Mouse of Horrors

Granted, I harbored absolutely zero expectations to this 2025 horror movie, as I've watched the likes of horror movies taking on classic characters such as Winnie the Pooh, Piglet and Popeye, and they haven't exactly been stellar movies. Yet, I still opted to watch "Mouse of Horrors" on account of it being a horror movie that I hadn't already seen before.

Writers Harry Boxley and Marc Gottlieb put together a fair enough script. Sure, it was rather generic, even for a slasher movie, but it proved to be entertaining enough for the silly premise that it was.

So the movie ties in with the 2023 "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" movie and the 2024 "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey II" movie, as killer Pooh shows up in the narrative.

The only familiar face on the cast list was Danielle Scott. Yeah, I've seen enough low budget horror movies to be familiar with her. The acting performances in "Mouse of Horrors" were actually fair enough, taking into consideration the premise of the script.

Visually, I found the movie to be adequate. There are some viscerally graphic murder scenes which made up for the otherwise bland storyline. Most of the special effects were actually not bad, but some were just laughable to look at.

The movie is tacky, sure. And if you are a diehard horror fan then I doubt you'll find much entertainment in the movie. But if you don't mind your horror movies mixed with a hefty doze of silly concepts, then perhaps you'll find some enjoyment in "Mouse of Horrors". I found "Mouse of Horrors" suitable enough for a single viewing.

My rating of director Brendan Petrizzo's 2025 movie "Mouse of Horrors" lands on a four out of ten stars.

Yes, it's another sort-of Mickey Mouse (& in this case, a sort-of Winnie the Pooh), but unlike The Mouse Trap, this time we have a British fun fair rather than an American Amusement Arcade. Again, it's a killing spree, though there is a plot and it's loosely a gory Bride of Frankenstein remake.

And again, Mickey is not mentioned by name, even calling him a rat (likewise for Pooh, it is a creation who looks similar but the inspiration is not named).

Sure, the editing isn't brilliant, while the sound effects are way OTT, and the effects, acting and direction are, well, low-budget, but the film is entertaining enough.

Credit has to go to Quint, who provide all the music tracks.

Despite all the nay-sayers, it's not that bad! Okay, so that's not a full recommendation, but if you like low-budget horror, especially slasher films, watch it with an open mind (and preferably a few drinks).

Not as bad as the rating would suggest, it's quite abit better then I'd of presumed and going into this I was heavily excited. The location was fun, the funfair makes for some great looking views and scares, and ultimately it was more fun then it had any right of being.

The Mouse was scary, and he had multiple abilities that is what made him terrifying. And the fact he had a creepy smile, Hauntingly brilliant teeth, and a weapon made him a threat and made him seem scarier then he could of been. So fair play to the props team. Winnie the Pooh costume is also here, and his costume is fine, but what made him scary was his slowness, calmness and he could hit you at any moment and you wouldn't notice. The fight scenes between the villains added a nice spark.

The bad bits would be the story could have been more fleshed out, as theirs the kills and the final stage that took up quite abit of time, for me it would of worked more had it been more fleshed out and took that time to establish some of the folklaw of the villains, and some more material to work with, when near the villains as that would of given it the chill.

The script is great as you can really feel the characters are friends, and even the first part was also good and the scenes were played out nicely which was also good. The script was great but again it had of been better if they had more material to work with when the villains were near it would of been great, but it's still a good script so it deserves some props.

The Movie is short in terms of story, and simple to follow, but a more fleshed out film with more of the folklaw, with slightly more bonding near the villains and everything would of made it a Good film, but it's not bad and I think it's Average Entertainment.

I'd rate this film a 4 Because half of it is good, and the minor flaws and a few suggestions I made would improve the film. Not bad though, either.

It isn't all bad to be completely fair.

Save for some of the random victims, the acting's fine. The movie doesn't look inherently bad and the gore and kills are all decent to well done.

But the movie ignores the characters you're supposed to care about to a ridiculous level. That might be fine but there's little to no backstory or character interaction at all in the meantime. It's just killing. No rhyme, no reason, and more often than not, not entertaining.

Ultimately it's slow. There's shockingly little story and just focusing on the characters doesn't even happen. It's genuinely difficult to spoil anything about it.

Gratuitous. Kinda the only word.

I'd skip this one.

If you have the time to watch this epic failure, don't. It would be more enjoyable to be stuck in traffic while holding in diarrhea. Seriously, I have done both and shatting myself at least had some relief.

Now for this doodie bomb. Brendan Petrizzo "directs" this disaster that makes no sense and has no story. The sound is more horrible than the "cinematography". You can't hear anyone. It looks like it was shot on an early iPhone but saying that would be an insult to the hard working people at Apple. I wonder what it was like to be on set and say "Cut, I think we got it. Moving on." And then "editing" it? The nerve!

How does one have that confidence or show their face in public?

There's so many films out there waiting to be made and somehow this stinker squeezed out through the Tubi cocky tube.