Editorials
The Queer Horror of ‘Chucky’: Episode 4 – “Just Let Go”
Each week Joe Lipsett will highlight a key scene or interaction in Don Mancini’s Chucky series to consider how the show is engaging with and contributing to queer horror.
This is the first week of my Chucky coverage that I’ve been jealous of Meagan’s reviews because the hospital horror scenes in “Just Let Go” are pretty darn exciting. But while melty-faced Chucky (Brad Dourif) double-fisting syringes into Detective Peyton (Travis Milne)’s chest to the point that his fingers bleed is highly entertaining, for our purposes, the queer horror narrative is still the one unfolding in the flashbacks.
Thanks to Devon (Bjorgvin Arnarson)’s research, the next chapter of Charles Lee Ray’s childhood is revealed. After the death of his parents, Charles was sent to a boys home where he stayed out of trouble for a few years. Then, as a fourteen year old (now played by Tyler Barish), Charles embarks on a mission of not just revenge, but also “mentorship.”
Obviously the big reveal is that Charles’ connection with a young boy at the group home is revealed to be none other than Eddie Caputo (played by Neil Giuntoli in the 1988 film). While Eddie winds up being Chucky’s accomplice and eventual murder victim in the 80s, here he’s simply a boy who shares Charles’ interest in the macabre, to the point that he willingly accepts the severed forearm of the murdered Janitor (Michael Scholar Jr) in a shoebox.
One interpretation of this development is through the lens of courtship: Chucky is wooing Eddie into a future life of crime. But there’s barely enough material here to justify that reading (perhaps we’ll see more of Eddie in the future?)
Let’s focus instead of the cultivation of homosocial relationships that Charles/Chucky covets. While in the present he’s just as interested in young Caroline (Carina Battrick) as he is in Jake (Zackary Arthur), it’s telling how easily Chucky assumes control of the all-boy troop at the group home. We see him not only commandeering story time and teaching the boys foul language, he takes them on an “adventure” into the woods to see the Janitor’s body.
The fact that Charles was reading the group Peter Pan is significant in this regard: the story is about an emotionally stunted, immature boy who collects young, impressionable boys in a make-believe world where he never has to grow up.
Thematically the choice of Peter Pan makes sense because Chucky’s world is make-believe. For Chucky, sweet talking Jake is all it will take to convince the boy to drop Lexy (Alyvia Alyn Lind) to her death. Hell, Chucky’s moral code is such that Detective Peyton’s voracious appetite merits stabbing him to death, or that Oliver deserved to die last episode because Chucky mistook him for someone else! Let’s face it: Chucky’s point of view is infantile, so Peter Pan is a perfect fit for him.
Coincidentally this isn’t the first time a Peter Pan narrative has been linked to queerness. Due to the character’s age and size, he was routinely played by a girl on-stage and according to The Atlantic, Peter is:
Eternally young; endlessly seeking adventure; brazenly living a fraught, fantastical life without grown-up interference or societal constriction—Peter Pan is the perfect character through whom society’s gender roles may be disrupted, and even abandoned. He’s more interested in killing pirates than kissing girls… Rascally and clever and devil-may-care, Peter will never reach manhood; he doesn’t want to achieve manhood.
Sound like anyone we know? Sure Chucky’s relationship with Jennifer Tilly’s Tiffany contradicts some of this, but the reality is that he’s always seemed more attracted to her murderous impulses than her physicality.
Of course the trip through the woods to see a dead body is also evocative of the homosocial world of Stephen King’s The Body (or Frank Darabont’s adaptation, Stand By Me), which positions a memorable adventure as a loss of innocence among a group of young male friends. And while this would apply more to Eddie than Charles in these flashbacks, this is a rite of passage and a new turning point for Charles: the moment he murders for himself.
Between the recent discussion about mentorship and grooming, the homosocial ties to The Body and the queer undertones of Peter Pan, it’s clear that Chucky has “a type”. The question is whether Mancini and his writers will continue to explore Charles’ childhood experiences, or whether the narrative will focus more on the present day now that Chucky has made his presence known to both Lexy and Devon.
Chucky airs Tuesdays on Syfy and USA Network. Also: Tune into this week’s Horror Queers for a punk interpretation of Peter Pan in queer director Joel Schumacher’s The Lost Boys.
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.