Again, I do not think releasing this film to revive traditional animation was a good idea. The movie is nothing new, and has been done MANY times over the decades. The same thing was done in the 1977 movie, and the many tv series it has had. It does not have a coherent plot running through the entire story, and it was not well advertised. I did not even know that it was released until AFTER it was done in theatres. They should have came out with an original feature, not package film to help device traditional animation. Maybe they did that on purpose

Like I said before, it has evidently strong and weak points.

It's just too short. That's my main complaint.

It was still really good, and it makes sense that Disney made the film. It had the nostalgic factor for adults and it appealed to younger kids. And I'm glad they were making more traditional like Winnie cartoons. It's a good adaption, but just falls flat in comparison to the other four films on this list.

For the same reason I gave last time.

I like it but it's kind of too silly and not as good as the original. Plus I absolutely love the others.

Granted, I haven't seen it, but I'm never a huge fan of the Winnie the Pooh movies, though admittedly I like the characters a lot.

Oh and the movie had absolutely AWFUL publicity - it's as if they made it with the intention that it would be their last 2D movie for the foreseeable future and could use this movie as an excuse for poor box office sales. Seriously, in the UK at least, they opened it on the same weekend that the last Harry Potter movie was released, with little to no advertising beforehand.. it's like they were completely setting themselves up for a fail. If this movie had proper publicity then I'm almost certain it would have earned a LOT more money, I mean c'mon it's Winnie the Pooh. I know this doesn't mean the movie itself is bad or anything, just saying.

^ No, it was like that in Canada as well. The marketing was HORRIBLE; no commercials, no advertising, etc. when I was researching Disney a random day, I found out that Winnie the Pooh was released in theatres 6 MONTHS AGO. They had it released against the latest Harry Potter and other really good movies all over the world. I truly believe that they marketed this movie badly, so when it would do poorly in the box office, they would use this as an excuse to stop traditional animation. People said that PatF was the reason traditional animation ended, but since it was successful, Disney then said they would release a 2D film every 2 years (Winnie the Pooh). None of the movies that are in development are going to be in traditional animation, and Frozen was originally going to be traditionally animated.

They did the same thing with Brother Bear and Home on the Range, they used Treasure Planet as an excuse to close their animation studio in Florida, and planned Brother Bear to be the last date 2D film, but production problems occurred with Home on the Range, so they switched the release dates of the two films, and confirmed they would stop traditional animation BEFORE Home in the Range was released, so it's flop was not the reason why they only used CGI then.

It's like they are movin away from their roots, and they STILL do not know what they are doing after 13 years. I hope they get it back together

Afterward I'm not sure.

Lame plot, very little character development, and nearly everything in the movie had been done before.

Or Lilo and Stitch