User reviews

Like so many these days, evidently the holders of the rights to Beatrix Potter's books believe in "Anything for a buck."

This is a total travesty and rape of one the best loved characters in Literature. One can't help but wonder if many of the high reviews given this rip off are written by people who've never read the books or even heard of them. And the producers, writers, directors, and animators are guilty of a crime against literature.

Peter has undergone a complete personality transplant and the story is a lame, pure generic 2018 mishmash. What's next? Winnie the Pooh in a car chase movie?

James Corden voices a twerking rabbit in a flagrant dismissal of the iconic source material which was beguilingly drafted yet suprisingly dark. This film takes the notion of nuance and has James Corden sit on it with all his self-satisfied bulk.

I have watched this piece of junk movie that Sony has ever made. I saw the trailer and I was agonized by the horrible trailer Sony Animation has come out. This movie is exactly like watching "The Cat in the Hat" 2003.

Seriously Sony Pictures, how could you screw up my favorite book based on Beatrix Potters "The Tale of Peter Rabbit" this doesn't even follow the book. In fact they don't follow the book at all. I can't believe you ruined Beatrix Potters memorable characters all for the sake of greed and money and stupidity.

First of all they base it in the 21st Century modern days with wheel cars, shopping centers, cellphones, electricity, electric fences. Which didn't exist in the 1900s. Also they put in hard rock and rap music which doesn't fit in with the source material at all.

They also turned the beloved memorable mischievous Peter Rabbit, his family and friends from the original book who gets curious about Mr. McGregors garden and escaping from the garden into an annoying rude rebellious rabbit who parties all the freaking time. He and his sisters and animal friends have Mr. McGregor the old man die and his young son takes over the mansion. They turned it into a Home Alone type movie. Seriously the animals abuse Thomas McGregor and they ruin his girlfriends date and vandalize his garden and house. Thomas has the Hedgehog getting electrocuted which is painful to watch. Also Peter caused an allergy reaction which made me turn off the movie. I'd much rather watch "Babe" 1995 pig movie than this piece of junk.

Why are many of the animal characters so freaking annoying. They also used the word "Crap" a few times and had so much crude bathroom humor which I'm very upset about as the books didn't have PG swearing or crude humor like this crummy movie has.

Stay away from this horrible rotten 2018 movie adaptation it's the worst book to movie adaptation ever. If you want a better movie adaptation. Then watch The World of Peter Rabbit and Friends made in 1992 by BBC. It's much better than Hollywoods lousy crummy movie version. There is the Nickelodeon CGI TV show released in 2014. Watch those shows instead. Forget about this 2018 version it's a big time waster to watch.

Peter Rabbit is meant for an audience of 3 to 8 year old children. This movie is not for kids under 12. This is a true shame because both my kids watch Peter Rabbit on TV. The TV show fits their age group. This movie absolutely does not. I don't want to give out too much....b ut even the first scene is too much for chidren under eight. Parents are left with "how am I supposed to tell my children what just happened?" Nick Park and writers assocaited with this movie, you made a poor choice regarding the direction this film took.

Unfortunately I choose this movie for my kid first visit to the movies. We walked out after 30 minutes, and some parents were much wiser and did it earlier. Not funny. Dumb jokes. Too much violence. Beatrix Potter is probably turning over in her grave. Peter Rabbit is absolutely disgusting hero, his friend isn't better.

Seriously, what an awful decision to cast that talentless idiot.

This movie is not really appropriate for kids. There is a rabbit putting a carrot up someones backside, fart jokes, nipple jokes, sex jokes, and the behavior of some characters is simply not appropriate for kids. These are not the kind of things I want my kids to learn so it is more appropriate for older kids who understand not to copy these nasty characters. I am pretty sure this is not how the characters are in the original books.

So given the nasty characters, this movie is better suited for children between 10 and 14 but the problem is, the story and setting are more like the 2-9 age group. And surely no adult can find this entertaining but I could be wrong. Bottom line is I dont know who this was created for... the only demographic that seems to fit is people who dont read or watch many movies and cant tell just how bad the writing and direction is and people who are stuck with the maturity of a 10 year old.

It really is too bad because the animation is excellent and they clearly spend a lot making this movie but they went and got a junior high schooler to write the dialog and jokes. Skip it.

Wow, it's amazing how a project looks good on paper but is terrible in reality. It could be the poor script or even the casting of the truly bad "Actor" James Corden, but this film is a stinkbomb, avoid at all costs!!!

It is far far away from the lovely book. Waste my time with it....I just did not recognise the magical world from the Potter's tale in this "hollywood" style story.

Leftist scenario, completely wrong educational patterns.

I took my two boys, 5 and 8 to see the Peter Rabbit movie. Wow. Hard to believe what passes for a children's movie now. It was so vulgar, so lowbrow, so cynical, so completely inappropriate. And this, a treatment of a children's story which is among the most lovely and most charming we have, period. I think Beatrix Potter must be turning in her grave. Peter Rabbit, sticking a carrot in someone's butt crack? Just gobsmacked. I got up after about 10 minutes and got a refund. Took the kids out of there.

My daughter and I didn't even get to the allergy issue. Early on we were surprised that having Farmer McGregor having a fatal heart attack in the garden was a reason for celebrating. And then the sweet forest creatures trashed the farmhouse. ?? Gordon Gekko and his "Greed is good" speech in "Wall Street" --but addressed to kids.

This film is another attempt by Sony (AKA the EA of Cinema) to try make money from a beloved author, who would roll in her grave if she saw this abomination. The jokes are stiff and forced, the humor is awful, it has no respect for the source material, and its Complete and utter garbage. Want my advice? see Paddington 2 its a far better use of your time!

Walk along people there's nothing to see here, especially not a family movie. Started promising than fast downhill to the mud.

This movie is disrespectful to the original writer of the story. She is probably turning in her grave. I also hate the man that plays peter rabbit and i find him very annoying.

I think exactly the same thing - "Gordon-1111 May 2018 This film tells the story of a group of rabbits who tries to take over their neighbour's garden.

The first two of three minutes look rather cute, but very soon I really detest those rabbits to the core. The rabbits are horrible, violent aggressors who keep on doing heinous acts to humans. The crooked acts are at times even lethal. Forcing someone to ingest an allergen is definitely not funny, in fact downright vicious. How can people find these acts funny? What if children imitate these lethal acts, thinking it's fun? This film glorifies bullies and aggressors. "Peter Rabbit" is a deplorable, absolutely horrid film that deserves universal condemnation."

The Lake District is merely a distraction and I would defy anyone to point out a character with a Cumbrian accent. From the get go I could tell I was not going to enjoy this. James Corden is yet to give me any reason to enjoy his delivery or screen presence and I can't begin to think what Beatrix Potter would have made of the co opting of her story by the screenwriters to produce a piecemeal retelling that only fit where it touched.

Beatrix Potter wrote Peter as naughty but impressionable, easily led by his cousin Benjamin. The writers could have followed her disciplinarian viewpoint or used it as a foli but instead appear to have taken 'based on' as a license to develop their own theme completely divorced from the world of the author. The Disneyfication of Winnie the Pooh is more honest.

I found Peter thoroughly irritating and cocky and had no sympathy for him whatsoever. The lines of all the characters were formulaic and predictable and where the writers tried to be clever it came across as trying to be clever. Instead of celebrating English writers of children's stories they simply mined our heritage.

So when my daughter upsets another child one day - they will have learnt to give her her allergen to kill her.

Nothing to do with anything related to Peter Rabbit. Beatrix would hate this nonsense. What happens when Americans get hold of something they don't understand.

It could have been great. But its over animated, characters were annoying. Peter rabbit was just unlikable all together. Then to make things worse they tried to add hip campy brief 90s college rock in the most lame way possible. They were just over acting everything, almost like they think families and children are stupid or something.