|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Feb 12, 2019 23:46:27 GMT
Just saw the other movies randomly over the years, but never committed myself to a complete series marathon as I find watching too many of the same type of movies in a row leaves me feeling burnt out. Fair enough. But you will venture them soon, right? Doesn’t have to be part of a marathon, just view them as their own. Rocky III is on my Watchlist for 2019 anyway.
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 12, 2019 23:49:09 GMT
Fair enough. But you will venture them soon, right? Doesn’t have to be part of a marathon, just view them as their own. Rocky III is on my Watchlist for 2019 anyway. That’s my favourite sequel in the series. Hope you enjoy it!
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Feb 17, 2019 5:21:33 GMT
From the looks of the trailer, it doesn't look half-bad and as a fan of practical effects, i'm glad they are making a comeback and using practical for chucky And all.
I didn't hate this teaser. Which is quite a shocker. I liked it. Yes. It is another horror remake, but I really liked the fact that this teaser really did not give that much away.
I liked the song choice and how it was edited, the kid looks like he is pretty decent, Aubrey Plaza in a role like this is intriguing, the lighting in the trailer was nice. I loved the use of reds and blues. And overall the idea behind it I don't mind. It's like Child's Play meets Small Soldiers. And it most definitely looks like it will be a hard R. I liked seeing the bits of practical effects.
It is not any worse or as insulting as Don Mancini's last 4 sequels. So yeah, it looked interesting to me. I was curious about it anyway. So this teaser definitely helped pique my interest. I am still very leery of it but I am going to give it a chance
|
|
|
Post by The Grand Inquisitor on Feb 18, 2019 5:02:38 GMT
Anyone else glad this tired franchise has finally received a long-overdue update?
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Feb 20, 2019 9:19:10 GMT
Anyone else glad this tired franchise has finally received a long-overdue update? Definitely am, the last 4 movies soured me no thanks to Don Mancini aka Don Mankinki or Fettacini as he's turned the character into a joke even with such crappy writing, unlikable characters and all that! and i felt the last worthwhile Chucky film was part 3 and nice to see we can finally see Chucky taken more seriously and be scary.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 20, 2019 18:06:26 GMT
Anyone else glad this tired franchise has finally received a long-overdue update? Definitely am, the last 4 movies soured me no thanks to Don Mancini aka Don Mankinki or Fettacini as he's turned the character into a joke even with such crappy writing, unlikable characters and all that! and i felt the last worthwhile Chucky film was part 3 and nice to see we can finally see Chucky taken more seriously and be scary. Isn't there a particular irony and hypocrisy in calling out someone for turning something into a joke or for it's bad writing while writing these sorts of terrible jokes? Anyway, I'm sure this new Child's Play will be pretty lame, but this is what we expect at this point. They make the absolute typical cliche modern remake with glossy 'orange and teal' digital cinematography, the 'grittier and grounded' approach, etc. It's exactly what I would expect from a lifeless horror movie remake of and old franchise. But at the same time the last few movies were really running on fumes anyway. So who the hell really cares at this point? Evidently this is one of those weird scenarios where the rights have split in some odd way so that Don Mancini has the rights to continue using the character and is making a TV series using the old continuity, and the remake rights retain the title and the killer doll concept but not the character so that's why the origin of this version's Chucky is no longer the soul of a killer trapped in a doll. It was all pretty silly to begin with, and both of those off shoots could be OK on their own, but there's really not much to be very excited about. Just two new versions of something we've seen too many times as it is.
|
|
|
Post by The Grand Inquisitor on Feb 21, 2019 10:31:04 GMT
Definitely am, the last 4 movies soured me no thanks to Don Mancini aka Don Mankinki or Fettacini as he's turned the character into a joke even with such crappy writing, unlikable characters and all that! and i felt the last worthwhile Chucky film was part 3 and nice to see we can finally see Chucky taken more seriously and be scary. Isn't there a particular irony and hypocrisy in calling out someone for turning something into a joke or for it's bad writing while writing these sorts of terrible jokes? Anyway, I'm sure this new Child's Play will be pretty lame, but this is what we expect at this point. They make the absolute typical cliche modern remake with glossy 'orange and teal' digital cinematography, the 'grittier and grounded' approach, etc. It's exactly what I would expect from a lifeless horror movie remake of and old franchise. But at the same time the last few movies were really running on fumes anyway. So who the hell really cares at this point? Evidently this is one of those weird scenarios where the rights have split in some odd way so that Don Mancini has the rights to continue using the character and is making a TV series using the old continuity, and the remake rights retain the title and the killer doll concept but not the character so that's why the origin of this version's Chucky is no longer the soul of a killer trapped in a doll. It was all pretty silly to begin with, and both of those off shoots could be OK on their own, but there's really not much to be very excited about. Just two new versions of something we've seen too many times as it is. But why doesn't a contemporary reimagining, exploring the perils of "smart" technology gone wrong, deserve a fresh chance and a clean slate?
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Feb 21, 2019 13:18:40 GMT
Isn't there a particular irony and hypocrisy in calling out someone for turning something into a joke or for it's bad writing while writing these sorts of terrible jokes? Anyway, I'm sure this new Child's Play will be pretty lame, but this is what we expect at this point. They make the absolute typical cliche modern remake with glossy 'orange and teal' digital cinematography, the 'grittier and grounded' approach, etc. It's exactly what I would expect from a lifeless horror movie remake of and old franchise. But at the same time the last few movies were really running on fumes anyway. So who the hell really cares at this point? Evidently this is one of those weird scenarios where the rights have split in some odd way so that Don Mancini has the rights to continue using the character and is making a TV series using the old continuity, and the remake rights retain the title and the killer doll concept but not the character so that's why the origin of this version's Chucky is no longer the soul of a killer trapped in a doll. It was all pretty silly to begin with, and both of those off shoots could be OK on their own, but there's really not much to be very excited about. Just two new versions of something we've seen too many times as it is. But why doesn't a contemporary reimagining, exploring the perils of "smart" technology gone wrong, deserve a fresh chance and a clean slate?Because it's a needless remake of an old property. If they made their own new thing, they'd have a clean slate. This is the baggage that comes with tinkering with nostalgia. You with your Star Wars avatar of all people should understand that.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 21, 2019 13:51:03 GMT
But why doesn't a contemporary reimagining, exploring the perils of "smart" technology gone wrong, deserve a fresh chance and a clean slate? I don't think I said it doesn't, but by the very definition of it being a remake of a known property it can't possibly have a clean slate. It begs comparison to what it's ripping off, and in the current state of the film culture it begs comparison to the other crappy remakes and 'reboots' that make up it's company. A new movie about AI or something would deserve a look, but then again, even that has been done to death and would to prove itself as something other than the average.
|
|
northernlad
Sophomore
@northernlad
Posts: 898
Likes: 620
|
Post by northernlad on Feb 21, 2019 15:37:53 GMT
I'll probably give it a watch for sure. But I wish they'd stop remaking movies. Ugh!
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Feb 21, 2019 16:50:45 GMT
I'll probably give it a watch for sure. But I wish they'd stop remaking movies. Ugh! It's at least not as bad now as it was ten years ago. Remakes seem to be going out of fashion, thankfully.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 21, 2019 17:31:17 GMT
I'll probably give it a watch for sure. But I wish they'd stop remaking movies. Ugh! It's at least not as bad now as it was ten years ago. Remakes seem to be going out of fashion, thankfully. This is, sort of, true. Not that originality is in fashion, but they tend to make long not-so-awaited sequels instead.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Feb 21, 2019 20:41:54 GMT
Or maybe they don’t have a voice for him period. That’s how I feel at this point.do. Indeed. Probably riding the coattails of Annabelle.
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 21, 2019 21:12:49 GMT
Or maybe they don’t have a voice for him period. That’s how I feel at this point.do. Indeed. Probably riding the coattails of Annabelle. I mean he’ll probably have one but just not one that can interact with people like any normal person does. Kind of like when he’s speaking ONLY in his Good Guy voice in a robotic manner.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Feb 21, 2019 21:14:11 GMT
Definitely am, the last 4 movies soured me no thanks to Don Mancini aka Don Mankinki or Fettacini as he's turned the character into a joke even with such crappy writing, unlikable characters and all that! and i felt the last worthwhile Chucky film was part 3 and nice to see we can finally see Chucky taken more seriously and be scary. Isn't there a particular irony and hypocrisy in calling out someone for turning something into a joke or for it's bad writing while writing these sorts of terrible jokes? Anyway, I'm sure this new Child's Play will be pretty lame, but this is what we expect at this point. They make the absolute typical cliche modern remake with glossy 'orange and teal' digital cinematography, the 'grittier and grounded' approach, etc. It's exactly what I would expect from a lifeless horror movie remake of and old franchise. But at the same time the last few movies were really running on fumes anyway. So who the hell really cares at this point? Evidently this is one of those weird scenarios where the rights have split in some odd way so that Don Mancini has the rights to continue using the character and is making a TV series using the old continuity, and the remake rights retain the title and the killer doll concept but not the character so that's why the origin of this version's Chucky is no longer the soul of a killer trapped in a doll. It was all pretty silly to begin with, and both of those off shoots could be OK on their own, but there's really not much to be very excited about. Just two new versions of something we've seen too many times as it is. The red and blue lighting is nice and i love how they are using practical effects, the whole voodoo soul thing has been done to death already and this seems like a fresh take on the character as an AI gone wrong like that Funzo episode of The Simpsons and Small Soldiers and it doesn't look like a half-assed attempt at remake like Elm Street or Poltergeist and also not a carbon copy like Psycho and The Omen but adding something new and fresh like The Fly or The Blob did. I think the killer robot angle makes sense I guess. It wont sit well with the die hard fans but it is more relevant in today's age. The original concept was very much an 80's thing that would be pretty silly today Mancini has been a cancer to the franchise after 3, i feel Child's Play 3 was the last great CP movie and really ended the story well, the last 4 movies were just spin-offs starring Chucky and i really find the new characters dislikable even Tiffany to his daughter, i mean he's to the Child's Play franchise what Kathleen Kennedy is to Star Wars, both need to go and to me that CP 3 was the last worthwhile Child's Play movie and Mancini has fucked up the franchise as he's such a hack director/writer as his writing got worse after 3 plus he stinks as a director as he doesn't know what he's doing. I mean this franchise has been dead for a long time and i felt when this new version was announced at first was another way to beat a long dead horse, i mean fuck the TV show, i have no more interest in Don Mancini's Child's Play after 3. I liked the trailer and i like Aubrey Plaza being casted as a mother than a party girl and good casting choice! i think it looks good visually from the lighting to the cinematography, i like the fact the kid is a little bit older as he can defend for himself and is like the kid in small soldiers, and i like that plus instead of being possessed by the soul of a serial killer, it's computer program and a tech gone wrong, i don't mind that update at all. it's trying to put a different spin on an old idea, i'd rather have a remake try to do it's own thing and not do the same thing like the original and same origin, because i'd rather something different like The Blob or Dawn of the Dead or The Fly did. I mean, it looks done practically on the effects which i'm happy for that and they are making a comeback and the trailer surprised me even with the song which is perfect for the feeling of the movie. I mean i've been curious about it with the trailer despite at first i wanted this franchise to just die already to rest in peace because i don't give a shit about Don Mancini's TV series, i'm tired of Don Mancini taking all the credit for Child's Play when it's Tom Holland deserves the credit for making the franchise for what it is, i mean Mancini was a part of it but i'm tired of hearing he's the father of Chucky when he's not the single lone father of Chucky in Child's Play as his original script didn't click but Holland came in and rewrote it and made it the Child's Play we know and love. Mancini as soon as he took over the franchise, with exceptions like Child's Play 2 and 3, is the reason why later on the franchise became a friggin' joke. I'm glad they did a remake, i'm glad Don is piss and throwing a hissy fit, because someone else is getting a chance to give their take on this character and do it more justice than Don has done in the past 21 years, i mean they are gonna take Chucky seriously for once again.
|
|
|
Post by The Grand Inquisitor on Feb 24, 2019 6:31:23 GMT
But why doesn't a contemporary reimagining, exploring the perils of "smart" technology gone wrong, deserve a fresh chance and a clean slate? Because it's a needless remake of an old property. If they made their own new thing, they'd have a clean slate. This is the baggage that comes with tinkering with nostalgia. You with your Star Wars avatar of all people should understand that. So the movie being a remake automatically makes it "needless"?
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Feb 24, 2019 14:17:56 GMT
Because it's a needless remake of an old property. If they made their own new thing, they'd have a clean slate. This is the baggage that comes with tinkering with nostalgia. You with your Star Wars avatar of all people should understand that. So the movie being a remake automatically makes it "needless"? From my point of view? Yes. The original continuity is still going strong and the original movie still holds up. I realize not everyone shares this view, but that's where I'm coming from with this. Doesn't mean the remake can't be any good, but it feels wholly unnecessary to me.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 25, 2019 15:14:21 GMT
I mean, it looks done practically on the effects which i'm happy for that and they are making a comeback and the trailer surprised me even with the song which is perfect for the feeling of the movie. I mean i've been curious about it with the trailer despite at first i wanted this franchise to just die already to rest in peace because i don't give a shit about Don Mancini's TV series, i'm tired of Don Mancini taking all the credit for Child's Play when it's Tom Holland deserves the credit for making the franchise for what it is, i mean Mancini was a part of it but i'm tired of hearing he's the father of Chucky when he's not the single lone father of Chucky in Child's Play as his original script didn't click but Holland came in and rewrote it and made it the Child's Play we know and love. Mancini as soon as he took over the franchise, with exceptions like Child's Play 2 and 3, is the reason why later on the franchise became a friggin' joke. I'm glad they did a remake, i'm glad Don is piss and throwing a hissy fit, because someone else is getting a chance to give their take on this character and do it more justice than Don has done in the past 21 years, i mean they are gonna take Chucky seriously for once again. The red and blue color palette smacks of half assed digital cinematography and post production color correction as an easy way of manufacturing and artificial high contrast look. It's all too typical in today's main stream studio films. This look, for all the credit you're giving it for employing practical effects, is very much not 'in camera' and very much not original. I'm not familiar with the 'funzo' episode of The Simpsons, but I suppose it sounds similar to the earlier Simpsons episode when they already did a killer doll, robotic story in the early 90s. So even the thing your comparing it to sounds like a rip off of something the original property already did years earlier to more influence and acclaim. Cast* "Casted" is not a word Sure, but the concept is such a fucking cliche. It's exactly what I'd expect some studio executive to think is the 'fresh take' when this concept is about 25 years too old to be anything but a cliche of what a typically shitty horror remake would do. Also, I hope the effects are mostly practical, but I have no confidence in that. I'd be shocked if there isn't a lot of CGI. And using an older, upbeat song and putting a ton of reverb on it and having it fade it with horror sound effects in the foreground could not be a more overused cliche of a horror movie trailer. Don Mancini may be clinging on to the one property he has to make anything in Hollywood, and the creativity of that concept probably ran out a long time ago, but at least with some of those latter sequels he took some chances. He saw the absurdity of the movies themselves and took that and ran with it. It may not have worked all that well, but it's an inherently silly idea to begin with that got sillier the more they continued so he went with it and got more self referential, self deprecating, and leaned heavily on the camp aspects of it. What he was doing was legitimately different from the normal, main stream horror movie. He took genuine risks by taking it in the direction that he did... For a time at least. That cannot in any way be said for this one. I wouldn't suggest that theres no chance that it could be good, but this is at least as much of a cash-grab to retain rights and bleed an existing IP dry as anything Mancini has done.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Feb 25, 2019 15:16:43 GMT
So the movie being a remake automatically makes it "needless"? Of course. Who "NEEDS" a remake? You could argue that we don't really NEED any movie, but clearly there's less of a need for something that's explicitly already been done. A remake needs to prove it's worthy of its existence more than other films do.
|
|
|
Post by The Grand Inquisitor on Mar 27, 2019 5:16:16 GMT
So the movie being a remake automatically makes it "needless"? Of course. Who "NEEDS" a remake? You could argue that we don't really NEED any movie, but clearly there's less of a need for something that's explicitly already been done. A remake needs to prove it's worthy of its existence more than other films do. Why can't every film just be judged on its own merits irrespective of whether it has previously been interpreted for the screen?
|
|