"Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" sequel promises substantially larger budget

[BluBonnet]

Cannes: ‘Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey’ Slasher Sequel Cuts Deals Around the World

The sequel to one of the most talked about indie films of the past 12 months has scored a number of international sales deals.

Microbudget creature slasher Winnie-the-Pooh: Bood and Honey became a viral hit for its IP-bludgeoning take on A. A. Milne’s beloved children’s story, helping it amass more than $6 million globally when it was released earlier this year off a budget of under $100,000. Buoyed by the success, Premiere Entertainment — which sold out all territories with theatrical components on the original — has now gotten off to a fast start on the follow-up, with many distributors coming back for a second swing of the bloody axe.

The Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey sequel has been sold to Mexico and Latin America (Cinemex), Germany and Italy (Plaion), France (Crome Films), Benelux (Movie Company), Scandinavia (Njuta Films), Russia/CIS (Voxell Films), Australia and New Zealand (Umbrella), Middle East (Phoenicia), Turkey (BG Film), Taiwan (AV-Jet), India and airlines (PictureWorks).

The slasher franchise film centers on Winnie and his sidekick Piglet. Having turned feral after being abandoned in the wild by their friend Christopher Robin, the two go on a murderous rampage through Hundred Acre Wood.

Principal photography on the sequel is scheduled for fall, with the plot being kept under wraps. The production is expected to include a substantially larger budget than its predecessor film.

Rhys Frake-Waterfield returns as writer and director. Waterfield and Scott Jeffrey are producing for Jagged Edge Productions while Stuart Alson and Nicole Holland serve as executive producers for ITN Studios.

ITN will handle distribution in North America.

[BudBaxter]

Perhaps they can afford decent creature masks this time & oh, I don't know, maybe write an actual script & hire professional actors?

[BluBonnet]

If the 2nd one is even moderately successful, we'll be looking at a trilogy.

[weberrygt]

6,000,000 / 100,000 = 6000% profit!

For comparison, and I am just making these numbers up: $2B on a $500M budget ~ 400% return. Obviously, a B means so much more than any M, but it's hard to ignore such a rate of return.

[BudBaxter]

People went to see the first one because it sounded fun/stupid/cool/or just plain WTF? (delete as applicable). Then they saw the actual finished product. No matter how many people paid to see it, I don't think I've seen a single positive review for Blood & Honey, not even in a 'so bad it's good' way.

I imagine audiences will be much more wary about paying to see a sequel.

But hey, given how many countries it's already been sold to, it's probably already made its budget back before they even start filming... It's like Cannon films never went away.

[KManX89]

It's still gonna be hot trash and not in a "so bad it's good" way.

Originally Posted by BudBaxter

No matter how many people paid to see it, I don't think I've seen a single positive review for Blood & Honey, not even in a 'so bad it's good' way.

Other than the occasional IMDb and Letterboxd review, no.

BTW, having sat through this turd, I can confirm it's not "so bad it's good", it's just bad. Terribad. Maybe if I could actually see what the hell was going on and it didn't bore me with how much it pads scenes just to get it to feature film length (I was trying to stay awake through the supposedly "funny" parts). Maybe they'll be able to afford some better lighting this time? And actual corn syrup blood instead of stupid, cheap CGI stuff? And better masks?

[KManX89]

Originally Posted by weberrygt

6,000,000 / 100,000 = 6000% profit!

For comparison, and I am just making these numbers up: $2B on a $500M budget ~ 400% return. Obviously, a B means so much more than any M, but it's hard to ignore such a rate of return.

Such an overrated statistic. No shit it had a bigger multiplier than any blockbuster, it was made for less than my lunch money. But in terms of actual profit, it doesn’t even come close to making what tentpoles typically make. By that logic, the Saw films all did better than Endgame, but we all know which movie made more green for their respective studio (hard profit, not revenue).

Which is why, if you’re curious, you owe it to yourself and fellow moviegoer to not pay to see this garbage (and it will be garbage just like the first one was). It doesn’t take many paying consumers like that for it to go black, hence we’re gonna keep getting more of these garbage heaps from a hack director who’s made no secret of the fact that he’s so eager to be the next Daniel Ferrands.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by KManX89

Such an overrated statistic. No shit it had a bigger multiplier than any blockbuster, it was made for less than my lunch money. But in terms of actual profit, it doesn’t even come close to making what tentpoles typically make. By that logic, the Saw films all did better than Endgame, but we all know which movie made more green for their respective studio (hard profit, not revenue).

Which is why, if you’re curious, you owe it to yourself and fellow moviegoer to not pay to see this garbage (and it will be garbage just like the first one was). It doesn’t take many paying consumers like that for it to go black, hence we’re gonna keep getting more of these garbage heaps from a hack director who’s made no secret of the fact that he’s so eager to be the next Daniel Ferrands.

Guy seems like the biggest hack in the world. Not being able to come up with a creative idea in his bones. using other peoples ideas to make his crappy horror movies.

[weberrygt]

Originally Posted by KManX89

Such an overrated statistic.

[Show spoiler]No shit it had a bigger multiplier than any blockbuster, it was made for less than my lunch money. But in terms of actual profit, it doesn’t even come close to making what tentpoles typically make. By that logic, the Saw films all did better than Endgame, but we all know which movie made more green for their respective studio (hard profit, not revenue).

Which is why, if you’re curious, you owe it to yourself and fellow moviegoer to not pay to see this garbage (and it will be garbage just like the first one was). It doesn’t take many paying consumers like that for it to go black, hence we’re gonna keep getting more of these garbage heaps from a hack director who’s made no secret of the fact that he’s so eager to be the next Daniel Ferrands.

Yes of course. I am not saying to replace, nor am I commenting on the actual movie itself. I am saying that it still pays to fund other movies besides the tentpoles you referenced. There is still opportunity to profit. I would be curious to see a ranking of movies by rate of profit/return.