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.
11 Reviews
Hopping down memory trail
LadyDerpyCritic17 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
And here I thought that this movie was a fever dream, Lol! I bet most people had this stuck in their subconscious somewhere deep because this movie is obscured. I decided to watch it again on Easter. I think I saw this when the movie was released on Cartoon Network- 2005 so it was a long time ago.
After watching it, my thoughts on it changed. The CGI is complete garbage. It reminds me of Casper's Scare School types of level CGI. So yeah, the CGI is terrible. The characters look like their eyes are bulging out of their eye sockets like they are in space suffocating without oxygen.
Speaking of the characters, they look ugly. I don't know what else to say. The big eyes and modeling of them look off putting.
The good thing about this movie is that I found voice actors that I know quite well. Christopher Llyod and Tom Kenny. I thought a few characters were likable like Junior Cottontail, Iron Tail, and Jackie Frost. The songs were enjoyable while one is a bop called "Ice Life" sung by Jackie Frost. Finally, the plot was decent. I hate to go through the whole plot so I will keep it short. Jackie Frost wants to make Winter eternal so with Iron Tail making a return, he wants revenge against Peter Cottontail for taking the role of the Easter Bunny that Iron wanted to be. The two work together to steal all of the seasons of Spring, Summer, and Fall. It is up to Peter's son, Junior and his friends to save the seasons and restore balance. So yeah, the plot isn't too bad. It's either decent or okay.
Overall, this movie is cute and fun for the family to enjoy on Easter.
After watching it, my thoughts on it changed. The CGI is complete garbage. It reminds me of Casper's Scare School types of level CGI. So yeah, the CGI is terrible. The characters look like their eyes are bulging out of their eye sockets like they are in space suffocating without oxygen.
Speaking of the characters, they look ugly. I don't know what else to say. The big eyes and modeling of them look off putting.
The good thing about this movie is that I found voice actors that I know quite well. Christopher Llyod and Tom Kenny. I thought a few characters were likable like Junior Cottontail, Iron Tail, and Jackie Frost. The songs were enjoyable while one is a bop called "Ice Life" sung by Jackie Frost. Finally, the plot was decent. I hate to go through the whole plot so I will keep it short. Jackie Frost wants to make Winter eternal so with Iron Tail making a return, he wants revenge against Peter Cottontail for taking the role of the Easter Bunny that Iron wanted to be. The two work together to steal all of the seasons of Spring, Summer, and Fall. It is up to Peter's son, Junior and his friends to save the seasons and restore balance. So yeah, the plot isn't too bad. It's either decent or okay.
Overall, this movie is cute and fun for the family to enjoy on Easter.
Very sad poor follow up to the classic
richarddelatorre915 April 2006
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.
Ugly, Terrible Unfunny Mess
firefled23 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is just, well, bad. It uses just about every children's movie cliché and stereotype (especially in the wince-inducing mother bird)to force together an uneven plot. The main character of Junior is so unlikable, you'll find yourself rooting against him and his "best" friends (whom he's known for about 15 minutes). To make it worse, the movie tosses in songs at the most random moments, from Jackie Frost's solo (she rhymes "ice life" with "nice life") to one of the most annoying songs I've ever heard, a ballad of friendship that accompanies a bubble ride. Oh, was that a spoiler? They ride in a giant bubble. Of course. By the time the movie ends with the obvious happy ending, you'll have wished you hadn't wasted those few hours of your life.
Stupid, Childish, and Annoying (SPOILERS)
I_Am_The_Taylrus22 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS
This is probably one of the worst movies I have seen in a while. Sure, the computer animation is solid and cute but that is it. Come to think of it, actually, all of the characters look pretty disturbing. Peter Cottontail Junior looks like a freak with his eyes the size of dinner plates. I think I fell asleep a couple of times. I do not children will be able to make it through this whole movie. Most scenes make no sense whatsoever. Maybe it is because I fell asleep, or they just do not, well, make sense.
Here is the plot. I am not sure of it. Peter Cottontail is the chief Easter Bunny of April I guess, and he as a son named Peter Cottontail Junior. One day Peter Cottontail Junior gets in trouble and has to clean the Clock of Spring. Then the dastardly January Irontail and Jackie Frost steal the Clock of Spring's golden spring. Wow, I do not care! That causes extra days in March so there is no Spring. Peter Cottontail Junior discovers it is all his fault. He sets out to find them. He also meets a robin and a mouse named Munch. Frost and Irontail also want to steal the Leaf of Fall and the Sun of Summer. I am not going into a lot of detail, but Junior obviously saves the day in the end.
Overall, this is not an enjoyable children's movie. Not even children will like this. It is not the worst movie ever made, but it comes close. Almost nothing about this movie was good. It was painfully predictable and even more painful to write about. The plot was by far the worst part. It made no sense and nothing was write about it. The characters did not have enough depth in them. Wow, Peter Cottontail's son. That's original. Anyway, this is an awful movie that you should avoid at all costs.
2/10
Recommended Films: Nothing, really, but I guess Here Comes Peter Cottontail.
This is probably one of the worst movies I have seen in a while. Sure, the computer animation is solid and cute but that is it. Come to think of it, actually, all of the characters look pretty disturbing. Peter Cottontail Junior looks like a freak with his eyes the size of dinner plates. I think I fell asleep a couple of times. I do not children will be able to make it through this whole movie. Most scenes make no sense whatsoever. Maybe it is because I fell asleep, or they just do not, well, make sense.
Here is the plot. I am not sure of it. Peter Cottontail is the chief Easter Bunny of April I guess, and he as a son named Peter Cottontail Junior. One day Peter Cottontail Junior gets in trouble and has to clean the Clock of Spring. Then the dastardly January Irontail and Jackie Frost steal the Clock of Spring's golden spring. Wow, I do not care! That causes extra days in March so there is no Spring. Peter Cottontail Junior discovers it is all his fault. He sets out to find them. He also meets a robin and a mouse named Munch. Frost and Irontail also want to steal the Leaf of Fall and the Sun of Summer. I am not going into a lot of detail, but Junior obviously saves the day in the end.
Overall, this is not an enjoyable children's movie. Not even children will like this. It is not the worst movie ever made, but it comes close. Almost nothing about this movie was good. It was painfully predictable and even more painful to write about. The plot was by far the worst part. It made no sense and nothing was write about it. The characters did not have enough depth in them. Wow, Peter Cottontail's son. That's original. Anyway, this is an awful movie that you should avoid at all costs.
2/10
Recommended Films: Nothing, really, but I guess Here Comes Peter Cottontail.
Caution!Bad movie ahead!
lyonsh-157797 July 2019
I know the first one wasn't the best movie but after watching this I have more respect for the first one.The animation is ugly,the songs are either uncomfortable are cringey and there is no reason to make it. Literally none. This movie is so lazy that it has the same plot as the first but with a couple changes that it didn't need. And i'm Pretty sure that no child will ever laugh at it's unfunny jokes. It doesn't have any bad morals or inspires bad behavior so it's not bad for your kid. If your just looking to find a movie to distract your kid,heck even make your kid fall asleep,then this movie is for you. But if you would rather show your kid something that may change his life or something that is just good then this movie will disappoint you.
Not the Peter Cottontail We Know and Love
Jace_the_Peanuts_Fan21 August 2023
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, but the trailer for it 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 it is that it has little to no connection to the first Here Comes Peter Cottontail. The only connections to it that are made are the characters' names, the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song, and the main setting, April Valley. 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. Peter Jr and his new friends Flutter the Bird and Munch the Mouse are the main 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 its predecessor is an Easter movie, and the titular song is an Easter song.
The movie is mostly about spring rather than Easter, even though this is supposed to be an Easter movie. There are multiple places representing different seasons, similar to how there are places representing different holidays in its predecessor. Irontail and Jackie Frost try 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 animation and character designs are lackluster. Most of the returning characters barely resemble their original designs. Even though this is supposed to be a sequel to the original Peter Cottontail, the designs make it feel completely different and not at all like a sequel, and I'm surprised it's not in stop motion. April Valley looks a lot like it does in the first movie, except it's now in CGI and has even expanded. I've got to admit it looks very nice! Other than that, the visuals look terrible. Seymour S. Sassafras's design is the worst offender. He looks nothing like his stop motion counterpart. Instead, he looks like the Mad Hatter and has been recast by Christopher Lloyd. Like all the other Rankin-Bass narrators, Mr. Sassafras was originally voiced by a celebrity.; he was voiced by Danny Kaye and looked like him. I'm guessing Kaye passed away long before this was thought of. If so, a new character should've been the narrator. Peter and Donna do look similar to their stop motion counterparts, but their heads and eyes are bigger, making them look younger and more cartoony. Antoine looks accurate to his original design for the most part, but he's purple instead of green for some reason. He's now a caterpillar again, despite becoming a butterfly at the end of the first movie. I'm guessing they made him a caterpillar again because his caterpillar design is more iconic. Irontail's design is accurate to his original design, and he looks the best or least bad out of all the returning characters, but he looks ugly in CGI, just like the rest of the characters. His whiskers are now curvy, and his eyes are bigger, which gives him an even more cartoony design as well. All the characters are soulless and have just one facial expression. The fact that Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys is in CGI instead of stop motion makes it feel somewhat like a remake of the first Rudolph rather than a sequel, but at least it's true to the source material and has a new character as the narrator (even some people who don't like it have said that). I can't say the same about this. If you're wondering, yes, I like Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys. It's the only long "overdue" Rankin-Bass sequel I like, but it's not without its flaws, and I understand why other people don't like it.
The new characters aren't too likable, and there's very little depth to them. At first, Jr thought about nothing but the future, didn't live in the present at all, invented all sorts of futuristic contraptions he thought could improve Easter and the spring season, and barely worked with his father. He invents a futuristic catapult that can bounce Easter baskets from April Valley to their destinations (I think there is a special name for it, but I can't think of what it is), which defeats the purpose of the Easter Bunny and could break fragile Easter eggs. Thankfully, he later learns that while it is important to think about the future, it is also important to focus on the present. Flutter and Munch are just there with Jr for most of the movie, and they don't contribute to the story at all. Jackie Frost is a rip-off of Jack Frost. The only difference is she's female. 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 from the RB Christmas movies are in the first Peter Cottontail and has the same animation style, so it's likely set in the same universe as the Christmas movies. If that's the case, Jack Frost could've returned here.
Is there anything else I like about this? Yes, there is. The movie barely follows up the events of its predecessor and ignores most of its events, but it surprisingly doesn't ignore all of its events. For example, there's a flashback from the original Peter Cottontail at the beginning, and Irontail's backstory is explained again and physically appears on screen. That's why I give it a 2/10. There's a rock version of the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song at the end. I've got to admit it's electric and catchy, but not as good as the version from its predecessor.
Don't watch this. Watch the original Peter Cottontail instead.
One of the biggest problems with it is that it has little to no connection to the first Here Comes Peter Cottontail. The only connections to it that are made are the characters' names, the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song, and the main setting, April Valley. 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. Peter Jr and his new friends Flutter the Bird and Munch the Mouse are the main 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 its predecessor is an Easter movie, and the titular song is an Easter song.
The movie is mostly about spring rather than Easter, even though this is supposed to be an Easter movie. There are multiple places representing different seasons, similar to how there are places representing different holidays in its predecessor. Irontail and Jackie Frost try 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 animation and character designs are lackluster. Most of the returning characters barely resemble their original designs. Even though this is supposed to be a sequel to the original Peter Cottontail, the designs make it feel completely different and not at all like a sequel, and I'm surprised it's not in stop motion. April Valley looks a lot like it does in the first movie, except it's now in CGI and has even expanded. I've got to admit it looks very nice! Other than that, the visuals look terrible. Seymour S. Sassafras's design is the worst offender. He looks nothing like his stop motion counterpart. Instead, he looks like the Mad Hatter and has been recast by Christopher Lloyd. Like all the other Rankin-Bass narrators, Mr. Sassafras was originally voiced by a celebrity.; he was voiced by Danny Kaye and looked like him. I'm guessing Kaye passed away long before this was thought of. If so, a new character should've been the narrator. Peter and Donna do look similar to their stop motion counterparts, but their heads and eyes are bigger, making them look younger and more cartoony. Antoine looks accurate to his original design for the most part, but he's purple instead of green for some reason. He's now a caterpillar again, despite becoming a butterfly at the end of the first movie. I'm guessing they made him a caterpillar again because his caterpillar design is more iconic. Irontail's design is accurate to his original design, and he looks the best or least bad out of all the returning characters, but he looks ugly in CGI, just like the rest of the characters. His whiskers are now curvy, and his eyes are bigger, which gives him an even more cartoony design as well. All the characters are soulless and have just one facial expression. The fact that Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys is in CGI instead of stop motion makes it feel somewhat like a remake of the first Rudolph rather than a sequel, but at least it's true to the source material and has a new character as the narrator (even some people who don't like it have said that). I can't say the same about this. If you're wondering, yes, I like Rudolph and the Island of Misfit Toys. It's the only long "overdue" Rankin-Bass sequel I like, but it's not without its flaws, and I understand why other people don't like it.
The new characters aren't too likable, and there's very little depth to them. At first, Jr thought about nothing but the future, didn't live in the present at all, invented all sorts of futuristic contraptions he thought could improve Easter and the spring season, and barely worked with his father. He invents a futuristic catapult that can bounce Easter baskets from April Valley to their destinations (I think there is a special name for it, but I can't think of what it is), which defeats the purpose of the Easter Bunny and could break fragile Easter eggs. Thankfully, he later learns that while it is important to think about the future, it is also important to focus on the present. Flutter and Munch are just there with Jr for most of the movie, and they don't contribute to the story at all. Jackie Frost is a rip-off of Jack Frost. The only difference is she's female. 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 from the RB Christmas movies are in the first Peter Cottontail and has the same animation style, so it's likely set in the same universe as the Christmas movies. If that's the case, Jack Frost could've returned here.
Is there anything else I like about this? Yes, there is. The movie barely follows up the events of its predecessor and ignores most of its events, but it surprisingly doesn't ignore all of its events. For example, there's a flashback from the original Peter Cottontail at the beginning, and Irontail's backstory is explained again and physically appears on screen. That's why I give it a 2/10. There's a rock version of the titular "Here Comes Peter Cottontail" song at the end. I've got to admit it's electric and catchy, but not as good as the version from its predecessor.
Don't watch this. Watch the original Peter Cottontail instead.
An enjoyable sequel to the original Rankin/Bass special
ja_kitty_7128 October 2007
I had taped this movie when it premiered on TV on CBC (on Easter Sunday, of course), and I was quite surprised with the excellent CGI animation that was put into it. I also like the casting. I love the talents of Tom Kenny as both Cottontail and Cottontail Jr., and Antoine the French caterpillar, which is weird because he was supposed to be a butterfly after the original, and Roger Moore as Irontail. I also love the kaleidoscope of colours as put into the main title sequence, and in the "I'm Ready" musical sequence, that was excellent stuff.
All of the above aside, I find this film an enjoyable sequel to the original Rankin/Bass special; I love the animation from Rankin/Bass, you know.
All of the above aside, I find this film an enjoyable sequel to the original Rankin/Bass special; I love the animation from Rankin/Bass, you know.
Good for the family
havenskylerbrockman29 March 2021
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 (:
Great Film - great sound
fender19714 April 2006
This movie is excellent, my son and daughter watch it constantly. Great gift from my mother. The sound is fantastic.Turn it up loud and cuddle up. Good family fun. The characters are great and the voices are sensational. Very colorful, the characters are great some of them are very cute and some of them are very dark and evil - but funny. the music and songs are also very good. Definitely recommended to all ages - seriously. A great film to watch over and over. The story is funny, warm, sad, exciting and most of all entertaining. The film sounds great, totally a quality production, some very clever character sounds and machine sounds. I look forward to more in this series, my kids love it. They must have watched it 15 times already.
Entertaining and worth the watch
atomicneutrino31 March 2012
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.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
