HOME | DD
Todelmer β What happened to my Rabbit?
Published: 2011-08-03 12:57:05 +0000 UTC; Views: 7618; Favourites: 62; Downloads: 75
Redirect to original
Description
A little something that I noticed about the changes in Rabbit's character design in the new movie. In the earlier films, he was much more effeminate and graceful in his movements and actions (which I very much preferred), where as now he has become very goofy and boyish. Also, a rather large change in the size of his hands, and don't even get me started on Tom Kenny as the new voice (ugggh, who's idea was THAT?!). Anywho, I miss the older, intelligent and heartfelt Rabbit, compared to this new crude and flat replacement.Related content
Comments: 40
You managed to time one screen cap perfectly for a colouring error. XD
I still think the 2011 film's design is more appealing to how he looked in the later Disneytoon films like Piglet's Big Movie and Springtime For Roo. I can't quite pinpoint all of it, but the punctuated buck teeth and forehead made him look kinda ugly in that era. 2011 Rabbit is goofy, but there's still this 'cuteness' about him that was there in your earlier screenshots.
As for his voice, Disney have been known to replace actors when they think they're too old for the role, Ken Samson was in his eighties when the 2011 was made (and sadly died only a year after). Paul Winchell and Sterling Holloway I believe were retired for this reason. Yeah Tom Kenny isn't the most accurate replacement, though in fairness, neither him OR Samson sound much like Rabbit's original actor, Julius Matthews. It could change, takes evolve. Jim Cummings and Peter Cullen didn't sound quite right as Tigger and Eeyore initially, though they gradually made them their own.
π: 1 β©: 0
Now, I will say this, I agree with you on Rabbit's voice.Β That was the one thing I didn't like in this film. (Well, okay, repeat viewings have also led to me sort of disliking what they did to Christopher Robin's eyes) Otherwise, I find it to be a perfect Pooh film.Β It captures the spirit of the classics, it doesn't modernize anything, the songs are fantastic and it just has that same old charm.Β Vast improvement over the CGI mediocrity they were releasing prior to it.Β I just feel the need to point this out, even though it may be a little late to do so, since it honestly seems to me like quite a few people here are trashing the film as a whole just because they changed Rabbit's voice and appearance and nothing else.
π: 1 β©: 0
XD can i ship tigger and rabbit or is that wrong because in the new movie him and tigger are more closeΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
The new Rabbit is voiced by Tom Kenny and I think that he's still feminine and fussy. I like the new character design except for the larger hands.
π: 0 β©: 0
YOURE SO RIGHT!!! MAN RABBIT, YOU WERE BETTER THAN THIS!!!
π: 0 β©: 0
THANK YOU!!! Finally, someone who agrees and see's this sh*t that happened to Rabbit! Dang it, I love Tom Kenny, but he should have know better than to try and replace Rabbit's original voice actor. They should have found someone who was at LEAST close to the original's voice. NOOOOO! Grr, no one knows how make a good 'Winnie the Pooh' movies anymore -3-
π: 0 β©: 0
I never noticed the change in his character design, but I'm with you on the voice actor. I just can't stand him sounding so similar to Spongebob.
Especially with him being more like Squidward.
π: 0 β©: 0
...okei, i need someone to help me here:
WHAT THE HELL IS RABBIT!!?? IS HE/SHE A GIRL OR GUY!? I WAS ALWAYS SO CONFUSED WHEN I WAS LITTLE! OmO
π: 0 β©: 1
Rabbit's a guy. He just fusses a lot.
π: 1 β©: 1
oh, alright than
π: 0 β©: 0
I haven't seen the new one yet. But I have seen Rabbit in The Tigger movie and I thought it was so good! But I like Pooh's Grand Adventure. Rabbit was so cute in that film! Do you agree?
π: 1 β©: 1
The 2011 film is a more book-accurate depiction of Grand Adventure, as the original Milne stories do have Owl misinterpreting a note from Christopher Robin that read "Bizzy. Back Sun." (It was supposed to mean "Buzy. Back Soon." in the typical misspelled language of the franchise) to mean that the boy was kidnapped by a creature called The Backson (obviously rendered as a giant bison-like animal in the imaginations of Pooh and friends) and the citizens of the 100 Acre Wood set out to "save" Christopher from this beast. It's no different to how that one scene in Piglet's Big Movie was a book-accurate retelling of how the gang tried to keep Kanga and Roo from moving in when compared to The Old Switcheroo episode of the cartoon series that focused more on the Tigger and Roo dynamic more so than on trying to evict the mother kangaroo and her little joey out of the woods, since they've become well-established characters in their own right at this point in time.p
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh ok. But I like the Grand Adventure better, don't you? And I love your Angelica Pickles icon!
π: 0 β©: 2
As for the Angelica icon, she is my favorite Rugrat. I may relate to Chuckie the most, but in that case, that just gives me all the more reason to have Angelica as my favorite, since Angelica being the antagonist was a key factor in the show's existence and with Craig Bartlett's assistance (there was reason why Helga and Angelica were drawn similarly and had traits that sometimes mirrored each other), Paul Germain created a tsundere bully that, following the first season (in which she was quite the little hellion), had her heartfelt moments despite largely being a bossy brat. In a sense, she's like her mother, especially where relationships are concerned, as the way Angelica is in picking on Chuckie and giving out order to assistant Harold is akin to how her authoritarian mother Charlotte is to pushover father-and-husband Drew and her sniveling underling Jonathan.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh ok. What is your favorite Amgelica quote?
π: 0 β©: 1
Besides the standard "Dumb Babies" (said when she's annoyed), I like her quotes from New Kid in Town (somewhere in the early seasons, most likely either season 2 or season 3), Moving Away (the final episode of season 3 and the last of the Original 65 episodes before the change in art style following the show's brief hiatus), and Rugrats in Paris (the second theatrical film). All three show that Angelica is more than just a bossy brat and that, deep down, she does care about the babies (as said in the second film, "Nobody messes with my dumb babies except me!"). In fact, it's alsoΒ shown in select instances that Angelica is so much like her mother Charlotte that the way she picks on resident fraidy-cat Chuckie and orders assistant Harold about is near akin to how Charlotte is towards father-husband Drew and her own lackey Jonathan. In the Nickelodeon Magazine comics, it is so prevalent that there is practically an Arnold/Helga kind of vibe between Angelica and the young Finster, which is no surprise, since Craig Bartlett himself started on Nickelodeon by serving as a Rugrats writer who actually helped Paul Germain craft Angelica's design and personality, hence why Angelica does share similarities with Helga Pataki in many ways (hopefully minus the stalker shrine). Both girls are blond bullies in pigtails who are raised by ineffective parenting styles (Helga being directly ignored by her parents and Angelica's parents trying to buy her love by spoiling her instead of giving her the true attention she needs), hence why they lash out in tsundere fashion towards those close to them (for Helga, this would be her PS118 classmates [particularly her beloved Arnold, best friend Phoebe, rival Lila, and Helga's own stalker Brainy] and for Angelica, this would be rival and best friend Susie, "rich bitch" Savannah [from the Pre-School Daze and All Grown Up spin-offs, Savannah sees herself every way superior to Angelica and makes Angelia actually live up to the "angelic" part of her name], dutiful follower Harold, and the babies [besides blood cousins Tommy and Dil, Angelica personally has made it known that she loves to make Chuckie squirm, as if she toys with him due the fact that she just might have something for the boy]).
π: 0 β©: 1
As a hardcore "Pooh-a-phile" (I've been a fan since I was born, with Pooh and Tigger as my first-ever stuffed animals), I am able to enjoy most things Pooh (the 2010 CGI series excepting, since it completely went in a totally different direction than any of the shows that came before it and had Darby essentially replace Christopher Robin). In terms of comparing Grand Adventure with the 2011 film, I loved Grand Adventure for the emotionally heartfelt moments (Forever and Ever [ www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4W9qy⦠still gets to me, as it's Christopher Robin basically trying to tell Pooh that he has to start living a life without him, but that they would always have each other in their hearts), but enjoyed the 2011 film for the in-joke throwbacks to the Many Adventures - such as "the book stuff" that had Mr. Narrator (comedian John Cleese this time) interacting with the characters - and the whole scene about whether or not Owl has a cold [ www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNt_h7⦠. That Owl, supposedly the wisest of the original cast besides Christopher Robin himself, served as the unknowing antagonist in both adventures by leading the rest astray by misinterpreting a simple note (that "going to school" means that CR was kidnapped by the Skull-a-saurus in the Eye of the Skull [a rock formation resembling a skull] and that "buzy, back soon" means that CR was kidnapped by the bison-like Backson) always gives me a good laugh, since it's a simple misunderstanding that sets these misadventures into motion.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh ok. I love the part where Rabbit, tried to find the map.
π: 0 β©: 0
I watched the newer movie from 2011 today for the very first time actually and I immediately noticed there was something different about rabbit. I haven't watched any Winnie Pooh related things in YEARS but Rabbit's behaviour in that new movie really really bugged me D':
You're totally right about his graceful movements and his character changes!
π: 0 β©: 0
Aw, c'mon!!
Β
I'm sure that he's the same as always to Tigger; he is to ME!
π: 0 β©: 0
Bad news, Ken Samson, died this year on October 8 at the age 85 by complications of a stroke. So sad. RIP, Ken, you always will be Rabbit anytime for a long time.
π: 0 β©: 0
Ah...I used to think he was a girl because of that.
π: 0 β©: 0
I hate the fact they changed rabbit's character and voice
π: 0 β©: 0
I tried SO hard to get into the new Pooh movie the more I learned about it. I had been so insanely stoked about it but...wow. Wow, it was a huge disappointment, for everything you said. Hell, whose idea was it to replace the ENTIRE cast except for Jim Cummings? Heck, if they could have gotten away with replacing the voices of the two most iconic characters in the franchise other than Piglet and Eeyore, they would have replaced him in a heartbeat. And it really breaks my heart because man...I grew up with those voices. Ken Samson is Rabbit, that's all there is to it. He wasn't the first but he had the part for the longest and provided Rabbit that heart and emotion and character I love. Not only that, but I know that at least Eeyore's VA WANTED to keep playing Eeyore. What are the odds that any of the cast had definitely wanted to be dropped? For no apparent reason? I mean, Ken's even still under contract to keep playing Rabbit AFAIK.
My god. Rabbit's been my favorite character my entire life, they developed him into a wonderful character throughout the movies and especially the series, namely the Kessie episodes- he's a fantastic character by himself and they butchered that on a lot of levels. His voice, his character, right down to his design and animation. They've never been able to stick to one real design for him other than a few defining characteristics, those mostly revolving around how downright feminine he looked. You're right, he was very graceful and let's face it, he's pretty. I mean, in a few of the movies they didn't even try to not push him into effeminate. "If It Says So", anyone? [link] [link] [link] Heck, he was lovely in the first movies: [link] [link] [link] It's not like I expect him to be pretty all the time, it's just they had ALWAYS been able to balance out grace and femininity with him still clearly being male and not trying with it.
At first I tried to go with the more eccentric, goofy animation for him because I do like that occasionally when it's not pushed too far, and frankly, it didn't ALWAYS not match Rabbit because that sort of animation could possibly fit the fact that Rabbit's borderline anal ways can have him teetering on the edge of a nervous breakdown, but the thing is...they always managed to express that fantastically before without making it this damn FRANTIC and as amusing as it looked- it wasn't bad animation- it wasn't fitting for him. The Tigger Movie for one did a wonderful job emoting him when he'd be enraged or frustrated without making him look so painfully off-model. And it's so weird, because this was by the Disney studios, by big-name prominent Disney animators, and it couldn't pull off the look they had been going for while The Tigger Movie did- it took that ball and ran hard with it and succeeded; not only that, but it had made a real story without making it too uncomfortably un-WtP-like. It exceeded expectations while Disney's 51st feature film became THE most underwhelming Pooh movie.
I know they were probably wanting to go by the first movies more, but then we run into the same. exact. problem. Rabbit was still very feminine in appearance- those dainty hands, rounder ears, the large eyes, etc. He didn't look like a girl, but he didn't look like a goofball by any means. If they wanted to go for that movie's animation of him, they should have done that and left out the boyish goofball thing and give him the more realistic characteristics he had in those movies, like running on all fours and hopping and posing like a rabbit, which was all very charming as well.
They failed, they just failed. It's not even nostalgia goggles unless you haven't seen just the first movies. Rabbit didn't act like that in the first movies at all. I was sorely disappointed because I'd been bouncing off the ceiling about it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Even Ken's Rabbit has his frantic moments (see: "Hunny for a Bunny"). But I agree, it's not just same in voice & mannerisms, but we'll just have to get used to it, just like people had to get used to Jim Cummings as Pooh & Tigger after Sterling Holloway died and Paul Winchell retired (and then died years later, with John "Piglet" Feidler going right behind him).
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh yeah, I know Ken's Rabbit had his frantic moments, the character seems like he's on the verge of a nervous breakdown sometimes or outright went into one (I know he did at least once did the classic 'cuckoo' snapping in the Kessie episode- not the emotional breakdown, mind you), but it wasn't constantly present in his animation regardless of the situation. As for getting used to Tom Kenny's Rabbit: with Jim Cummings as Pooh and Tigger, he got the voices pretty much spot-on and there really were no mannerism changes. There was little to get used to short of the knowledge that the men behind them had passed on. There's an actual distinct difference between the Ken's and Tom Kenny's Rabbits, and there is with John Feidler's Piglet and the voice actors who replaced him- but there's a difference there as well: Piglet didn't change along with the voice. It's easier to swallow a voice actor change, as heartbreaking as the original actor's death is, when the character doesn't undergo an inexplicable transformation as well.
Plus, I don't necessarily have to get used to it. Not trying to be stubborn or rebellious (who would rebel against Winnie the Pooh..?), it's just...I have a few decades of Winnie the Pooh to fall back on, and they haven't done anything new after the last movie. So if I need my Pooh fix, I have plenty of options to go about doing it. With the lack of new Winnie the Pooh things, it doesn't seem like I'll have much need to adjust to the mess of new voices and awkward character interpretations. If they were churning out new material, then yeah, but with one movie in the face of several features and a couple of television series..? Nah.
(Please note I'm just responding, not trying to debate it. Even if I felt strongly enough about it to do it, I could argue till I'm blue in the face and there's nothing that would change. But I don't feel that strongly about it, especially since they just made the movie and did nothing else; so I'm just answering your points, not attempting to change minds.)
π: 0 β©: 1
So if I need my Pooh fix, I have plenty of options to go about doing it.
I know. The original "feature-rettes" that became the Many Adventures [ [link] ], the New Adventures 2-D cartoon [ [link] ]. the Welcome to Pooh series that had live actors in costumed suits as well as being able to see Mr. Narrator face-to-face as played by Laurie Main [ [link] ], the Book of Pooh puppet series [ [link] ], or even--god forbid--the CGI "modern" rendition that is My Friends Tigger & Pooh [ [link] ].
With the lack of new Winnie the Pooh things, it doesn't seem like I'll have much need to adjust to the mess of new voices and awkward character interpretations.
With them redoing the Many Adventures as "Mini-Adventure" one-minute segments, it appears as if they are trying to replace the old voices for the new ones. Whether that means a new series or film is on the way is Disney's perogative.
If they were churning out new material, then yeah, but with one movie in the face of several features and a couple of television series..?
That's because they had to bring Pooh back to the mainstream public after practically bastardizing it with the aforementioned CGI rendition. I mean, there WAS reason WHY Clare Milne--Christopher Robin's daughter--was SUING Disney due to Disney getting away from the standard set by her grandfather's stories and her father's childhood legacy. In fact. that was WHY the 2011 rilm was made, to return the 100 Acre Wood back to its roots for a new generation.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ok, first of all, Ken Sansom (the ORIGINAL and the best voice of Rabbit died 2012).Β When I found that out, I wasn`t moved to tears, but more like really, really peeved.Β Second, who the heck in their right mind hires the voice of SpongeBob to take over such a unique voice? if Ken were looking at what a pitiful job Tom Kenny did, he`d be turning over in his grave.Β Such a talent need not go to waste.Β I even (and still even though I`m far beyond my childhood years) re watch these early Winnie The Pooh episodes and have had (again, I still do) this insane crush on Rabbit, but how they would get a person that`s really and truly meant for crappy shows like SpongeBob Gaypants is FAR beyond me.Β Oh Disney, what have you done?...
π: 0 β©: 2
SpongeBob's not a bad show. But I agree that Tom Kenny's voice just doesn't fit as Rabbit. Sigh...
π: 1 β©: 0
Ken wasn't the original Rabbit. That distinction belongs to the actor from the Many Adventures feature film/featurettes. But I do agree that Tom might not have been the correct fit to do Rabbit, especially since the movie was trying to go back to the roots of the franchise after the disaster that was the 2010 CGI series that replaced Christopher Robin for Penny & Bolt - I mean, Darby & Buster. There's reason why Clare Milne, Christopher Robin's daughter, sued Disney for going away from the establishment set by her grandfather's stories and her father's childhood.
π: 0 β©: 0
OH MY GOD IM NOT THE ONLY ONE.
I miss my cutie rabbit. π: 1 β©: 0
That's... disappointing. To say the least.
Rabbit was always such a likeable character to me. He was intelligent, had sense, and graceful as you put it. Sure, he complained and got upset easily, but that's just who he was. Deep down he mostly did those things out of concern for his friends. Plus, I just like Rabbit's effeminate actions and movements. It just made him him, and he was still one of the strongest characters.
I haven't seen the 2011 version yet, but this certainly is off-putting to me. I'll still try to give it a fair chance and just see how much damage there is, but for now I'm not enjoying the idea of this awesome characters being turned into a goofy comic relief of sorts.
Plus I love his older character design. It looks much better than... that new one. Sigh.
Also... they needed his character to have warmth? Old Rabbit didn't have that? The thing I love about Winnie the Pooh characters (for now, the older ones) is that they were simple in nature, but all had deeper and relatable personalities. Sure, they were child-like, but yet so well-developed in mind. Rabbit may not have displayed it all of the time on the outside, but deep down he was just as sweet and loving as the rest of the characters in the Hundred Acre Wood.
Incidentally, I don't think Tom Kenny did a bad job at Rabbit's voice... but still. It's just one of those nostalgic things I guess.
To summon up this entire comment, I really despise when they take classic characters and drastically change them for no real reason other than "just because I can and/or want to."
π: 2 β©: 0
AGREED!!!!!!!!! So glad I'm not the only one thinking this! & I actually saw the new movie-every time rabbit talked I cried inside. And seriously?!!?! Trying to change around his entire character?! NO. I LOVE the old rabbit and thats the one I grew up with. That's the one I wanted to see in this new movie! This new version had no heart. Rabbit isn't supposed to be the 'funny one'. He's the adorable fussbucket with a heart of gold that is just burried deep deep deep inside himself 
π: 1 β©: 0
Well, unless you found out already, I can tell you:
Eric Goldberg, supervising animator for Rabbit in the movie, said that Rabbit was a good character to show frustration & he's a great animator with facial expresions. [link]
Tom Kenny was chosen for his voice even though Ken Samson was alive, well and his contract didn't expire because the directors said that they could make him and Owl funnier and mime them for more hummor, getting the right voice actor. They worked with Tom on Meet the Robinsons so they got him and said they gave him warmth, because the early Rabbit didn't have warmth and Tom made him more likable. [link]
Thought that'd help.
π: 1 β©: 1
Yeah but I felt it would've been more convenient if he and Andre Stojka play them one more time before they both retired. Though it's mostly a nitpick but it was one of the problems I had was the casting. Pooh, Tigger, Christopher Robin, Roo, and Piglet are fine and understandable(Since kids age and when they hit puberty they lose their voice, unless they are a girl. And John Fiedler has passed on), but why do you have to get new actors for the rest of the cast? Why? There performances aren't bad, but it would've been more easier to use the actors that they have. And it almost goes the same for the Live Action film that was OK at best. Sure they still used Jim as Pooh and Tigger, and Brad Garrett is fine as Eeyore. Though why couldn't they do the same for the others? Though to be fair Nick Mohammed did OK as Piglet. Nearly sounding like John Fiedler and Travis Oates). Β Hell they could've gotten two British voice actors that actually sounded like Rabbit and Owl. Which was Rob Rackstraw and Mike Grady.
π: 0 β©: 0
