Here Comes Peter Cottontail: The Movie

I grabbed this on impulse at the checkout stand of my local grocery store for my children (3 and 1.5 yrs old). I was pleasantly surprised that it is a cute movie. It has many traits that remind me of older children's' movies that came out in the 60's, 70's and 80's which I grew up with. Such as it has frequent, impromptu songs sung by the characters (like many of the old clay-mation Rankin Bass TV specials on which the movie is loosely based) where they dance around. Also, the plot is simple and straightforward which is easy for small children to understand. There are many lively characters that get introduced along the way and the animation is good. My children love it and are watching it over and over. I think it's refreshing to see the older style of children's movies in this movie. More modern children's movies try and contain more mature content (jokes meant only for the parents to get) and I'm not entirely in favor of that. Overall a cute movie I would recommend to other parents of small children.

I remember my sister and I loving this movie as kids, we'd watch it over and over again. I decided to show it to my younger brother for Easter after not seeing it for years. I will admit, the animation is a lot uglier than I remember haha. But it was made in 2005. Honestly tho, the story is good. It held my little brothers attention, it has some humor that I can enjoy. The voice acting is decent, and don't get me started on the music. Super catchy and not at all cliché or cringey. I honestly wish they'd remake the movie with better animation, and keep the songs and voice acting the same. It's been a while since I've seen the original so this is an unbiased review in comparison, but we're gonna give that a watch next (:

This move is such a poor follow up to the classic by Rankin Bass. The look, voices and feel is so off in this movie it would have been much better if they made an independent Easter story. It does not explain the affiliation of the two Easter specials. It does not provide enough information for you to enjoy the return charters in full and the stories behind them, which only those who have seen the original classic could appreciate. Irontail is the only charter that is somewhat close to the original in looks but not at all in personality or voice. The feel of "holiday" and "Easter" is absent from the overall storytelling and art direction. The animation feels like a 2005 video game and the music sounds like any other modern Saturday morning cartoon, not at all appropriate for a holiday special. The talents of Christopher Lloyd and Roger Moore is clear but would have been much better in an original Easter story.

Crisp, clean and colourful CGI movie. Two ice-cold evil-doers from the north pole, and their army of cute little penguins, steal clock parts from Peter Cottontail's village in the hope of covering the world in ice. Peter and two of his trusted friends (a little bird and a mouse), with the help of other friends they make along the way, save the day! The evil and vain Irontail (voiced by Roger Moore) and his dastardly partner in crime Jackie Frost (voiced by Molly Shannon) must face Peter and his friends' perseverance in a classic good versus evil battle in the snow. Good, clean and easy to understand feature. Cute characters, sweet movie for the very young.

Here Comes Peter Cottontail the Movie and three other long "overdue" Rankin-Bass sequels (Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys, Frosty Returns, and The Legend of Frosty the Snowman) are not well-liked by fans of their predecessors, and I can see why. I watched Peter Cottontail the Movie on YouTube last spring when Easter was right around the corner. That was the first and only time I've ever seen it, and I hated it. However, the movie's trailer was one of the previews on a Frosty the Snowman DVD I had when I was little, so I've known about it for all my life.

One of the biggest problems with the movie is that it has little to no connection to the first Here Comes Peter Cottontail. The only connections to it are the characters' names, the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song, and the main setting, April Valley. The events of the source material are barely acknowledged or followed up on, making this more of a standalone movie. The story is mostly about new characters, and all the returning characters from the source material, other than Irontail, are barely there. There is very little to do with Easter here, even though this and its predecessor are Easter movies, and the titular song is an Easter song.

The title implies that this is a remake of the first Peter Cottontail, even though it's supposed to be a sequel, making the title misleading. It takes the title of the first movie and adds the words "the Movie" to the end of it. It's mostly about Peter Cottontail's son, Peter Cottontail Jr, and Peter Cottontail Sr has little to no screen time, which also makes the title misleading.

The movie is mostly about spring rather than Easter. There are multiple places representing different seasons, similar to the places representing different holidays in its predecessor. Irontail and Jackie Frost spend most of the movie trying to get rid of spring and make every season winter. What do any of those things have to do with Peter Cottontail or Easter? Those are interesting and original concepts, but the story would've worked better if this was a standalone movie and didn't have Peter Cottontail characters.

The character designs and animation in this sequel are quite disappointing. Most of the returning characters look very different from their original designs, which makes the film feel disconnected from the first one. I was also surprised that the movie wasn't made using stop-motion animation. While April Valley looks decent in CGI, the rest of the visuals are subpar.

The design of Seymour S. Sassafras is particularly poor; it looks nothing like the original and seems to have been modeled after the Mad Hatter instead. Additionally, he has been recast by Christopher Lloyd. If Danny Kaye, the original voice actor, had passed away or retired before the new film was thought of, the filmmakers should have created a new character for the narrator, as Seymour's original design and voice were modeled after Kaye's.

Peter and Donna resemble their stop-motion counterparts, but they have larger heads and eyes and smaller bodies, which makes them look much younger and more cartoonish. Antoine somewhat resembles his original design, but he is now purple instead of green for some reason and has reverted to a caterpillar, despite becoming a butterfly at the end of the first movie. I assume the filmmakers chose to revert him to a caterpillar because that design is more iconic, which does make sense.

Irontail's design is accurate; however, he looks unattractive in CGI, like the rest of the characters. Their lack of expressive facial features gives them a soulless appearance. The use of CGI rather than stop-motion makes the movie feel more like a remake of the original rather than a sequel.

In contrast, the new Rudolph movie introduces a new character as the narrator and stays true to the source material, which I appreciate. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about this sequel. Personally, I enjoy "Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys" despite its flaws, but I understand why some viewers might not like it.

The new characters are not very likable and lack depth. At first, Jr is focused exclusively on the future, neglecting the present. He constantly invents various futuristic contraptions that he believes could improve Easter and the spring season, but he hardly collaborates with his father. One of his inventions is a futuristic catapult designed to launch Easter baskets from April Valley to their destinations. This invention defeats the role of the Easter Bunny and could break fragile Easter eggs. Fortunately, Jr eventually learns that while it's important to think about the future, it is equally crucial to focus on the present, appreciate where you already are, and not think too far ahead.

Flutter and Munch accompany Jr throughout the movie, but they do not contribute meaningfully to the story. Additionally, Jackie Frost is a rip-off of Jack Frost. The only difference is she's female, while Jack is male. According to "Rudolph and Frosty's Christmas in July," all the Rankin-Bass Christmas movies are set in the same universe. The versions of Santa Claus and the reindeer in the Rankin-Bass Christmas films also appear in the original "Peter Cottontail," sharing the same animation style. This implies that "Peter Cottontail" is set in the same universe as the Christmas movies, which raises the possibility that Jack could have returned here, eliminating the need for Jackie.

Is there anything I like about this, besides April Valley's design and the scene where Jr learns from his mistakes? Yes, there is. 1) It surprisingly doesn't ignore all of its predecessor's events: there's a flashback from the original Peter Cottontail at the beginning, and Irontail's backstory is explained again and physically appears on screen, but those are the only callbacks to the original that are acknowledged. 2) There's a rock version of the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song at the end. I have to admit it's electric and catchy, but not as good as the version from its predecessor. These items are why I give it a 2/10.

Don't watch this. Watch the original Peter Cottontail instead.