaTOON, Canada

Re:

Post by Randall » March 12th, 2011, 10:34 pm

carlminez wrote:...this is probably the first animated feature that I can honestly say I'm interested in.
? :|

Weird that you'd be hanging out at this Forum, don't ya think?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Re:

Post by Macaluso » March 13th, 2011, 7:43 pm

carlminez wrote: Finally, a traditionally animated film with cute, talking animals!
Do you just... not WATCH movies?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 84
Joined: January 18th, 2011

Re: Re:

Post by carlminez » March 26th, 2011, 4:17 pm

Macaluso wrote:
carlminez wrote: Finally, a traditionally animated film with cute, talking animals!
Do you just... not WATCH movies?
Dude, it was like 10 years ago I saw a traditionally animated movie with cute talking animals! I guess Princess and the Frog could fall under that category, but then we still wouldn't get away from it's conspicuous lack of cute talking animals.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 338
Joined: October 31st, 2008

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Darkblade » April 1st, 2011, 3:30 pm

Cartoonbrew posted a clip of the movie.



Rabbit seems a bit off.

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18842
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » April 2nd, 2011, 11:57 am

Yeah...to me he seems a little "over"-animated?

It is odd to see the characters back with all the Xerox-style drawing lines around them again - even if they're not as "sketchy" as back in the original days - after the years of black marker-outlined TV adaptations.

Pooh and Piglet were pretty true to themselves, though, but I'm just still not impressed enough to rush and go see this. It's a Winnie The Pooh movie for goodness' sake! This is supposed to keep us all coming back for more hand-drawn animation? It's something we've seen before, not something that's going to build on the right steps of Princess And The Frog and the more assured storytelling of Tangled.

I do love Pooh, and I like that they've made a new movie with the characters with the crop of current Disney animators that isn't a DTV, but it's also just more of the same, just more nicely rendered. That the title is so boring and bland and doesn't place it in the Pooh canon anywhere just adds to the laziness of the release, to me. And since the movie's probably not going to run more than 80 minutes tops, and probably won't have an added-value short film in front of it (even though Disney have a couple up their sleeve) like back in the original Pooh days, I'm probably going to wait for this one on disc.

I was good to The Tigger Movie and Piglet's Big Movie and, while I realize those weren't exactly theatrical Pooh canon, I did splash the cash to see them in a theater. Tigger was fine, but they owe me for Piglet! ;)

Animated Views Staff
Animated Views Staff
Posts: 5402
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Dacey » April 2nd, 2011, 4:28 pm

Actually, Pooh will have a short with it...although maybe not in UK theaters:

http://animatedviews.com/2011/first-ima ... of-nessie/
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 56
Joined: August 19th, 2008
Contact:

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Hewylewis » April 2nd, 2011, 4:35 pm

I hope Nessie talks abd has a beautiful voice!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5403
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: Nevermore

Post by Daniel » April 2nd, 2011, 5:44 pm

Ben wrote:And since the movie's probably not going to run more than 80 minutes tops
62 minutes for the film itself, supposedly. Not including the credits or the Nessie short. Eh. :?

Rabbit sounds alright in the clip. Sounds like a mixture of the previous actor (0:8 to 0:12 sounded really close!) with a hint of Spongebob. It's okay, but would've preferred if Ken had continued providing the voice. Just seems like another unnecessary change.

Finally, we hear Piglet speak some lines. Can't say I'm as impressed as I was with the first trailer, but it's a HUGE improvement! :) Piglet sounded too old/"off" and like he had a cold in My Friends, but here he sounds closer to John while sounding a little younger. Piglet sounds so cute now and I love that his squeak and little noises are back.

Animated Views Staff
Animated Views Staff
Posts: 5402
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Dacey » April 2nd, 2011, 6:15 pm

62 minutes for the film itself, supposedly. Not including the credits or the Nessie short. Eh.
I'm wondering if I should even say this, given that the joke got kinda old around here recently, but...SMURF THAT!!

Seriously, this is the running time for a FEATURE ANIMATION PRODUCTION?!?! That's shorter than "Never Land"!

And, unfortunately, Dan's right. The Hollywood Reporter confirms it with an early review:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review ... iew-173002

If the credits take a full ten minutes, it sounds as though the actual film might not even clock it at an hour. :(
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 56
Joined: August 19th, 2008
Contact:

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Hewylewis » April 2nd, 2011, 7:47 pm

Did any of you forget the running time for Dumbo? It was about an hour long too, and look how much it told in that amount of time.

Animated Views Staff
Animated Views Staff
Posts: 5402
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Dacey » April 3rd, 2011, 3:19 pm

I knew that someone would bring up "Dumbo" when I said that. ;)

Chances are that "Dumbo" would've actually been longer if Disney had more money at the time, but the studio had just suffered from two bombs in the form of "Pinochio" and "Fantasia." But I could be wrong when I say that. After all, without the Pink Elephants sequence, "Dumbo" doesn't even run close to an hour--more like 55 minutes--, and however entertaining that part of the movie may be, it can easily be seen as "filler." Whatever the reason for the length may be, it's fairly easy to tell an effective story in a short ammount of time when your main character doesn't ever talk. ;)

In the case of "Pooh," though, we know that that this isn't about story, nor is it about the studio not having enough money. As has been said here before, it's becoming more and more obvious that Disney has very little if any faith in this project doing well. And it's starting to become depressing. :(
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 56
Joined: August 19th, 2008
Contact:

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Hewylewis » April 3rd, 2011, 3:23 pm

Oh come on, buck up!!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 608
Joined: January 22nd, 2007

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by Whippet Angel » April 3rd, 2011, 3:37 pm

Why is Owl in the hole? Couldn't he just fly out? :?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1558
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Post by droosan » April 3rd, 2011, 3:39 pm

Consider that the 1977 movie was mostly just two previously-released WtP 'featurettes' which were stuck together. And also that the A.A. Milne books themselves make for short, brisk reading.

The Tigger Movie -- as much as I enjoyed it -- is very 'plotty,' by comparison with the original films and the books.

Every dialogue-based scene I've seen in the trailers & peeks at this 'new' Winnie the Pooh movie seems to have its origins in passages from the books. I'm looking forward to it, whether or not it becomes a 'box-office smash'. :)



.. oh, and: woooo!

Image

Post Reply