Disney Working on Live-Action Adaption of Winnie the Pooh (NOT A JOKE.)

erasure fan1

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
IGN wasn't all too fond of it with a 4 out of 10.
http://m.ign.com/articles/2018/08/03/christopher-robin-review
christopherrobin-deck-990000-1533261997417_320w.jpg
 
Rich T

Rich T

Well-Known Member
Ign's review pretty much confirmed my worst worry about this movie: It depicts the Pooh characters as being alive and audible to everyone in the real world. That sucks; it's the exact opposite of what the Pooh stories are about. At least it's a non-violent family film, which is always a plus, but I'll pass on this one.

On a separate note; I've always wondered why the animators of the original Pooh cartoons portrayed Rabbit, Owl and Gopher as flesh-and-blood instead of stuffed.
 
Magenta Panther

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
Rich T said:
Ign's review pretty much confirmed my worst worry about this movie: It depicts the Pooh characters as being alive and audible to everyone in the real world. That sucks; it's the exact opposite of what the Pooh stories are about. At least it's a non-violent family film, which is always a plus, but I'll pass on this one.

On a separate note; I've always wondered why the animators of the original Pooh cartoons portrayed Rabbit, Owl and Gopher as flesh-and-blood instead of stuffed.
Click to expand...

Owl and Rabbit weren't stuffed toys in the book. As illustrations (by Ernest Shepard), they were drawn as real creatures. As for Gopher, he never appeared at all, that I remember. He was inserted into the stories by Disney.
 
Rich T

Rich T

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
Owl and Rabbit weren't stuffed toys in the book. As illustrations (by Ernest Shepard), they were drawn as real creatures. As for Gopher, he never appeared at all, that I remember. He was inserted into the stories by Disney.
Click to expand...
Thanks -- makes sense. And I do remember animators talking about Gopher as an original character (even having him bluntly say to Pooh and Rabbit, "I'm not in the book" -- which might be the most awesome meta-moment in Disney history.)
 
brb1006

brb1006

Well-Known Member
Rich T said:
Ign's review pretty much confirmed my worst worry about this movie: It depicts the Pooh characters as being alive and audible to everyone in the real world. That sucks; it's the exact opposite of what the Pooh stories are about. At least it's a non-violent family film, which is always a plus, but I'll pass on this one.

On a separate note; I've always wondered why the animators of the original Pooh cartoons portrayed Rabbit, Owl and Gopher as flesh-and-blood instead of stuffed.
Click to expand...
Because Owl and Rabbit are real animals as seen in the original AA Milne books.
 
brb1006

brb1006

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
Owl and Rabbit weren't stuffed toys in the book. As illustrations (by Ernest Shepard), they were drawn as real creatures. As for Gopher, he never appeared at all, that I remember. He was inserted into the stories by Disney.
Click to expand...
Fun Fact: According to an autobiography by either AA Milne or Christopher Robin Milne. There was a Gopher character that was planned on being in the original Pooh stories but got scrapped since gophers weren't native to the UK. Disney might had used this scrapped character.
 
Rich T

Rich T

Well-Known Member
ChampDisney said:
If it isn’t Superheroes, Star Wars or Game of Thrones related, IGN won’t support it.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I think the review raises some valid points about the plot, including the weirdness of portraying a responsible father in a financially hard time as "doing the wrong thing" by wanting to keep putting food on his family's table... and *particularly* the decision to make Pooh & co. real fantasy creatures instead of imaginary. Because that just kind of sets a torch to the whole point of the Pooh stories. And if C.R. turned his back on a group of living, breathing, amazing and *REAL* creatures who were his best friends... what a horrible kid! :D
 
champdisney

champdisney

Well-Known Member
Rich T said:
To be fair, I think the review raises some valid points about the plot, including the weirdness of portraying a responsible father in a financially hard time as "doing the wrong thing" by wanting to keep putting food on his family's table... and *particularly* the decision to make Pooh & co. real fantasy creatures instead of imaginary. Because that just kind of sets a torch to the whole point of the Pooh stories. And if C.R. turned his back on a group of living, breathing, amazing and *REAL* creatures who were his best friends... what a horrible kid! :D
Click to expand...
I don’t believe Disney’s version of Pooh was supposed to be all in Christopher Robin’s head as opposed to the original books. I could be wrong. Perhaps Christopher Robin wasn’t even aware that he deserted his pals because as he got older, even he believed it was all in his head. I don’t know, I haven’t seen the film yet but I fully intend to.

IGN needs to lay off the nitpicking when it comes to children/family films. Films of this nature are made for the ones to sit down, forget about the real world and enjoy the unrealistic fantasy for all it’s worth. Not to pinpoint what doesn’t make sense. After all we’re already talking about living stuffed animals.
 
Rich T

Rich T

Well-Known Member
ChampDisney said:
I don’t believe Disney’s version of Pooh was supposed to be all in Christopher Robin’s head as opposed to the original books. I could be wrong. Perhaps Christopher Robin wasn’t even aware that he deserted his pals because as he got older, even he believed it was all in his head. I don’t know, I haven’t seen the film yet but I fully intend to.

IGN needs to lay off the nitpicking when it comes to children/family films. Films of this nature are made for the ones to sit down, forget about the real world and enjoy the unrealistic fantasy for all it’s worth.
Click to expand...
The original Pooh animated shorts take place in Christopher Robin's imagination, as does the recent animated feature film, which has a nice closing credit sequence where you see the props Christopher Robin used to act out the adventure you just watched.

The whole point of the Pooh stories is that it's about a child's imagination. The Pooh characters aren't supposed to be Smurfs who can enter the real world and talk to other people.

Ign had a point in this case. It's great to make a family film. But if you're not going to follow the author's intent, make your film about another group of characters. I'm sure this'll be a big hit, just like the Jim Carey Grinch film. As with Grinch, the original work and an excellent animated version still exist, so it's certainly not the end of the world. I'm sure this film has some charms, and if it gets more people to read the books, more power to it.
(EDIT)
About fantasy films, in general: There are good fantasy films and bad fantasy films. The best ones stick to a consistent set of in-context rules that make the message more powerful and the fantasy more believable. The Pooh books had one simple rule: 100 Acre Wood is a special place that exists in a child's terrific imagination. Doesn't mean this new film can't be enjoyed. Just means it could've been better (maybe even a generation-spanning classic) and less disposable.
 
Last edited:
erasure fan1

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
ChampDisney said:
If it isn’t Superheroes, Star Wars or Game of Thrones related, IGN won’t support it.
Click to expand...
Well they gave hotel transylvania a 7.6 and isle of dogs a 9.5. While super heroes, fantasy and star wars are in igns wheelhouse, I don't think thats why they gave this a 4. The review brings up some good points. Maybe it's just them calling a spade a spade. So far I wouldn't give any of the live action movies more than a 6 so I'm inclined to believe this.
 
Disneyfanman

Disneyfanman

Well-Known Member
I haven’t seen the movie yet. I was not impressed by the trailers. I was going to wait for video. BUT...... it got an “A” Cinemascore and audience reviews are super positive. My wife wants to see it. My adult son loved it. I........May. .......Not....... Be.......Able......To......Resist!
 
NateD1226

NateD1226

Well-Known Member
I just saw the movie! I thought it was very cute and sweet but a bit slow in the beginning. It wasn't that bad but they could have done better.
 
FigmentForver96

FigmentForver96

Well-Known Member
Disneyfanman said:
I haven’t seen the movie yet. I was not impressed by the trailers. I was going to wait for video. BUT...... it got an “A” Cinemascore and audience reviews are super positive. My wife wants to see it. My adult son loved it. I........May. .......Not....... Be.......Able......To......Resist!
Click to expand...
Very cute movie. It doesn't pretend to be anything it's not. A family film that has you smiling from ear to ear beginning to end. It's no blockbuster but it is really well done and it feels very classic Disney if that makes sense. One of the better live actions
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom