Editorials
Is ‘Child’s Play 2’ Better Than ‘Child’s Play’?!
With the quite good Curse Of Chucky now available on VOD (and hitting Blu-ray on October 8th) I thought it would be an interesting time to discuss a somewhat controversial notion among fans of Don Mancini’s iconic Chucky character – is Child’s Play 2 actually a better film than Child’s Play?
There was a time when suggesting such a thing seemed like heresy. For years I’ve just assumed that my childhood enthusiasm for the Child’s Play sequels was nothing but a youthful flight of fancy. I had it in my head that the first film was the only true important component of the franchise (with Bride Of Chucky being an interesting postmodern footnote). But as I began revisiting this series last month I began to see a real case developing for the enduring quality of Child’s Play 2 (unfortunately I can’t say the same for the rushed Child’s Play 3 – though I applaud that film’s effort to change the scenery a bit). Is it the perfect Chucky film?
For years the fanbase has been carrying the torch that the 1988 original film is the only one that is “truly scary.” I’d contend that none of the films are actually scary. That’s not to say they’re not good – it’s just that the best Child’s Play movies are exemplary “fun” slashers. You can take the kills kind of seriously, but the pleasure you derive from them usually stems from their inventiveness more than anything else. There’s gore, but you’re not grossed out. These movies scratch the horror itch in a big way, but they’re not going to haunt your dreams.
The first film might take itself slightly more seriously at times, but it’s still certainly in on the joke of having the world’s most diminutive foul-mouthed killer. The moments where the film acknowledges this (such as Catherine Hicks’ first violent encounter with Chucky) are its most successful. They’ve got the suspense, intensity and wit we associate with Chucky’s best moments, but the surrounding elements still aren’t fully nudged into the Chucky-verse. I’d argue that the series had yet to find its true identity and that Child’s Play is peppered with slight tonal miscalculations that keep it from really coming into its own.
Child’s Play 2 manages to strip away all artifice and still manage to be an effective slasher. It knows it’s dealing with a sassy killer doll, and it fully embraces that path. It doesn’t have to hide Chucky’s true nature from us like the first film did in its first few acts (and initial marketing campaign). In fact, it begins at the “Good Guy” factory and seems to ratchet up the more playful elements of the universe from frame one. The film is brighter, more colorful and runs at a brisk pace. The initial kill, a technician being electrocuted during the process of restoring (reanimating) Chucky perfectly sets up the film’s mix of youthful whimsy and adult cynicism.
Andy’s new foster parents, Joanne and Phil (played by Jenny Agutter and Phil Simpson), are painted in broad strokes. She wants to nourish Andy back to emotional health, he wants the kid out of the damn house. But you can sense just a hint of the warmth that must have initially bonded them as a couple (and Joanne’s grief over the later loss of Phil is palpable). Again, we get a youthful shorthand with just enough layering added to not make it a farce (a different dynamic with a similar balancing act informs Andy’s relationship with his foster sister, Kyle).
Then, you have the kills. Almost every one of them makes expert use of Chucky’s size, available tools and skill set. From the sleazy “Good Guy” exec to Beth Grant’s disciplinarian teacher to Phil’s untimely demise. Where a few of the kills in the first film took place from Chucky’s anonymous POV (before his reveal), here we really get to see him relish the art of murder. It’s something he really enjoys and that joy, sick as it is, works incredibly well when shared onscreen.
The film’s finale in the makeshift funhouse of the “Good Guy” assembly line embodies the success of the piece in a nutshell. It’s exploding with color and inventiveness. It’s violent and bloody, but playful. It has a nice sense of momentum and is able to oscillate between humor and menace in a deft manner. Thematically, it brings Chucky sort of full circle in his demise (at least in terms of his 2nd life as a doll). And it sums up how John Lafia’s Child’s Play 2 outshines the original Tom Holland film a bit – it manages to have its cake and eat it too. That’s what Chucky’s all about isn’t it?
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
‘The Exorcism’ – Russell Crowe Stars in Horror Movie Formerly Titled ‘The Georgetown Project’
You must be logged in to post a comment.