Thursday, October 29, 2009

Child's Play (1988)

A child's toy possessed with the soul of a serial killer attempts to transmigrate his soul into the young boy's body, while leaving a trail of bodies in his wake. Chucky may have become the butt of all jokes in the 20 years since the release of the original film, but there is no denying that CHILD'S PLAY broke amazing new ground in special FX and the killer doll theme. It is unfortunate that Brad Dourif will always be remembered for this role, since he only has a limited screen presence, however his characterization as the notorious Chucky is as memorable as it is forceful and frightening. With more fun performances by Chris Sarandon, Catherine Hicks, and Alex Vincent, the film takes a cheesy B-movie plot and steps it up to an iconic late-80s Slasher. Though the body count is low, and there really isn't much blood, the incredible movement and design makes Chucky completely convincing. The marriage of costumed little people acting on enlarged sets with the animatronic doll is pretty seamless, and blows away any of the computerized FX used in the later films. Mancini's critical look at consumer culture reads heavily in the film, but is not so forceful as to take away from its entertainment. It goes without saying that this is a staple Horror classic!

Rating: 9/10.
Gore: 5/10.
Number of views: 12.

HorrorBlips: vote it up!


  1. I agree, there is no serious horror collection complete without this movie. A staple at the Graveyard....this one has been played many times at the Davis Graveyard Drive In Theater :) Even though people have begged me to stop....:D


  2. You know what's odd about the Child's Play series? The first installment features a completely realisitc, moving, Chucky doll. The effects were great as you pointed out, but as the series continued and technology improved, Chucky began to look more fake. I was watching Bride of Chucky the other night and he just felt so fake looking. I remember being petrified of the first film as a kid because it felt like the doll truly came alive. Back then I was more scared of Chucky than Freddy. By that time Freddy was already our good friend who liked to spew cheesy one liners.

  3. Isnt it ironic? I feel the same way about computerized FX in recent films. Technology has gotten to the point where films like 2012 can be made, yet the shit ass monsters on the SyFy Originals look worse than the xenomorph in ALIEN 3.. There are definitely inexcusable slip ups in later CP entries, like Shit Face running behind the truck in the most unconvincing CG I have ever seen..

  4. Upon revisiting the film about 6 months ago, I was surprised at how good it actually was. While the plot itself may be ridiculous, it's actually handled quite well by the actors, amazing EFX, and direction. I do feel like there was some uncapped potential with the relationship between Andy and Chucky. I think they should have toyed more with the idea that Andy could be crazy and that the doll has convinced him to do bad things, like kill his babysitter. Although they sort of hint at this, it would be way more interesting if they drove that plot point further.

  5. That is an excellent, excellent idea, and something that I would really like to see in the remake. It might have also been interesting to see an ambiguous storyline where we never find out if Chucky really is a killer doll by never revealing him on camera and leading the audience to believe Andy could have been the killer all along. Maybe told through first person perspective during the killings? I like it Becks, I think youre really on to something!

  6. Let's make this movie Carl!!!! Haha.

  7. I dont want to spoil it for you, but lets just say the premise we have come up with is nearly identical to the premise in LUNATIC minus the killer doll and plus some sweet ass lycanthropy

  8. jervaise brooke hamsterJuly 27, 2013 at 6:23 PM

    Macumba, give me Pauline Hickey on her 17th birthday circa 1985, i beg of you ! ! !.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.