Disney’s new Winnie the Pooh is an unexpected gift, an unlikely return to a magical and gentle world that belongs so firmly to the past that I would have thought the journey all but impossible.
A.A. Milne’s beloved character, Winnie the Pooh, and his Hundred Acre Wood friends, for decades a cornerstone of the Disney empire, have languished since my childhood in second-rate, small-screen adaptations, as well as a few theatrically released films (The Tigger Movie, Piglet’s Big Movie, Pooh’s Heffalump Movie) indistinguishable from direct-to-video fare.
Until now, few if any of these latter-day efforts have displayed much grasp of the sense of whimsy and nonsense that is the soul of Pooh. It’s not just that the jokes came a bit too fast and the cuts were a bit too quick. There was too much plot, too much formula, too much didacticism. There was conflict, rising action, an exciting climax, and an important lesson was learned about family, or valuing everyone, or something.
Milne’s stories are nothing like this. They tend to be rather aimless affairs in which more is imagined, planned or misunderstood than actually happens, much like a happy Saturday playing in one’s back yard with a few toys. Characters might behave generously or even heroically, but not, thank goodness, to resolve some theme or to teach a lesson, but simply because it was the Thing to Do.
The earliest Disney adaptations understood that how Milne told the stories, and the less-traveled paths that he and his characters found through the vagaries of language and logic, were far more important than anything that happened. What matters is not that Piglet is entirely surrounded by water, but that when he writes a message in a bottle reading “Help! Piglet,” he then has to clarify that the note is not asking Piglet for help, and so it winds up reading “Help! Piglet (Me)” (and in the book he adds on the reverse side “It’s me, Piglet, help help!”).
Fidelity to an author’s voice has never been one of Disney’s strong suits. From Pinocchio and Bambi to Peter Pan and The Jungle Book, Disney has pilfered whatever was useful and done with it as it pleased. With Alice in Wonderland, there was an effort to get Lewis Carroll right, but not a terribly successful one. The one notable exception is Milne, whose voice, though certainly Disneyfied, remains recognizably his own in those early shorts and in the 1977 compilation The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh.
That voice, lost in the non-Milne stories of Disney’s recent Pooh fare, is now back in Winnie the Pooh, which is based on three previously unadapted Milne stories, “In Which Eeyore Loses a Tail and Pooh Finds One,” “In Which Piglet Meets a Heffalump” and “In Which Rabbit Has a Busy Day and We Learn What Christopher Robin Does in the Mornings.”
Here is a typical exchange from the episode with Eeyore’s tail: Owl suggests that they issue a reward for the lost tail, and Pooh, hearing the word “issue,” thinks Owl has sneezed. Owl protests that he didn’t sneeze, but Pooh is sure he did. Owl objects, “You can’t sneeze without knowing it.” Pooh’s response is: “Well … you can’t know it without something having been sneezed.” If you aren’t going to have dialogue like this, what is the point of having it in the Hundred Acre Wood?
Winnie the Pooh looks back for inspiration not only to Milne’s stories, but to Disney’s Many Adventures and its ilk. Behind this, I suppose is the old-school Disney nostalgia of John Lasseter. Like those old episodes, Winnie the Pooh is aware that the Pooh stories were written to be read aloud and that character’s storybook milieu is as much a part of his natural environment as the Hundred Acre Wood.
Pooh and his friends thus inhabit a watercolor world that appears on the pages of a book alongside the printed words of the story, allowing them to interact with the letters on the pages and jump over the book’s spine from one page to another. The narrator, too, is a character in his own right, and he and Pooh occasionally confer on what is meant to happen next, or what a word means, and that sort of thing. Some have described this as “breaking the fourth wall,” but that metaphor from stagecraft isn’t quite right for this sort of blurring of diegetic boundaries.
A couple of inspired surreal musical sequences recall the brilliant, unsettling “Heffalumps and Woozles” bit from “Blustery Day” (as well as precedents like Dumbo’s celebrated “Pink Elephants on Parade” sequence). One involves the intimidating Backson, another Milnean bogeyman based on a misunderstanding, animated here in an appealing chalk-on-chalkboard style. Then there’s a deceptively harmonious, sickly-sweet sequence in which a honey-deprived Pooh slips into a dreamy state in which he sees honey and honey pots everywhere he looks.
As they should be, the moral elements are low-key and matter of fact. Pooh must force himself to put thoughts of honey out of his head and think of Christopher Robin, who is supposed to be in danger (of course it’s a misunderstanding). Then, forced to choose between an actual pot of honey and helping a friend who really is in an unhappy state, Pooh regretfully defers his own gratification to help his friend — a modest act of heroism that goes unnoticed, though not unrewarded.
I don’t want to overpraise this modest little film. Barely an hour long, padded with a pleasant short called The Ballad of Nessie that looks like 1960s-era Disney and plays like an homage to Dr. Seuss (with a moral about how it’s okay to cry), it’s a slight affair, as any Pooh feature would be. Milne’s tales are not crafted to run feature length. Many Adventures wasn’t a true feature, but three sequential episodes. Winnie the Pooh weaves together three storylines into the events of a single day, making for a tale about as successful a feature-length Pooh story could be.
This has been a dreadful summer for family films. Spring brought us Rio and Kung Fu Panda 2, but since then, it’s been a wasteland. Last week’s Zookeeper was the bottom of the barrel, with Mr. Popper’s Penguins not far behind. Even ever-reliable Pixar stumbled with the frantic, forgettable Cars 2. And what’s on the horizon? Lord, give me strength: It’s Smurfs.
Running down that lineup, replete with fast-paced gags, snarky humor and action, I wonder whether a film as gentle and retro as Winnie the Pooh can possibly find an audience today. I hope so. It deserves to. At any rate, if it can’t find its audience this summer, there is no audience. And that would be a shame, and our children’s loss.
Register film critic Steven D. Greydanus blogs at NCRegister.com.
Content Advisory: Brief mildly unsettling imagery. Fine family viewing.


Comments
Post a Comment
Isn’t “Help! Piglet (Me)” from “Winnie the Pooh and the Blustery Day”, which WAS adapted by Disney? I watched that one probably half a hundred times growing up—and while there’s no back of the note in the movie version, the “Help! P-p-p-piglet (Me)” is definitely there . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0i7JU9SijE&feature=related
@ Sophia Mason:
You’re absolutely right. When I first wrote that paragraph I was sure that episode was in Many Adventures—that’s why I included it—but then when I tried double-checking the sources my brain slipped a gear and I failed to connect “Blustery Day” to “In Which Piglet is Entirely Surrounded by Water,” and so I thought I had made it up, and I added that incorrect factoid. I should have triple-checked. Many thanks for the catch!
Big sigh of relief! At last, a movie I can take my youngest children to see. We’ve been reading & enjoying Pooh stories this summer so this will be a delightful treat (and the older kids might want to come, too: I know they sneak in and listen when I read—I can hear them laughing!)
@Mr. Greydanus: Anytime! (That was an awfully gracious response, BTW. But what else does one expect from a fellow Pooh fan?!)
I was sooo concerned that they were going to mess this up like they did so many of the others! Pooh is one of my favorite characters and we watch “The Many Adventures..” dozens of times and read the stories more times than I can remember. Glad to hear that I finally have a movie to look forward to seeing this summer! (and a good word for two friends. Their son is one of the lead animators for “Nessie”!)
No audience? I’ll be there with my little 23 month old grandson and my 62 year old husband. One guess who’ll be MORE excited. Thanks Steve.
I hope the snarky reference to Smurfs was to a movie preview you’ve already seen and was not to the cartoon I watched growing up in the 80s and whose several reruns I enjoyed watching last year. To be fair, I imagine it’s one of the easier shows to screw up since it’s stock in trade is the perfect mixture of whimsicality, naivete, and moral uprightness, which sounds hard to reproduce and mass market to today’s more sophisticated, relativistic audience.
If you’ve never seen Disney’s Darby O’Gill and the Little People (Maltin raves about it and it premieres a 20s-something Sean Connery), I thought it was extremely faithful to the books’ core tone. Though my memory is foggy, I have the same general impression for Pollyanna. Maybe film adaptations are less prone to creative license than cartoon renditions.
Anyways, as someone who has always enjoyed The Many Adventures, I am excited to show my kids the new Pooh story thanks to this review.
@ filiusdextris:
While I am not a fan of any incarnation of the Smurfs, I have no brief against the ‘80s cartoon here. My snarky comment reflects only my stoic confidence that the CGI/live-action feature film will be a trial to sit through at best, excruciating at worst. If not, I’ll eat my hat. Heck, I’ll eat Jimmy Akin’s hat, it’s bigger.
The two Disney adaptations you mention, Darby O’Gill and the Little People and Pollyanna, belong even more decisively to the past than The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. There is no way Disney or any other Hollywood studio would make a film remotely like either, regardless of source material or medium.
“Here is a typical exchange from the episode with Eeyore’s tail: Owl suggests that they issue a reward for the lost tail, and Pooh, hearing the word “issue,” thinks Owl has sneezed. Owl protests that he didn’t sneeze, but Pooh is sure he did. Owl objects, “You can’t sneeze without knowing it.” Pooh’s response is: “Well … you can’t know it without something having been sneezed.” If you aren’t going to have dialogue like this, what is the point of having it in the Hundred Acre Wood?”
## The books are works of towering genius. Pooh was clearly an existentialist:
worldcat.org/title/pooh-and-the-philosophers-in-which-it-is-shown-that-all-of-western-philosophy-is-merely-a-preamble-to-winnie-the-pooh/oclc/033104068
——
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/deepthought/pooh.html
Three of my teenagers and I went to see Winnie the Pooh this weekend. There was a row of teens behind us, too, along with many small children and their moms and dads. We all enjoyed it immensely!
@ Elise:
Alas, you must live in the only town in America where all the teenagers weren’t all watching Harry Potter. Winnie the Pooh grossed a lowly $8M this weekend—less than the fourth weekend of the disappointing Cars 2 and less than the 2nd weekend of the execrable Zookeeper.
Did you see the commercials, Steven? Smurfette has been reworked into the kind of Grrl Power character you hate. Don’t worry, Jimmy, your hat’s perfectly safe.
While I can certainly see the appeal of the old Pooh stuff, I sort of disagree about the more recent Pooh not being very good. I was actually rather fond of the New Adventures Of… TV show, that movie The Grand Adventure (or somthing close to that) which also featured an attempted (and unnecessary) rescue of Christpher Robin, and even—yes—The Tigger Movie. That last one seems to be where it started to go downhill, though, and I won’t argue with anyone who points out typical disney flaws in the others. (It’s still better by far than a certain other film with a striped protagonist and the word “Movie” in the title, I can tell you that!)
The last few years haven’t been so kind to Pooh, with all those video sequels, the miserable “Book of Pooh” and the Mary Sue fanfic that is “My Friends Tigger and Pooh.”
Anyway, I am seeing this movie.
@ Linebyline:
I haven’t seen the commercials. That is how reliable my critic-sense is.
As for the recent Pooh stuff, I don’t say that it’s no good at all. I sort of liked Piglet’s Big Movie. It was okay as Disney knockoff Pooh. It just didn’t get Milne the way this new film does.
I read somewhere an explanation of Winnie the Pooh as being modeled after a boys’ boarding school. Piglet, Pooh, and of course Christopher Robin are pupils; Kanga is the matron/school nurse; Owl and Rabbit are teachers (Owl either History or Latin; Rabbit some scientific subject and also coaches soccer); Eeyore is the groundskeeper.
Didn’t Christopher Milne, the original for Christopher Robin, kill himself? Again, I seem to remember that, but I may be mixing him up with someone else.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.