Winnie the Pooh (2011)

[whbinder]

Originally Posted by zackisthewalrus

I can confirm that. I'm 16, and a lot of my friends (in the 15-18 range) want to see it. They mostly either don't have time, or they don't have money.

When I was a child I had the time and the desire, but not the money
When I grew I had the money and the time, but not the desire
Now I have the desire and the money, but not the time.

[JJBerning]

My point was more that the Deathly Hallows is NOT for little kids.
Little kids would be terrified.

I am 40 and I want to see the pooh movie too.
Yes, Pooh can appeal to little kids and adults equally but I don't think the last few Harry Potter movies are made for little kids.

So, I still have the same point, Pooh really had a different target market, familes with young children.
Sure people of any age might enjoy the movie equally but the studios put it in the theaters at the same time as Harry Potter for familes with children that are too young to see the Deathly Hallows 2.

[jonsmith369]

Originally Posted by JJBerning

My point was more that the Deathly Hallows is NOT for little kids.
Little kids would be terrified.

I am 40 and I want to see the pooh movie too.
Yes, Pooh can appeal to little kids and adults equally but I don't think the last few Harry Potter movies are made for little kids.

So, I still have the same point, Pooh really had a different target market, familes with young children.
Sure people of any age might enjoy the movie equally but the studios put it in the theaters at the same time as Harry Potter for familes with children that are too young to see the Deathly Hallows 2.

The only good excuse for putting this movie up against Harry Potter was that they must have accidentally forgotten that Harry Potter was opening that day and didn't realize it until it was too late to reschedule it. It was just about the stupidest thing they could have done and it almost feels like they intentionally sunk this film, but I have no idea why they would?

They could have released this Pooh movie on any other weekend in the entire year and it definitely would have done better than $8 million. They should have released this against Cars 2 so parents could choose whether to let their kids see the classic Winnie the Pooh characters or expose them to that obnoxious turd Mater. I honestly have no clue why they would they would disrespect this movie like that, unless maybe they had so much faith in it that thought it could overcome the Potter hype. I just wonder if they will release the Blu-ray against Kung Fu Panda 2 or Harry Potter 8 again just so they can officially declare this film and hand-drawn animation dead in the water.

[detective392]

Originally Posted by jonsmith369

The only good excuse for putting this movie up against Harry Potter was that they must have accidentally forgotten that Harry Potter was opening that day and didn't realize it until it was too late to reschedule it. It was just about the stupidest thing they could have done and it almost feels like they intentionally sunk this film, but I have no idea why they would?

They could have released this Pooh movie on any other weekend in the entire year and it definitely would have done better than $8 million. They should have released this against Cars 2 so parents could choose whether to let their kids see the classic Winnie the Pooh characters or expose them to that obnoxious turd Mater. I honestly have no clue why they would they would disrespect this movie like that, unless maybe they had so much faith in it that thought it could overcome the Potter hype. I just wonder if they will release the Blu-ray against Kung Fu Panda 2 or Harry Potter 8 again just so they can officially declare this film and hand-drawn animation dead in the water.

It would have made more money with any other date but Disney seemed confident that parents would take the children to young to see Potter to Pooh instead and tried to cash in on that. I don't really see Potter or Panda messing up Pooh's home video release as I'm sure it will do fine on home video and chances are it's releasing this Fall so Christmas will be a huge part of sales.

[whbinder]

Originally Posted by JJBerning

My point was more that the Deathly Hallows is NOT for little kids.
Little kids would be terrified.

Right. No one's debating that. Harry Potter is for teenagers.

I think the respectful disagreement here comes from the fact that you believe the target demographic for Pooh is small children. I disagree.

Harry Potter: teens (and some adults)

Pooh: Children and also teens (and some adults)

So there's a large market of Pooh's audience that overlaps with Harry's.

I would agree with you if I felt that HPs audience was largely teens and Pooh's audience was largely small children.

Cheers.

[Infrared Sight]

I went to see Pooh yesterday with my daughter and I very much enjoyed the movie. There was probably a total of 20-25 people in the theater. Most were parents with kids, but a group of late teens/early 20s did also come into the theater to watch it too. I will gladly buy this on blu-ray when it does come out.

[zackisthewalrus]

Blu-ray.com is listing Dec. 20 as the US release date.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Winni...Blu-ray/26838/

[ETphonehome501]

Originally Posted by zackisthewalrus

Blu-ray.com is listing Dec. 20 as the US release date.

No, there have been NO official announcements from Disney or other sources indicating this release date. I'm sorry. Someone just submitted the movie to our site too soon.

[DiscoDan]

I watched this a few days ago and liked it okay. The animation was beautiful and i'm sure it'll look amazing on blu. I wouldn't call it classic or anything though.

[mayorofsmpleton]

Originally Posted by JJBerning

My point was more that the Deathly Hallows is NOT for little kids.
Little kids would be terrified.
So, I still have the same point, Pooh really had a different target market, familes with young children.
Sure people of any age might enjoy the movie equally but the studios put it in the theaters at the same time as Harry Potter for familes with children that are too young to see the Deathly Hallows 2.

That doesn't change the fact that youngsters under 13 are still targets of marketing and make up a lot of the audience.

Many of the HP audience are adults that have grown up on the films -- but there is plenty of cross-over audience despite the adult themes present. So you get a problem of "We have a 6 year old... WE want to see Harry Potter but ideally he'd be better at Winnie the Pooh. We're going to see Harry Potter and we're bringing our six year old."

WtP was probably tossed on the date to provide counter-programming but it honestly didn't work so well as a "re-launch" of Pooh.

It will show better legs over the next few weeks but it wasn't the smartest to have it debut the same exact weekend. The week before or after would have been smarter.

[mayorofsmpleton]

Originally Posted by JJBerning

My point was more that the Deathly Hallows is NOT for little kids.
Little kids would be terrified.

Depends on the kid. Not every child finds this kind of film terrifying. I know plenty of kids 5-10 who adore the franchise. Similarly they were fans of the Lord of the Rings films, etc. When fantasy is involved it's much easier to sell DARK films to a younger audience. Granted, 3-6 is pushing it but I'd argue plenty of 7-12 year old kids should be just fine.

[Coveragentcov]

Originally Posted by detective392

Can't wait for this to be released and I'm sure that Disney will release a Blu-ray for this. Isn't the UK the only country not getting a BD release of this and so far it has done better in the US then it did in the UK.

Sadly that is an incorrect statement. Not 1 country in Europe will get the Blu-Ray release.

[detective392]

Originally Posted by mayorofsmpleton

Depends on the kid. Not every child finds this kind of film terrifying. I know plenty of kids 5-10 who adore the franchise. Similarly they were fans of the Lord of the Rings films, etc. When fantasy is involved it's much easier to sell DARK films to a younger audience. Granted, 3-6 is pushing it but I'd argue plenty of 7-12 year old kids should be just fine.

Exactly I know a lot of young kids that loved Deathly Hallows part 2 and it's not to scary or doesn't bother them in any way. It may not be a children's film but a lot of children have seen the film without any problems as it's not that scary a movie and most children can handle things like that today.

Originally Posted by Coveragentcov

Sadly that is an incorrect statement. Not 1 country in Europe will get the Blu-Ray release.

Wow that sucks. Wonder how much Disney will make from imports as I'm sure this is getting a BD release in the US.

[ChipmunksDad]

We took our 2 year old she loved. it. That is all one needs to know about this film. What they didn't make at the box office, they will more than make up for in merchandise.

As to what kids see these days, I was utterly floored yesterday when I saw 5 and 6 year olds at Cowboys and Aliens. So the same age at something like Harry Potter would not surprise me. And I must say, as a parent... WTF is wrong with parents these days? Have yo lost your minds? There is such a thing as age appropriate right?

[detective392]

Originally Posted by ChipmunksDad

We took our 2 year old she loved. it. That is all one needs to know about this film. What they didn't make at the box office, they will more than make up for in merchandise.

As to what kids see these days, I was utterly floored yesterday when I saw 5 and 6 year olds at Cowboys and Aliens. So the same age at something like Harry Potter would not surprise me. And I must say, as a parent... WTF is wrong with parents these days? Have yo lost your minds? There is such a thing as age appropriate right?

Age doesn't seem to really matter anymore these days when it comes to movies. Kids 5 and up were excited for Harry Potter becuase that's what's in these days for them just like Cowboys and Aliens is the movie all the young kids are seeing these days while they say they are to old for Pooh.

I agree that Disney will make up any BO loss with merchandise and home video sales. Pooh's actually doing quite well though with $22 million in the US alone considering it opened with Potter and still has stiff competition with Potter, Captain America and now Smurfs and Cowboys and Aliens.

[format916]

yeah i was pretty surprised to see pooh with 22 mil, so i think it will be just fine... as for kids watching potter...i watched chucky and jason as a kid and i turned out fine!

[jonsmith369]

Originally Posted by mayorofsmpleton

That doesn't change the fact that youngsters under 13 are still targets of marketing and make up a lot of the audience.

Many of the HP audience are adults that have grown up on the films -- but there is plenty of cross-over audience despite the adult themes present. So you get a problem of "We have a 6 year old... WE want to see Harry Potter but ideally he'd be better at Winnie the Pooh. We're going to see Harry Potter and we're bringing our six year old."

WtP was probably tossed on the date to provide counter-programming but it honestly didn't work so well as a "re-launch" of Pooh.

It will show better legs over the next few weeks but it wasn't the smartest to have it debut the same exact weekend. The week before or after would have been smarter.

I was hoping that Winnie the Pooh was going to get a decent chance to get it's numbers up over time, but my local theater with 12 screens already had pulled it by last week. It only got 2 weeks where as most bigger kids movies are there for 4 or 5 weeks. It will definitely have very little chance of redeeming itself at the Box Office if the situation is similar elsewhere. Hopefully we get a Blu-ray release (along with the original movie) with a coupon before the Holidays to allow it to capitalize there at least.

[dr_vasanth]

There is no way "The Pooh" isn't getting the blu treatment from Disney. The announcement should just be a formality..

[RedZeppelin]

I took my 5yo daughter to see this. We were both disappointed. It seemed like a bunch of unrelated vignettes just thrown together. The animation was certainly beautiful but the story did nothing for us. I think my daughter smiled maybe once throughout the film.

I guess we're just spoiled by movies such as Wall-E, Up, and Toy Story that are not only pretty to look at but are so brilliantly-written.

[ChipmunksDad]

Originally Posted by RedZeppelin

I took my 5yo daughter to see this. We were both disappointed. It seemed like a bunch of unrelated vignettes just thrown together. The animation was certainly beautiful but the story did nothing for us. I think my daughter smiled maybe once throughout the film.

I guess we're just spoiled by movies such as Wall-E, Up, and Toy Story that are not only pretty to look at but are so brilliantly-written.

Never read the original Pooh books then?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?rh=n...nid=2272759011