Editorials
Time to Revisit… ‘Gremlins 2: The New Batch’
In this edition of “Time to Revisit…” I take a look back at Joe Dante’s underrated 1990 sequel Gremlins 2: The New Batch, which came about four years too late on the heels of its hit predecessor but nevertheless managed to live up to (or arguably top) the first film in almost every way imaginable.
Agreeing to direct only after Warner Bros. wooed him back with the promise of full creative control over the finished product, Dante infused the film with a go-for-broke sense of wit and an anarchic spirit, transforming what could’ve been a rote Hollywood sequel into a genuinely subversive piece of popular entertainment.
While at the time this off-the-wall sensibility resulted in general indifference from moviegoers and the film’s ultimate failure at the box-office, it is nevertheless a genuinely inspired work that more than deserves a reconsideration by modern critics and audiences.
Beloved Favorite: Gremlins (1984)
Number of votes on IMDB: 48,577
The Plot: After his unusual new pet – a furry “mogwai” named Gizmo – is exposed to water, suburban teenager Billy Peltzer inadvertently unleashes a mob of deviant pint-sized monsters.
Why it’s so celebrated: Gremlins was one of the top-grossing films of the 1980s and a critical success, initially making nearly $150 million domestic on a modest $11 million budget. Executive-produced by Steven Spielberg, the film catapulted director Joe Dante into the Hollywood stratosphere and launched the career of writer (and future A-list director) Chris Columbus. Following in its wake came a host of copycat “small monster” movies (though it has been claimed that both Ghoulies and Critters were conceived prior to Gremlins‘ production period) as well as a belated 1990 sequel. In the present day the film is warmly remembered as a must-see classic of popular cinema and an essential entry in the ’80s-era Amblin canon.
Why it’s time to backburner it for awhile: There’s no doubt that Gremlins is a fun and surprisingly dark ’80s genre film (that Phoebe Cates Santa monologue never gets old), but it’s been widely celebrated ever since its release and Christ, we all know it’s good. By contrast, its less commercially-successful sequel gets largely overlooked despite the fact that it’s the equal of, and arguably better than, its predecessor. Which of course brings me to…
Beloved Favorite: Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
Number of votes on IMDB: 25,512
The Plot: Billy Peltzer must deal with another round of gremlin mayhem after a new horde of the nasty creatures are unleashed in a high-tech New York skyscraper.
Why it’s not so celebrated: First off, I should take a moment to mention that there is a cult of ardent Gremlins 2 fans out there, and moreover I’m certainly not the first online journalist to champion the film. But when looked at overall, it still remains a woefully underrated effort. One obvious reason for its box-office failure (it ended up making slightly over $40 million on a $50 million budget) was the fact it took six years for the film to come out, an eternity in Hollywood sequel-dom. On a creative level, the movie proved far too “out-there” for the majority of moviegoers, with an audaciously satirical and self-referential tone that perhaps proved too smart for its own good.
Why it deserves a revisiting: Gremlins 2 is quite literally one of the purest distillations of a popular director’s style ever released by a major studio. Granted full creative license by Warner Bros. in exchange for agreeing to direct the film, Dante made the most of his near-unprecedented artistic freedom by making the film a highly-subversive meta-commentary on modern life, and even went so far as to poke fun at the original for its plot holes (“What if they’re eating on an airplane and cross into a different time zone?”). His insertion of a seemingly endless bounty of gleefully unexpected gags, including one famous scene in which the gremlins “sabotage the film reel” (changed to a less-effective bit in the VHS version but later reinstated on DVD), brings the enterprise to a level of inspired absurdity that never feels labored .
And yet for all of its artistic bravado, Gremlins 2 still works as popular entertainment. Loaded with clever slapstick moments, striking set design, mostly-excellent effects and sequences of exuberantly over-the-top action, the entire film plays like candy for the eyes. Regardless of how it was received at the time, Dante proved with the film that he was capable of melding his cerebral sensibilities – apparent from the very beginning of his career with intelligent genre efforts like Piranha and The Howling – to an aesthetically stimulating, popcorn-friendly visual palette. His delight in being given the opportunity to make exactly the movie he wanted is apparent in every frame, each one alive with a striking depth of visual detail.
It’s a shame, then, that unlike the first movie, a Gremlins 2 Blu-ray has yet to see the light of day. While it may be that Warner Bros. is simply waiting for the film’s 25th anniversary to come up like they did with the original, I’d guess the real reason is that they just don’t see the value in it. And why should they? It’s a creation representative of nearly every studio executive’s worst nightmare – a bigger-budget sequel that refuses to play by the rules.
Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.
To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.
Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.
After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.
SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?
Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.
For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.
Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.
Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?
AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?
Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.
From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.
The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.
Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.
With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega…
There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.
Looking for New Episodes of “Chucky” on Peacock? Here’s What Changed
‘Mountain Man’ – Joe Manganiello Will Battle Zombies in Upcoming Horror Movie
‘The Blair Witch Project’ – Original Stars Release a Statement Asking Lionsgate for Residuals & Recognition
‘Trap’ – Official Trailer Previews a Wild New Horror Experience from M. Night Shyamalan
‘Longlegs’ – New Teaser Video for NEON Horror Movie Is Soaked in Cryptic Eeriness
You must be logged in to post a comment.