PatrickvD wrote:I'm pretty sure it's based on stories from the books. And they've mentioned they will be using the "leaping from page to page" thing from the original film. Which was what I loved about the original.
Well, I did read that originally this was pitched as a DTV, but Lasseter liked the story so much he bumped it up to a theatrical release. Not sure if that is true or not, but if its an anthology, it seems unlikely? Especially if re-workings of established tales.
As long as it's not for kids with ADD like the Australian DTV's and theatrical films, I'm fine. I love the original film. Nothing ever since made me even remotely care about Pooh.
I think that's a little unfair. Most Pooh DTVs were television spin-offs in effect, but I didn't think that Tigger Movie or Piglet's Big Movie were bad at all.
Also, if this really was exactly like the Eisner era, then where is that Princess and the Frog sequel? Where is that Meet the Robinsons television series? The Bolt spin-off? Chicken Little III?
One Pooh movie and some Tinkerbell films that are apparently decent instead of atrocious do not compare to the likes of Cinderella II, Atlantis II and The Little Mermaid III. Let's not pretend they do.
Again, a little unfair. Even before Eisner left/resigned/was thrown out/told to leave with a gun to his head (* delete as appropriate) the DTV output was already considerably cut down. Same for TV series - what was the last film to TV spin-off you can remember? Emperor's New Groove/School? How long did that take to fly? What stopped the TV series spin-offs more than anything is the Disney Channels dominance of live-action tween shows I think more than anything else.
(That's said, its a long time since I can remember a film to TV animated series from any studio - remember when films like Godzilla, Ghostbusters, Men in Black and - heaven's above - even Little Shop of Horrors got animated spin-offs. Its just not a trend these days).
Synergy, it's what Disney does. They've invented it and are the example in Hollywood as to "how to do it". They just went overboard. I don't think anyone was expecting Disney to completely abandon their business. They just have to go about it without destroying their brands. Because of course this is about fixing Pooh as a brand name. Destroyed under Eisner.
To be fair, Disney may not have kept the Pooh brand name, regardless of who destroyed it. If you're involved in multi-million lawsuits lasting year after year, perhaps a good business decision
is to milk it while you can?
And you don't have to make a new film to fix a brand, just promote the old brand more. I think everyone accepts that My Friends Tigger & Pooh was a big of a disaster - too much messing with the format - but they still have a highly regarded movie, some reasonably regarded sequels, a well-loved TV show (The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh) and an award winning and valued pre-teen show (The Book of Pooh) which are between them hours and hours of "on brand" Pooh content.
That doesn't mean Lasseter enjoys making these films though. He probably had a gun to his head when he gave this the green light
But under his leadership Disney has released two of the best reviewed animated features in the studios' recent history. So quality is guaranteed. Under Eisner, quantity was guaranteed. Quality faded a long time ago.
Actually, the quantity of theatrical releases seems to have gone up since Eisner's departure. (And as you know, I'm not convinced Lasseter has much range, regardless of how well reviewed his films are).
