Peter Rabbit

Just because it's not the original when you was a kid doesn't mean you should call it a disgrace and it's not original Peter rabbit. This is aimed at kids and my daughter starts to smile when it comes on and loves watching it. Absolute shame this programme has stopped making more episodes.

I recently saw some media related to the show a few hours ago. Yes, the characters are cute which is common for a show directed to children. However, I have other thoughts as well. Just like the original books, Peter has his trademarked blue jacket and brown fur. But unlike the books, this version of Peter lacks shoes. In other adaptations, the rabbit is seen wearing mary janes or sneakers. I can only wonder why he's barefoot here. Anyway, everything else about the show (such as the stories and setting) is fine if not excellent. Eversince making a debut many decades ago, Beatrix Potter's most famous character has appeared in various media adaptations.

don't be fooled. just because it's on Nick Jr, the absolute worst channel on TV right now, with Mind idiocy such as "Dora, Go Diego Go, and Bubble Guppies" But the new 2013 animated debut of "Peter Rabbit" is GREAT. sure, the humor in the show is meant for younger audiences, but it's a little complex with the script sometimes. anyway, it's a very enjoyable show that a lot of people should check out. But, I recommend buying the episodes on iTunes. imagine the embarrassment you'll receive if you watch this straight from the Nick JR. channel. The show is really nicely animated, and the main characters (Benjamin, Peter, and Lily) are the most adorable animated bunnies I have ever seen. just go into watching it with a open mind. and no, it's not one of those abominations of cartoons where they TALK to the audience, or they play "GAMES". this one is none of that. sadly, my little brother watching "Peter Rabbit' doesn't like it, and prefers the other garbage. oh well. more for me.

I've been knowing Peter Rabbit for 19 years. However, my interest in the character regained only a few years earlier. When I learned that Nick Jr. has a series featuring Peter and other characters from Beatrix Potter's books, I went on the web to know more. But when I saw an ad of the series online, I was a bit surprised that Peter is missing shoes. Why is Peter missing shoes? Could this indicate that whoever made the series read Potter's books in such a fast pace and didn't look at the illustrations hard enough. If I was the one supervising the creation of the series, I'd make sure Peter will have some dainty footwear. Peter wears shoes in the original books as well as in other adaptations that are more faithful. Portrayiing a character wearing something shouldn't be too difficult. Anyway, despite the discrepancy, I do enjoy the show a bit. I just can't say that I'm impressed.

Looking back at the original illustrations by Beatrix Potter, you'll notice that Peter not only wears a jacket but also a pair of shoes. After Potter's book became such a hit, various versions of the tale where made. Some very faithful to the original, and some not so much. While the creators of this show did a good job in giving the rabbit his iconic blue jacket, I was disappointed that they (probably) forgot to give him shoes. Where are the shoes? This obscene flaw is something that has been done in a number of renditions of the tale. I suppose those who made those renditions have bad eyesight, and didn't notice Peter has shoes in the original story. It also doesn't get any better in this generation as Sony will release a feature film depicting Peter Rabbit but also following a similarly obscene direction.