Winnie l'ourson : Du Sang et du miel

Say, for a $100K production budget, Rhys Frake-Waterfield made a B-movie and as a result for the recent demand in independent slasher films caused by Terrifier 2 + it's a horror retelling of iconic characters, it becomes box office success. But nonetheless with no one's surprise it's absolute garbage. In my opinion with that kind of budget it's not an easy task to make a film with a decent quality. I'm impressed by the animated sequence they created for this movie and it was kinda cool. But even the decent production quality, somewhat good cinematography, visual tone, set pieces and locations overshadowed by it's very poorly written and atrocious screenplay with a bad ending, slow and tiring pacing, weak performances, lazy direction and an amateur cast with subpar acting abilities.

I really liked this movie. It's obvious that this shouldn't be taken as a serious horror film. Most of the 1-star reviews are people trying so hard to be movie critics.

This movie is fun, stupid, cringe, and funny. The whole thing feels like a dream, from the cliche/mediocre acting to the ridiculousness of the story. "Winnie the Pooh going on a killing spree because Christopher Robin left him". Listen to that, the vibe of the movie even feels satirical. I love how they use the exact same kills from the Halloween movies (head stomp kill, pinned to wall by knife kill, etc.). They even did the neighborhood vs. Michael scene from the end of Halloween Kills. I find that hilarious because they are doubling down on copying parts of those bad movies, further proving the fact that this movie is satire.

Some of the kills were actually good, the shots as well. There are retarded moments in the film too, but that doesn't matter because it feels purposeful + it ends up making the film funnier.

Not exactly a "so bad it's good" movie, but similar. Overall this film is a fun, fever dream that doesn't try to be good.

Blood and Honey is not a good movie. It's poorly written, there are some directorial shots that would never make a movie made by a studio, and there is some pretty cringe acting as well. The characters are paper-thin to the point I can't remember any names. The pacing is a bit off and the effects at times were notably bad.

But what did you expect on a budget under $100,000 made by amateurs? I don't feel like my time was wasted by people who used an IP as a lazy money grab. I thought the team tried and did what they could within their means.

There were a handful of cool directorial shots, a few fun kills, and some bad in an entertaining way scenes that made this at least watchable. It's a really short film that isn't an absolute chore to get through. This isn't even the worst horror film I've seen this year.

If the next time around there is a bigger budget, better writing/editing, and better casting it could be fine. A lot of their issues seemed to be budget or inexperience related as opposed to offensively bad or incompetent.

For a predominantly female cast, I could tell the writer was a male before I even double checked. He must thing all women are complete idiots. Not a single one ever had a plan, all they did was give half-hearted screams and run very, very badly. Of course in his defense, Christopher Robin wasn't much better. It was a snooze fest.

I'd had relatively decent hopes for this. The premise was original and the opening animation was lovely. Another reviewer said if they'd made a short from there, it would've been amazing and I agree. But they fleshed out no plot, spent zero on the costuming of the iconic leads (I'm serious, hitting up a Dollar Tree would've been more affective) and left everything with no resolution at the end, presumably to make room for a sequel.

So, I gave it three stars for the start and for encouraging others to use their talents on works now in the public domain. Hopefully something more interesting and exciting will come from it.

This movie is not a finished product, not even close. This needed AT LEAST a month or two longer in the editing room because it is a mess! I'm not even talking about the terrible story or acting because I knew I was getting that regardless, which is no problem for me as long as there's some carnage. I'm talking about the atrocious sound mixing/editing, the abrupt cuts and transitions, and nauseating camera work. The basics of filmmaking! Whenever someone is getting murdered, you can't even tell what is going on because the camera work is so amateurish and shoddy. It's almost like the camera operator was having a seizure whenever they were supposed to film a kill.

This movie had a $100,000 budget, yet they showed almost no gore/make-up FX when someone would die. If you're filming a low-budget B horror movie, people are going for the kills and not much else, therefore you better be pumping 80% of your budget into the "horror" aspect of the movie and show some people getting slaughtered.

Terrifier 1 had a $25,000 (a fraction of Blood and Honey's budget), yet showed every kill in grisly detail and people LOVED it! Then they made a sequel for $250,000 and made 13 million off it. I'm not sure where the $100,000 budget of this movie went, but it was most definitely not the kills, editing or acting. Maybe Pooh and Piglet's costumes were each $50,000 a piece, and if so the costume designer definitely pocketed that money.

The only reason I'm not giving this a 1 is because I like the concept of taking a fictional character from the public domain and putting a B horror twist on it. Though a good concept, the execution could not have been much worse. This should not have left editing room let alone released IN THEATERS! The distribution company should be held accountable. It's like video game developers releasing unfinished games. Trash.

2/10.