While not severely off-putting, it’s definitely a change from the original and more in line with the politically-correct sensibilities of today that don’t allow someone to just be a blockhead because they’re a blockhead!
I don't think it was about being "politically correct" so much as it was just about letting Charlie Brown "evolve."
When I was a kid, I used to laugh when Charlie Brown failed, but now that I'm older, I actually find a lot of the older specials almost depressing. Charlie Brown's a genuinely decent guy who often comes
so close to victory, only for everything to fall apart because, well, he's Charlie Brown. And while that's funny to a point, after fifty years, it eventually becomes old and, in a way, almost cruel. Maybe, after a while, Schulz should've let Charlie Brown kick the football. Perhaps he could've been allowed to keep that baseball game win. I get the point of a character being enduring because he keeps trying even when he doesn't win, but after a while, Charlie Brown being a "loser" just because he's Charlie Brown simply becomes lazy storytelling. I was once talking with someone about Family Guy, and he wondered what the show would be like if Meg were the main character. "It would be like Peanuts," I answered.
Then again, Schulz was always playing devil's advocate to himself. In A Charlie Brown Christmas, Linus was wise beyond his years because of his faith. In It's The Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown, Linus is portrayed a fool because of his beliefs, blindly waiting for an unseen being who is never going to show up. And even Linus, often seen as Charlie Brown's only "true" friend, usually went along with the cruelty towards him simply because, well, he's Charlie Brown. Heck, even the people who
liked Charlie Brown were rarely actually good to him, with Pepperment Patty, who was in love with him, always acting like he was hitting on him, rather than it being the other way around.
So, yeah, the movie was faithful on a nostalgic level (arguably sometimes a bit
too faithful, as part of me would've liked to see the characters in more new situations), but I had no problem with the "updates," if we can even call them that. It's been 65 years, so I'm okay that Linus can now give his blanket a firm "push" in his school locker and then be fine for the rest of the day without literally going out of his mind. Nor do I have any issue as some have at least claimed to (although I think most "complainers" are just trying to be trendy) with modern pop music being used on the soundtrack (which the Peanuts frequently used anyway, including an
entire special of 80's music in Flashbeagle). And, at this point, after all he's been through, I think Charlie Brown has ultimately earned the happy ending--and respect--that the movie ultimately allows him to have.
And by the way, if you haven't seen it yet, I do reccomend seeing this one in 3D if you can. I'm usually not always crazy about "depth only" 3D, but in this case, the "depth" is very interesting because the animation is very "flat." It's very hard to explain, but the characters often almost look like stop motion figures, and it feels like if you touched them, they would feel like felt or plastic or clay. It gave everything a very "hand-crafted" look that ultimately will not fully come through in 2D (in 2D, it doesn't look "dimensional" so much as it looks like a much more colorful Peanuts special).
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."
