Winnie the Pooh (2011)

[EricJ]

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'.

I'm looking forward to the Pixar Factor that every old-school post-Lasseter 2D/fairytale/throwback animated project we think will "sink the studio" from the teaser hype turns out to be a pretty darn good movie anyway. (Well, that's making generous allowances for Princess/Frog, but it was painless enough to count.)
Even if it doesn't "beat" Harry Potter, if it at least gets the crisis-averted positive word of mouth that Tangled got, the message will have been absorbed.

And yes, looks like they're going back to the Walt days of adapting the actual Milne text--I cringed a bit of personal recognition at the "Issue a reward" (gesundheit!) jokes in the trailer, as I'd used to think they were hysterically funny when I'd first read the original Eeyore's tail story, at five or six.

[Ben]

Still doesn't beat the "feature" production length of 42 minutes for Saludos Amigos!

But, really, just over an hour? I can get Droo's take on the Many Adventures compilation, but that had its genesis of Walt wanting to do a full feature but deciding on introducing the characters through featurettes instead with the intention of creating a film later. And with the new linking sequences that still made a full 77 minutes run time.

Being positive, I hope this means that the new Pooh will be tight on storytelling, although the episodic nature and sketchy plots have never lent themselves to being gripping narratives (I enjoy the Pooh films for the characters and fun situations).

This at least explains why it was only in production for such a short time, and hence it's low, low budget, which I guess it has as good a chance as any at making back, even over a few weeks. But I just don't see - even with a short attached - at where the value is for families: the shorter movies don't cost less to take the kids to, and it'll be over before everyone's got finally settled.

One thing though: does that Hollywood Reporter length of 69 minutes (including the 10 minute credits) also include the Nessie short!? The way they write it could lean either way, but is Pooh really just over 50 minutes of actual animation!?

[Daniel]

Here's another clip where we hear the Narrator and more of Eeyore:



Not to mention Kanga, who will also have a new voice... yay. >.> She doesn't sound as mature. When she was humming it made think of "Whistle while you Work".

John Cleese definitely fits the role and Eeyore, well... he sounds a little off.

[Hewylewis]

I love the clip, especially Kanga's new voice!!

[Macaluso]

Whoa Eeyore... is that whosits that voiced the rabbit in Boundin' and Chuckles in TS3?

[Hewylewis]

Yup, Bud Lucky.

[EricJ]

Not to mention Kanga, who will also have a new voice... yay. >.> She doesn't sound as mature. When she was humming it made think of "Whistle while you Work".

The old Kanga just sounded more, well, maternal when she sounded like Lady and Merryweather.

[Hewylewis]

I just appreciate how Kanga is more involved in this new installment, wheras she was more like a background character in the previous ones and Roo took her spotlight.

[Ben]

Have to say I'm liking Bud as Eeyore more here, after getting used to him, but it's a slightly different take to be sure. Kanga, too, isn't far off, but doesn't have that mature/maternal sound of authority. Not that she sounded all-knowing, but with Kanga I always thought she kind of knew that what the rest of the gang got up to was often ridiculous, but here she sounds just like any other young Disney female type.

I'm kind of liking Cleese, but thinks he's been brought in as a name voice rather than being as Narrator-y as Sebastian Cabot or even John Hurt. But he does have a jovial sound to him here, and it's not totally out of place. I'm interested to see it, but it doesn't feel "classic" Pooh to me, and I'll probably wait to see it on video.

[EricJ]

I'm kind of liking Cleese, but thinks he's been brought in as a name voice rather than being as Narrator-y as Sebastian Cabot or even John Hurt. But he does have a jovial sound to him here, and it's not totally out of place. I'm interested to see it, but it doesn't feel "classic" Pooh to me, and I'll probably wait to see it on video.

Cleese can do kids' stories (there's a hilarious audiobook of him reading Dr. Seuss), but he's still trying to do his own act of sounding Lively and Indgnant--
The book storyteller isn't supposed to be amused or outraged at the story; Cabot was just supposed to be the stuffy-elegant reader, which made the fourth-wall gags funny when he spoke to the characters.

[Ben]

Um...Cabot was amused and surprised (if not outraged) at the stories all the time.

[estefan]

Also not the first time Cleese has done narration for Disney, as he seemed to pop up constantly as a narrator on episodes of Mickey Mouse Works.

While I'm not bothered by the re-casting, I wonder what the reasoning behind them are. Maybe to separate the film from the Pooh of the past twenty years? That said, it would have been blasphemous to replace Jim Cummings, so they were smart enough to keep him (as he really does have Pooh and Tigger down, truly one of the best voice-actors in the business).

Of the castings, Christopher Robin's is my favourite. Really don't understand why A.A. Milne's son living in England would have an American accent, other than Wolfgang Reitherman's tendency to cast his offspring as every young male lead.

[Macaluso]

Literally no one else will ever do Tigger and Pooh's voice until Jim Cummings is dead

[Darkblade]

If I remember right, A.A Milne disliked the pooh books.

[Hewylewis]

He disliked his own books?