Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey (2023) User Reviews (433)

Does not utilise it's premise at all.

[benjaminskylerhill · 2/10 · 16 February 2023]

I fully expected Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey to have indistinguishable disposable characters, kills that are gross and mean-spirited, a bone-thin plot, inane dialogue, and acting that is...mediocre at best.

I was right about the film having all of these things, and I didn't mind these things. They're par-for-the-course in the slasher genre, and I embrace the self-aware trashiness of it all.

What I was not prepared for was just how boring this movie is. And it's because it does not even attempt to make use of its characters that should make for a slam-dunk of a hilariously enjoyable concept.

Christopher Robin and his college friends should have been the focal characters. But Christopher Robin is barely in this movie and instead we get a group of vapid girls who have no relation to Christopher. They get killed off instead, and there is no reason to care because they're completely detached from the connection between Pooh and Christopher at the beginning of the film.

It would have been so easy for them to capitalise on a concept that could only be found in Winnie-the-Pooh: the animals kill Christopher's family and friends as revenge for him abandoning them. But the plot we got could be interchanged with literally any other plot in the slasher genre, as it's just a bunch of randos getting killed.

What also doesn't help this disaster is the awful editing. Almost every shot lasts longer than it should, and it makes each scene feel agonisingly long.

It's a film where we watch a lot of half-baked ideas play out on screen, and none of them are unique. None of them are what I wanted to see from a concept as silly as this.

This could have been hilariously good fun. Instead, it's identical to the rest of the trash you can find in bottom-of-the-barrel horror.

A Big Ol' Pile of Unfinished Pooh!

[scootm16 · 2/10 · 16 February 2023]

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.

Winnie the Pooh:Cringe and Strangely bad

[olcare · 2/10 · 17 February 2023]

First of all, the movie is really bad but its badness has made it entertaining in certain aspects. The main reason for the badness of the film is the acting. It may be the worst cast I've ever seen in my life. They act so badly in every scene that it's unbelievable. The acting is a disaster and it really ruined the movie.

There were 3-4 bloody scenes in the movie that looked good in the cinema, but some scenes were incredibly unnecessary and long. Also, the nudity was forced on us before the characters died. It would have been better if they had chosen the cast according to the movie's requirements.

Actually, when I first heard about the movie, I thought it might be interesting. It has a low budget and a different structure. However, the screenplay that the director chose was extremely bad, which ruined the movie. Although I really liked the animation in the first part, the costumes of Piglet and Winnie were incredibly artificial and awful, which turned the horror scenes into comedy.

It would have been better if it had been written much better and if it had been adapted to the screen with good costumes in a short time. Unfortunately, our director has made very bad choices and has created a disaster of a movie. He has disrespected the characters' past. There's really nothing worth watching in this movie.2.

Contender for worst movie of the decade

[phoneticnachos · 1/10 · 22 March 2023]

Some horror films are so bad that they're good. This one is just bad.

Nothing is good. The acting, the writing, the plot, the complete and utter lack of even so much as an ATTEMPT at character development, was a complete mess. It's not one of those horrors that are "so bad it's good", it's just painful to sit through from beginning to end. Full of plot holes, completely lacking a protagonist, full of characters who are uninteresting and un-likeable, I can't imagine how anybody could enjoy this movie.

Everyone involved should just quit the movie industry. Their lack of talent, judgement or consideration for their audience shows no compassion or remorse.

Jaw-droppingly bad

[FeastMode · 1/10 · 25 April 2023]

I was originally going to watch this in theaters as I do with most theatrically released horror flicks. Then I saw the bad reviews and decided not to watch it. Then I saw the extent of the bad reviews and the amount of coverage it was getting and I decided to watch it as a joke.

I can't say it made me laugh enough to make it so bad it's good. But I was in completely awe for much of the movie. My jaw dropped on numerous occasions at how bad everything is. It's completely incompetent on every level. Every filmmaking aspect is poor. There really isn't much to say.

I'll give one example of the incompetence. It's a scene from very early and is not a spoiler. The women find a gas station in the forest. It looks like it's been abandoned for decades. Broken down cars, overgrown plants, and a completely trashed inside with no electricity. The character walks in looking for a worker so they can fill up gas. I don't understand how stupid a character can be. What possible indication do you have that this is a functioning gas station?

Then to my surprise, she does find someone inside. I figure maybe he's just some homeless guy or a creep. But I guess not because two more customers walk in. I... don't... understand...

The entire movie is filled with this type of nonsense. (1 viewing, 4/23/2023)

Some horror films are so bad that they're good. This one is just bad.

[iamleviprice · 1/10 · 16 February 2023]

Let me start by saying that I went into this expecting it to be very, very bad, but sometimes that makes for a fun watch so I was open-minded. Literally the ONLY decent thing about this movie is the score; everything else, the acting, the writing, the plot, the complete and utter lack of even so much as an ATTEMPT at character development, was a complete mess. It's not one of those horrors that are "so bad it's good", it's just painful to sit through from beginning to end. Full of plot holes, completely lacking a protagonist, full of characters who are uninteresting and un-likeable, I can't imagine how anybody could enjoy this movie.

What a waste

[mikemoviefilmhammond · 2/10 · 16 February 2023]

If there are any "real" directors reading this; there is clearly an interest in a Winnie the Pooh horror. This isn't it.

I don't even know where to start in expressing the sheer disappointment of this "film". What's worse, it doesn't appear to be an issue about the low budget - more the direction. We have all seen recently what can actually be achieved with a small budget. It would appear this "director' got very lucky with an interesting idea, but has no idea how to actually make a film.

Our cinema was about half full, but after 45 minutes I would guess half of those had left. Not because it was scary or gory or too intense - but, my guess, and along with us, bored out their minds. By about an hour in the rest of the audience had broken into conversation. We left with about 15 minutes left as just couldn't take another second.

On the way out I asked for a refund (never done that before lol). The guy behind the counter laughed and said a couple others had said the same thing.

So what's wrong with it? Well, first and foremost its not scary. It's also not funny or clever or interesting or well shot. It drags on and on with super bad acting, awful music, bad editing, bad camera work, dreadful lighting, terrible dialogue, super cheap looking costumes.... and I could probably go on.

Sometimes bad films can be a cheesy, campy good time but the absolute killer here is - it's boring.

The world of horror has some absolutely fantastic up and coming directors and its a shame someone with some talent didn't have this idea and execute it properly. But as Winnie is now public domain, maybe someone will.

And, somebody needs to ban these people from ever making another film. And, I want my money back.

As I was writing this review I came across a review in the Daily Beast by Nick Schager (full credit to him for the below and the full article can be found online/socials) that puts it so much more eloquently than I have been trying to:

"Frake-Waterfield exhibits minimal skill at framing a unique or unnerving shot, effectively transitioning between scenes, or eliciting jolts though canny cuts or audio cues. He's not helped by Vince Knight's muddy, shaky cinematography and Andrew Scott Bell's comatose score, which loses steam at precisely the moments that is should be punctuating the action.

Its difficult to fault the musicians for their lethargy, however, in light of the omnipresent amateurishness on display, almost none of which can be blamed on production constraints; though its clear that Winnie the Pooh Blood and Honey was made on a shoestring budget, its failings have to do with a simple lack of talent both in front of and behind the camera.

In the weeks leading up to Winnie the Pooh Blood and Honey's premiere, the writer/director has expounded on his plans to film a series of additional children's lit horror shows, with Bambi and Peter Pan next in line for the grim dark treatment. On the basis of this fiasco, however, that feels like so much wishful thinking. For all of Pooh's kills, the greatest casualty of his rampage may just be Frake-Waterfield's career prospects".

Do not waste your time! If I could give a zero I would have!

[twinmom-10035 · 1/10 · 23 March 2023]

Horrible movie! Stupid characters! Super dumb girls who stand around and wait to die! Characters who Stand next to the murder begging them not to kill another person as they are killing the other person, as if words will work! Four men beating the murder, you keep hitting till they die, you don't stop so he can then kill each one of you! If you are in a truck and the murder is coming toward you or is occupied killing others, find the keys and Back the hell up AWAY from the murderer!!!! Seat belts, hard brakes killer goes flying and you get away. This is not hard, every character in the movie were stupid, not horrible movie stupid, just stupid!

I think some people have misguided expectations

[samgallenberger · 4/10 · 16 February 2023]

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.

Bad

[ashfordofficial · 1/10 · 22 March 2023]

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.

good bloody fun

[Ready4disJelly · 9/10 · 29 January 2023]

If you're going into this movie expecting a multimillion dollar budget movie with an Oscar nominated script, your going to be disappointed. This has been described to me as "a perfect experience for fans of B movie slashers" and that's exactly what I got. I'm glad I saw the movie in theaters (Mexico City) because I had a complete blast.

I think they pulled this off by being in on the joke. It almost plays as a satire of the slasher craze from the 80's. They knew they were making a Winnie the Pooh slasher and they leaned hard into the premise. I laughed, I was shocked (the deaths are all super fun and creative), and I was impressed by the cinematography and music (especially for this budget which I think is probably less than $100k). In short, it's just a good time if you know what you're signing up for.

Similar to Terrifier 2, this is a super low budget horror movie getting a huge amount of attention and press and that's so exciting to me as a lifelong horror fan. I personally want to live in a world where that happens more often. So yeah I gave it two extra stars for that reason alone. They pulled off the impossible.

Go see it in theaters and support true indie horror films.

Stupid as hell idea, but it can be entertaining if you give it a chance.

[LuisPunisher · 7/10 · 29 January 2023]

There are some cases of movies in which just by seeing the poster you have a good glimpse of what you are going to watch. There's no point in me doing a synopsis, because if for some sick reason you've ever dreamed of a movie where Winnie the Pooh (yes, the bear from your childhood) goes psychotic and on a killing spree, that's just what you're going to get in this movie.

I want to clarify something, being objective this is not a good movie even remotely. As far as slashers are concerned, it is quite mediocre, although it has some brutal deaths at the end, it is overshadowed by films such as Terrifier.

So why do I give it a 7? Because the plot, although it is quite stupid, is very funny at the same time, seeing the fat bear torture and kill its victims. It's something worth seeing, even if it's just out of curiosity. The funniest thing is that the movie itself is not a comedy, it might seem like it takes itself seriously and that makes it all the more fun. Also, I must say that Piglet's squeals give the film a plus.

In short, the best way to watch this movie is to understand that it's one of those so bad it's good movies, and not take it seriously at all. If you don't find the idea of Winnie the Pooh killing people at least a bit fun, you should do well by skipping this one.

The Texas Pooh Massacre

[danielcereto · 1/10 · 22 March 2023]

I am not sure what I have watched. Seriously, I'm in schock lol... I am a big fan of slashers so that's why I've watched almost all the great and the surreal ones too. This movie is on the top list of the worst. But, let me tell you something, if you want to watch a slasher starring Winne the Poh you can't expect an Oscar winning here. But I think it could have been far better with a more serious script and actors.

First, the movie is maximum a Z one. It is bad, really bad in all aspects. Even the gore looked pretty cheap.

Second, the music is terrible. As bad as you can expect in a Z++++ movie.

Last but not least, the best are the girls ready to dissapear. Didn't feel anything for any of them. Good job Winnie and friends.

So, overall if you want to waste some time watching a terrible slasher, do it. Even you can find somehow entertaining if you're in the mood.

A Terrible Excuse of a Mess!

[brionesb · 1/10 · 17 February 2023]

I like films and movies in general and horror is one of my favorite genres. Lately I've been getting into the more low budget films where the filmmakers rely on creativity over showing off the budget on special effects and past their prime actors looking to still be in movies. A lot of the ones I've seen in fact have fallen into the "so bad it's good" or cheesy and over the top category that you can't help but have fun because everyone involved with the film clearly was while making it!

Unfortunately this is a train wreck that absolutely needed more time to be polished. The worst part about this is that you can see that there some solid foundations in some of the way the shots were setup & the premise is a decent one to build from. The problem is that this looks like it was executed by someone who is learning to make movies, which is fine, but it probably should've gotten more time in front of other filmmakers that could've pointed out the obvious flaws.

One big flaw that this movie has is that the narrative is difficult to follow. Scenes that should establish who the characters and help the audience follow what is happening with them as the story progresses is non-existent. Characters literally pop in & out of thin air and things happen to them but you don't see how the story takes them from point a to b. In additions to this, the movie is impossibly dark to the point where you literally can't see anything except random things meant to represent the characters and objects they're holding or moving around! Several scenes were just so dark that you couldn't tell where the characters are in relation each other or the scenery. Movies are a visual medium, you need to see what is happening or at least have an inkling of what is unfolding even if you're not supposed to see things clearly!

The plot about Winnie-the-Pooh and the other forest animals turning feral after Christopher Robin left them to be an adult was a good starting point but ultimately went nowhere. Why did Pooh & Piglet wind up torturing or killing people if they became ravenous from hunger instead of eating them? Why is Christopher Robin just barely in the movie, while the focus is on a bunch of other characters that we literally know nothing about?

Clearly you can see the inexperience of the director on display here as some scenes and shots are well done while others are absolute trash. I'm sure given enough time they will improve with more movies under their belt but they need someone to help guide & mentor them so that they can make a movie that is watchable. Sure, this was a micro budget effort but it's advertised like it has more money behind it than it really does. If this guy had a solid fundamentals I'd be complaining more about the story than how everything is presented! And the presentation doesn't require fancy cameras or special effects, you just need good clear shots and narrative flow which don't require a ton of money if given the time to do it right!

Lastly, I heard that there is already a sequel in the works? How in the hell did this piece of garbage manage to get a sequel greenlit and Zack Snyder had so much difficulty getting more movies made in the DC Universe?! That tells me that somehow there is someone with money that has more cash then sense and somehow got talked into making more of this...

I will definitely & absolutely NOT recommend this movie for anyone in any form! Not even if you're high or drunk, this is just a pure waste of time that you will never get back.

No, just no

[ttkorkala-61-773805 · 2/10 · 16 April 2023]

Hard to find anything good about this film. Even the original disney version was scarier. Felt like some school project and the actors where from same school. It would hav been possible to make great film from this story but this was just awful. Only some of the bloody effects where made good. Just read that they gonna make number two and hard to understand why that would be beneficial. Even if i could see this film for free it still would feel like waste of my time.

If you like this film there's something very wrong in you. Pulling nails is more entertaining. Stay away from this piece of phoo.

Pooh!

[clayface9 · 1/10 · 16 February 2023]

Let me make it clear that I'm not offended by the idea of a Winnie the Pooh horror movie. Such a movie isn't going to "ruin my childhood". However, this particular Winnie the Pooh horror is very bad. It starts off explaining how Christopher Robin found and befriended genetic freaks called Winnie the Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore, Rabbit and Owl. They remained friends until Christopher went off to college and left them to fend for themselves. Unable to find enough food, the rest of the animals killed and ate Eeyore, which led to them becoming feral and taking a vow of silence. This part of the movie was adequately done, but it was all downhill from here. The rest of the movie has two men in unconvincing Winnie the Pooh and Piglet masks going around killing people in gruesome ways. What happened to Rabbit and Owl? I don't know, they were nowhere to be found. This movie is bad, and it's way too grim to be enjoyably bad.

WTF?!

[smooth_op_85 · 1/10 · 4 February 2023]

The only good part about this movie was the beginning where they explained how they went feral

No Rabbit, No Tigger, or Roo...honestly, I was hoping for something that would've been a gritty telling of what happens after Christopher Robin had to leave

What we GOT was a forgettable slasher that didn't even care for logic, characters that are worse than the movie tropes and I didn't care for any of them at all. They were just...bland and I didn't care about them when they died

The film is dark as in it's barely visible. Some films did it better but this one is so dark I can't see what's happening half the time. The kills are...meh, I just feel like these are human versions of turkeys with no survival instinct

Whoever decided this was a good idea needs to be fired.

Gross film making, and not in a good way.

[yellowgrenade · 1/10 · 23 March 2023]

I'm not going to talk about the terrible acting, and the bad editing and the lazy boring plot, because there's already been many reviews discussing these shortcomings.

What offends me that most about this movie, and Rhys Frake-Waterfield's other unknown movies " Peter pan's neverland nightmare" and something called " The area 51 incident", is the fact thast waterfield trys to coast on already established franchese, or things that already beloved in pop culture, i dont find it offensive that he turns these on their heels, i find it offensive that he does it so damn BADLY. That it just becomes an insult to the source material. Thus man should stop making movies if his cheap attempt to gain hype is to take something that people already know and try to use that to sell your crap film.

Rhys Frake-Waterfield is a great example of a bad film maker. Who's movies aren't even so bad that they become good again, theres no redeeming quality to his work. He should try something else.

It's not a movie

[rehmankhilji · 1/10 · 25 April 2023]

It is not a movie, i dont understand why to even put it in this category. It's some kid with his handy cam and with face masks stolen or taken from some recent Halloween party.

I must say the narration in the start was good, i was all buckle up for it, but the first few minutes, the zero level acting by the first two, i was like wait a minute, this is not a movie.

And then when creatures appeared wearing masks, concluded, it is not a movie, some kids playing around and making something totally stupid.

Not even worth to be on data base or any review.

Delete this one, ignore it and move on. Garbage.

Absolutely terrible

[Laura_Ratings · 1/10 · 27 February 2023]

I already saw that the movie had sadly enough scored quite low on IMDB before going to the movie myself, but man was it worse than I had thought.

The script was terrible, full of cliches and so predictable. The only thing it surprised me with was with how many/few people survived. The acting was sub-par.

There is a backstory with the main character about stalking, but so much attention was paid to this that it insinuated it had something to do with Winnie and Piglet, when it did not. So why was it there? It felt like an empty add to the plot. There is also a story line added of a troubled relationship between two girls, but that too feels like a feeble attempt at adding some backstory to the characters.

Next is the totally unneccessary amount of nudity and sexualization of some of the characters. In one of the scenes Winnie rips off the shirt of a girl (so her upper body is fully exposed) before killing her, literally for what reason? It doesn't appear that Winnie or the others are sexually driven so it is just a boring attempt to make the movie "interesting" for the (male) viewer. Also the scene of another girl in a bikini feeling herself in her room and in the hottub have zero purpose in the movie. It's redundant and does the movie no credit.

As others have also pointed out, the masks on the animals were quite poorly done and made it look cheap, maybe CGI would've been the better choice here.

Finally there is the complete unbelievability of how long people stay alive in some of their conditions. You're telling me a girl can still scream while half of her brain is already crushed? Highly doubt it....

It seems like they ended the movie so that there could be a sequel, but honestly it would need a lot of improvement on all its fronts for it to be good.

Not As Bad As Made Out

[vengeance20 · 6/10 · 3 May 2023]

So, having heard much of this film, mostly bad, I went to watch thinking it might be good. I wanted to watch this anyway since first hearing about it back in 2022.

The film sees Pooh and Piglett turning against Christopher Robin and anyone who dares enter the 100 Acre Wood. It's basically a slasher version of the childhood films and TV Show we all knew and grew up with.

I found the film to be not bad. It's not amazing by any means but it's not half as bad as what it's being made out. It's straight forward, to the point and has some not bad kills. It's not as gory as I'd of liked it to be, nor is it as good plot wise. But it's decent enough and hey, it's different and an interesting take on the childhood show.

At 1 hour and 17 minutes, it's short, which isn't bad and the pacing isn't too bad either. The characters are alright for what they are but are cardboard and there to just get picked off by the antagonists Pooh and Piglett. The ending felt rushed and abrupt, but oddly enough, wasn't bad and pretty good. The kills were ok but not as gruesome enough as the title suggests.

Overall, it's not bad, but it does lack a plot, character developement and some good gruesome kills to justify it's title. At 77 minutes it's short and good for that and the fact that the film had a male soul survivor which was good. The film is not as bad as made out, but not amazing. I'd recommend a watch of it, you might like it. But have your own mind and get your own honest opinion on it.

6/10.

Waste of time

[andrewlee-77239 · 1/10 · 4 February 2023]

A lot of hype over this film a HORROR version of Winnie the Pooh. The film was a waste of time. Cannot believe they already talking about a sequel!!! Low budget you can tell Pooh and Piglet are people in masks. Bad Acting and script. I usually give a film a chance even if bad rating etc but I turned this off as was that bad There are many films out there that are terrible but this words cannot say how bad it is. There will be people that will like it and like me people that will hate it. Film had possibility but sadly his is how it turned out. Watch it or dont your choice it is a full let down.

Wtf

[ColinTheGorilla · 1/10 · 5 March 2023]

I thought this movie would be a so bad it's kinda good horror movie but this movie is awful and genuinely one of the worst pieces of cinema I've ever seen as it's so terrible. The acting is beyond awful and some of the worst I may have ever seen as it's truly terrible as I hate every damn character in this movie. This actually might be the worst movie I've ever seen. It's so terrible and not even remotely scary at all and the plot is truly terrible. Everything about this movie sucks and I wish it was never made due to how terrible and an abomination this movie is to all of cinema. Overall this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Wildly misogynistic for no reason??

[lillianroberts · 1/10 · 30 October 2023]

I watched this with a roommate and expected gore, a ridiculous plot, and probably bad acting. Fine, I thought it'd be silly and fun. Instead, I got a gorey movie with bad acting that was also brutally misogynistic. The women murdered were all killed really horrifically and many of these scenes had unnecessarily sexual undertones. One woman's shirt comes off, another is tied suggestively while in a bikini, etc. And, at the end of the movie, rather than take a chance to get revenge on his arch nemesis who abandoned him and is supposedly responsible for turning the animals into such monsters, Pooh decides to murder one last woman instead. I truly don't understand why the movie needed to be so hyper sexual or focused on such intense violence against women and it ruined, for me, what could've been just a stupid but fun slasher movie.

No redeeming qualities whatsoever

[aprilsfriendorin · 1/10 · 1 November 2023]

You're probably considering watching this movie because it seems funny. You're probably thinking, "hey, even if I don't like it, I can make fun of it and laugh at the characters!" Well, I'm here to tell you- don't. It's not funny. It's not scary. It's not good. You know how some bad movies are actually kind of entertaining? Yeah, this isn't one. It's just plain bad. Here's a rundown of the worst parts:

1) Terrible makeup/costume. They didn't even try to make the Winnie the Pooh characters look realistic, they just look like guys in masks

2) Ridiculously sexist. You can tell this was written by men who have never interacted with a real women. The characters are extremely stereotypical, while the dialogue is cringe and vapid. Like, I seriously don't think this writer has met a single woman. Also, unnecessary nudity is forced in, which, of course.

3) No character development or plot whatsoever. There's nothing to make you care about these people, at all. Also, four of the main characters look exactly the same. There's no diversity at all, like not a single POC. I've actually never seen that before. Probably for the best though, nobody should want to be attached to this atrocity.

This man is already planning to make sequels. Do not encourage him by watching this!