Winnie The Pooh: Blood and Honey

[ZariusTwo]

A mysterious upcoming horror film titled Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey has appeared on our radar today, and we have questions. The very indie horror title is reportedly in post-production from writer/director Rhys Frake-Waterfield and stars Amber Doig-Thorne, Maria Taylor and Danielle Scott. According to the project’s IMDb page, the film is a grisly retelling of the Winnie the Pooh “legend”. Check out images from the film below.

Winnie-the-Pooh is a famous fictional anthropomorphic teddy bear written into existence by English literary legend A.A Milne alongside the famous illustrator E.H Shepard. The character first became famous back in 1926 with the picture book collection The House at Pooh Corner. Pooh would be turned into a household name in 1961 when Walt Disney Productions began making the character into a collection of films. Winnie the Pooh has gone on to become one of the worlds premiere children’s entertainment franchises.

Now the bear is back, and he’s got a brand new look. He also doesn’t seem to be up to any good, from what we can tell in these official stills from Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey. While not much is known about this forthcoming horror film, the images are giving off a very indie You’re Next energy, from the barnyard animal masks, to a message in blood smeared across windows.

https://www.dreadcentral.com/news/430297/winnie-the-pooh-blood-and-honey-violent-new-horror-film-reworks-a-childhood-classic-images/

[Turo602]

Oh, dear...

[Leo656]

More like "Oh, bother", no? :lol:

[ZariusTwo]

Home Run Derby was right there

[LeotheLateBloomer]

As Piglet would say, "Oh, d-d-dear..."

[superstaff]

Say what you will about Disney, but they used to be psychotically protective of their IPs. A few years ago, this would've never been made because, as they used to say, they cared about the 'integrity' of the characters. This is why, for example, they never allowed the Disney Princesses to interact in the DP merch, because they wanted to ensure people understood the characters were meant to come from different universes. I thought that was pretty dumb, though......maybe they had a point? Now we're getting a Winnie the Pooh horror movie right after a Chip and Dale Rescue Rangers movie that mocked and smeared many Disney IPs, including Peter Pan/Bobby Driscoll. I guess they just don't care anymore, if they ever really did. I'm not some huge Disney fan, but I respected their influence in animation. But I guess profits from Disney+ and virtue signaling brownie points matter more to their current staff.

[Leo656]

Poor old Pooh-bear is now in the public domain, as of the first of this year. Disney only controls "their version" of it now.

"Oh, bother" indeed.

[superstaff]

Poor old Pooh-bear is now in the public domain, as of the first of this year. Disney only controls "their version" of it now.

"Oh, bother" indeed.

Ohhhh. I see.

Eh. It wouldn't surprise me anyhow. Disney or not. It's still dumb post-modern Hollywood crap.

I love that stuff like this is what passes off for 'creativity' nowadays. The world's d00med. :oops:

[Leo656]

On the plus side, someone's long-awaited Pooh/Rabbit slash fiction can finally be monetized, how awesome is that? :lol::lol::lol:

Poor Eeyore gets the worst of it. Last I heard, he got nailed in the ass. :tgrin:

[Allio]

Funnily enough me and my friends were talking about which characters would be the most racist and it’s pretty much agreed it’s Rabbit. You know that he would say “boy” one too many times.

[Leo656]

It's less offensive than people who say "funnily enough".

[Allio]

Aren’t a couple of characters Disney exclusive? Like wasn’t only four of the characters from the actual book? Or am I getting things mixed up with the real toys?

[Leo656]

I've actually seen that godawful Pinocchio horror movie. Thanks for bringing that sh*t back into my memory.

The sh*t you'd see on Saturday afternoon premium cable, man.

[oldmanwinters]

Heh, if A. A. Milne was hesitant about letting Walt Disney put his own stamp on his creation, just imagine what he'd think of this.

I guess it's like Pride & Prejudice getting the "& Zombies" treatment.

[Sumac]

Eh. I pretend I am surprised.

[IndigoErth]

Poor old Pooh-bear is now in the public domain, as of the first of this year. Disney only controls "their version" of it now.

"Oh, bother" indeed.
Just what I was going to ask about...


Though I'm disappointed it's just a horror movie with some guy in a mask. Now... if it had been some kind of clever and artfully macabre animated thing, with an art style that's reminiscent of the illustrations from Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, it might have intrigued me...even if that still would have been rather messed up to do to Pooh. (But now I want the Scary Stories book art version of Disney.)

edit: Dammit... The Horror Acre Wood. I want an animated thing. Why can't I at least draw like Stephen Gammell. lol

[neatoman]

Kind of weird how this is the first Pooh movie made after the character became public domain. Like sure, I get making a horror movie about normally child-friendly characters, you'd just figure the first post-copyright Pooh movie would be a more... "Earnest" adaptation? I don't think when the Wizard of Oz went PD the first thought was "Let's make a movie where Dorothy slits the Wicked Witch's throat and drinks her blood".

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Kind of weird how this is the first Pooh movie made after the character became public domain. Like sure, I get making a horror movie about normally child-friendly characters, you'd just figure the first post-copyright Pooh movie would be a more... "Earnest" adaptation? I don't think when the Wizard of Oz went PD the first thought was "Let's make a movie where Dorothy slits the Wicked Witch's throat and drinks her blood".

So wait, if the character is public domain, does this not include the Disney version?

[IndigoErth]

Probably just applies to the general character and concept, not individual works that belong to whoever (such Disney) that created them.

[Allio]

Looked it up. Tigger still has a couple of years of copyright as he was in the sequel book.

[neatoman]

So wait, if the character is public domain, does this not include the Disney version?

No, Disney still owns the rights to their Pooh products until 95 years after publication. It is the original book that went public domain, meaning anything found in this book such as the characters and stories, are free for anyone to use. The first Pooh movie made Disney does indeed align pretty well with this book, so you can make a movie pretty similar to it if you wanted to, but you can't straight up copy the Disney version because it still deviates from the book in a few ways. Anything Disney has made that features new characters or stories not found in the book cannot be copied either, because they are not yet in the public domain. If you want to make an exact duplicate of the Disney version you'll have to wait until 2062 and that will only apply to the first short they made.

I think Tarzan is probably the best case to understand how a character relates to copyright and trademark after entering the public domain.
Tarzan the character entered the Public Domain in 2008 along with the first book.

As of this post, all books featuring Tarzan up until Tarzan and the Ant Men is considered public domain (assuming 95 years after publication applies here, if it's lifetime+70 years then all Tarzan books written by ERB are public domain).
Any book less than 95 years old (assuming the 95 year rule again) is still under the copyright protection of the ERB estate.
While the character and many books are public domain, the ERB estate maintains a trademark on Tarzan. This means that if you want to make a movie titled "Tarzan" you'll still have to pay them. You can however still make a Tarzan movie and the character can still be called Tarzan in the movie, you just can't use the title.

[Allio]

Picked up the Winnie the pooh book collection. Gonna try my hand at a Winnie book. Can’t be that much harder to be better than that Christopher Robin film.

[Shark_Blade]

This is how it’s meant to be.

[Allio]

Makes me wonder if Winnie the Pooh will be added to the large group of fairytales, kind of like how Peter Pan, Oz and Alice are thrown in even though they aren’t really fairy tales.

[neatoman]

Makes me wonder if Winnie the Pooh will be added to the large group of fairytales, kind of like how Peter Pan, Oz and Alice are thrown in even though they aren’t really fairy tales.

If you mean, "Will the public relate to Pooh in the same way as Peter Pan, Oz and Alice?" then yes.

[Allio]

It's less offensive than people who say "funnily enough".

Well to be fair the decision was made more based on the original book. Rabbit didn’t really have the most positive response when meeting Kanga and Roo.

[neatoman]

So when is this movie actually coming out?

[Allio]

Something I learned if you want use Winnie the Pooh. You have to use the Hyphen version of the name “Winnie-the-Pooh”

[Allio]

Just finished Winni the Pooh blood and honey

Honestly it has some nice ideas. I’m liked the drama between Christopher Robin and Pooh and the idea that the animals have thrown away their own humanity since the boy left and the idea that all of this killing stems from a trauma from when they had to eat Eyore to survive.

the Rest of the film is pretty generic.

[Coola Yagami]

Wait, it was actually about Pooh? I thought it was about some random serial killers running around wearing Winnie the Pooh character masks.

[Allio]

Nope they are indeed the actual characters. Though in this case they are some kind of mutants or something. Half human/animal creatures that Christoper Robin found as a kid and befriended despite their appearance.

Intro to the film, easily the best part.

QpEtIXbYNVs

Shows that there is indeed an interesting concept

[Coola Yagami]

Nope they are indeed the actual characters. Though in this case they are some kind of mutants or something. Half human/animal creatures that Christopher Robin found as a kid and befriended despite their appearance.

Intro to the film, easily the best part.

QpEtIXbYNVs

Shows that there is indeed an interesting concept

oh god. And after reading a synopsis, the only killers are Pooh and Piglet. So I assume they also ate rabbit and owl.

[Allio]

I imagine that considering just how low quality that Piglet was, I just assume they didn’t have much more budget for Rabbit and Owl. Though maybe the sequel since it’s confirmed (the movie has so far made nearly 4 million on a 100,000 budget.)

[Allio]

And we got the sequel

SR8BnlrVmiY?si=7xy3hlVzBAhawXU5

We went for a 50k budget this time to 1 mill budget. They overhauled the designs and even piglet has a better design now. We also have Owl and Tigger

[Allio]

Well… that’s interesting. Blood and Honey 2 has started off good ratings wise

[neatoman]

Alright, I've seen the sequel and... I think I literally had the worst theater experience of my life. For whatever reason, the entire damn theater was full of teenagers who loudly exclaimed fake reactions, had conversations throughout the movie and literally took ****ing selfies during the showing, with Flash photography no less! I get that it's a meme movie and not worth taking seriously and I might be able to handle one or two assholes who won't put down their phone, but what are the odds of being at a showing full of these drooling morons?

Anyway, yes. The movie sucks, it's not as bad as the first one but it's still really bad. There is also this weird thing in which they explain away the differences from the first one by claiming that one was just an in-universe movie based on what happened, but at the same time they also claim that movie was about Christopher Robin in a bear mask and footage of it on TV has him say the line "It's pawing time", which isn't really accurate at all. It's a really weird relationship between these movies. I know each Evil Dead movie is partially a remake of previous installments and that one of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies is set in the "real world", but the former was due to copyright problems and the latter was clearly meant to be a meta thing. This was just weird.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Alright, I've seen the sequel and... I think I literally had the worst theater experience of my life. For whatever reason, the entire damn theater was full of teenagers who loudly exclaimed fake reactions, had conversations throughout the movie and literally took ****ing selfies during the showing, with Flash photography no less! I get that it's a meme movie and not worth taking seriously and I might be able to handle one or two assholes who won't put down their phone, but what are the odds of being at a showing full of these drooling morons?

Anyway, yes. The movie sucks, it's not as bad as the first one but it's still really bad. There is also this weird thing in which they explain away the differences from the first one by claiming that one was just an in-universe movie based on what happened, but at the same time they also claim that movie was about Christopher Robin in a bear mask and footage of it on TV has him say the line "It's pawing time", which isn't really accurate at all. It's a really weird relationship between these movies. I know each Evil Dead movie is partially a remake of previous installments and that one of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies is set in the "real world", but the former was due to copyright problems and the latter was clearly meant to be a meta thing. This was just weird.

Another reason why I find teenagers annoying.

I just can't bring myself to watch these movies because they were made as shock value and every time a piece of family-friendly property (Disney's in this case) goes public domain, they chose the unoriginal horror route with no real passion.

[triplexxx]

How the hell do they get a classy actor like Simon Callow to participate in this abomination?

[Allio]

Just saw Blood and Honey 2 and yeah, much better than the first. We get the story for what the mutants are as they were seven kids (everyone minus Roo) that were kidnapped children that were experimented on and that Winnie used to be Christopher’s brother. The best part of the first film was the Christopher Robin dynamic and so this focuses on that. And the gore was pretty good.

overall, outside of a couple of bad usage of CGI, it was a fun gorefest.

I even liked that the first film is portrayed as a schlocky in universe “based on a true story” of a man in a bear mask.

[Allio]

Didn’t know to make a new thread of just keep the films to a single thread.

The next in the blood and honey universe.

BL6M27fz_d0

Unfortunately this is just coming off as a generic child abduction story with wonderland name thrown around. Granted most thought Blood and Honey was going to be killers wearing a pooh mask so perhaps it will show an actual wonderland.


Granted, isn’t like we haven’t had Dark Peter stories before, so this isn’t that far out as compared to winnie