Winnie-The-Pooh: Blood And Honey Review: A not-so-sweet slasher
Oh bother, indeed. A.A. Milne's classic tale enters the public domain in the form of a horror movie with very little brains—and even less Eeyore
Film Reviews Winnie-the-Pooh
Image: Jagged Edge Productions
Old-school exploitation promoters like Roger Corman must surely admire how the makers of Winnie-The-Pooh: Blood And Honey seized on an item in the news cycle—Winnie-the-Pooh entering the public domain when the copyright expired on A.A. Milne’s 1926 book, Winnie-the-Pooh—and cranked out a quickie horror movie. Normally, the idea of Pooh becoming fair game for any artist to interpret (minus specific elements owned by Disney) might inspire a fake trailer for an inappropriate movie reboot by a site like Funny or Die. But writer-director Rhys Frake-Waterfield went and cranked out a whole feature. Then, when its trailer went super-viral, production company ITN gave him extra money to do reshoots, although judging by the end credits, which mention “principle photography,” it still wasn’t enough to hire a proofreader.
There was a time—let’s hypothetically call it “the ’80s”—when audiences reasonably knew what to expect from a slasher movie. Creative kills, some gore, a bit of sex and nudity, a slow-moving and indestructible killer with some kind of gimmick, and the promise of a sequel that’ll be pretty much the same thing. A glut of copycats watered down the formula, and many of the imitators these days deliver very little exploitation and not enough story to make up for that loss. So to say that Winnie-The-Pooh: Blood And Honey delivers everything a slasher movie should is higher praise than it used to be. Marketing alone would have guaranteed this movie a certain percentage of curious eyeballs, but Frake-Waterfield made sure that what genre fans see is everything they expected. In a nutshell: two hefty dudes in animal masks doing really gruesome shit.
Like so many slashers, this is a movie perfectly targeted to adolescent boys who are right on the cusp of “stuff for children is stupid!” and “violence is hardcore!” They’re the kind of kids at the right age to laugh when Blood And Honey’s opening narration refers to the original incarnations of Pooh and Piglet as “abominations.” Lest such labeling makes any reader feel excluded, rest assured; if you’re in any way still in touch with that inner Beavis or Butt-head, you’ll find something here that’s huh-huh cool.
Eschewing too much backstory, which the best slashers usually save for the sequel, the opening animation suggests that back in the days of Christopher Robin’s childhood, his animal friends, rather than sapient plushies, were actually demonic man-animal hybrids. When the boy became a man and went off to college, an unprecedented winter hit the Hundred Acre Wood, causing Pooh to stave off starvation by eating Eeyore and promptly going insane. Resentful at the human who abandoned them, he and Piglet vowed never to speak again, which is sad news for anyone hoping to hear classic Pooh catchphrases after every kill. Despite supposedly rejecting their humanity, however, they still dress like fat lumberjacks.
Adult Christopher Robin (Nikolai Leon) is perfectly cast, with one of those vewy Engwish lisps that Mike Myers made a fortune imitating. He wants to prove to his wife that his childhood friends were real, but probably didn’t expect them to break her neck with a chain, then hang him on a hook and whip him with Eeyore’s severed tail.
Blood And Honey is smart enough to subvert at least a couple of old slasher tropes, while leaning into two very modern ones. Yes, the setting is an Airbnb, and yes, one of the characters is a social media influencer, a trait as punishable by onscreen death these days as a character losing their virginity used to be. We don’t otherwise learn much about the five girls facing inevitable, imminent doom as we might like, save for Maria (Maria Taylor), whose PTSD backstory seems to be setting her up as the final girl. And lord knows why an American redneck runs a garage in the middle of the English countryside, except as a really odd way to honor slasher history.
There’s very little comic relief here, allowing the inherent absurdity of a killer Pooh with arbitrary super powers (that skin-cutting karate chop is seriously random) to do the humorous work. The masks absolutely look like masks, but they’re slightly more expressive than the trailer reveals, allowing Pooh to wiggle his ears and widen his grin as needed.
It all ends very abruptly, and because so much happens at night, not every kill is clear. The gore, however, is ample, while the nudity involves Pooh gratuitously tearing off one victim’s shirt. (One might call it a silly old bare.) That, along with the fact that most of the violence is male on female, may alienate some viewers, though it wasn’t made for them. This isn’t any kind of elevated horror, and barely has any plot. But it never pretended otherwise. Bring on the Heffalumps and Woozles in part 2!
(Winnie-The-Pooh: Blood And Honey is now in theaters)
65 Comments
Surprise, surprise. Shitty premise makes for shitty movie.
It’s not a shitty premise. It’s just a rushed project to take advantage of a good one.
There’s this stoner guy who loses his rug; so he hangs out with his asshole friends at a bowling alley.
Or the classic description of the Wizard of Oz: “Transported to a surreal landscape, a young girl kills the first person
she meets and then teams up with three strangers to kill again”.
I love bad descriptions. I thought it was The Onion but apparently not, somebody imagined Fox describing Obama getting Bin Laden as “Black Man Kills Senior Citizen”
For Obama, The Onion DID do “Black Man Asks Nation For Change”
Also my personal favorite, “Black man gets worst job in America.”
…aaaaand that’ll be my coffee spit take for the day. Thanks!
Top Gun: A gay love story. Set in the Navy. In the 1980’s. With volleyball.
Top Gun did also have a spelling mistake in its opening text as well.
And he was so worried about his brand, he almost changed his name to Lav Likmer.
…technically making “Brokeback Mountain” its spiritual sequel:“Who needs fighter jets when we have horses…and each other?”
Sounds like my kinda movie!
Exception that proves the rule.
The rule is: I rule.
This is my exact point.
Brilliant!
This is currently counted as a positive review on RT.
although judging by the end credits, which mention “principle photography,” it still wasn’t enough to hire a proofreader.Well, geez, AV Club, why couldn’t you just lend them yours…uh, oh nevermind…
That guy in the comments who does it for free on every article is probably already writing a letter.
havent see them around i assumed they went insane
I have to think that’s going to be pretty much everyone’s takeaway from this review.
Yeah, no shit. Talk about the pot calling the kettle illiterate…
No, you guys aren’t commenting on lack of proofreading.
I’m glad I stuck around long enough to see this. Simply stunning.
It’s like Donald Trump making fun of someone else’s hair.
“they still dress like fat lumberjacks”
Fuck it, at least Pooh is wearing pants in this one.
I don’t know why they needed the Winnie the Pooh license if they weren’t going to make them plush animals anyway.
Sounds like Killer Klowns from Outer Space, where they made a whole movie. just to justify a joke title.he and Piglet vowed never to speak again, which is sad news for anyone
hoping to hear classic Pooh catchphrases after every kill.Can’t believe the missed the chance for Pooh to say, “Oh, bother”.Unless that’s actually a Disney thing.
Killer Klowns was more a showcase for the makeup and visual effects, though it’s better than those kinds of films usually are.
I’ve tried to watch KKfOS a few times, but I don’t think I’ve ever lasted more than 15 minutes.The synopsis sound fun, but what a slog.
I don’t think I’ve ever lasted more than 15 minutes*juvenile snickering*
Wait those aren’t supposed to be masks in-story? Otherwise, this is absolutely not surprising. While reimagining childhood things as terrifying monsters is a staple of horror, I feel like it’s been overdone as of late and this feels like a project that exists only because it could rather than because anyone had any ideas for it.
It’s pretty much an extrapolation of “clowns are actually demons sent to terrorize children” trope that’s been going on since It and Poltergeist.
Clowns make sense, though. There’s an uncanny valley aspect that makes them inherently unsettling. Same with dolls. It doesn’t translate to Santa Claus or anthropomorphic teddy bears.
Ok, what about
I feel like that thing wants to eat my soul.
Don’t forget John Wayne Gacey too who put evil clowns on the map.
The gore, however, is ample
I heard it was low-quality, obvious CGI.
mostly high-fructose corn syrup
If only…
No. Just no.
Violence isn’t hardcore. Bubbles is hardcore!
“demonic man-animal hybrids”? They look like guys in shitty masks. Even low-budget charm has to try harder than this.
Disney wanting to cling to Mickey Mouse for dear life makes more sense every day.
The funniest parts for me concern the microbudget and lack of production values. For example, the “social media influencer” character is named Lara, but you’d be forgiven for thinking her name is Natasha, because that’s what’s written in large decal letters on the back of the phone. That’s because the actress is named Natasha Tosini (all of the cannon fodder girls feel like rejects from “Geordie Shore”) and she’s clearly using her own phone because they couldn’t afford props. But apparently the extra cash for reshoots didn’t go to any coverage or competent editing for the character’s brief screen time. In the leadup to her demise, she holds her camera vertically to take selfies, before the edit switches the POV to show her holding it horizontally, and in the close-up shots, you can see that no one bothered (either through makeup or color effects) to cover up her breast implant scars. When it’s that chintzy, you just have to throw your hands up and laugh.
That’s funny. To read about, at least. Not sure it’s enough to get me to slog through the movie.
The reviewer is right that it’s basically an 80s B-slasher movie. I got “Slumber Party Massacre” vibes at points. It’s like something Troma would put out when bored. It has some fun kills, a few laughs, and it’s mercifully short (only about 75 minutes). Not a slog by any means, but if you’re not in the mood for the cheapest production values possible, then yeah, don’t (oh) bother.
They missed a trick not calling it Winnie The Pooh: Hundred Mass-acre Wood.
Using public domain stuff and giving it a new spin is good , but my god! I hate the lets take a kids thing and make it evil/creepy/overviolent genre. Its completely worn out , and an excuse for hacks.
No no, you’re not getting it! Kid things are cute and innocent, but imagine instead they’re really violent. You wouldn’t expect that, right?Man, hilarity is just lost on some people.
Well, sure, but a huge chunk of the horror genre is hacks copying something, the 80’s slasher craze was made up of endless Halloween ripoffs. Were most of them good? Not really, but I still found a lot of them entertaining for what they were.
“One might call it a silly old bare”The incidental creation of that pun , may be the only good thing about this movie existing..kudos!
“a silly old bare ass” ?
Maybe perpetual copyright wasn’t such a bad idea after all.
Turning Pooh into a horror movie takes no balls or creativity. You really wann be edgy mr director howbout a gay romcom
Basically it’s Toy Story 3 with Buzz and Woody as murderers.
Try Call of Poohthuhu instead.
https://www.amazon.com/Call-Poohthulhu-Edward-M-Erdelac/dp/B09ZLGJLG8
Okay holy shit you got me with “silly old bare”. Nice one.
“…not every kill is clear. The gore, however, is ample, while the nudity involves Pooh gratuitously tearing off one victim’s shirt. (One might call it a silly old bare.) That, along with the fact that most of the violence is male on female, may alienate some viewers, though it wasn’t made for them. This isn’t any kind of elevated horror, and barely has any plot. But it never pretended otherwise…” Kinda shocked by this reviewer taking the road of ehh it’s not trying to be more than it is…expected the usual easy out, its trash F, here are the obvious issues anyone would know going in. They didnt even go for the low hanging fruit that most of the attacked are the trope of scantly dressed women. Not saying the movie is good or bad for it, just commenting on the fact the review did what we used to do…reviewed it for those who would be interested in such movie and what the creator set out to do and if they did it. They set out to make a joke, old tropey horror in your out film you can laugh at with cheap sets and actors on a low budget. It’s ok for horror not to be elevated horror and i did at least think the idea of the animals being humanoid weird creatures was interesting in a where did they come from or evolve from sorta way. The actors did their best but overall it’s a easy miss. The violence was on all characters and the nudity was obviously used to hit the quota for R rated, as many attacks werent anything you haven’t seen in a videogame. It’s nothing to rush out for and the review explains it well, it does the job for those interested and not overthinking it. It’s not or kinda is a misogynistic movie if you want but i think it’s just film maker makes a film without thinking hey this is not what we do anymore and forgets controversy exist…somehow they got away with it…
You are not allowed to make cracks about hiring proofreaders
This seems like Snakes on a Plane or those TRL re-enactments Paul Scheer did. A kind of funny idea that makes you snicker at the premise, but in reality does not work at all.
All of this is wrong because none of it says “This is the most valueless movie ever made.” It’s so goddamn slow. There are many cool things a “Pooh-as-slasher-villain” premise could yield, and this is literally none of them. Where’s Trinity the Tuck? Where. Were. The. Jokes?! I love trash, but I’m a goddamn connoisseur of it. This is trash among trash. Worthless.