Public domain Pooh is back in the trailer for Blood And Honey 2
Tigger has now joined Pooh in the public domain, so he's here killing people as well
Aux News Pooh
On January 1 of this year, Winnie-The-Pooh supporting character Tigger joined his friends from the Hundred Acre Wood in the public domain, meaning modern creators can now freely use the character to make whatever kinds of interesting art they want to without having to worry about the A.A. Milne estate coming after them. It also means, for better or worse, that filmmaker Rhys Frake-Waterfield can now make a sequel to last year’s Winnie-The-Pooh: Blood And Honey with Tigger in it. And that’s… good? Good for everyone who made the first one, at least.
Blood And Honey 2, which has a whole new cast and significantly more elaborate creature prosthetics, is about the demonic Pooh and his furry friends going on a violent rampage outside of the Hundred Acre Wood to get revenge on Christopher Robin after the events of the first movie—which mostly involved Pooh and Piglet murdering people, and they seem to enjoy that, so we don’t understand why they’re so angry. This trailer features some gnarly kills and a shot of evil Tigger, but mostly it seems to be making a noble effort to sustain The Joke from the first movie. In other words, it has more of “what if Winnie-The-Pooh killed people?”, and that’s really all it needs.
Now, one could once again point at that these movies could be considered parody, and therefore might’ve been allowed to exist even before Winnie-The-Pooh entered the public domain, but, if nothing else, it must be a lot easier to make something like this now than it would’ve been a few years ago. If filmmakers really wanted to start having fun with this stuff, though, they would just put Pooh and the other characters into movies that played it totally straight, like if a rom-com had that cliché scene where the guy gets bad advice from his friends but one of them just happens to be Tigger.
14 Comments
And let’s never talk about this movie ever again!
Wait, I thought we were all ~12 years old and this was the height of edginess?
Do 12 year olds know who Winnie the Pooh is? The last Disney show ended in 2010.
Well that means current 12 year olds could have been watching a recent show when they were little. Also loads of kids watch DVDs and whatnot that their parents still have. My friends 11 year old watches the hell out of the original Charlie and the Chocolate factory at this point, doesn’t give a shit for the newer version.
Considering the movies and the books are pretty timeless, a lot of them. Most likely shown to them by their Gen X and Millennial parents. My 16 year old and 8 year old are both very familiar with Pooh and his friends
Let’s talk about it even less than that.
EEYORE!EEYORE!!EEYORE!!!And his killing strike could be called “The Donkey’s Punch”!!!!Why I don’t write movies professionally, I will never know.
They think they’re being all gross and edgy when all along “Winnie the Poo” was right there.
That’s a German film.
there’s a lot to mine, using Winnie the Pooh characters as the Seven Deadly sins…. but instead, it’s big guy in a mask, teens in a house, low level lights, terrible editing, shotty production.Just admit this is next generation direct to video without the charm of discovering Shannon Elizabeth in Jack Frost.
shoddy
I’ve realised I can’t think of a single way I’d want to adapt Winnie the Pooh. Not even as just a faithful retelling of the stories in a different format. The books are perfect. The original illustrations are perfect. Obviously this particular film franchise is an abomination, but it’s just the most extreme example of a principle: don’t adapt something that doesn’t need it.
Rule #1 of schlock: If it makes $$, do it again.
I don’t know, all of this feel less offensive to me than the godawful Disney version that butchered EH Shepard’s illustrations into that simpering, croaky-voiced transatlantic monstrosity.