1977 mass murderer animated biopicRating: 16/20
Plot: All his neighbors said that he seemed so normal, but young Christopher Robin had more than his share of dark secrets. It all started with an unhealthy attachment to a stuffed bear which he called Pooh. Pooh was purchased with pants, but Christopher Robin, one afternoon when playtime got a little out of hand, removed and set them on fire along with his own. That should have served as the first warning for his parents. Classmates would laugh at Robin and his "silly old bear," and his elementary school teachers would say, "Christopher Robin, I've told you before to keep your Pooh out of here!" His peers would laugh and point, and eventually something inside of young Christopher snapped. He assembled a small army of deadly stuffed animals and embarked on a murderous rampage of revenge during which many of the classmates who ridiculed him would wind up eviscerated. The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh chronicles his early life.
Disney does English kiddie lit really well, previously evidenced by their extremely erotic version of Mary Poppins. Now there's a movie that makes me horny just thinking about it. The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh fails to make me horny (at least not anymore), but I still think it's an underrated Disney classic. It's obviously animated with a limited budget, but I think that adds to the charm. It's simple and extremely innocent, just like its source material. A.A. Milne's stories are great on their own, so Disney didn't really need to sprinkle too much of its magic all over this and overly complicate things (see the cgi Winnie the Pooh animated television series). The voice work is wonderful, especially Sterling Holloway as the titular bear and Paul Winchell as Tigger. After the feature, there was a little documentary where you get to see Winchell doing the Tigger voice. I'll admit that that footage DID make me a little horny. I really like how Tigger says rubber. "Their legs are made out of rubba!" Oh, and Ron Howard's brother Clint does the voice of Roo in this. I also like Sebastian Cabot's playful narration. The narrator and characters talk to one another which, even as a kid, I thought was kind of neat. This movie also frequently reminds the viewer that it's from a book, using turning animated pages and words cleverly. You get to see Pooh hopping on words or flying on a balloon from one page to the next. There's some music, simple childish music that kind of gets stuck in your head. I'm not sure how I feel about the Pink Huffalumps on Parade sequence that was straight out of drunk Dumbo's subconscious or the added gopher character who just seems extraneous. I asked Jen, "Why's that thing in this? He's not in the book." As if on cue, the character said, "I'm not in the book." I guess that's kind of funny.
Dang it. Why did I have to mention Mary Poppins? Now I won't be able to get anything done all day.
12 comments:
I forgot to mention that this is pretty gosh darn whimsical...
Charm is the perfect word for this gentle, very sweet film. All of the voice work is perfect (though I have to put Holloway's face out of my mind since his strange/creepy appearance is totally at odds with Pooh). I am confused because Gopher is in the book I own, but we totally agree on the film. A 16 (but I would give it a 20 for movies I loved watching with my kids).
He is? I looked it up in Jen's very worn copy and didn't see the Gopher. At least not in that scene where Pooh's stuck in Rabbit's door. Think they added him to later additions of the book? That doesn't sit well with me at all.
I'd really like to see the new Pooh movie. I've heard good things.
Oh, and of course we agree 100%...it's an animated movie!
no gopher in aa milne's book. he is a disney creation. also, tigger was not in the first winnie-the-pooh book, he was in the sequel, the house at pooh corner. i really love the voices disney hired for the movie and am extremely fond of the movie, but i will always prefer the classic, non-disney pooh bear from the books. but then, the book is always better than the movie, i guess :)
I think Cory's been reading some illegal bootleg or something.
I forgot about Tigger not being in the first book, but he's not in the first part of this movie either. Which is good because too much Tigger would have been a bad thing.
'Of Mice and Men' (the 90's version) is better than the book...and I love the book! The 90's movie version with Gary Sinese and John Malkovich added a gopher character.
Hey, don't knock it. There's a lot of money to be made in black market Pooh. My book looks classic and official, and I would have been perfectly happy with it until you two had to go and ruin the ride ("Incredibles" line...another animated movie Shane misjudged). I might have a Disneyfied version of the book, but if you're asking me to choose original Milne over anything Disney, I'll just have to tell you to go fu...wait, what's gotten into me? Work has got me cranky, though I don't have to sit on a urine-smelling couch... only chairs that smell like despair.
Oh, and though I love Jen's input, I do have to disagree on the book/movie thing. I can probably name 20, beginning with "Jaws".
'Incredibles' is a 16...what more do you want?
Didn't the 'Jaws' author come out and condemn his own book and the movie later?
I'd like to see a little list of other movies that are better than books.
I want "The Incredibles" to get at least the 19 it deserves (I might even give it a 20).
Benchley felt all quilty and whiney about sharks after a series of shark-related nightmares and a complete dropoff in public attention unsuitable to his narcissistic needs. Did he repent over his squid story, Beast? No, he did not! Jaws and Bissett's nearly see-through t-shirt in "The Deep" are where he should have left his legacy. Besides, sharks have gotten very uppity lately, especially on the East coast.
I'll get started on that movie vs book list right away.
1. Jaws (book was kind of creepy) 2. The Godfather (very good book but epic movie) 3. The Graduate (the book kinda sucks) 4. The Manchurian Candidate (much more powerful and disturbing film) 5. The World According to Garp (Irving's book is kinda odd and self-indulgent, whereas the movie captures the brilliance) 6. Star Wars 7. The Shawshank Redemption (King's story is very good, the movie is great) 8. Of Mice and Men (Sinise, Malkovich and the film are perfect) 9. Fail-Safe (movie was better at conveying the tension) 10. A Place in the Sun (An American Tragedy is work to get through) 11. Psycho (Bloch's book is not nearly as shocking or amazing) 12. Marathon Man (Olivier and Hoffman make this work better) 13. All the King's Men (movie packs more punch, the novel kind of drags) 14. War of the Worlds (1953)(movie better at bringing story to life) 15. OK, this is getting hard and you're probably getting bored. I have concluded I need to read more. My scientific analysis says that the book is better 71.38625% of the time. So there. Now I'm going to go get a life.
That seems scientific enough.
Been a while since I've read 'War of the Worlds'...I had an autistic student last year who read 'The Godfather' over and over. I don't think he had ever seen the movie! Cool kid--showed up to school in a suit about half the time and laughed at all my jokes.
Post a Comment