New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Edwin Davies: I don't think anyone was anticipating that Winnie the Pooh was going to do gangbusters regardless of what time of year it was released, so for it to pull this much when it was the only film that dared to open against Harry Potter is something of an achievement. For a relatively inexpensive film that'll probably do most of its business on DVD or television, this is neither a great nor a terrible result.

Bruce Hall: Well what do you know, there WERE other films opening this weekend. Who knew? If we must discuss this inconsequential film I will say this. It wasn't very nice to make Winnie the Pooh your sacrificial lamb this weekend, Disney. He's a beloved childhood icon and a warm reminder of simpler times. At least, he is if you were born before 1980. Then again, he's a fat lazy little complainer who spends all day sitting around eating sweets with no pants on. Maybe he had it coming.

But this is a perfect film to sit the kids in front of on a Sunday morning when you want to try (unsuccessfully) to get just one more hour of sleep. It's cute, quaint, and has a super short running time. All the things that will whisk this thing out of theaters in the blink of an eye will help it make a killing on DVD.

Max Braden: Winnie the Who? Not having kids I don't know how much this release was needed in theaters; it seems to me it could have gone straight to video and still been profitable. I try to see most movies but let some children's selections pass, but I might still rent this one to hear Zooey Deschanel's music.

David Mumpower: Brett's comparison to The Love Letter is astute. Spelling it out for those of you who don't remember and don't want to google it, that title was counter-programmed against Star Wars: Episode One - The Phantom Menace. It was a better movie, too. I haven't seen it, but since it didn't have Jar Jar Binks, I feel confident about my assertion. Winnie the Pooh isn't even counter-programming, though. Harry Potter is for kids of all ages, which makes Winnie the Pooh's release simply...programming. The end result is in line with a lot of the teen girl-centric releases we've seen over the past few years, but nowhere near what a popular family feature should do. This movie was immediately relegated to box office footnote status the moment it linked itself to the final Harry Potter release. As an aside, 90 minutes of this concept is my definition of hell. The bear likes honey and the other critter is whiny. Dragging that out for more than an hour could be worse than It's Pat the movie.

Brett Beach: David, you will be happy to know that, not counting closing credits, Winnie The Pooh clocks in at 61 minutes.

Continued:       1       2       3       4