Editorials
Building a Better Sequel With ‘Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2’
It’s an interesting time to be a horror fan. From artsy genre mashups to the modern slasher renaissance, it appears that there’s a scary movie for nearly every kind of viewer these days. Personally, I think one of the most fascinating genre trends in recent years has to be the rise of horror flicks inspired by childhood stories that only just entered the public domain – a movement that was kick-started by Rhys Frake-Waterfield’s Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey in 2023.
While that first film was mostly panned by critics, with reviewers accusing it of being a disastrous cash-grab leeching off of a popular intellectual property, it was still successful enough to warrant a better-received follow-up. And with the sequel finally available at home this week, I think this is a great time to dive into how Frake-Waterfield and his team were able to turn a low-budget experiment into a proper big-screen slasher meant to open the gates for an entire cinematic universe.
Before we begin, I think it warrants mentioning that I don’t even think the original Blood and Honey is as bad as people say it is. Yeah, it’s undoubtedly cheap and the Pooh stuff is mostly set dressing on a rather conventional slasher flick, but the production still has a lot of heart. The writer/director is clearly well versed in classic Winnie yarns, and I actually prefer the original monstrous Pooh design over the more “realistic” one, as the smoother mask and more cartoonish body-shape somehow make him look even creepier – especially when slathered in honey.
That being said, the first film had several glaring flaws which were clearly only overlooked due to the batshit crazy premise. From amateurish photography to flat performances and stock dialogue, the movie felt like a rough draft rushed into production before someone else could beat the team to the public domain punch. Thankfully, when the flick went viral and allowed for the production of a sequel with a much larger budget, the director decided that the next installment required some course correction if he was going to turn this into a franchise.

Glow-up?
This clearly worked out, with Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2 surprising even fans of the original with its increased quality. But while most people praised the film’s higher production value and more elaborate death scenes (not to mention the updated monster designs), I think that the things which make it a better experience aren’t necessarily related to money. In fact, I’m of the opinion that Frake-Waterfield realized that it would be a waste of resources to spend the new budget (reportedly 5 times more than the original) on another amateur production, and that’s probably why he recruited Summer of 84 co-writer Matt Leslie to help him expand the story.
Frake-Waterfield and Leslie ended up significantly revising the new film’s lore, delving further into Christopher Robin’s trauma while also adding more disturbing versions of Pooh’s Hundred Acre Wood friends into the mix. The duo even incorporated some mystery elements into the story by having Christopher Robin investigate the disappearance of his brother and try to get to the bottom of the Hybrids’ origins, which means that the flick doesn’t grind to a halt when the killing stops.
Speaking of kills and Hybrids, the goblin-esque Owl was probably my favorite new addition here, with his maniacal dialogue allowing for some memorable moments among the villains. However, the build-up to Tigger’s killer reveal is downright phenomenal (with the character having been absent from the previous film for copyright reasons). Having the other Hybrids treat him like an unhinged Joker-style threat was a stroke of genius, and I love his Freddy-Krueger-inspired quips, though I wish his final design wasn’t so similar to the other animals.
I also really enjoyed the obvious Island of Doctor Moreau influence on the creatures’ revamped origin story. It actually reminded me of Alan Moore’s eerie explanation for the existence of anthropomorphic animals in his public domain crossover comic The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, though it’s a shame that Blood and Honey 2 presents this idea through a single absurdly long exposition dump.
There’s also the matter of the sequel framing the original movie as a fictional film-within-a-film sensationalizing the “real” 100 Acre Wood Massacre. Not only does this meta approach allow for some easy retcons, explaining away narrative inconsistencies between the films as a classic case of movie magic, but it also serves as recognition from Frake-Waterfield that his original ideas needed some work.

Yes, he bounces!
While the recasting and redesigns are kind of unfortunate for fans of the first Blood and Honey (especially if you think that some elements of the original are better than the sequel), it’s understandable that the filmmakers would want a more experienced team both behind and in front of the cameras when dealing with a larger budget.
The new continuity allows for a blank slate on which the filmmakers can start over with the right foot forward without necessarily discarding everything that came before. To be honest, I actually hope that the story’s film-within-a-film elements continue into the sequels much like Scream’s infamous Stab franchise – especially if the team can continue to use them as a way of addressing fan concerns.
There’s obviously still plenty of room for improvement here. The more expensive monster make-up is veering too close to Whoville territory, and we could use some more likable human characters to up the stakes. However, even if you don’t particularly like the film, I think Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey 2 has established Rhys Frake-Waterfield as the best kind of indie filmmaker: the kind who can learn from his mistakes and isn’t afraid to continue to take risks with future projects.
That’s why I can’t help but be excited for the upcoming films in the Twisted Childhood Universe. Not because I’m particularly interested in a killer Bambi or evil Peter Pan, but because I think these films are being helmed by a flexible creative team that’s willing to improve on their past work. And at the end of the day, I don’t think horror fans could ask for more.
Editorials
Before ‘The Blair Witch Project’, ‘Alien Autopsy’ Showed How Real Found Footage Could Feel
The line separating artist from con man is a lot thinner than you might initially believe. While I think we can all agree that lying for the sake of profit is actively malicious behavior, isn’t it also true that the faux documentary aspect of The Blair Witch Project is half the reason why that film became such a cultural phenomenon? After all, if there’s one thing filmmakers have in common with stage magicians, it’s that misleading and misdirecting audiences is simply part of the job.
That’s why I’ve developed a habit of mostly ignoring the moral quandaries behind many of film and television’s biggest “hoaxes” in favor of appreciating the narrative elements that drive productions like Mermaids: The Body Found and even Animal Planet’s highly underrated The Cannibal in the Jungle. However, if there’s a definitive case of a highly publicized broadcast fooling the world into taking it seriously, it has to be Fox’s infamous 1995 TV special Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction.
It’s been over three decades since that eerie footage first haunted television screens right at the peak of the ’90s ufology craze, and in that time, the video has taken on a life of its own. From countless parodies and references in everything from The X-Files to Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater (as well as John Dower’s recently released tell-all documentary The Alien Autopsy Scandal, which I’d highly recommend to genre fans everywhere), there’s no denying the legacy of the Alien Autopsy video. However, I rarely see the tape discussed as what it truly is: a highly convincing found footage film directed by a passionate stage magician and brought to life by masterful practical effects work.
That’s why I’d like to invite readers to join me on a deep dive into one of the most infamous broadcasts of all time in an attempt to reevaluate the footage as a fascinating narrative experience rather than a complete hoax.
The TV Special That Convinced Millions It Was Real

Ray Santilli next to Extraterrestrial replica in ‘The Alien Autopsy Scandal’
For starters, regardless of whether or not you believe that there was in fact an extraterrestrial crash in Roswell during the summer of 1947 and that some form of autopsy was performed on the victims, the producers behind the black & white recordings, Ray Santilli and Gary Shoefield, insist that their video was a “restoration.” Though I’d argue that the proper word is “remake”of genuine footage that was too damaged to air on television. That’s why the duo went on to recruit filmmaker and eccentric magician Spyros Melaris and sculptor/monster designer John Humphreys to bring their version of the autopsy to life and sell it to the highest bidder.
This is where the story of the Alien Autopsy as a narrative experience really begins. Melaris claims that his approach to the faux recording consisted of striving for extreme period accuracy in both shooting equipment and setting while also planting subtle details that would initially seem like mistakes but could later be revealed to actually fit the time period. That being said, the filmmaker was under the impression that the short would be released for free as a PR stunt, with the team later producing and selling an informative documentary chronicling exactly how the footage was faked and commenting on how easy it is to manipulate public perception with a good old-fashioned magic trick.
This obviously isn’t how things went down, and that’s likely the reason why Melaris has since distanced himself from everyone else involved with the project. Yet, no amount of behind-the-scenes drama can undermine the genuine effort that went into making the short as impressive as it is. From the sourcing of real animal organs from a local butcher to make the organic part of the creature more lifelike to the highly detailed sculpt that made use of a hollowed-out underlayer that could be filled with fake blood and assorted viscera, there’s a reason why so many Hollywood specialists are still impressed with the artistry on display here.
Of course, the believability is only half the story, as I think that the best part of the autopsy is how Melaris builds on the existing tension by obscuring certain details and often embracing the chaos of what a real examination of extraterrestrial life could feel like. The camera often goes out of focus at just the right time to make certain effects hit even harder, and we can only speculate as to what the hazmat-suited doctors are gesticulating about during the operation. There’s a real air of mystery to the whole thing that almost makes it feel like a cosmically terrifying, cursed film containing forbidden knowledge that civilians were never meant to see.
So when Fox’s Fact or Fiction brings in the specialists to comment on the film and its otherworldly subject, it’s no surprise that we end up with one of the most memorable mockumentaries of all time – albeit one where the participants are unaware that the footage they’re commenting on is basically a large-scale practical joke. A joke that the network was obviously in on, as many participants claim that the TV special cut out significant portions where guests point out that they believe the footage to be an elaborate hoax.
The Lasting Impact of the Hoax Turned Cultural Event

Regardless, I remember going to bed terrified after watching reruns of the special and thinking about the respected pathologist who claimed that the body was almost certainly inhuman, with even effects maestro Stan Winston commenting on how difficult it would be to recreate some of these visuals through practical puppetry. That’s not even mentioning Jonathan Frakes’ dramatic hyping up of the disturbing imagery as if he was talking about the tape from The Ring, with his spooky demeanor here likely being responsible for his later role as the host of Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction a few years later.
Personally, I’d argue that the Alien Autopsy phenomenon had just as much of an impact on me as a horror fan as The Blair Witch Project, a film that was almost certainly influenced by the success of this immensely popular hoax (to the point where they even produced their own TV special commenting on Heather’s found footage). Even if Fox didn’t intend to produce a narrative feature about the aftermath of the Roswell crash, the end product still holds up remarkably well as a highly entertaining mockumentary exploring the idea that we may not be alone in the universe.
While neither Santilli nor the rest of the production team has ever commented on this, I also think it’s very likely that the idea of a faux Alien Autopsy could have been influenced by Dean Alioto’s The McPherson Tape/UFO Abduction. I’ve already written about how this granddaddy of found footage was co-opted by rogue ufologists who began selling bootlegs of the tape at conventions as if it were real evidence of a close encounter, so it’s not that much of a stretch to imagine that Santilli and company could have heard about this phenomenon and been inspired to come up with their own highly profitable hoax.
At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that the Alien Autopsy film is recreating any real footage from Roswell, but I can still appreciate the short and the accompanying television event as a standalone horror story that still influences the way we see found footage to this very day.
After all, the possibility that something could be real is often much scarier than finding out for sure – and that’s why I think Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction is still worth revisiting three decades down the line.
You must be logged in to post a comment.