|
|
Post by ck100 on Jun 20, 2019 17:55:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 20, 2019 18:14:53 GMT
Better than expected quite honestly.
|
|
arekay
New Member
@arekay
Posts: 19
Likes: 7
 
|
Post by arekay on Jun 20, 2019 22:42:27 GMT
Glad this is getting positive reviews, huge fan of the original.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jun 20, 2019 23:28:13 GMT
This is good to see, but Pet Sematary started out with good reviews and declined big time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2019 5:42:35 GMT
This is good to see, but Pet Sematary started out with good reviews and declined big time. ^^^^^^^^^^ |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 21, 2019 14:44:09 GMT
It has better reviews than the original!
|
|
|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Jun 21, 2019 19:06:25 GMT
I thought the movie was actually okay for the first two thirds, much better than the pile of crap I feared it would be. And then the last act...ugh. It was like the writer had to stop with the last part of the script unfinished, and his nephew, who ain't all there in the head, was like, "Durrrrr!!! I'll finish it for you!" The movie got really dumb from that point on.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jun 21, 2019 21:39:24 GMT
My fiancé and I just got back from seeing it. As fans of the originals (more so her than me) thoroughly enjoyed it!!!! I thought Chucky was actually really terrifying. It was one of those things where the design looked better in motion and the design totally worked!!!! Mark Hamill was also the perfect voice for Chucky. The updates to the story were really good too. I hope this gets a sequel.
I also would not compare this to the original.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 22, 2019 10:15:20 GMT
It has better reviews than the original! Not anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 23, 2019 13:41:44 GMT
It has better reviews than the original! Not anymore. I've NEVER seen a movie go from fresh (70s) to rotten (50s) in 2 days, especially AFTER it's release. Once Friday hits, the final rating is usually set in stone. I could also swear the original was not a 67 a few days ago. Something seems fishy imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jun 23, 2019 14:58:42 GMT
I've NEVER seen a movie go from fresh (70s) to rotten (50s) in 2 days, especially AFTER it's release. Once Friday hits, the final rating is usually set in stone. I could also swear the original was not a 67 a few days ago. Something seems fishy imo. The movie doesen't even deserve to be in the 50’s. It should be in the 60’s at least. |
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jun 23, 2019 22:31:24 GMT
I enjoyed it.
It's really different in many ways.
Enough that it can be seen as a different film.
It felt more like Small Soldiers
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 23, 2019 22:42:34 GMT
Just got back from seeing it and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Of course it’s not in the same class as the original, but I knew it wasn’t gonna be.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 23, 2019 23:01:20 GMT
Crap! Overdone, over-acted, stupid incongruous moments of forced humor and any originality factor just thrown right out of the window. They may as well just have made another Chucky sequel. The original Child's Play - 88' took a silly premise and then played it straight. The direction was tight, the performances from the 3— or is that 4— leads were all right on target and the film didn't boast scenes of bloody and graphic violence and amped up audio effects to make up for lack of suspense in the presentation. As the sequels progressed, the films became more and more of a parody\spoof of each other. All this reboot has done, is make another parody based on a worn out formula and started back from the beginning. It wasn't even that interesting that Chucky, or is that Buddi, was just a deliberately malfunctioned software program. It was far more intriguing that Charles Lee Ray was looking to get out of his possessed dolls body and into a real human before he got trapped forever. 💔 First Halloween 2018, now this. You just lost my respect, Mr. Cheese. Just playing. I know it’s your opinion. Is there anything that you thought was good about it? |
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 23, 2019 23:17:50 GMT
💔 First Halloween 2018, now this. You just lost my respect, Mr. Cheese. Just playing. I know it’s your opinion. Is there anything that you thought was good about it? Yeah! The end credits so I could leave. It started out ok and then just denigrated into rubbish. Having technical proficiency in film-making paraded before me, does not a good movie make. As I say often, in the best horror films, the substance should reflect in the style and this was just superficial and routine. I have liked some reboots, but not half as many as I had anticipated. This wasn't one of them. I wasn't excited, enthralled or invested in what was going to happen next. In the original Child's Play, it had plenty of little surprises up its sleeve.
These reboots are just a quick cash grab and the 70's and 80's wins again.
Fair enough. Was it worse than Seed? |
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 23, 2019 23:33:29 GMT
Fair enough. Was it worse than Seed? I can barely recall Seed and haven't seen anymore Chuckie's after that.
As the sequels go that I have seen, I like Child's Play 3 the best. 2 was ok the first time I saw it, but it never really held up on repeat viewings. I find it kinda meh and routine too. Bride was fun and novelty because of the introduction of Tiffany and I like Jennifer Tilly, but it was mighty silly and that is when it started to really kick in on the spoof angle. This is a sign that they couldn't really do anything else with it, so just throw whatever they can into the over-heated cauldron, in the hope that something might come of it.
This reboot just took the original premise and then worked around it with fancy but brittle wrapping paper, like the melon head gift in the film.
Interesting you skipped Curse and Cult, yet went straight to this one. Then again, it’s a remake so it isn’t following anything, but still. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemanjackson on Jun 24, 2019 0:53:00 GMT
Not bad. Kind of leaned into the campiness the longer it went. Liked it was quick, basic stock characters, etc.
Some gnarly gore though.
|
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 24, 2019 14:29:14 GMT
I've NEVER seen a movie go from fresh (70s) to rotten (50s) in 2 days, especially AFTER it's release. Once Friday hits, the final rating is usually set in stone. I could also swear the original was not a 67 a few days ago. Something seems fishy imo. The movie doesen't even deserve to be in the 50’s. It should be in the 60’s at least. I see the same sentiments all over the web. Most comments about this movie are positive. Initial reviews were positive and it again climbed back into fresh territory after dropping. Then he goes back down again? I don't think I've ever seen anything like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 25, 2019 0:58:19 GMT
It's back in the 60s again. WTF?!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Dec 1, 2019 10:38:18 GMT
CHILD'S PLAY 6/10 CHILD'S PLAY PART 2 4/10 Despite having a much more interesting cinematography, CHILD'S PLAY PART 2 pretty much recycled the plot from CHILD'S PLAY PART 1. While CHILD'S PLAY PART 3 does change things up by abandoning the "Possessed toy murders people and makes everyone believe his owner did it" formula, the end result is still not scary enough. The opening title sequence is the best of the franchise, but the one-liners have become stupid. At the end of the 1st installment, there were only a few people who could testify to the existence of CHUCKY the evil doll. The reasons given as to why the secret was kept at the beginning of the 2nd installment may have been too convenient, but at least it wasn't illogical. At the end of that movie, we saw security cameras recording everything, so why doesn't anyone believe in him this time around? This is the point in the franchise where CHUCKY stopped caring about being seen. He even pops up screaming with a knife in his hand near a man. The CHUCKY we all thought we knew until this point wouldn't have done that without making sure the person was unable to move. "Luckily" for him, he scared the man so much he died of a heart attack (he falls down on a table and breaks it, because apparently slasher flicks require the death scenes to be as noisy as possible). Speaking of, a lot of his plans require so many things out of his control to happen. One of them involves replacing paintball capsules with real bullets. I assumed that this would lead to a massacre (especially since he only did this with the red paint rifles instead of the blue ones), but it disappointingly doesn't. 4/10 BRIDE OF CHUCKY 3/10 SEED OF CHUCKY 3/10 CURSE OF CHUCKY 6/10 You know how many sequels are called "pointless" because the story didn't need to continue? CULT OF CHUCKY is pointless for a different reason. It feels like it's setting something up, but there's no clear direction. It starts out as an unbalanced mix of psychological thriller and gory slasher flick. Throughout the movie, there are hints of it also being a "Characters from different installments face off against each other and/or team up to defeat the villain" action sequel. It ends up being (again) an unbalanced mix of dark comedy and nihilistic drama. Seriously, just look at the plan ANDY BARCLAY (the protagonist of the original trilogy, now all-grown up) comes up with: Get himself locked up in an asylum, wait until CHUCKY comes for him, turn the tables around, and kill him. He succeeds... and he still is somehow left trapped. CURSE OF CHUCKY wasn't the best installment just because it had a well-crated moody atmosphere for most of its running time, but also because of NICA PIERCE (the protagonist). She was likeable and (internally) strong enough to taunt CHUCKY. I rooted for her to survive and I was invested in her family drama. Keep in mind that I don't usually say these things when dealing with a direct-to-video horror movie. Now, most of what she does is beg others to believe her or looked scared/sad when someone dies. I thought "OK, her personality isn't really being displayed because she's a victim of circumstances. The movie will build this up until the climax, where she'll fight back." That doesn't happen. Quite the opposite, actually. She gets hypnotized by DR. FOLEY (a rapey psychiatrist) and stays half-awake until her body is possessed by CHUCKY. Come on, Don Mancini! Why did you write the script in a way that holds Fiona Dourif back, when she has proven to be the best actress of the franchise?! By the way, CHUCKY mentions how disgusting FOLEY is (for taking advantage of NICA and probably other patients) but, when he finds himself in NICA's body, he touches her breasts. That's not rape too? Plus, even though they're unrelated characters, I don't want to imagine Brad Dourif touching his daughter like that. The continuity in this saga has always been questionable, but these last 2 movies have given me a headache. So... CHUCKY decided to stop trying to transfer his soul into a human body, which led to a fight with his wife TIFFANY VALENTINE and their child GLEN/GLENDA. TIFFANY switched bodies with the real JENNIFER TILLY, but CHUCKY didn't know that. CHUCKY killed JENNIFER, and GLEN/GLENDA killed their father. TIFFANY started to pretend she was JENNIFER. CHUCKY somehow survived and mailed his own arm via mail to the TILLY residence, where he killed his child. TIFFANY ignored it and decided to help CHUCKY transfer his soul into other dolls and humans, creating an army. The method to do this is a shortened version of the voodoo chant, and the time limit rule doesn't apply anymore for some reason. TIFFANY changed her identity back and, to this day, nobody makes the connection between the missing celebrity and her look-alike. Did I get all of that right? 2/10 I don't want to sound ungrateful by saying negative things about CHILD'S PLAY 2019, because it's what we've been asking for many years: A remake that, rather than telling the same story, tells a new one with the original's core elements. I'm sorry, but it's a forgettable bore. As goofy as the previous installments could get (purposefully or not), they were always memorable and kept my attention. I can't really judge Mark Hamill's performance, because the makers didn't decide if they wanted CHUCKY to be essentially a machine who does bad things out of misunderstandings or the same character he was before. The fact that he develops a semi-personality in the last part contradicts the tone they're going for. While the original looked a little creepy (for what was supposed to pass as a cute doll), I could get used to seeing him after a while. Who would ever want to be near, let alone play with, this hideous re-interpretation?! 4/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog. |
|
