Hot on the heels of catching the first ‘Terrifier’ I decided to jump straight into ‘Terrifier 2’ to see if things picked up a bit and whether I could really properly understand why ‘Art the clown’ has slowly risen to ‘icon’ status over the past few years…And…well…things DO kind of improve a bit over the original, but in a cruel twist of fate, for every ‘win’ this film seems to deliver, it has a counter balance to drag it right on back to where it started.

This time around the film centers on a small family run by single mum Barbara, her kids Sienna and Jonathan are both fairly average highschoolers, but somethings not quite right with Jonanthan. He’s beginning to fall down the creepypasta/murder rabbit hole. And while most teenagers at this point in time WILL do that even if its just once or twice…Jonathans getting REALLY into it, and particularly into the story of ‘Art the Clown Killer’ who brutally murdered 9+ people last halloween and hasnt been heard of or seen since.

Both Barbara and Sienna try to curb Jonathans ‘habit’ but slowly it begins to get more and more intense, ultimately leading to Jonathan encountering Art the clown, and have having a very intense experience with him involving a dead possum.

The school report Jonathans increasingly erratic behaviour and eventually Sienna is pulled into Arts world, and begind to more and more intensly encounter the murderous clown leading to an encounter and final showdown between all involved….Oh! yeh, an thers a B-plot about Sienna trying to make some kind of Angel/Valkyrie costume in time for halloween because its based off one of her dead dads drawings…that seems to eat a lot of the runtime and doesnt explicitly lead anywhere that I could see other than giving her a cool costume with a little bit of meaning to fight Art in at the end.

I feel like Damien Leone took the wrong lessons from the first ‘Terrifier’ audiences were shocked and drawn to the gore, but a little let down by the one dimensional characters and near total lack of story. So what does he do to rectify this? He basically creates an hour and 50 plotline that runs in rings for most of the aforementioned hour and 50 plotline, which then ultimately transitions to 40 minutes of ‘two scared girls and a kid run around a complex, slowly getting attacked again’

It feels almost like a trolling attempt on the audience quite frankly. an hour and 50 of convoluted plot thats slow burn to the point that it VERY nearly made me bail on the film (and believe me, I dont walk out of movies where I can POSSIBLY help it). Only to essentially wind up in the EXACT same scenario that was the framing device for the first ‘Terrifier’ now just with an added kid and disturbing surreal visions.

The script? Hoo boy…the scripts runtime is 2 hours and 18 minutes long, and it feels easily twice that. This film has absolutely NO business being that long, its painfully long, criminally long. There’s slow burn cinema, and then theres watching a film Petrify in real time. Most of the runtime is made up by small insignificant moments that just happen to have a funny ‘Art the clown’ scene in them, the joke shop sequence when Sienna goes to buy a pair of angel wings is torture to me to sit through.

This film should have been about an hour and 40…an hour 45 AT MOST. And im honestly baffled that this was released in the form that it was, because I cant think of a bigger turnoff to me than a movie that I KNOW isnt going to be worth parking my ass in front of the couch for 2+ hours BEING 2+ hours long.

And thats not even mentioning the issues I have with the continuity of this films world. I mentioned in my ‘Terrifier’ review that the big problem I have with ‘Art’ is how the character is defined and what he does. when you want to create a mysterious character, you have to give the audience a few breadcrumbs to help them understand WHY they need to fear this character, and then keep that characters origins and understandings as limited a possible. Charactes like ‘Pinhead’ and ‘Freddy Kruger’ THRIVED on giving the audience enough to know WHY they should fear them, but not enough to make them boring or too well understood (sequels unfortunately reduce this impact significantly.)

The problem with Art is, they havent really established WHO or WHAT he is, nor have they really established any kind of idea of WHY he is the way he is. Art simultaineously is ‘just a guy in a clown suit who brutally murders people’ but he’s also some kind of ‘cosmic horror demi-beast’ he can be a physical person everyone can see, or he can be a figure that only one specific person can see. He can seemingly influence when people have a problem with him…But he can also drag a dead possum around a school with a small child dressed like him without being picked up on any security cameras or on site staff.

And it can be infuriating, because without defining to the audience What Art even is, even if his motivations for killing people boil down to ‘He just likes killing people’ it leaves me asking the question ‘why should I care?’ why should I care or invest my time into this character when the film makers cant even be arsed to define what he is/isnt and what he can/cant do within this universe.

I also didnt much appreciate (and very mild spoilers here) how they clunkily tried to weave in the first film BACK into this one. reintroducing a couple of characters in a couple of scenes TOTALLY seperate from the story being told for no real reason other than to make the audience aware that the two films happened in the same universe, and for a particularly surreal gross out post credits sequence. I can understand a passing line or two referencing the first film. But like; the pull entire characters back into this film for no reason. and they eat up a good 5-10 minutes of this films runtime…for NO reason. I didnt get it.

That being said, there are some elements that this films script does improve on the original. The characters do feel a bit more fleshed out, they do have a more interesting story than the original cast members (albeit I really wish they’d condensed that down to something more tolerably watchable) Art the Clown himself DOES get a couple of additional lore pieces that DOES ever so slightly add to his history. I think the beginnings of the shift into out and out Horror Comedy here do add an extra playful dynamic to the film, and the bleakness of that comedy is a welcome compliment to the total and utter violence we see on screen.

I guess, where I sit with this one really script wise is that it has some good ideas, some decent bones are here. Its just completely drowned out by the needlessly long runtime and total inconsistency on scene structuring. we’re bordering once again in the realm of ‘stuff is just happening with no rhyme or reason…just go with it’ and while that may work for a one off film. I dont want to sit through 2 hours of the director just cinematically telling me to ‘trust him’ only to then not deliver.

The directions about on a par with the first film. I didnt particularly notice anything creatively I disliked, but they seem to have traded a rather beige viewing experience that was the first film, in for a neon soaked 80s-ified aesthetic instead. which, at this point in time, is about the 2nd most generic thing you can do with a horror film barring what they did with the first film. I dunno, this films directoral creative identity is just kind of ‘one size fits all’ generic to me. There were maybe 2-3 scenes that made me actually sit up and go ‘Ooh…now thats a bit different!’ before we quickly found ourselves back in the sludge.

Thats not to say scenes are particularly BADLY handled though, most sequences are competently put together and the direction of the cast is an improvement over the last entry. its just not a big enough improvment to be out and out GOOD. I just kind of sat there taking in a total loss of atmosphere wondering how something like this could have been as successful as it was given it really has no voice, nothing particularly to say other than a pithy throwaway b-plot about the power of family love.

DIrection of the cast is also improved over the original, in the first film, most cast direction notes just seemed to be ‘run over there, breath heavy and scream on cue.’ here, we actually have characters with a little bit more depth, and theres a lot LOT more of them, and they DO actually get to do some semi-decent bits and pieces here, they seem to have a keen guidence on where their cues are and their motivations for the scenes. they wernt oscar winning by any stretch. But I found it more tolerable than the first entry. I just wish they’d picked actresses who looked slightly more different from each other, as theres about 6 actresses in this thing who all look kind of similar and it made it difficult to keep track of exactly who was who, where they were and what was going on with them.

The cine is about the same as the first film quality wise, there are a few more interesting shot choices here over the first film (largely due to a slightly higher budget) but, for the most part its the same stuff from the first film style wise, just trading in neon over desaturates. What I DID appreciate very much with this film is that it looks like the censors were MUCH more forgiving on the gore shots in this film. as, for the most part, rather than cutting away or prematurely ending the scene just as the gore was getting started. This film dives head first in and seemingly has a real fixation with Eye torture and scalping…

I also very much welcome the use of practical effects, with digital work coming in more to smooth over the cracks than anything else. I do feel the practical effects here are a *little* ropey compared to other films efforts. But I applaud the full use of it where possible non the less.

The edit, still isnt all that great, I found the colour correction distracting, and the sequence building is a little all over the place. Because they havent defined what Art can and cant do, it makes sequence building very difficult, your trying to tell a story where one of the main characters simultaineously is a flesh and blood killer, but also the figment of a childs imagination. Its going to be a struggle. I feel they did the best they could, but there was absolutely a lot of this movie that should have stayed on the cutting room floor, and I feel like some of the sequences would have benefitted from one more pass through to really nail EXACTLY what those scenes were trying to say.

Performance wise….look, this is a slasher movie that is predominantly trading on excessive and violent gore shots, where it feels like the writer/director has forced himself to write a story he didnt want to do because audiences demanded a bit more substance. The casts performances here HAD the opportunity to really help tilt this series into something a bit more substansive and interesting. Unfortunately, most of the performances here feel like TV movie of the week quasi-hallmark fodder. they’re generic, stiff, not particularly believable, and until we end up back in Leones stomping ground of ‘Terrified girls running around a warehouse’ the performances dont really do all that much. When we DO get to the closing 30-40 minutes, the tone shifts a bit and things DO pick up, particularly with Lauren Lavera as Sienna, who spends most of the film being a fairly dry and uninteresting character until that final act where she finally gets a decent chunk of meat thrown her way which she relishes. Ultimately delivering a solid performance in my opinion.

Of course, the best performance in this film, and really one of the ONLY reasons to watch this film is David Howard Thornton as Art the Clown. Delivering a second turn as the murderous cannibal clown that was, if anything, even more enjoyable than his first outing. he’s even more animate, give a much better physical performance here and being able to work more with the surrounding cast (and his child underling) gives him new depths of range to work with, which he grabs with vigour. There were points in this film where, quite genuinely, he was the only reason I was still watching. Though, quite how long ‘Art’ as a character will be able to maintain that attention past this sequel given the limitations of the character and the fact it felt a little repetitious in places for me already, has me concerned for whether ‘Terrifier 3’ will really have much legs beyond its theatrical run. That and with Leone saying he thinks the series will probably get to *At least* ‘Terrifier 5’ has me frankly concerned.

The soundtrack, once again, is totally neglegable. a screechy, bland, stock modern horror score, that literally did nothing for me. I have no notes. it did the job of scoring a horror film just about fine, it didnt feel like it scored THIS horror film particularly well at all.

‘Terrifier 2’ left me with mixed feelings honestly, While I applaud some solid performances, the reintroduction of some genuinely gnarley at times gore and some decent plot elements that continue to explore this world. The films ultimately too long and too messy for me to really enjoy. I honestly dont believe a slasher movie should break 2 hours if it hasnt got something significant to say, and I dont believe ‘Terrifier 2’ does. If you enjoy these films, more power to you. The frustrating thing for me is I CAN see a good movie in this, I can see an entry being made that DOES tick all the boxes for what I want out of this kind of movie. But this felt too undercooked for me. I cant recommend it ultimately, but I hope that things do continue to improve with this series, as I can see the potential there.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/terrifier-2/

The ‘Terrifier’ franchise is one i’ve been meaning to check out now for a few years after it initially caught media attention and controversy in the form of several hit pieces claiming it was one of the ‘sickest’ and ‘most graphic’ films ever made, and serveral sensationalist pieces regarding people throwing up in the isles and walking out within the first 20 minutes. Well, i’ve seen it now, and I dont think people were walking out of the theater due to it being too shocking. Rather, they were walking out because of how frankly DULL this thing is.

The plot is paper thin, essentially a couple of drunk women are walking home from a night out, when they encounter ‘Art’ the clown (here I dont believe he’s named in the film….but hey ho.) He stares at them for a while while they go and buy drunk pizza, and then Art basically stalks them from the pizza shop to a nearby apartment complex/warehouse where the rest of the film is basically just art hunting down the girls and the randomers who are in the complex killing them in moderately graphic ways until we hit the credits.

Its hardly the most original idea, in fact, my mind almost immediately went to the scrapped plotline for ‘Halloween 2’ where Laurie Strode was going to be ‘surviving’ a night in an apartment complex with Michael Myers stalking her across multiple floors, picking off the residents. Well…this film is basically doing that, only rather than a load of residents, its some exterminators and a crazy lady…and when I say ‘Characters’ I mean THE most stock/generic NPC types you could have for a horror movie. and its dull, REDICULOUSLY dull.

The scripts threadbare, theres a lot that can be done with the ‘stalker/pray’ subgenre of slasher, but here. theres just not a lot happening. Most of it is scared women running and hiding, occasionally getting a shot in at Art and VERY occasionally a moderately strong gore shot, where they’ve clearly been told to ‘tone it down’ by the MPAA because it cuts away frequently from all the ACTUAL nasty bits.

The tone is lumpy, it doesnt know if it wants to be a pure gore flick, a supernatural-esq horror film or some kind of dark horror comedy. the ‘jokes’ arnt particularly funny (though I will praise David Howard Thorntons animated performance as ‘Art’ for gracing Tiktok videos everywhere with some entertaining ‘reaction’ videos) and the kills arnt really new or interesting, and that leads me to the biggest problem this film has for me.

The films got no ‘soul’ for lack of a better word, theres no particular vibe or feeling to this for me. Art as a character feels like something pulled out of 2000s era creepypasta stories, but as written by Ai. theres no clear intention to this picture here for me. no deeper meanings or metatextual element. Im sure SOMETHING could be written in regards to the graphic abuse of women in this film and in particular how the femenine form is ridiculed, mocked and mutilated by Art across the runtime. But I dont think that was the film makers main goal here…or at least, if it was, its VERY badly handled in my opinion.

No, to me? this film feels less like a solidly well paced story and more a movie where the gore scenes were planned out first, then the plot was written to tie those elements into it. For the hardcore dedicated ‘horror fans’ im sure thats all they need to whet the whistle, but I like a bit more meat on my gristle, and this film just doesnt provide that.

The directions fine enough, Its got a relatively clear vision of what its trying to create, but I wasnt particularly ‘enthralled’ by it, mainly due in part to the creative choiced around the colour grade and editing because for some reason, for the grade for this thing they decided to just turn the saturation right up, and turn the ‘highlights’ right down, leaving parts of this film black crushed into the void and others looking fuzzily overvibrant in a quite offputting way.

That combined with the edit, which is a little too fast paced for me and, in places, felt like there were large chunks suspiciously missing from the action, left it feeling like an incomplete work, something where the final edit hadnt actually fully taken place and they were awaiting the final sign off before it went out to the public…only its somehow got out to the public.

Direction of the cast is fine enough, but given the characters are SO one dimensional and largely spend the movie silently running around a warehouse, or screaming…there isnt really much to be said about it. they manage to handle the kill scenes semi-effectively, but I do wish they’d really gone a bit more out there than they did, because the kind of stuff being shown here, felt quite by the numbers when compared to the rest of the genre.

The cine was probably the films strongest element, keen composition really helps create some visually interesting shots, the colour grade, while largely distracting, does on occasion work in the films favour to produce some solid results. they largely follow the line and ruls of thirds, theres some nice-ish depth of field stuff. Nothing out and out ‘Wow’d’ me. But it was probably the element I was most impressed with.

Performance wise, David Howard Thornton is the only good thing about this movie. His performance as Art is VERY animated, lively and at times genuinely menacing. My only complaint is a bit of a complex one honestly. Usually, the less you know about a character and their motives, the more interesting they become because you WANT to find out about these evil characters and how they came to be. Well; the problem with Art is they give you TOO little. I dont know who Art is, where he comes from, how he’s as powerful as he is. His history. I know nothing. and because I know absolutely nothing and BECAUSE his character is so one note, it actually made me care even LESS about this guy, because they didnt give me enough TO be interested. Throw in a couple of ‘out of left turn’ twists for the clown, and I just became a bit frustrated with him more than anything else.

…But I digress, Thorntons performance is fantastic here, he’s amazing and probably the only other reason to catch this thing. The rest of the cast are generic, but kind of sort of okay in that sense…Put it this way, there was a terrible performance.

The music was so generic (screechy, bangy synth gumpf that has been the horror standard since 2011) that I have no comment on it.

‘Terrifier’ to me was a beige watching experience. a handful of interesting moments woven into an hour and 10 minutes of people breathlessly running around and not much else. Based off of this, I have NO idea how Art has become this figure representative of 21st century slasher icons. I can just about see why someone would think the character was funny/interesting…but ‘Iconic’? no. not in my opinion.

I cant honestly think of an audience who would be genuinely enthralled by this film. Gore fans would be let down by the lack of actual proper hardcore gore, but probably satiated by the intensity of 2-3 of the kills, story fans will probably be clock watching by the 30 minute mark and broader horror fans will probably find this thing feels like a bit of a ‘by the numbers’ slasher given everything that came before it.

Its not one I can honestly recommend. I could *maybe* see myself revisiting this one in future if I was doing a movie night with friends to try and keep the peace. But honestly? I was just kind of bored by this one.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/terrifier-2016/

One of my all time favourite Peanuts shorts. AND one of my favourite football kick gags in the series history. No notes. Great stuff.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/its-magic-charlie-brown/

The ‘True Neutral’ of Halloween, I have no fond attachment to ‘It’s the great Pumpkin Charlie Brown’ it didn’t really air in my country, I didn’t grow up with it and I saw it for the first time 12 months ago and was kind of non plusses…and thats kind of where I was tonight.

The plot, revolving around Linus being derided for believing in a ‘Santa’ analogue called ‘The Great Pumpkin’ and waiting all night in a Pumpkin patch for his arrival while the other kids enjoy the Halloween festivities is a slow burn, but charming special that I didn’t entirely ‘Love’ but I can appreciate it for what it is I guess.

There are a half dozen decent jokes across the runtime, for the mid 60s it must have felt quite charming and refreshing. But this kind of slower paced, warm animation probably couldn’t be made today.

The animations find but a tad messy, the non HD copy I watched was a little ropey, but that absolutely helped the film along.

I can understand how people could have nostalgia or a fondness for this special, I’m a little lost as to how anyone could outright LOVE this. It’s a little too slow for its own good, but ultimately harmless…I’d watch it again, but I don’t think I’d go out of my way to make time for it.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/its-the-great-pumpkin-charlie-brown/

Watched on Thursday October 17, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/friday-the-13th-part-vii-the-new-blood/2/

In the same year that ‘Dracula’ terrified audiences, Universal was already winding up the follow up 1-2 punch of the decade in the form of 1931’s adaptation of ‘Frankenstein’ I’ll admit, when it comes to the Universal monsters, I always had much more of a soft spot for Frank than Drac. but I feel its not without good reason.

Dracula is a romance film sold as a horror flick, but ‘Frankenstein’ is a horror flick with a touch of romance and macarbre comedy. Across the board it feels like a step up on ‘Dracula’ maintaining the style established in the Vampiric flick, but leaning much more into the surreal and nightmarish.

The script is a little slow boil by modern sensibilities, but at 70 minutes long, I really cant complain. the first and third acts are all rock solid action horror fun throughout, though the second act, to me, does sag a little as we end up spending elongated time with the Baron Frankenstein and talk of engagements and weddings abound…

The tone is a near perfect blend of horror, action and tragedy, with just a smidge of dark comedy for good measure. I feel they could have leant into the tragedy and dark comedy a bit more for my money…Though I dont think its spoilers really to say they do that more in the sequel.

The characters are all a tad eccentric and manic, a probably intentional choice to show just how grounded ‘The Creature’ is when compared to an actual god born man. my only critique? is they are a little one dimensional. Now, I could argue that years of pop culture oversaturation has made these characters feel one dimensional, when, at the time, they would have in fact felt quite fresh and unique…But then I wasnt born in the 1920’s to have had first hand experience on that front…So what do I know?

The direction once again embraces the german expressionist movement, if anything this film leans into it even more with superb end results. the creature design is iconic and simply excellent (though I feel the subtle refinements in ‘Bride’ really finish the design off) Its a gorgeous looking film with both its studio and location based sequences blowing the socks of anything that was coming out around this time.

The cine is also excellent, with a wide range of shot types, a rich and textured depth of field, some ASTOUNDING sound studio sets (the mansion set where you can actually see the ceiling has to be SEEN to be believed!) I also have to compliment the lighting which uttelry saves this picture, anything less than whats on screen would have failed to truely capture the macarbe in quite the same way.

The performances? Boris Karloff. Nuff said.

and the soundtracks a little stocky, but beautiful and haunting in its own way.

while probably not my ALL TIME favourite universal monster movie, Frankenstein is almost certainly top 5 for me. a powerful work that is still as striking as the day it was comitted to celluloid. and a major feat of the time. Recommended.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/frankenstein-1931/

6 Years after ‘Bride of Chucky’ introduced us to Tiff and bought our psychotic good guy back to the big screen in roaring fashion, I was honestly kind of surprised at the time to see Chucky reappear on the scene in ‘Seed of Chucky’. It had honestly been a long time coming and a lot of goodwill grew on ‘Bride’ in the years after its release. Unfortunately, ‘Seed’ to me feels like the cinematic equivilent of one of those guys who tells a mid-tier joke, gets a chuckle from the audience and then latches on to that quip/punchline for the entire rest of the evening reducing what could have been a quite enjoyable time to an insufferable and grating ‘trapped in an elevator’ experience.

The film picks up in present day 2004, and we’re introduced to Glen (Or Glenda!) the lovechild of Tiffany and Chucky as teased at the end of the last film, now all grown up (well…he’s 7 but apparently voo doo related pregnancies and births have an accellerated growth, so lord knows how old they actually are).

Glen was recovered by a gothey looking ventriloquist, who brought him back to the UK with him and basically abused him and used him as a dummy on the professional circuit. Glen has a ‘Made in Japan’ engraving on his wrist, and wouldnt you know it! One night while being allowed to watch TV, he catches an interview with Jennifer Tilly on the set of a new ‘Chucky’ movie thats being shot, and in the interview, Glen sees that Chucky has the same ‘Made in Japan’ tattoo on HIS wrist, meaning, Chucky and Tiffany MUST be his parents! SO! hitching a ride out of the UK over to LA, Glen is reunited with the dolls, ressurects them, and finds himself embroiled in a kidnapping attempt involving the actress Jennifer Tilly while ALSO coming to terms with the fact his parents are ACTUALLY notorious murderers AND having to battle a gender identity crisis that borders on transphobic (Not to get into TOO heavy a set of spoilers, but this DOES play on the murderous trans person trope…)

I just do NOT jam with this film…apart from the aforementioned mild transphobia (which somehow in some trans communities been reformed into Glen being an Icon? im not entirely sure how based on this film) the film is quite comfortable joking about sexual assault, gross out humour is the meal of the day, random nudity is pretty prevelent here (which, given NON of the childs play films up to this point have had ANY nudity at ALL really…was surprising.) It feels like an attempt at making a ‘Chucky’ film for a low brow audience, and I found myself tolerating the film for most of the runtime.

I landed on my exact feelings on this film a few years ago. If ‘Bride of Chucky’ was an independently rooted production from the mind of Don Mancini that married up the classic Universal monsters feel with undertones of John Waters style humour. Then ‘Seed of Chucky’ is an overt John Waters fan film. Its TOO blunt, TOO crass and TOO in your face, its not what the franchise is known for and not what its about. the tone of this film borders in places on ‘TV movie’ terratory, when I can compare your movie to the ‘Scary Movie’ franchise in terms of tone and humour, you know you’ve really lost your way.

The script is really more a series of happenings with the kidnapping and sexual assault of Jennifer Tilly being used as the THINNEST string to hold the whole production together. Make no. mistake, this is really just a vague series of happenings building to a rather predictable, parody heavy and eye rolling finale that feels tired…which is INSANE when you consider this was only the second ‘Chucky’ movie and that it had been 13 years since the series last had a regular and recurring sequel. This really could have been fertile ground. We had ‘Chucky in the 80s’, ‘Chucky in the post modern 90s’. and ‘Seed’ was ripe for a lampooning of post 9/11 celeb worship culture, cusp of social media..dom…and it just isnt…its Chucky and Tiff hanging around a mansion for 50 minutes occasionally picking people off for fun.

The scripts TOO self aware for its own good, theres too many pop culture references, too many 4th wall breaks, too many lazy attempts at humour, theres being inspired by John Waters, and then theres ACTUALLY cramming John Waters into your movie for some…random reason. I will overlook the occasional slur in this thing purely because of the time it came out (though that doesnt give it a free pass for the slurs it does use) But its SUCH a weak piece honestly.

The pacings all over the place and never quite right, its always either too slow and plodding, or too fast and incoherent. the tones totally off base, the characters are all too self aware and goofy for me. the good messages they TRY to promote get lost in a sea of banal randomness that seemed built more for online engagement, than for the benefit of making a coherent film.

The directions spot on for what its trying to do, but that doesnt mean I like it. its hypercolourful in a garish and unpleasent way, the planning for sequences is breakneck and equally incoherent, the overreliance on CGI is annoying and the quality quite poor even for the time. I didnt feel immersed in this films world, I felt like I was constantly on the verge of a commercial break.

The cine is probably this films strongest element, there are some strong shots in this, the compositions are both iconic and interesting, and even if the colour use in this made me feel nausious. I am at least somewhat grateful they DID bother to experiment with colour a bit more, given this film came out right at the start of the ‘Dirt brown and sludge orange’ era of horror movie colour grading.

What ruins it, is the editing. which is too fast paced, doesnt give the audience time to appreciate the shot structuring, experiments FAR too much with overlaying shots and just felt unpleasent to sit through.

Performance wise, Jennifer Tilly is the best thing in this film even somehow outshining the almighty Brad douriff in her duel role as Tiff and the actress Jennifer Tilly…its hardly a stretch lets be honest, she plays herself and arguably one of her most iconic characters…But, she does it really well and is arguably the one reason to really kind of check out this thing. I feel like this is Brads poorest performance as Chucky…he’s still great mind, but he just…doesnt really have a lot to do or say…most of his time in the film is just him reacting to things…it feels like he’s being upstaged in his own movie…

Billy Boyde as Glen really didnt do it for me, the english accent grated on me and left me desperately wishing they hadnt made that creative choice. Because Glen IS the movie…its a bit of a stink bomb performance that lingers WELL past my own tolerance level.

Add to this, the soundtrack just…isnt that great…its standard horror orchestral pieces and jukebox covers of pop classics…a BIG step down from ‘Bride’ that only further frustrated this production.

‘Seed of Chucky’ is an annoying film. while it absolutely has its moments, its trying SO hard to feel like a John Waters movie, it forgets what it ACTUALLY is and ends up, ironically, in a bit of an identity crisis over what it ACTUALLY wants to be. I didnt enjoy it particularly, I didnt hate it…But its absolutely not one i’ll be reaching for in future, and not one I can really recommend.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/seed-of-chucky/

Watched on Saturday October 12, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/out-there-halloween-mega-tape/1/

After ‘Childs Play 3’ failed to set the box office on fire it would be almost 7 years until Don Mancini would bring our favourite Rubber renegade back to the big screen. In that time a lot of self reflection was held about the direction and nature of the series and how ‘Chucky in the 90s’ would really take shape. And I for one was absolutely delighted with the end product that is ‘Bride of Chucky’

The plot is pretty straightforward, the film takes place in present day 1998, in universe a year or so has happened between this film and ‘Childs Play 3’ and we’re introduced to a bit of a curveball right out of the gate in the form of ‘Tiffany’, Chuckys love interest from before he was murdered the first time. After his Death in November 1988, Tiff went to Charles’ apartment and found a ring on his mantel and figured that he was about to propose to her.

She then spent the following 10 years following the news headlines about a *supposed* rampaging killer doll, while booking up on ‘Voo Doo’ practices, eventually managing to bribe a police officer into breaking into an evidence locker (complete with several homages to horror icons past) to recover the shredded remains of the fan blended Chucky Doll.

Tiff reassembles the doll, does the chant and within minutes Chucky is back in the room. But its not as harmonious as it first appears, when its revealed that Chucky never really intended to propose to her, and that the ring was basically just left there, having been robbed from one of Charles victims because it was worth ‘5-6 grand’.

Spurned, Tiff decides to trap Chucky and torment him…This doesnt end well, and long story short, Tiff winds up made of plastic too. While all of this is going on we’re also introduced to ‘Jesse’ and ‘Jade’. Jade is the adopted daughter of the towns police captain, and he’s got her on a VERY tight leash. Jesse lives in the same trailer park as Tiff and gets by doing odd jobs around the park.

When Jades guardians push her too far on the night of her prom, the pair decide to elope, get married and start a new life in a new town. Jesse gets a call from Tiff asking for a favour, instructing Jesse to take two dolls to Hackensack New Jersey, with $500 promised on collection, and $500 on delivery. Jesse bites her hand off at the offer and thus a roadtrip of carnage unfolds as Chucky and Tiffany hitch a ride across state lines in yet another attempt to regain their human bodies, all the while pinning several muders both accidentally AND intentionally on Jesse and Jade in the process…leading the couple to believe that the other partner is a mass murderer!

And, this review for me is a pretty open and shut case. I love, love LOVE this movie. the decision to pivot out of ‘Horror comedy’ into ‘Comedy Horror’ is just the right angle to really pull this feature kicking and screaming into the post modern era.

The script appears to be strongly influenced by the works of John Waters, which I feel compliments and contrasts the return to ‘Universal Classic Monster’ style horror last seen in ‘Childs Play 2’ perfectly. You end up with surreal moments of domestic disharmony being played out by two semi mutilated dolls. its camp, its bliss.

The pacing is breakneck, at an hour and 28 minutes, this feels like its an hour long in real time. the act structuring is clear, smooth and feels effortless in ramping up the stakes, the characters are largely enjoyable, the right side of trashy and barring Jesse and Jade themselves who, for me kind of feel a little flat as far as characters go, everyone else is running with a wonderfully aggressive snark thats just delightful to sit through.

The dialogue *feels* very ‘John Waters-esq’ (‘Fuck Martha Stewart’ is absolutely SCREAMING ‘Serial Mom’ to me…How Mink Stole didnt get a cameo in this thing I’ll never know) Some of Chuckys best lines of the franchise are in this movie, Tiff gets some rock solid dialogue to and the whole thing is VERY keen to let you know that while this is a continuation, it really isnt TRYING to stay in line with whats come before it, It experiments, and it succeeds for me in experimenting, which I really appreciated.

The directions largely flawless for me, Ronny Yu delivers a creatively defining picture for the franchise with some inspired kills and interesting scene setups that homage the old Universal Monster movies, without being TOO overt about it, its not afraid to be in your face, but for me, the best moments were the ones that spoke more through the cinematography than in the dialogue choices or the archive clips. In fact, the only wobble I had really on the direction front is really more a case of it being a victim of its time in the sense that there are some VERY wobbly early CGI sequences dotted throughout, which to 2024 eyes are painfully noticable.

The cines rich, colourful, gorgeous. Shots are well composed with a rock solid depth of field and apart from the aforementioned CG and a couple of less than steller ‘blink and you’ll miss it’ green screen moments, this is a really solid work, all tied together by a stunning edit that again chimes back to the freshness I first felt watching ‘Childs Play 2’ a LOT of the story is told through the cine, and to be able to pull that much emotion from a reaction shot of a plastic doll using only the cine and editing is really quite astounding for the time.

The performances are pretty solid too, Brad Dourif once again brings a flawless performance as Chucky, noticably, the performance here pivots more into self aware comedy with quips about him getting too old for this and clashes between 80s serial killer mentalities and 90s new wave killer techniques. Jennifer Tilly hits the ground running as ‘Tiff’ giving a performance that left me ASTOUNDED that we couldnt have had her sooner. It really is probably the strongest introduction to a new permanent character in Horror film history.

The weak links here are unfortunately Katherine Heigl and Nick Stabile as Jessie and Jane who…arnt inherently bad perse, they’re just too normal, they dont have any depth. Im guessing thats kind of intentional really with the film being a postmodern take on the horror genre as a whole, and while the story does focus on their eloping, the film seems much more interested in the contrasting parallels with Chucky and Tiffany’s demented blossoming toxic romance. It kind of suffocates the main plot in favour of the subplot…But given I really enjoyed the subplot, im okay with that.

Add to this a KILLER soundtrack featuring hits from Rob Zombie, Kidney Theives, White Zombie, Blondie, Billy Idol and Slayer that is PERFECTLY utilized across the board, and I honestly found myself with very little to dislike…

‘Bride of Chucky’ marks a shift in the franchise that would stay in place for the next entry…Or the next 15 years depending on which one helps you sleep at night. and I feel it was the kick in the pants the series needed to get it back on track. a clear labour of love, if you enjoy the likes of ‘Pink Flamingos’, ‘Polyester’ or ‘Female Trouble’ but you wished it had more goring and ‘Hellraiser’ references…’Bride of Chucky’ is an absolute must!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/bride-of-chucky/

Watched on Thursday October 10, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/halloween-is-grinch-night/1/