Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:04 pm

Actually, they're gonna rename the movie Bear so that moviegoers won't think they're seeing a girly movie that's strangely about defecation. The marketing department at Disney thinks Bear is manly, it inspires courage and confidence and growling, while Winnie the Pooh sounds like a little girl's nickname because of her fondness for the toilet.

albert

Neal · Post by **Neal** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:06 pm

I was hoping for "Golden Grizzly"...

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:12 pm

Unfortunately, they vetoed Golden Grizzly because they found some focus groups always equate "Golden" with "The Golden Girls" and they don't want little boys to become fans of four old women talking about sex.

Plus, Bear is shorter to say and spell.

Word on the street is Disney also plans on making an animated version of "The Elves and the Shoemaker". They're gonna call it Shoes.

albert

estefan · Post by **estefan** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:19 pm

Escapay wrote: Word on the street is Disney also plans on making an animated version of "The Elves and the Shoemaker".

You're probably joking, but I actually think that would be a great story for Disney to adapt.

Elladorine · Post by **Elladorine** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:24 pm

They could call it "Oh, Bother" but that would be one too many words.

Disney's Divinity · Post by **Disney's Divinity** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:27 pm

Neal wrote:Honestly, I like the simplicity. In my opinion, this should be the last 2D Pooh film. (and no more CGI or puppet Pooh films, either!)

I kind of disagree. Pooh is really the only property they have that I don't mind seeing sequels to. I guess it's similar to those mice films (Rescuers and Basil) where there could always be another story; there's no clear, definite end. Pooh is something I would never want to see end, tbh.

But I do agree that they should try to space the films out and have there be a break between them. Only, I think they've been doing that. Besides, everyone knows they still need to make an Eeyore movie.

(There's no hope for a Rabbit movie, unfortunately.

)

Actually, they're gonna rename the movie Bear so that moviegoers won't think they're seeing a girly movie that's strangely about defecation. The marketing department at Disney thinks Bear is manly, it inspires courage and confidence and growling, while Winnie the Pooh sounds like a little girl's nickname because of her fondness for the toilet.

albert

I haven't read the stories yet, but I always have wondered why he's Winnie the Pooh. Is Winnie his name? And wth is a Pooh bear?

UmbrellaFish · Post by **UmbrellaFish** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:39 pm

Disney's Divinity wrote: I haven't read the stories yet, but I always have wondered why he's Winnie the Pooh. Is Winnie his name? And wth is a Pooh bear?

A.A. Milne (the author of the books) was inspired by his son to name the character that, because his son, the actual Christopher Robin Milne, called his own teddy bear Winnie, which was the name of a bear at the London Zoo. Pooh, too, comes from an animal at the zoo, a swan. How, or why, Milne put those names together I don't know, but he wouldn't be the same rumbly, tumbly, old bear without them.

disneyboy20022 · Post by **disneyboy20022** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 4:45 pm

I know..

The Adventures of how Winnie the Pooh was really Winnie the Bear and Pooh the Swan

though they probably will just shorten that to Winnie and the Pooh Swan

Neal · Post by **Neal** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:03 pm

I also have said before that Pooh is the only franchise that I don't mind seeing sequels to, but even so, I have grown a little weary of all the installments.

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 7:41 pm

KubrickFan wrote:
blackcauldron85 wrote: Maybe because Rapunzel is already a well-known fairy tale that Disney hasn't covered yet; some think that there's no reason to change the title- it is the story of Rapunzel (but with the Disney twist). Disney already has The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, so maybe they think that it should be called The Further Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, or More Tales of Winnie the Pooh, or something coming before Winnie the Pooh in the title.
Again, why? There's, I believe, no indication that the movie will use the episodic format of the Classic movie. Plus, there hasn't been a movie, short or series that used it, all of them added some words to it. This will be plain 'Winnie the Pooh'.

John Lasseter has confirmed a bunch of times that the new movie will follow the format of the first, using multiple different stories from the original Milne books. So yeah, I like to see it be named something that relates to the first one. Certainly not, "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh 2"... but something along the lines of what blackcauldron mentioned... something like "Many MORE Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" or something.

To me, it seems almost backwards. Using "Winnie the Pooh" as the name, imo, should only have been used for the very first Pooh movie, if it was ever used. Simply "Winnie the Pooh" doesn't sound like a sequel at all. It sounds like an original movie, which it isn't. That's why I don't like it, at least.

And the whole "Rapunzel" and "Tangled" thing has nothing to do with it. I don't think anyone is upset because "Pooh" is named after the main character. It's a whole different thing...

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 10:28 pm

estefan wrote:
Escapay wrote:Word on the street is Disney also plans on making an animated version of "The Elves and the Shoemaker".
You're probably joking, but I actually think that would be a great story for Disney to adapt.

I am joking (sadly) but I would love for it to happen.

SWillie! wrote:John Lasseter has confirmed a bunch of times that the new movie will follow the format of the first, using multiple different stories from the original Milne books. So yeah, I like to see it be named something that relates to the first one. Certainly not, "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh 2"... but something along the lines of what blackcauldron mentioned... something like "Many MORE Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" or something.

The Unseen Adventures of Winnie the Pooh?

Winnie the Pooh: The Adventure Continues?

Adventures You Have Yet To Experience With Winnie the Pooh?

Winnie the Pooh, Part Six?

The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh: The Squeakquel?

The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh 2: Electric Boogaloo?

The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh: Episode IV - A New Hope?

<strike>The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh</strike> Never mind, they used that for the tv series.

SWillie! wrote:And the whole "Rapunzel" and "Tangled" thing has nothing to do with it. I don't think anyone is upset because "Pooh" is named after the main character. It's a whole different thing...

I know, I was being silly. Like Pooh. Winnie, that is. Not the other one.

albert

KubrickFan · Post by **KubrickFan** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:27 am

SWillie! wrote: John Lasseter has confirmed a bunch of times that the new movie will follow the format of the first, using multiple different stories from the original Milne books. So yeah, I like to see it be named something that relates to the first one. Certainly not, "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh 2"... but something along the lines of what blackcauldron mentioned... something like "Many MORE Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" or something.

To me, it seems almost backwards. Using "Winnie the Pooh" as the name, imo, should only have been used for the very first Pooh movie, if it was ever used. Simply "Winnie the Pooh" doesn't sound like a sequel at all. It sounds like an original movie, which it isn't. That's why I don't like it, at least.

And the whole "Rapunzel" and "Tangled" thing has nothing to do with it. I don't think anyone is upset because "Pooh" is named after the main character. It's a whole different thing...

That it will be episodic must've escaped me.
But 'The Many More Adventures of Winnie the Pooh' is an awfully long title. And I don't think it will be a genuine sequel, but merely more of the same. So, 'Winnie the Pooh' could definitely work, just as the simple 'Star Trek' did, even though it was the eleventh movie in the series.
So, what you're trying to say is that some people are making a fuss over a title, no matter what?

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:43 am

KubrickFan wrote:
SWillie! wrote: John Lasseter has confirmed a bunch of times that the new movie will follow the format of the first, using multiple different stories from the original Milne books. So yeah, I like to see it be named something that relates to the first one. Certainly not, "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh 2"... but something along the lines of what blackcauldron mentioned... something like "Many MORE Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" or something.

To me, it seems almost backwards. Using "Winnie the Pooh" as the name, imo, should only have been used for the very first Pooh movie, if it was ever used. Simply "Winnie the Pooh" doesn't sound like a sequel at all. It sounds like an original movie, which it isn't. That's why I don't like it, at least.

And the whole "Rapunzel" and "Tangled" thing has nothing to do with it. I don't think anyone is upset because "Pooh" is named after the main character. It's a whole different thing...
That it will be episodic must've escaped me.
But 'The Many More Adventures of Winnie the Pooh' is an awfully long title. And I don't think it will be a genuine sequel, but merely more of the same. So, 'Winnie the Pooh' could definitely work, just as the simple 'Star Trek' did, even though it was the eleventh movie in the series.
So, what you're trying to say is that some people are making a fuss over a title, no matter what?

Well one could also argue that, especially by today's standards, "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" is also quite long. But we call it "Winnie the Pooh" anyways. No matter what the new movie is called, people will end up calling it "Pooh 2"... I'm almost sure of it. However, for me... the official title should stay in sequence with the original, especially since they are trying to stay with the "book" type feel for the film. I would argue that what you said... that it will be "more of the same"... is all the more reason to name the movie something similar to the original. "Star Trek" was NOT more of the same. It was very different. "Pooh" will indeed be more of the same. And so I think they should name it likewise.

And no, I'm not saying that people are making a fuss about the title just for the sake of making a fuss about the title (although to an extent that probably is true in some people's case). I'm saying that the reason people are upset about "Tangled" is that it doesn't fit the original fairy tale, and it doesn't fit the artists' visions. For "Pooh", people are upset that it isn't in line with the original. Two different things.

I have to note, though... nobody's really making a fuss over Pooh's title. I do like the simplicity of it, and would much prefer it over something stupid. But I do wish they would have related it to the original.

disneyboy20022 · Post by **disneyboy20022** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:28 am

I'm just glad it's not going to be like the other pooh films...such as I am glad they aren't coming out with something like Eeyore's Gloomy Movie

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:41 am

disneyboy20022 wrote:I'm just glad it's not going to be like the other pooh films...such as I am glad they aren't coming out with something like Eeyore's Gloomy Movie

That would actually have the potential to be SO funny. Like if they made it ridiculously gloomy and like sarcastic almost. Eeyore has always been my favorite character.

ajmrowland · Post by **ajmrowland** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:15 am

I have a soft spot for him.

kbehm29 · Post by **kbehm29** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:30 am

disneyboy20022 wrote:I know..

The Adventures of how Winnie the Pooh was really Winnie the Bear and Pooh the Swan

though they probably will just shorten that to Winnie and the Pooh Swan

I am cracking up! You just made me day, that was hilarious.

disneyboy20022 · Post by **disneyboy20022** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 1:59 pm

SWillie! wrote:
disneyboy20022 wrote:I'm just glad it's not going to be like the other pooh films...such as I am glad they aren't coming out with something like Eeyore's Gloomy Movie
That would actually have the potential to be SO funny. Like if they made it ridiculously gloomy and like sarcastic almost. Eeyore has always been my favorite character.

Like an Alternate reality version of the Hundred Acre Wood where Eeyore rules all?

I think that's kinda being done by another company in a differ franchise

although there might be a book about it Eeyore's Gloomy Life already

Sotiris · Post by **Sotiris** » Tue May 11, 2010 6:37 pm

Robert Lopez of Avenue Q fame is writing the songs for the movie. Robert Lopez has worked with Disney before in adapting Finding Nemo as a musical for the Animal Kingdom theme park and Toy Story for the Disney Cruise ship.

What I don't get is why didn't they hire The Sherman Brothers for the job. Besides penning the original (which by itself should make them the only choice for the job) with Tigger Movie they proved that their music still matches perfectly with the Pooh universe and is not outdated.

Q: Tell me about the new “Winnie the Pooh” traditional 2D feature film set for released in Spring of 2011?

Jim Cummings: We are very very very happy. What happened was it was perfect timing. Right about the time “The Princess and the Frog” crew was winding down their production, all those world class animators became available. They just finished up and switched over to “Pooh”. Andreas Deja is doing Tigger. Mark Henn is incredible, he did Princess Tiana, Ariel and Jasmine. He is doing Pooh. These are the best guys on earth who do this. Everyone is going through the roof. The music is great, it is by Robert Lopez and the guys who did “Avenue Q”. Wait till you hear the music, it is soooo beautiful. It has everything you like about “Pooh” with a new updated sound.

Source: http://moviemikes.com/2010/05/interview ... -cummings/

Disneykid · Post by **Disneykid** » Tue May 11, 2010 7:09 pm

Yeah, that's pretty strange. I understand Robert Sherman not working on it since his health has been failing him as of late, but Richard is obviously still active having written the Stark Expo theme in Iron Man 2 (and proving he's still got it). Hopefully Lopez doesn't try to overdo it. What makes the original's songs stand out is how simple and brief they are, more like sung poems than flat-out musical numbers.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Winnie the Pooh (2011)