Connect with us

Editorials

‘Curse of Chucky’ – Celebrating the Unlikely Franchise Revival Ten Years Later

Published

on

Curse of Chucky

I don’t need to inform anyone that mainstream Hollywood entertainment is still in the grips of a franchise and IP based fervor. Mega franchises, sequels, reboots, requels, remakes – all of these have been the lion’s share of high profile releases for well over a decade now. Everything from the most recognizable franchises in film history to more niche pop cultural artifacts have been resurrected, dusted off, and had a new coat of paint air-brushed on.

Every day across social media the online film community seems to litigate “the state” of Hollywood.

Superhero fatigue. Franchise fatigue. You know the discourse. Personally, I take as much of a nonchalant attitude with all this stuff as I can. I have my peccadillos. I have my areas of agreement regarding “the state” of Hollywood. But at the end of the day I’m just…a dude. A dude who just wants to watch movies and hopefully have as good a time as I can doing it. All of the fracas regarding the industry is, at the end of the day, mostly noise to me.

If a movie looks good, I’ll see it. That goes for Superhero Movie #852 or the latest under the radar indie gaining buzz.

So what does all of this waffle have to do with Curse of Chucky? Well, relatively speaking, I consider Curse one of the most successful franchise reboots we’ve gotten since the trend kicked off in earnest all the back in 2005 with Batman Begins.

Yes, I’m serious.

Best Netflix Horror

After almost a decade off screen, our favorite ginger-haired killer doll came back with the 6th installment in the Child’s Play series after the critical and commercial failure of Seed of Chucky. Franchise creator and steward Don Mancini stands by Seed, and since its release it has gained more appreciation over the years for its daffy, dark, and whacked out satirical looniness. It was clear, however, that Curse would be the first movie in the franchise to go straight-to-video/VOD, and the history of horror franchises that once occupied theaters being relegated to straight-to-video carries with it a certain stigma of cheapness and cynicism. Going from the big screen to the small screen is a sure sign that your franchise has officially run out of gas.

Then something unexpected happened. Curse of Chucky started getting good buzz after its Fantasia Fest premiere. It was largely hailed as a return to form, an unexpectedly confident and clever comeback from a once-popular horror franchise everyone had put in the rearview.

Like many successful reboots of the past 15 years, Curse took a drastically different approach with its tone, with Mancini stripping the story down to a cast of core characters, one location, and an emphasis on making Chucky sinister again.

Working with a lower budget and short shooting schedule, Curse of Chucky is crafted as a Gothic horror. There are clear Dario Argento-esque influences on display here in regards to camera work and lighting. This is a well shot, stylish film and despite some rough around the edges effects work, it could have easily been released in theaters.

But how does Curse of Chucky go about rebooting the franchise? Well, by continuing the franchise.

Nica (Fiona Dourif) is a paraplegic young woman who lives with her mother Sarah (Chantal Quesnelle) in a sprawling, secluded house. One day they receive a package containing a Good Guy Doll. Not knowing who sent it or why, Nica decides to give it to her niece Alice (Summer Howell) as a gift. That night Nica discovers Sarah dead from an apparent suicide.

But we know it wasn’t a suicide.

Nica’s sister Barb (Danielle Bisutti), niece Alice, husband Ian (Brennan Elliott), nanny Jill (Maitland McConnell), and local priest and family friend Father Frank (A Martinez) arrive for the funeral and to support Nica.

Soon family drama, old resentments, secrets, and bodies all start to pile up as Chucky’s beef with this family is revealed.

Curse of Chucky

Mancini makes a bold move in keeping Chucky silent and his movement off-camera for half the film. We mostly see him playing the ‘Toy Story’ game as he enacts his sinister plan. We know it’s Chucky. We know he’s alive. Keeping the audience so far ahead of the characters in a story can knee-cap a film before it even takes off, but the rub here is waiting for the why.

Fiona Dourif as Nica is an instantly likable and easy to root for protagonist and the family drama that unravels throughout the film is filled with Mancini’s darkly humorous touch. The cliche of “is dad sleeping with the nanny?” is subverted with a smirk and characters you may expect to hate end up actually having a bit more dimension to them.

Who really fares best here is Chucky as a character. Fans often gripe about the rough around the edges design and effects work in Curse not being near on par with the theatrically released films. He’s less expressive and has a far more plastic sheen to him than the earlier films. The animatronic work is just a bit more basic, but it’s still recognizable as Chucky and it’s still good work for a direct-to-video/VOD film.

The character himself gets back to his darker roots as a plotting and scheming villain who relishes in the pain – both mental and physical, that he imparts on his victims. Brad Dourif hasn’t lost a thing since he began playing the character since the original film, and for my money Curse is probably the most genuinely scary Chucky has been since Child’s Play 2.

Despite the film being largely well received, it does irk some fans who feel Chucky’s motivation in the film is lackluster and commits the sin of adding backstory where none is needed.

It’s revealed through flashback that before his death, Chucky befriended Nica’s mother while Nica was in the womb. He develops an obsession with Sarah, kills her husband and kidnaps her, expressing a desire to become a family. The police find his hideout. Assuming Sarah somehow tipped the cops off, Chucky stabs Sarah in the stomach (which causes Nica’s paralysis) and flees. He’s chased to the toy store and gunned down on that fateful night in the 80s.

On one hand I understand this new exposition dump being hard to swallow for some. This is a significant retcon for the series as a whole, but it’s not entirely out of the realm of verisimilitude in my opinion, as one of the more interesting quirks of Chucky as a slasher icon is that he had a whole life before he possessed the Good Guy Doll. He was out and about with his own history as a flesh and blood serial killer well before his second life as a murderous toy, leaving his past a bit more open for exploring in ways that don’t feel hacky or reaching.

The delivery of this exposition is a bit undercooked, however. Perhaps if Mancini teased it out a bit more throughout the narrative it would have landed better, or even if he dedicated a bit more screen time to the flashback- but as it stands it’s an admirable, if somewhat sloppy, new wrinkle in Chucky’s story that injected new potential moving forward.

That potential is what resurrected the franchise and is what should be applauded. Of all the slashers that carved up the 80s, it’s rather surprising and delightful that Chucky is the only one with a continued, unbroken narrative going strong today.

Jason was rebooted in 2009 and has been stuck in movie purgatory ever since due to labyrinthian legal issues, among other things. Time will tell if the announced Crystal Lake series from Bryan Fuller comes to fruition.

Freddy has also been stuck in dreamland since his remake in 2010 put audiences to sleep.

I don’t think I need to explain to anyone reading this just how wild the branching timeline of the Halloween franchise is.

But Chucky? Not even his remake was enough to put a stop to his primary timeline. His story is ONE story, still going strong well into 2023. In fact, the third season of his awesome TV series for USA and SYFY – simply titled “Chucky” – just premiered this week.

2023 appears to be a good year for old Chucky. A third season of TV, the 10th anniversary milestone of the film that injected new blood into his fading franchise, and the 35th anniversary of the original Child’s Play. To quote the doll himself, I guess he’s our friend ‘till the end.

Editorials

What’s Wrong with My Baby!? Larry Cohen’s ‘It’s Alive’ at 50

Published

on

Netflix It's Alive

Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.

Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.

Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.

It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.

At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.

It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.

As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.

Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.

Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.

Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.

I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.

Continue Reading