Search Keyword Within Blog

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Winnie the Pooh (2011): 8/10


Several years ago, there was a study that found that besides Mickey Mouse, Winnie the Pooh was the most popular Disney character out there. I am not sure how true it holds today, because the marketing has definitely dropped in recent years in favor of some Pixar fare and more Princess fluff. So when the Winnie the Pooh movie was announced, I was excited as it would be the unofficial sequel to one of the greatest animated movies of all-time: The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. Made right before Disney’s untimely death, the original film pretty much represents the world and imagination of Disney: fun, whimsical, innocent, creative, and very charming.

However, the marketing for this movie was so subpar, was so subtle, so atrocious (I actually had written about this issue last year), you would have thought that was going directly to DVD as opposed to theaters. Enjoying an extremely small run, this film had no chance to make money and make noise to the likes of Cars 2 and Kung Fu Panda 2. And here’s the thing: Winnie the Pooh outshines them both. This film has the magic, the beauty, and the imaginative content of the original short films—making it a delightful sequel. Although the running time is extremely short and the music isn’t as catchy, this film is perfect for youngsters, and the young-at-heart.

I may have griped about the running time, but I should probably commend the writers for being able to stretch a story about finding Eeyore’s tail to an hour. That’s essentially the story: Eeyore lost his tail and everyone is setting out to find it. Along the way the characters at the Hundred-Acre Wood also fear that a monster might be approaching the area. The script is void of any tension or drama, which is a massive rarity nowadays. With animation evolving into a serious art form, you get less and less movies that truly strive to entertain the kids without teaching them or scarring them. This film is very lightweight with its material, and trust me that is a good thing.

The voice acting was incredible and with the exception of perhaps Rabbit (Tom Kenny did a fine job regardless) they sounded darn accurate and close to the original source. Jim Cummings had the tough job of voicing Pooh and TIgger, but did a phenomenal job delivering the lines and singing to some of the songs. John Cleese was delightful as the Narrator, I guess Morgan Freeman wasn’t available (Bad joke, moving on). To me though, Bud Luckey as Eeyore stole the show as the depressed donkey had much more to say this time around, and says it with such droll and lack of enthusiasm you can’t help but laugh.

The animation was nearly flawless, as the colors were light, there was no computer-animation getting in the way, and best of all the animators were able to throw in plenty of visual humor. Some of the funniest moments in the original Pooh adventures involved the actual book and the words being part of the environment and in this case they play an even bigger role. How text plays a role in a film? Just watch and find out, but there are tons of moments when the narrator and the book toys around with Pooh and his friends.

Bottom Line: If there is a gripe I have with this movie, is that the running time was extremely short. It could have been nice to throw in a second or third story to at least pass 75-80 minutes and really get your money’s worth. Nonetheless, the hour-long drama of finding a tail was funny, very delightful, and delivers smiles all around without ever becoming boring. Winnie the Pooh is the type of warm animation that we just don’t see anymore: perfect for the kids but also not mind-numbing to the adults. The music was fun, the voice acting was great, the humor is everywhere, and there isn’t a dull moment to be found in the Hundred-Acre Wood. Honestly, this movie was 20 minutes away from becoming a near instant-classic. I recommend this flashback to your childhood, no matter how old you are.

No comments:

Post a Comment