curse of chucky

[stavros693000]

well I guess don mancini is hard up for cash again, with a new instalment due out in October.
it supposedly set after the events of childs play 3 so the abomination that was seed and bride don't have any reference (thank god).
im sure it will be a piece of crap but I will watch it anyway........its gonna be direct to dvd, so that's usually not a good sign.

Any one else goona see this?
in the trailer chucky looks a bit qweer ,like a tranny or something

[spoot]

I'll see it eventually......I tend to stream horror films when I'm doing sumthing else.........sometimes they catch my attention for the long haul.   

[Howard_Casto]

WTF?  I guess this was some super fast back-pedaling.

Chucky was supposed to get a full-on reboot movie and it was supposed to have a theatrical release. 

[Speculation]
My guess is after the backlash of the recent horror reboots they decided to do a prequel instead.  They wouldn't have to change the script that much because much like Freddy, Chucky just comes back because.... I'm saying magic?  They've set it between 3 and the "chucky films" so they can use the reboot script without having to alter it for all the nonsense that happened in those films. 
[/Speculation]

[Barnacla]

It is a exhausted saga, this is reason for a new reborn, but...  Is it necesssary? Tom Holland did a great job in first time.

[stavros693000]

i agree tom Holland did a decent job on childs play and should return for a remake one day.

SPOILER!!!!!!!

I watched this last week and you find out during the course of the movie that its set after the events of seed of chucky, And the reason chucky looks a bit qweer/weird is because hes wearing some sort of make up to hide his stiches that he got in bride after being minced at the end of childs play 3.

over all I thought it was ok and I enjoyed it (but im baised as a childs play fan since I first saw it when I was 7) and watching the first childs play at 7 yrs old scared the ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- outta me, I had fuking nightmares for years lol

there also a cool little fan scene at the end of the credits with andy and played by alex Vincent , andy Barclay from childs play one and two.

so its not as good as the first but imo better than 2 and 3 ........and way better the bride or the abomination that was seed.
so if your a fan of the series I think you will enjoy it, if you have low expectations. I did and it was a lot better than I expected it to be.

[Ginsu Victim]

Just watched it tonight and was shocked at how good it was. Definitely the second best movie of the series just behind the original. Don Mancini seems to have become a much more competent filmmaker since he spread his Seed about nine years ago.

Strong recommend!

[Howard_Casto]

I bought the bluray and I'm saving it for Halloween.

[Howard_Casto]

I watched it early and enjoyed it BUT, the ending, as much fan service as it is, kind of ruins all the good will that the rest of the film provides. 

Ok so there are three endings to the thing.  The first ending is fine and fitting, no problems there.  Then in the second ending, he tracks down the little girl and plays "hide the soul" with her.  Which would be great... except that he can't.  You see in Child's Play 2 we learn that the longer Chucky is in his doll body, the more human he becomes, eventually becoming flesh and blood.  He can only do a soul transfer when he's still a doll. 

This btw makes the whole scene where the girl in the wheelchair knocks off his head impossible as well... he's been in this current body for YEARS at this point (since the events of seed)  so he should be completely flesh and blood.

As bad as this is, the third ending is even worse.  Ok we cut away as chucky is doing the incantation to transfer his soul into the little girl's body.  Then it's 6 months later and he's still in the doll body?  Wtf?  What went wrong?  Don't get me wrong, it was nice to see Andy back, but make it work.... cut the scene with the little girl!


On top of that there are a few glaring continuity errors.

When the girl in the wheelchair calls to find out where the package was shipped it's from the evidence depository, which I'm assuming is the one from Bride.  Ok how does that work?  Tiffany is the one doing the shipping and she's currently in Jennifer Tilly's body, who is a "famous" movie star and lives in LA.  While we are at it, weren't they making a movie about the events of Bride in Seed of Chucky?  The instant that doll arrived shouldn't someone have recognized it? And why isn't he in his "movie prop" body?  You know, with the giant plug in the back?

I enjoyed the film as I said, but it has some severe logic problems, even for a horror film.  I don't think they could decide if the events of Bride and Seed were cannon or not.  You can't have it both ways... either completely ignore those films or incorporate them fully. 

[Ginsu Victim]

The third ending is just a bonus "love letter" to the fans that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story. It is only available in the unrated edition.

[Malenko]

I thought this thread was about about John Gruden ruining Monday Night Football.

[Howard_Casto]

The third ending is just a bonus "love letter" to the fans that doesn't actually have anything to do with the main story. It is only available in the unrated edition.

Nope.  It says "six months later".  If they wanted it to just be an easter egg they wouldn't have given it a timeline, we could have assumed it happened prior to this film ect.  The designation of a specific time denotes they are trying to fit it in......somehow.

[CCM]

I've only seen the first 2 movies in the series and thought they were horrible.   And the trailer for the new one looks equally dumb...

[lcmgadgets]

My tastes in horror r such that I find 97% of it is crap, but the last 3% makes up for it.

None of the Chucky movies made it into the 3%, for me.

...still, I suppose I'll give it a shot (probably into the donations bin at Goodwill after I nod thru 30 minutes of it).

[Ginsu Victim]

Nope.  It says "six months later".  If they wanted it to just be an easter egg they wouldn't have given it a timeline, we could have assumed it happened prior to this film ect.  The designation of a specific time denotes they are trying to fit it in......somehow.

What I said is true, and is based on what Don Mancini said at New York Comic Con. (That or the commentary, I don't recall which.)

[Howard_Casto]

Oh I don't doubt that he said something stupid like that.  He can't even keep the cannon of his own films in order... no offense to him.