FILM ESSAY: TWO OF HORROR'S GREATEST VILLAINS WITH SPLIT PERSONALITIES

"Psycho" has been a film that I have been very vague about in the past. I understand that many people by today's standards are already aware of the twist given how exploited it's been over the years (particularly with the TV show "Bates Motel"). But I know that there are still people who aren't aware of the twist, and therefore I try to keep with the tradition to give away as little as possible while still explaining why it's a must see. I did not even discuss the twist when I placed Norman Bates as my 5th favorite movie villain, despite that I was giving away spoilers when describing the others on my list. Therefore, to make up for it, I am finally going to give more detail on the character of Norman Bates.

And to make things a little more interesting, much like how I compared Mickey and Mallory from "Natural Born Killers" to John Doe from "Se7en"; I'm going to compare him to a villain who I grew such a great fondness too earlier this year Professor Henry Jarrod from the 1953 horror classic "House of Wax".

WARNING: THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!

Now I'm sure you are wondering what both men have in common due to them being different. Norman is a young man as Jarrod is older with more experience than him. And their motives and methods for killing are even different enough to separate them as their own identity. Norman Bates kills people who checks into his Motel dressed as his Mother with a knife, while Professor Jarrod strangles people, dips them in wax, and displays them in his wax museum. Though he kills his victims alone, his henchman Igor and Leon aids him of making them resemble historical figures, while with Norman Bates he's all by himself believing that he's with somebody else. On top of it, Jarrod knows what he's doing when he murders people as the cloaked figure. Norman Bates does not because his personality completely switches over to his Mother when he kills people.

So, with having so many differences why would I bother comparing these two? Well a few reasons. The first and probably most obvious reason is that they are both mentally unstable individuals who run a business and kill multiple people to achieve a desire, whether it would be for business, revenge, or staying within their delusional mindset. Both films also tend to focus more on the antagonists, as everybody else who encounters them are more the observers and the victims, where the true nature to these two characters are revealed in the end through a shocking twist. Beyond that, what makes them similar is that they both have split personalities. Of course one does it intentionally in the way how a character like Bruce Wayne would disguise himself as Batman (only it's for evil), as the other jumps from one personality to another without having control over the other personality. However they both come from a tragic background that has caused them to become the men that they became infamously known for.

 

Professor Jarrod is a skilled and passionate wax figure sculptor who impresses the people who come to his museum for how life-like and full of detail his wax figures look, as well as admiring Jarrod's charm and narration for how he describes them through such love and affection. Maybe with a little too much love, because as gifted and charismatic as he is, he treats his creations like people who are living and breathing, claiming that he talks to them and are his friends. Already the film establishes his delusions, only he’s shown to be harmless where his fantasies only inspire him to create beauty and provide great showmanship, who refuses to resort to creating horrific images to shock audiences. Sadly, his life and passion fully collapse when his business partner burns down his Wax Museum to collect the insurance money. Jarrod watching these wax figures melt away is a traumatic sight for him to see. Since he spent all of his time and effort making them look beautiful to the point where he feels a personal connection to them, seeing his creations slowly fade away to melted wax is like watching all the people he's ever loved and cared about being trapped and burned in a raging fire. What's even worse for Jarrod is, even though he survives after being left for dead by his partner, he doesn't make it out in one piece. The flames surrounding his museum have caused great effect on both his appearance and career. He can no longer sculpt his own creations ever again now that his hands have been burnt, who now must rely on other people to make his wax figures for him as he supervises. His face has also been burnt to the point where he could easily pass as "The Phantom of the Wax Museum". His deformity forces him to conceal his true face behind a mask so unbelievably life-like for how much it flawlessly resembles and functions like an actual face that he could make a fortune and the change the world by creating masks as opposed to wax figures. Having trouble coping losses feeling that the law will not provide the justice that he’d wish for, he loses his sanity to take revenge and restore his wax museum by finding people who look identical to the wax figures that are nothing more than a memory and using their dead bodies as replacements after killing them. In order to achieve this without raising suspicion he takes on two different personalities. His true half being the severely burned cloaked figure who lurks in the dark foggy streets of New York City to kill his victims and steal their bodies, and his other half masquerading as a crippled and weak version of the man he used to be. Seeing his whole world fall apart is a soul-crushing sight to see, for how much you sympathize with him through Vincent Price's endearing performance and the incredibly harsh visuals depicting his loss, where you understand why this man would stoop to such a low after losing everything that means so dearto him. That doesn't mean the film claims that his murders all justified. The only killing he commits that was deserving is when he kills the man who destroyed his entire life, who you can argue murdered his old self. Everybody else he kills so he can rebuild his old museum are all innocents who don't deserve to suddenly have their lives taken away for his passion for art. The moment when we are informed that this man has fully changed for the worst is when he tells his new partners about creating a “Chamber of Horrors” exhibit to appeal to the masses instead of just carrying on with his original artistic approach. While revealing his sudden change of heart as he shows a wax figure of his former business partner indicating that he has some kind of link to the murders happening in the first act.

Norman Bates becomes a victim of awful circumstances at an early age in his life. Ever since the death of his Father, Norman as a child has been sheltered away from the world by his Mother Norma, not interacting with anybody except for the person taking care of him. Norma was fully attached to her son and would always force Norman to remain with her. This kind of treatment screws up Norman's mind by causing him to develop an inseparable relationship with her, feeling she's the only person in the world that matters, and will harm anybody who tries to take her away from him. Norman goes to this extreme when Norma meets a man who opens a Motel business with her and falls deeply in love with him. Full of jealousy and rage beveling that his Mother has abandoned him, he murders both the fiancé and Norma after finding them in bed by poisoning them and staged their deaths to look like a suicide. Feeling insanely guilty for his crime, Norman digs up her Mother's dead body and stuffs her corpse to make her look alive, as he would talk to it. But it wasn't enough to make him believe that his Mother was still alive. This caused him to start carrying conversations by himself by developing two separate personalities, his Norman Bates personality being his friendly naive and innocent self, and his Mother personality containing all his anger, jealousy, and destructive nature that he developed since childhood. As he would talk to himself, he'd mimic his Mother's voice, and would dress-up like her in old clothes and a cheap wig when murdering his victims. If Norman wasn't raised in such an isolated environment with a woman who was always so overbearing, he may have had a better life, but unfortunately it wasn't the case. Now that he must live through life believing his Mother is still with him, he will kill anybody who will shatter his delusion, or lure him away from it because he doesn't want to accept the reality that he committed Matricide. The victims never intended to make Norman come to terms with himself of his actions; they were just as ignorant about the whole situation as the audiences who saw the film at the time were, which of course aren't justifiable. But in Norman's mind when becoming his Mother, it was the only thing to do. In the end (if we don't count any of the sequels), Norman officially dies after failing to kill the people who found about his true nature, and his second personality containing all the evil that he's hidden and tried to forget has taken a life of its own.

Regardless of their major differences, and having more recognition more than the other is, both of these characters are alike in many ways. They share the same depth and spotlight when depicted in the film's they came from; are unusual people who develop a split personality developed from a traumatic experience they had; are both very charming from one personality and incredibly vicious in the other; killed people based on the experience that destroyed them that involved the loss of love; and are mysterious characters until the end when everything comes together in a shocking twist. And through the aid of captivating writing, stunning atmospheric visuals to create mood, and frightening and endearing performances from Perkins and Price create two of the best horror villains with split-personalities to be featured in cinema.

Happy Halloween everybody! 

THE TERMINATOR: TERMINATED SCENES

Before I decide to review any of the Terminator films after James Cameron left the director's chair,  I'm going to review the deleted scenes from the first and second film to see if they were worth cutting out or should've been placed in the final film. Covering the first film will be much different from how I reviewed deleted scenes in the past because instead of me reviewing a special cut of the movie, I'm just looking at the deleted scenes found under the bonus features. Let's jump in the past and see if any of these didn't deserve to be terminated.

TERMINATED SCENES FROM



WARNING: THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!



In a less than 30 second scene, after Sarah punches in her time card at the restaurant, we cut to a shot of her locker (with her name on it) and see her walk up to a mirror criticizing her wholesome image at a job she hates. The reason why this scene is cut is for being just as self-explanatory as the scenes of Sarah of working at her job. We already see her name when she punches in her time-card and watch her unhappily work at her job in the scene that follows. Why bother showing a middle to this with information we already know about her identity (TWICE in the same deleted scene, incase if someone in the audience can't read), and having a scene that visually shows her misery after? Nothing new is gained here.



In the scene when the Terminator kills the wrong Sarah Connor, the scene was originally going to end with the machine casually walking to its car as children and neighbors flee the scene. I can see why the scene was cut. It doesn't enhance the story in anyway. But I don't think it would've hurt the film if it was kept. The image of seeing this cyborg treating a killing it committed in public in broad daylight as if it just swated a fly, not caring or acknowledging the cries from the children (most likely one from the woman it killed) around it is incredibly chilling. It's pretty messed up the more I think about it. But then again what do you expect from a machine that's programmed to kill?



Regarding authority figures in the first two films who saw Kyle and Sarah's stories about the future to be crazy, the only likable character in that category was Lieutenant Traxle. Unlike his sidekick Detective Vukovic, and Dr. Silberman who were very condescending and didn't always take their job seriously, Traxler always remained humble and professional. In the deleted scenes we see this character be given a bit of an arc. The first couple of scenes show him and Vukovic taking part in the chase after the shoot-out in the "Tech-Noir", that are so brief that their involvement in the chase is unneeded. But after Kyle's interview, we see Traxler standing silently puzzled about Kyle's story of the Terminator hoping that he is crazy. Towards the end of the shoot-out at the police station as Kyle and Sarah make their escape, they find him slowly dying, handing Kyle his gun telling him to do what he must to keep Sarah alive. Traxler believing Kyle's story doesn't add a lot to the plot, but given how much time we spent with him where he becomes the fourth important character in the movie for finding ways to warn Sarah and protect her, it seemed a little unsatisfying that he wasn't given much of a proper farewell. It's honestly refreshing to see in retrospect that someone who would accuse one of the main characters for insanity and lock them up for it, not only fully accepts that their sane when proven innocent but try to aide them before meeting their maker. This idea would be handled much better with Miles Dyson in the second film, but he's never shown trying to apprehend any of the protagonists, which is what makes Traxler's arc so amusing.



The following three Terminated scenes focus on the relationship between Sarah and Kyle. The first one happens after Sarah wakes up from her nightmare visions of the future. Sarah calls her Mother telling her to hide-out in the cabin, and she looks up the computer company responsible for the end of humanity "Cyberdyne System" in the phone book. Discovering the address, she tells Kyle her plan about blowing-up the company to prevent the future from happening. Kyle rejects the decision for not being part of his mission, and Sarah angrily runs-off and gets into a struggle with Kyle in the woods, eventually causing him to pull out his gun on her from his war instincts. Sarah cries to Kyle about not wanting to spend the rest of her life running away from the Terminator, but Kyle doesn't listen. Shocked by the beauty of the forest (the only place in the movie that isn't sleazy or dark and gloomy), Kyle slowly begins to break-down at how everything he sees is gone. Sarah comforts Kyle by telling him they can change it, causing Kyle to agree with her plan. This is the longest terminated scene out of the bunch, and while I know this scene will slow-down the tension, it's a very moving and character-driven scene. This is the moment where Sarah begins to take command, no longer being the innocent victim, which Hamilton gives a performance as powerful as she would be in the sequel where her character fully evolves. As Sarah has her moment of change, so does Kyle. Up until this scene, Kyle is always shown to be tough and angry, acting as strong and objective as a machine. All it takes for him to truly realize what is lost is how beautiful the world did look before the war, revealing the human side of his character since all his life he was trained to be a soldier which has dehumanized him. Biehn's acting does feel a little soap-operaish but his emotions are still felt. The best part about this scene is that Sarah's motivation to prevent the future from happening would have started here. In the context of the film's plot it doesn't feel needed, especially when its highly successful sequel has made perfect use of it. Still it's overall an excellent scene that develops these two characters so effectively.



As the two are making Pipe Bombs to blow-up "Cyberdyne", Sarah gets excited about showing Kyle what the past is like before the future. Kyle on the other hand is not too enthusiastic about it because he's still stuck with his mind set on war. Sarah hopes if their mission is successful the war will be over for Kyle, but to him it will never be over. In response to Kyle's feelings she now feels that she's officially part of the war after crossing paths with Kyle and the Terminator. This is a well-acted scene as Hamilton and Biehn still share such moving chemistry together. However, the stuff they talk about is already information we can easily gather ourselves that doesn't need to be spelled out to us. It does give a point to why Kyle is all of sudden making Pipe Bombs, but we can assume in the theatrical cut that he was going to use it on the Terminator after no longer feeling the need to follow Sarah around and wait for it to move-in so he can get a face of what the human-like cyborg looks like.

 

Following the romantic sex scene, Sarah tickles Kyle as they are still lying in bed together. It's nice to see a moment with Kyle smiling showing what he could've been like if he lived in the past. It does a better job showing it than the brief scene when Kyle laughs from Sarah playfully toying around with him, since he's still in war mode. But it does break the tension of the chase scene that follows, and as sweet as it is, I'd much rather stick with Cameron's alternate option with showing Kyle being happy.



At the end of the climax before Sarah is taken to the hospital, we witness one of the heads inside the factory discovering the Terminator's computer chip after being dismantled with the intention to use it as inspiration for future projects. Once Sarah is brought inside the ambulance, the camera pans up as ominous music plays to reveal that the factory where Kyle and Sarah were when they fought against the Terminator was at the very same company that would be responsible for Judgement Day. Seeing this scene in retrospect with the second film in mind, while showing how they found the chip, we never see them find the mechanical arm nor is there any indication that it was already taken. Unknown to how they retrieved the arm without the authorities noticing it is a big plot-hole, making it seemed retcon in the second installment if it was left in. Though to be fair (not counting any other sources outside the films), it's never fully established how the Terminators in the second film were still able to cross through time after John Connor blew-up the time displacement equipment. Regardless if the scene makes sense or not in context to the second film, the reveal of where the climax took place and how the aftermath of it effects the future plays out like an ending to a "Twilight Zone" episode, making this realization eerie and full of dread.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

The absences for these scenes are quite valid as the film in its final cut works perfectly without them. The reason for this is because most of these scenes don't contribute much to the overall story for how short they are. With that said, I'd still be interested in seeing a cut of this film with most of these scenes edited into the film. Scenes like the cops taking part in the chase, the scenes with Sarah and Kyle in the kitchen and in bed, and Sarah looking at herself in the mirror wouldn't be missed for mainly stating and showing the obvious. But the rest of the scenes that follow are interesting, emotional, and scary. The Terminator walking away from the scene of the crime is uncomforting; Lieutenant Traxle believing in Kyle's story gives this character a perfect send-off; the scene with Kyle and Sarah in the woods nicely shows the character's evolving; and the reveal of "Cyberdyne Systems" is haunting. They're just great moments that deserve to be seen within the context of the movie. I'm not saying that an alternate cut of the film means to rid the theatrical version for good, it just would be highly amusing to see most of them restored for at least a limited time. If Cameron is willing to make an extended cut of the second film, I don't see why this should be an exception.

FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 5: A NEW BEGINNING

Last October I covered the "Friday the 13th" films leading up to the first time the series was announced to officially end "The Final Chapter". It would've made a great finale to the franchise, except that there are 7 films left (not counting the remake) for me to cover. In all honesty, even though the previous film looked like the official end to Jason, there were still signs that the series was going to carry on without him after seeing Corey Feldman go insane at the end. This ambiguous ending led the series to the appropriately titled sequel released the following year...

Taking place 5 years after when Tommy Jarvis killed Jason, Tommy (John Shepherd) still traumatized by his encounter is transferred from the state mental institution to a halfway house to rehabilitate him back to normal (what exactly happened to his sister, no clue). Not long after his arrival, a teenager with anger issues living at the facility kills one of the teens that annoyed him, who is then quickly taken under custody by the authorities. The killing doesn't stop when visitors and locals by the place where Tommy is staying are being murdered by an unknown killer, who eventually starts murdering the teenagers living at the half-way house.

Now that Jason has been officially killed-off in the last movie (for now), the series decided to go back to its roots by having the killer be unknown until the climax. Without giving away who it is, the reveal of who the murderer is is silly, disappointing, and senseless. The worst part is the film attempts to create characters who you would suspect to be behind this, as some of the characters would develop theories that Jason may have risen from the grave. But from the moment I saw a character react to a situation in a certain way, I knew that this person was going to be the killer for how lacking any subtly the scene was supposed to have.

The film was originally going to have Corey Feldman be the star of the film, but after already being committed to the classic 80s kids film "The Goonies", he only had a limited time amount of time to be in the film. This of course led to the film's script being rewritten by containing similar features that was originally going to be used for the plot for Part III (mainly the last survivor being sent away for treatment). Feldman's presence was reduced to a cameo instead of the starring role, who is obviously not committed to being frightened by Jason when you compare his performance to the last movie. John Shepherd as an older Tommy Jarvis gives the exact opposite performance that Feldman gives and truthfully just about every cast member in the entire film. Despite looking too old to be a teen and semi resembling the "they're eating her" guy from "Trolls 2", he still looks like a grown-up version of Corey Feldman's character. Watching him suffer through the film psychologically is some of the best acting that the series has to offer which is incredibly rare! In most of these films when characters act scared or tormented, they usually come across as hokey. With Shepherd's performance, you don't get that. He says very few words and yet his actions and reactions says everything. When his memories of Jason come to haunt his recollection to the point where he sees visions of him, he's terrified out of his mind and insanely frustrated that he can't forget about his encounter with him fearing that he one day he may become a murderer like Jason after murdering him himself. And after being pranked or pushed around by a teenager it pushes him over the edge causing him to coldly lash out violently and running away in fear of what he could've done if he wasn't stopped. The battles that he has with himself are always present. They are illustrated effectively through Shepherd's emotionally gripping performance of a person who's near the end of his rope making you believe that this is a man who needs some serious help, most likely because Shepherd volunteered at a state mental hospital in order for him to study the behaviors of the mentally ill.

 

The psychology of Tommy is utterly fascinating to the point where it's emotionally chilling, but the film is more focused on the supporting characters and how to kill them off. None of the characters is given the same kind of depth as Tommy does. They are all very simplified for how many characters the writers are trying to push-in for the unknown murderer to kill where they come across as stereotypes or living cartoon characters. As much of a waste, it is to have Tommy's struggles be overshadowed by characters who have little importance to the story, this is by far the most entertaining cast of characters that I've ever witnessed in any of these films. Usually, these movies would have one or two characters who are either intriguing or fun to watch, as the rest of them are bland and forgettable. The characters in this film all standout for how over the top they are, who should be annoying but are laughably goofy. There's way too many characters for me to talk about but some of the best include the chocolate loving Joey (Dominick Brascia); the foul mouthed nasty next door neighbor Ethel (Carol Locatell) and her childish motorcycle riding son Junior (Ron Sloan); the punk robotic dancing teen Violet (Tiffany Helm); the two greasers Pete (Corey Parker) and Vinnie (Anthony Barrile); the perverted coke addicted nurse Billy (Bob DeSimone); the angry Mayor Cobb (Ric Mancini) and so on. The irony is half of the characters are so abnormal that the teens at the halfway house are sane when compared to the characters outside. There's only one or two characters (not counting Tommy) who look like they have a purpose to be there, as the rest seem like they could function fine with society for how minor their problems are played out. There are indeed characters who don't stand-out as much when compared to others or just as uninteresting bland as many of the other characters in the franchise like Robin (Juliette Cummins) who seems to have no reason to be at the half-way house; the cops; some random guy in the woods who just shows-up (easily the most pointless character in the film); and one of the directors of the facility Pam (Melanie Kinnaman). The best character in the supporting cast definitely goes to Demon (Miguel A. Núñez Jr) a punk who looks like a wanna-be 80s pop star than he does an intimidating hoodlum, who lives inside a van with his girl smoking weed and eating enchiladas. His flamboyant personality is a lot of fun for how it doesn't fit his tough guy approach, but it's his short-lived relationship with his little brother Reggie (Shavar Ross) that gives a little more personality than the one trait given to the others. There's a sense that the two genuinely love hanging out with each other, and as much as Demon loves being a "bad boy", he's very protective of his brother by trying to keep him away from mischief. It would have been nice to have more scenes of these two together.

The crazy thing about some of these characters are that they are killed off immediately after they are introduced, and given how many characters are in the film that would mean the body count would be extremely high, which certainly is. It's the highest that the series has ever been by far. But if you're expecting to be amazed and shocked by the murders like in the previous film, you're going to be disappointed! The MPAA have once again demanded the film to be heavily cut due to its grotesque violence and hardcore sex, consequently causing the film to be re-edited multiple times to be granted an R rating as opposed to an X rating, and the film suffers greatly for it. There are some highlights like a pov shot of a character getting a meat-clever to the face as blood trickles down from the screen; a teen getting his eyes crushed by a belt (even though the directions for when the killer is tightening it keeps changing); and a girl getting her eyes clipped by hedge-clippers, a kill that we don't see but is still effective from the sound effect, pov shot, and the blood we do see (a lot of the best kills in this film involves eyes doesn't it?). Some of the dead bodies shown after the kills look very gruesome as well. And out of all deaths, the highlight is the first real murder that happens in the film for how unexpected and silly the reason for it is, making it the first time a person who isn't from the Voorhees family has cold-bloodily murdered an innocent. But aside from those moments, the deaths are very tamed, anti-climactic, and hokey (and most of the cheapness to these deaths don't usually fall under the "They're so Fake it’s funny" category like in some of the other films). You can definitely tell that a lot of material was cut for how less of an impact most of these killings feel, and most of the little gore do we look like the kind of gore you would buy from "Party City". It's just as bad as the editing and effects for the second film. Also, keep in mind that in spite of having such a large body count, some of the deaths happen off-screen, which are only evidenced of them happening by seeing their remains. The atmosphere surrounding the film doesn't make-up for these restrained deaths either for how average everything looks and appears, as well as predictable from how most of the scares and scenes play-out (the fake-out at the ending being the most obvious for how wholesomely corny the scene starts out). The only scenes that director Danny Steinmann knows how to exploit even with the MPAA making him cutting most of the footage out are the scenes involving sex and nudity. This is easily more perverted and sleazier than any of the films that came before it for how Steinmann likes to have girls randomly show their breasts to the camera, and show as much sex possible when two teens are getting it down in the woods. But I guess that's expected when you hire a director who directed porn earlier in his career.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

Many fans consider this film to be one of the worst in the series, if not thee worst, and their reasons for feeling that way are legitimate. The reveal of who the killer is obvious and disappointing. The death scenes after coming-off the heels one of the most gruesome films in the series are lacking due to the violence being heavily censored. And putting Tommy's struggles with his insanity to the side just to show water-down killings is a missed opportunity. However, much like how I found Part 2 to be overrated, I find this film to get too much of a bum rep. I'm not saying it's one of the best of the series, it certainly isn't. But when comparing it to a sequel that gets way too much love from fans despite having some of the same problems that this film has (The MPAA interfering with the violence, the predictable formula, and the confusing motives from the killer) this film has more hits. The killer is way more threatening than Jason was in the 2nd installment; the supporting characters though aren't anywhere near as natural as the characters in the second film were, are definitely more memorable and entertaining for how joyfully loony they are; and the psychology with Tommy is more fascinating than how Part 2 touched upon Jason's psyche, let alone having a better lead and an actor who gives an intense performance. It's a disappointing follow-up no doubt, but when ranking these films based on the previous films, it's not the bottom of the barrel, that I'm afraid goes to the second film regardless of its importance for being the film to make Jason the killer.

CHILD'S PLAY 3

Before the release of the second "Child's Play" movie, Universal Studios was already considering on pushing for a third film. This forced screenwriter of the first two films Dom Mancini, to come up with a script in a short amount of time who unfortunately struggled writing a follow-up after being out of ideas. The only idea he had in mind for a sequel was to have multiple Chucky's come to life, except that the film would be too expensive to make. After finally coming up with something, the film was finally put in production and released nine months after the second film came out.

Because of the film's rushed production, the film was considered to be the black sheep of the "Child's Play" trilogy, for being too goofy, out of place, and dull. Many eons ago, when I did my favorite movie villain list, when I included Chucky on the number 11 spot from the trilogy, I counted this film rather than dismissing it. While I was talking about my favorite moments with Chucky, I said one day I would touch upon the film's pros and cons, and now is the appropriate opportunity to discuss them.

Set eight years after the second film, the Play Pals Company decides to bring the "Good Guy Dolls" back to the market after recovering from the bad publicity surrounding the doll. During the restoration of the abandoned factory where the dolls were made, a crane that moves Chucky's dead body gets the doll's blood mixed into a vat of plastic, incidentally creating a new body for Chucky (Brad Dourif). There's no explanation why they didn't just make new toys in the factory, or why Chucky's bloody remains haven't been touched, except there'd be no sequel. I'm still confused of how the person operating crane didn't notice the blood, how he or she would've reacted to the remains after dropping it, or how just a huge vat of plastic doesn't create multiple bodies for Chucky now that it's contaminated with his blood. After Chucky kills his first victim (who again doesn't consider the fact that he just revealed his secret to him, just like his first victim in the last movie) he discovers that an older Andy (Justin Whalin) is attending a Military School from failing to adjust to the numerous foster homes he's been sent too while his Mother is STILL away for treatment. What happened to Kyle some of you may be thinking, there is no explanation what-so ever! It's like the two never even met each other. I'll give the film this, her absence is less insulting than the reasons for Detective Norris not being in the sequel. Chucky somehow perfectly mails himself to the school, only to discover that one of the younger kids from the school named Tyler (Jeremy Sylvers) stole the doll for wanting one as badly as Andy once did when he was 6 (this kid looks way too old to be excited for a doll made for little kids). Realizing that he has not "revealed his secret yet", Chucky decides to go transfer his soul into Tyler's body instead. But like before, obstacles get into Chucky's way (that he could have easily dealt with half of the time), people think Andy is crazy, and we get a bloodbath of murders.

Just judging the film by its premise, you can already spot most of the problems that many fans and critics have with the film. For one thing, it pretty much follows the same exact predictable formula from both films, consequently suffering with the same amount of plot holes and confusing logic as the second film had. Therefore, the film's story doesn't just have the same cons as the second film, but now it feels boringly repetitive at this point. The only major changes the film has is being set in the future (that still feels like it’s taking place in the early 90s) at a Military camp, that just caused more outrage for how outlandish the location is. Looking at the film again, the way the school is captured (especially without Chucky) does seem to appear that we are watching a different kind movie. At times, I expect to see Sergeant Hartman to walk-in for how some of these scenes look so reminiscent to "Full Metal Jacket". Other times it looks like I am watching some kind of"Coming of Age" drama when we see Andy interact with his love interest, and get bullied by his superiors with his nerdy roommate. Yet when Chucky shows up, it feels somewhat odd as if he (along with Andy I suppose) just crossed over to a different movie.

As out of place as Chucky is within this war setting, I don't find the environment to be as boring as others have made it out to be. If anything, I find it to be an amusing change of pace. We've already had two films where Chucky goes after Andy as he's in an environment where he's surrounded by people who love him but think he's going insane. Here Andy is confined to a location that is based on teaching strict discipline in the harshest way possible as he's given ill treatment by almost everybody around him. And now that Chucky has entered this military facility he has access to any weapon of his choosing knowing that there's no escape for the people he prays upon. Only this time his presence in the camp is as outlandish as the environment in a Chucky film is due to the camp prohibiting fun of any kind, which makes Chucky trying to blend in a little more difficult than before. As intriguing as the concept is its still handled poorly for not going all out with the possibilities, as well as lacking the brutal nature that we're supposed to feel from this place. For a place labeled as "hell on earth" in the trailer, this place is heaven compared to other Military training locations I've seen in other movies.

The film does offer some environments that fit with Chucky's personality like a Penthouse filled with toys (why does a no nonsense businessman have toys in the place he lives like Gepetto would) and a cool haunted house ride located at a carnival, only those scenes don't last as long. The majority of it takes place either on the school grounds or in the woods where they take part in the war games. What's strange about how some of these locations contrast with each other is that the film throws two climaxes back-to-back. Giving its Military setting it would seem appropriate that the finale would take place during the "War Games" that the film keeps building-up its importance as Chucky is taking hostages and sabotaging the games by replacing paint-balls with real ammunition (which would never work in real-life, but still an intense idea). You'd think we get a big bloodbath finale in this warlike environment, but instead we find the characters wandering over to a neon-lit carnival (that they saw earlier) as the film attempts to be like the climax in the second film by turning a playful setting into something grim. Unfortunately, it isn't nearly as well-staged as its predecessor as it seems to be shoehorned in, and not taking its time to build-on suspense, atmosphere, and Chucky's determination. Though it's not just this scene alone that lacks tension because after Chucky kills his first victim, the film doesn't contain any suspense or surprises for how predictable they are with little to no time given to have us anxiously wait for him to attack. The only scare that was well timed after the film's opening is when Tyler opens the package, regardless how predictable it was.

What this film really lacks that was done so well in the last two films are the characters. I can't exactly say that these are some of the worst characters in a horror film because there are some pros to have them. As disappointing as it is to not see Alex Vincent reprise his role as Andy, Justin Whalin looks and acts the part of playing an older version of the kid we encountered in the first two films. His feelings of torment towards the "Good Guy Dolls" are as believable as Vincent's performance, making him seem nearly as vulnerable as the character was a kid. But much like how Andy defended himself in the second film, he too gets himself ready for a fight against his old friend (despite not acting nearly as badass as Vincent's performance). Only this time he's not defending himself, he's defending Tyler, who has become a protector instead of the victim. And that's another thing I enjoy about the film, Chucky is no longer going after Andy, he's going after a different target. The film does follow the same formula as the previous two, which still makes the plot tiresome. Still I have to give them credit for switching up the person Chucky chooses to go after, where we see Andy grow from the events of his last encounters, as we get a bit more insight of what went on between Andy and Chucky off-screen in the first film through his relationship with Tyler. Alas, as interesting as these ideas are, just like its Military setting, the execution is dull. Whalin' is good as Andy, however his performance isn't strong enough to support the characters he meets at the school. This is due because every character he meets are all bland cliches that we've seen plenty of times before in other films. We see Andy have the nerdy misfit for a roommate, a high authority bully who acts like a humorless Nedimyer from "Animal House", the wide-eyed innocent who won't listen to reason, and a love interest who's strong but the writers forgot to give her a personality. Perhaps the actors playing these stereotypical characters can bring some kind of charm to them as the actors in the previous films did, except their acting is as boringly bland as how they are written.

The only supporting character who leaves such a big impression is the barber played by Andrew Robinson, who is scarier than the killer doll. This guy is a total creep who has a serious fetish for hair. When he cuts people's hair, he gives a sinister smile as he gets uncomfortably close to them while making sounds that seem sexual for practically every-time he cuts as he looks forward to seeing the skin on their head. His pleasure for cutting the hair of youngsters raises more flags as he has a wall of hair attached below a picture of the people he’s cut. It's surprising how such a disciplined environment would hire an obvious sicko. He doesn't even make them bald as he's supposed too, therefore he's not doing his job. This character is so creepy, nasty, and entertaining to watch for how insane he is, that he could have been the antagonist for a crime thriller.

But instead of having the demon barber of "Kent Military School", we have Chucky as the film's main villain. Due to the film's lack of suspense, including the fact that we know how Chucky thinks and acts at this point, he becomes less of an intimidating threat who is now played more for laughs than he's ever been in the last two films. He's still portrayed as a savage killer filled with rage, only now he's cracking more one-liners than he's ever done before, as his reactions to the abuse he gets when playing possum are played out as silly than they are scary. He looks menacing and kills people, but with the tension being pretty much gone you don't feel the stakes that are at risk. If anything, you are more rooting for Chucky than you are fearing him for how little connection there is to the characters (including Andy). I would even argue that this is the very film to what started Chucky's status as an anti-hero playing it up for pure dark comedy instead of "Bride of Chucky". It's disappointing that Chucky isn't played up for scares like he did before which can be seen as a prime example of the film's rushed production, however out of all the film's in the trilogy, this is where he's the most entertaining. Brad Dourif as always is perfect for voicing of Chucky, providing so many sick jokes and quotable one-liners that they are almost endless. When the film gets too dull and generic, Chucky's presence saves it for how much life and personality Dourif brings to the character.

The effects for the doll supporting Dourif's voice-over are still as animated as he is. It's quite amusing that as the film's go-on the puppetry for Chucky only get better, when usually in most horror sequels the effects would tend to get worse. Probably because this film was able to use computers to fix it's mistakes unlike the other films. Usually when computers are added with practical effects, it's easy to tell the difference between what's there and not. Even with films where the effects still look amazing today, there's still a tiny connection in the brain signaling you the difference. In this film, I rarely get that. If anything I'm shocked to discover that the use of computers were involved to help make Chucky act as lively as he does. It always feels like he's there with the characters. My favorite effect goes to Chucky's final form at the end of the film. We've seen Chucky making his last attempt at getting Andy looking burned to a crisp, or covered in molten plastic that both look monstrous, but here we see half of his face get slashed off that turns him into a "Good Guy Doll" version of Two-Face. The reason why the effect is so cool is for how fleshy and full of detail it has, making him look less artificial like his other final forms for how realistic it is. It's the most disturbing Chucky's ever looked in the end of a film in the trilogy, that in some ways makes me wish he still had that look in the sequels that followed.

With the film playing little on suspense and more on Chucky's wild personality, the murders are less shocking and more excessive than they were before. In "Child's Play 2" there was a feeling that the film couldn't go all out with Chucky killing people in extreme yet silly ways, and though this film doesn't quite go as overboard with the killings in the later films, it's pretty close to it. Some of the wildest scenes include Chucky killing a person with toys, or watching ounces of blood splatter out of a guy's throat as Chucky cracks jokes. Occasionally, Chucky doesn't directly kill people. He at one point gives a person a heart-attack just by scaring him causing Chucky to feel disappointed that he couldn't butcher his victim. The only kills in the film that aren't overboard are the deaths that happen during the "War Games" due to them looking like scenes made for a war movie.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

"Child's Play 2" may have had plenty of issues, but at least there was some kind of effort put into it to make it nearly as good as its predecessor. This film on the other hand is just simply a rushed product to cash-in on the popularity for this horror villain. The scares and thrills are mostly absent. The characters are nothing new. And the inconstant tone is more distracting than it was in the second installment. There are some great ideas thrown into the movie, except the film doesn't wish to fully explore them for taking the safe predictable formula used in the previous films. But while being the weakest in the trilogy, it's still highly entertaining. Chucky is more of a riot than he's ever been before. The updated puppetry is an impressive improvement. Most of these kills are some of Chucky's best for how wild they are if not scary. Whalin's is convincing as an older Andy, as Robinson makes for an entertainingly weird villain who should be the focus instead of Chucky. And its fun to see Chucky go from one interesting set-piece to another to cause mayhem. There's nothing in the film that's offensively bad, it just doesn't decide to take many risks with its new premise as things begin to dumb-down even more (though not as bad as the following films would go).

OVERALL THOUGHTS ON "THE CHILD'S PLAY TRILOGY

Growing up as a teenager, I was obsessed with these films for how scary, violent, and funny they are, thinking that they were top-notch slasher films. To this day I still enjoy them (I still consider Chucky to be one of my favorite movie villains) but they do not hold-up as well as I remember them. The confusing logic and plot holes are everywhere. The tone in the last two films are inconsistent. Chucky is more fun than he is scary (in the sequels at least). And a lot of the kills are goofier than I remember them to be. As silly and nonsensical these films can get there's still plenty of environment value to gain from them, mainly for how enjoyably devilish Chucky is as we watch him kill people in creatively extreme ways. These films don't fail to deliver with good thrills either, because the first two films do keep you in suspense for when or where Chucky will strike next whether you find him scary or not. Part of that has to do with how incredibly likable some of these characters are thanks to the charming performances of Vincent, Hicks, Sarandon, and McCarthy (the characters in the third film I can careless about). The sequels in the trilogy don't quite match-up with its predecessor (though the second film came close) but they are still worth a look for how much they explore Chucky's personality, while the first film served more as an introduction to this horror icon.

CHILD'S PLAY 2

Over the years, I've placed the killer doll Chucky as my 11th favorite movie villain from the "Child's Play" trilogy for his fun-loving killer personality, unique methods for killing, and scary design. However, in terms of reviewing the films, I've only had the chance to review the first film that I found to still-hold up well for having solid acting, great suspense, some memorable kills, and a fine balance of horror and comedy. Rather than reviewing all the sequels this October, I shall be focusing on Chucky's first two solo sequels from the "Child's Play Trilogy".

Two years after Andy's encounter with Chucky, the company responsible for making the doll somehow manage to get their hands on the original doll. It's never explained how they were able to take what would be considered evidence to a crime scene. I guess we're supposed to assume that the company bribed the authorities. The reason why they need the doll is to prove to their stockholders that there is nothing abnormal about it (after the series murders linked to their product) by rebuilding it. That makes even less sense than how they got the doll. How is reconstructing the doll going to prove anything, shouldn't they leave it the way it is? Recreating the doll is not going to help their case, if anything it seems like they're trying to bury the evidence, the exact opposite of what they're supposed to do. They were going to see if the voice box has been tampered with, but after the doll being burnt to a crisp and shot countless times the chances of the doll's voice box to be working would be highly unlikely. Never the less, according to the film, the tape somehow survives and they found nothing, unless if they count the blood and body parts that once connected to Chucky's heart. There is no one way they could miss those major details. I'm already 5 minutes in, and nothing makes sense in the slightest. The exposition is unnaturally rushed, their reasons are complete bull, and the businessmen act like the events happened a few months ago instead of two years. Moving right along, after Chucky is rebuilt, the soul of the Lake Shore strangler Charles Lee Ray (voiced by Brad Dourif) returns to the body after being given a new one (completely asinine, but whatever, we wouldn't have a sequel). Chucky then tracks down Andy (Alex Vincent) at a foster home after his Mother was sent to mental institution for claiming the doll was alive, who plans to transfer his soul into Andy's before he's stuck inside the doll for the rest of his life. As anyone would expect nobody believes Andy when he discovers that Chucky has returned, and Chucky kills people as a helpless Andy flees from him.

Apart from our leading villain, the only on-screen actor who returns from the first film is Alex Vincent as Andy who gives a much more confident performance. He was adorably sweet in the first film for how genuinely helplessly innocent he portrayed the character. But I'll admit that his acting while not awful by any means can be a little stilted, and awkward, inspite of his strong efforts. Vincent's acting in the sequel pulls it off stronger. As he manages to still act cute and innocent, how he portrays Andy dealing with the trauma he's going through comes across as believable. He does not go for full-blown drama when conveying Andy's emotions. Instead, he keeps the emotions mostly subtle. He achieves this by trying to conceal his fear and sadness inside him after everything that he went through, who seems like he's okay, but the signs that he isn't are always present for how quietly depressed he appears. While being emotionally upset, Andy does try hard to fight against it to prove to his Foster parents that he can overcome his fears. And when he and Chucky come face to face again, he of course is fearful toward him thus causing his relationship with his Foster family to get worse. Only rather than running, hiding, and looking helpless (even when carrying a weapon) from Chucky most of the time, he shows a strong hatred for him which motivates him to act braver he's ever been to end these nightmares once and for all.

Originally, Catherine Hicks and Chris Sarandon were going to reprise their roles as Andy's Mom and Detective Mike Norris, however their scenes were cut before filming began for budgetary reasons. This is disappointing because the film doesn't provide a proper farewell to these characters, after feeling such a close attachment to them in the first film. What we get instead of Andy saying goodbye to his Mom before taken away, or perhaps seeing Norris try to help Andy, is rushed exposition of their departure from the businessmen reconstructing the doll. You probably may have noticed that a ton of plot that could fill-up a good 20 minutes of the film has been scrapped to give us a quick summary just to get to Chucky killing people. I wouldn't mind it so much if the characters weren't anything special, except they are and the first film took it's time to get us pleasantly acquainted with them so we can fear for their lives when Chucky comes after them. During this incredibly sloppy writing about the restoration of the doll and the Mom being sent to away for psychiatric observation, we learn that Norris just simply decided to keep his mouth shut about the whole affair, which I find to be a big disservice to his character. Norris did suspect the boy to be crazy in the first film, but he was still protective towards Andy's Mom (even when finding her crazy too), showed remorse over seeing Andy being taken away, and wasn't the kind of person to easily give up in a life or death situation. The reasons of him not speaking about the incident is valid. It's just the fact that he doesn't do anything to try to help the Barkley's out after all of this, doesn't come across as something he would do after what they've been through together. And do you know what's more jarring about the sudden absence of these character, one of them was constantly on set. Catherine Hicks was married to the operator of the animatronic Chucky doll, who would stop by and visit him when she had the chance. The deal to not have her in the film may have already been done at that point, I'm just stating that if one of the stars from the first film is married to someone attached to the project, I don't see how hard it would've been to shoot a scene of her and Andy parting. They pretty much have her so why not use her?

For all my complaining about the film deciding to offensively sideline two important characters, giving Andy a new set of characters to interact with is a more sensible route. The people who rescued Andy know that he is telling the truth, which means there will be less tension since Andy has two people who believe him. Therefore, the choice of bringing a lone Andy to a new environment with people he never met before until now is a logical way of recreating the suspense of people questioning his sanity. Beyond that, there are plenty of memorable new characters such as Andy's foster parents (Jenny Agutter and Gerrit Graham) who contain opposite personalities. As well as the nasty teacher Miss Kettlewell (Beth Grant). But the best new character Andy meets during his second encounter with Chucky is his foster sister Kyle (Christine Elise McCarthy). With Hicks and Sarandon gone, Kyle serves as a combination of Andy's protectors. She maintains Hicks' Mother-like qualities while also having the same tough bravery as Sarandon's character. But while being a perfect mix of both characters that in some ways kind of makes up for these characters not being present, she still has her own traits, mainly revolving the typical rebellious teenager trope. Her connection with Andy does get predictable. She's mean to him, eventually takes a liking to him, grows suspicious about him, and then takes his side. It’s as paint-by numbers as it gets. On the other hand though, their connection is still as charming as it was between Andy and his Mother, and by comparison, it’s more fascinating. As bratty and tough Kyle seems, she still has a soft side. She sympathizes for little Andy's fear of being taken into a new foster home by understanding that he hasn't been moving from one family to another like she did. And when she notices that Andy is about to make a poor decision she quickly steers him in the right direction. From spending time with Andy she finds herself getting in touch with her feelings after spending so many years of repressing it from her anger. The writing for it may not be the greatest for how basic it is. Still the chemistry between Vincent and McCarthy is definitely felt thanks to their adoring performances as their scenes are given the right amount of attention where they don't come off as corny or forced to give the film some kind of sentiment through all the humor, scares, and gore.

As cute as their friendship is, Chucky is undoubtedly the main reason why this sequel deserves to be seen. Unlike in the first film where he poses as a lifeless doll for the first half, the film does not waste any time. We know who he is, how he behaves, and what he's capable of, making it incredibly pointless for a sequel to build-up to the reveal of the doll's true colors again. The film doesn't wait till we're a half hour in to show him killing and cursing on-screen, we see him take action after the first 15 minutes. Because that we are able to spend more time with Chucky on-screen, we are given the chance to get more of a feel for his personality than in the previous film. The first film felt more like an introduction to his character for how much backstory he's given. This film gets us antiquated with the Chucky that most people think of, which is using insane methods of killing people while cracking one-liners.The first film offered some of that too, only Chucky wasn't playing it as much for laughs as he does here. Here he seems to be enjoying every moment he has when taunting a victim, and laughing at their misery after making a joke. Nevertheless, while being sadistically playful with his mischief, he remains as a threat for how determined he sounds when going after Andy. Dourif is as lively as ever voicing this killer doll who doesn't feel restraint with going all out with the character's wise-cracking personality with a thirst for blood. Helping to convey Dourif's animated voice-work is the puppetry for the doll that is superior than the effects in the original. The effects in the original still hold-up well, its just when comparing the effects, the manipulation in the sequel is less noticeable. You don't get the sense that they're using different puppet heads to convey his expressions, or appears to be shot from the knee up to hide the puppeteers, or so much as being shot from a distance to hide his double. He looks like he's really moving on his own for how natural his movements are animated and shot that's attached to a face that's a little more expressive. His design is also more appealing for having light skin that make his bright blue eyes pop-out, and rotten teeth to remind us of the savage killer within this cute doll making him appear more menacing.

Just because the film doesn't decide to use the same strategy as the first film did with Chucky's on-screen appearance as a killer doll, doesn't mean we don't still get suspense from him acting like a lifeless doll. In order to get to Andy undetected by his foster parents, he poses as a Good Guy Doll named Tommy that the parents already had. Through this, he can find situations to get Andy in trouble by making him look insane so he can get to him. The tension involving Chucky waiting to strike without blowing his cover is as suspenseful as it was in the first film that is carried through suspenseful cinematography that plays with your expectations, a grim and playful score, and dramatic acting involving the people who confront Andy for his supposed crimes. The locations themselves help play large a factor of providing a foreboding sense of dread. Many of them are places that seem friendly like the house where Andy stays for example. It seems wholesome at daylight, yet seems eerie at night for its large collection of creepy antiques, old paint, and a basement as dark and dreary as the fruit cellar from "Evil Dead" (which the film contains a few shots and ideas that are reminiscent to "Evil Dead 2").

The suspense building-up to the deaths of Chucky's victims still bring a strong feeling of fear and paranoia, but most of the pay-offs are played more for laughs here than they were in the original. The deaths in the first film were silly for how over the top many of them were, still there was a grimness when capturing these demises that prevented them from being rib-tickling. The deaths in this film are a little bloodier, a tad bit more absurd, and Chucky gets to have some fun with his victims before killing them. The problem that the film has when handling these deaths is that since the film tries so hard to take its thrills and story as seriously as the first film did with it, seeing these deaths take a more cartoony direction combined with Chucky having more of an excessive personality doesn't mash-as well together as it did before. There's a sense that the film wants to go all out with its comedy, but are forced to tone it down to make it feel like the second half to the first film. This makes the overall experience feel a little awkward for the film not having the same balance of thrills and laughs then what was brought to audiences before. And nowhere in the film is that best expressed when we see people die. You'll get a few murders that feel similar to the style of them in the first film, such as Chucky suffocating a guy, or causing a person to break their neck that have a small touch of comedy to them. But then you'd see something ridiculous being played out with great exaggeration as Chucky beating someone to death with a ruler, or a random person getting stabbed in the eyes with fake eye balls. I'm not saying these scenes aren't entertaining to watch, they do their job pleasing enough for those who just want to see Chucky do his shtick that the film decides to take to new heights. It's just the inconsistent tone for how these scenes are played out can be a bit irritating.

Admittedly as highly suspenseful the film is with Chucky terrorizing Andy, when you stop and think about Chucky's plan, it's absolutely one of the most idiotic things that any horror villain can do when playing "Cat and mouse" with his or her prey. Chucky gained a new body and must switch his soul to Andy's since he's the first person he told his secret too before his soul is trapped in there forever. Ignoring the confusing logic of how restoring a dead body counts as having a new body that somehow summons a dead person's soul inside the body (I swear I remembered the film making more sense when I was a teenager), if Chucky has a "new body" why bother coming after Andy? I know he wants revenge on him, but he could have transferred his soul into another body and get him. He has the perfect opportunity to take over the body from one of the businessmen at the Toy Company. They're alone on a dark and empty parking-lot with no way for the man to escape, and yet Chucky kills him. This gets more puzzling when seeing that Chucky just clearly revealed his secret to him. His victim knows all the details about "the legend" involving Andy's Good Guy Doll including who possessed the doll. Now that Chucky just showed him that he is actually alive as he threatens his life, he has confirmed knowledge that the doll really is bewitched by the soul of the Lake Shore strangler. He pretty much killed the first person who knows about his secret, so how does Chucky expect to get out of the doll now? But let's say that the guy Chucky killed was someone not clever enough to put two and two together, or that there's some kind of nonsensical loop-hole in the spell that the only way Chucky can fully reveal his secret by telling the person his full name directly? When he does find Andy, he doesn't take as much action as you'd think. I get that he's trying to stay under the radar, but come on, he's a serial killer, killing is what he does best, and a strangler for that matter, one of the most stealthy kind of killers there is. With the right planning, he can silently kill all these people in the middle of the night without Andy knowing it. Some of the opportunities are practically given to him, and yet he remains as a lifeless doll because of one other person who is either in the room or is about to enter. Some can argue that Andy will simply run away as Chucky kills someone like in the first film, but there's one point in the film when Chucky does kill a person with Andy present and he still manages to capture him.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

The film is usually considered to be the best of the sequels, as some would argue it to be the best of the franchise. I will say it is the best sequel of the franchise if not thee best film. But I think it's a little overrated for two reason. The first is the writing for how lazy, mindless, and insulting it gets most of the time. And the other is the uneven tone for being too comical with its deaths and humor, and too serious with its emotions. But as stupid, goofy, and awkward the film can be, it's still quite the ride. Chucky's personality gets to shine more here than in the original. The deaths though I cannot say are nearly as good as the ones in the first film are still entertaining to watch. There are plenty of moments of genuine thrills presented in a chilling atmosphere through excellent film-making. The effects are an impressive update. And the relationship and dramas that Andy and Kyle go through bring a bond that's as strong as the relationships with the characters in the original. The absolute highlight of the film that makes the film worth seeing is the climax in the toy factory as a furious Chucky chases after Andy and Kyle. The sequence throws so many twists and turns at a pace that moves as fast as roller-coaster that it ends the film on the perfect note, making it the best climax in the whole franchise. As majorly massive as the flaws in the film are, we're still given a solid enough sequel that delivers well with its thrills and entertainment value tied to the most infamous killer doll in horror movie history.

GREMLINS 2: THE NEW BATCH

One of the greatest examples of a dark family film made in the 80s that would have received a PG-13 rating if made today is "Gremlins". The film contained wacky yet likable characters, tons of humor, a sentimental light-hearted charm connecting to Christmas, and one of the most adorable characters to have ever existed. But on the other hand, it was also intense, violent, scary, and downright insane as we watch devil like creatures cause mayhem in a small town to have fun at the cost of humanity. It's a movie that's still being celebrated today for its innovation through the mythos, comedy, and special effects. For a film as successful as this, naturally it would seem destined to get a sequel. Director Joe Dante not intended to make a sequel to the film and turned down Warner Brothers Studios offer to make a continuation. After a few years of approaching various directors and writers, as ideas for where the Gremlins would attack next would keep being scrapped, Dante was approached a final time with the offer to give him complete creative control. Dante accepted the offer, was given a bigger budget, and we had the follow-up to the 80s classic...

 

The sequel did fine with critics, as audiences detested it at the time. The reasons for it was that the film didn't contain the same edge as the original, as it came out 6 years too late to capitalize on the success of these creatures when they were big. Over time, audiences began to warm up to the film appreciating its comedy and creativity. However, the opinions still appeared to be mix, as some find it to be a downgrade to the original for being different in tone, while others consider it better than the first film for going all out with no restraint. What are my thoughts? ON WITH THE REVIEW!

Billy (Zach Galligan) and Kate (Phoebe Cates) are engaged to be married, and work in Manhattan at the largest automated building containing all different kinds of businesses in North America runned by the eccentric millionaire Daniel Clamp (John Glover). To Billy's amazement, he finds the mogwai Gizmo in the building's gene-splicing lab who is scheduled to be dissected. Billy rescues Gizmo, preparing to assume responsibility for him now that his master has been diseased. But Gizmo accidentally gets wet from a broken automatic drinking fountain and starts multiplying new mogwais. Eventually (as I'm sure anybody would expect) the mogwai's turn into gremlins, multiply a whole entire army, and cause chaos. This time instead of being in a small town, they're inside a gigantic building where they'll have their deranged fun until night fall with the intention to devour the big apple.

Right from the very second the film begins; it makes itself perfectly clear that this film is not meant to be taken seriously by presenting the Looney Tunes in the opening scene for Bugs Bunny's 50th anniversary (animated by Chuck Jones himself who was lured out of retirement). This was an unusual way to start out a movie about monsters playfully terrorize and endanger humanity, I can only imagine how many people at the time confused it for an actual short cartoon being played than being part of the actual film. From this point-on, the film throws more countless gags at the audience than the original had now that it has a higher budget, full of cameos and countless references to films involving Sci-Fi, horror, and 80's action. The hardest jabs that the film hits with its comedy is by mocking itself. It shows no mercy when making fun of elements from the original film such as the confusing logic involving the mogwai, audience's reaction to the darkness surrounding the first film, and even the speech that Kate makes about learning that there is no Santa Claus. It cares so little about the logic and continuity involving the first film that we get a brief cameo of Leonard Maltin reviewing the original film itself as he holds a VHS tape of the movie. How is that possible? Talk about breaking the fourth wall! Well to be fair it's not as massive as when the film stops dead in its tracks to have the gremlins take over the projector reel to make audiences believe that they were in the theater during the film's release (calling back to the theater gimmicks that horror Director William Castle would do). As iconic as the humor in the original film is, the laughs are certainly harder for its endless insanity.

The effects and puppetry used in the original is still impressive. I'd even argue that the mogwai's designs are more realistic in the original than they are in the sequel. The mowgai's here appear less like living creatures you'd want as a pet, and more like stuffed toys that kids would beg their parents to buy for how goofy and drenched in color they are. But I can't deny that the effects aren't an upgrade either. They are given more expression and movement where you don't feel the limitations to the effects as you would with the original. In the first film for example we don't see Gizmo walk on his own, he's usually shown sitting around or hiding somewhere. This film gives him scenes where he can walk on his own, as well as dance. We're no longer seeing the gremlins and mogwais look the same as they did in the previous film either (except for Gizmo and Stripe), many of them are given distinctive designs and characteristics for them to have an identity. Each mogwai has their own facial feature or color pattern on their fur to make them stand-out on its own instead of looking like mischievous clones of Gizmo. Some of the gremlins in the film are later mutated by drinking potions in the gene-splicing lab, which causes them to take different shapes and sizes. A few of these forms include a Bat-Gremlin, a Spider-Gremlin, and an Electric Gremlin. They're not just different by the clothes they wear. The changes to them also lead to a wide variety of different effects like Stop-Motion and hand-drawn animation. Do all the effects work, no, but they're still fun to watch for how inventive they are with the designs and situations.

The Gremlin who steals the show is the "Brain Gremlin" voiced by Tony Randall (Tim Curry was originally considered for the role) for his charismatic sophisticated behavior with a touch of insanity, not to mention that he sings too. It's fascinating to see a Gremlin verbally communicate with humans in a polite matter who only wants his kind to be as civilized as humans, an element of the film that makes me wish was explored more. This gremlin could've been perfect as the film's primary antagonist for how well rounded and entertaining of a foe he is with a fascinating motivation that could give these savage creatures a whole new layer of character. But instead we get an uninspired knock-off of the villain in the first film Stripe, under the name of Mohawk (who even contains the voice-work of Frank Welker). There's nothing new about the villain's character and motives when compared to Stripe, except from having a different design who later gets mutated with a couple of other gremlins. He's nothing more than a lazy re-trend of a foe we've already seen who has more screen-time than the gremlin who clearly deserves more attention.

The most disappointing aspect of the movie is how incredibly dumbed down it is. The film is wildly entertaining and big with laughs, but as a sequel to a family film that managed to shock audiences it's quite degrading. It's so cartoony and self-aware of its pointlessness that it at times doesn't feel like it's part of the same world as the first movie, serving itself more as a parody spin-off. And since the film is aiming to be less intense to satisfy the audiences and critics who bashed the first film for it, it can't go as all out as it did before. That's not to say that the film doesn't contain these kinds of moments. The reveal of the first gremlin was shockingly unexpected; the struggles that Mr. Clamp has when he sees a gremlin is nearly as intense when watching the Mother fighting off the gremlins in the kitchen; and it does contain a few grotesque bits of the gremlins being slaughtered and multiplying. But those scenes are rare, and don't have the same impact or suspense as what was carried out prior to this film. And somehow this film gets a PG-13 when there's hardly anything in it that would warrant one (was the rating for the film supposed to be a joke since "Gremlins" was one of the film's that helped launch the idea of a rating between PG and R)? To be fair with the film's lack of ability to shock people, it's not the choice of making the film fully comical alone. It's the fact that its predecessor had already managed to successfully frighten audiences with its twists, turns, and effects. It would seem near impossible to bring the same kind of element of surprise again now that people are already fully aware of the behaviors and appearances of these creatures. That is unless they decide to take it to an R rated route, which you know the makers won't do given its popularity among kids. Therefore, the choice of going for complete comedy seemed like the best way to make a pointless sequel since the original did function like a cartoon at times too. It still surprises audiences just more on a level of humor than it does with terror.

 

A Gremlins sequel would never be complete if it didn't have its adorable mascot Gizmo (voiced again by Howie Mandel). Going into this film, aside from Gizmo multiplying new gremlins, I didn't think he would have much of a purpose in the film except for fan-service. It certainly seemed that way at first giving that all he does is look innocent and helpless as the gremlins torture him for half of the film where I was just waiting for him to be saved by the characters and just witness everything. But during the film's third act, he's shown to be done taking the gremlins crap by deciding to go Rambo/John McClane on their green asses. The concept of Gizmo turning into an action hero is as silly as it sounds. However, it doesn't become cringy where it seems out of character (watch the behind-the-scenes featurette if you want to see Gizmo act out of character). There is sympathy to be felt when being abused by Mohawk making his arc feel warranted since his pain and fear is constant in the first two acts. And seeing him turn into a heroic badass is both cool and incredibly cute. Gizmo did kill Stripe at the end of the first film after being abused too, but his retaliation against him didn't feel as earned as it did in this film for how downplayed it was. There was never a moment of him feeling that he's had enough since he's just shown hiding inside Billy's pack-back reacting to the chaos around them until he drives a toy car to rescue Billy without showing hesitation at doing so.

Billy and Kate’s return in the series aren't given anything new for these characters to grow-upon apart from being an engaged couple. They pretty much do what you'd expect them to do. Take care of Gizmo, warn everybody about the gremlins, and try to stop the chaos. No arcs or challenging obstacles are given to them. All we get is a thrown in love triangle that really doesn't go anywhere nor is given as much attention as you'd think. Galligan and Cates are still likably wholesome as these characters, and do make a cute couple, there just simply isn't anything given to them that's new. Keye Luke as Gizmo's previous owner Mr. Wing gives just as strong of a performance as he did in the first film, but he only appears in one scene since the character dies after he's reintroduced, which is heartbreaking but disappointing that we don't learn anything new about this character. Really, the only human characters from the original film who are given something new to do are the Futtermans. It's stupid that the film decides to randomly retcon the Futtermans of still being alive where now a bit of the edge that the first film had has a smaller body count (I guess Joe Dante couldn't resist doing a movie without including one of his regular actors Dick Miller). But it's still neat to see these supporting characters have a larger part by aiding Billy, Kate, and Gizmo with destroying the gremlins. Dick Miller is just as a riot to watch as he was previously (who is still as humorously suspicious with foreign stuff as he was before), as Jackie Joseph has more than one scene as the wife by being overly happy while constantly taking pictures.

The new human characters the film introduces are just as animatedly excessive as the characters were in the original. Taking the place of Mrs. Deagle is the head of security at the building where Billy works at Frank Forster (Robert Picardo) who is a genuine jerk that fires and insults people for minor things. Unfortunately, he is nowhere near as memorable or threatening as his female counterpart was, who poses little to no threat in the entire film. The film's original villain was going to be the owner of the building Daniel Clamp (who is a parody of millionaire Donald J. Trump, and media mogul Ted Turner) which would've been fitting, especially since actor John Glover had already played an obnoxious backstabbing businessman in "Scrooged". But the film decides to make him the counterpart of Billy's Father by giving him an optimistic personality (with the same kind of child-like enthusiasm as a businessman like Walt Disney) and having him being obsessed with technology by creating automatic devices that go haywire. Glover delightfully sells the character's man-child personality who can be both very funny and endearing. In the horror themed channel out of the many other themed channels that Clamp produces (a joke in the film that eventually became a reality) is an actor playing an elderly Vampire hosting the channel played by Robert Prosky (a character based on Grandpa Munster that Al Lewis from the TV show "The Munsters". Lewis would later on in his career host a show showing old monster movies as the character). Prosky carries the same innocent likability as Glover does as Clamp who you pity for being chosen as a horror movie host than as a Newscaster, until he gets his unofficial chance. Watching the measures he takes to get his shot based on the absurdities surrounding the building with a crazy Gedde Watanabe acting as his cameraman are quite amusing leading to a few good laughs.

The strangest and (in my opinion) best new character the film offers is Christopher Lee playing a mad scientist who runs the gene-splicing lab with the twins from "Good Morning Vietnam" and "Terminator 2: Judgement Day" as his assistants. Lee plays around with the characters insane personality while still maintaining his dignity by playing him straight by being elegant and commanding with no feelings or remorse for Gizmo and the people around him, except for science. His character is so weird that when he first spots the gremlins, he's not shocked or amazed by them but more annoyed that they invaded his lab as if he's seen creatures more destructive and ghastlier than them. And witnessing what kind of crazy experiments he makes and how insanely into it he is, it almost seems that he's a character who can have his own film. I'd like to know how he found access to one of the pods from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" and what he intends to do with it. Haviland Morris as Billy's boss is quite entertaining for how flirty she is, but overall doesn't feel needed as she mainly serves as a pointless obstacle that takes the form of a love triangle, making her the least interesting new character in the film. At least Picardo chews up the scenery with his aggressively demanding and cynical attitude.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

The film isn't bad but as a follow-up to the first movie it's not up-to par. It lacks scares and shock value, doesn't show anything that new with half of the original characters, has so many great ideas that get thrown away, and goes so overboard with its comedy that it's at times hard to swallow that this is supposed to be part of the same universe as the first movie. But the number of gags, creativity, and impressively updated effects are so much fun to watch that you don't care about continuity and nor does the film itself. It's also nice to see Gizmo be given an arc than just looking cute. And the characters both old and new are very charming and as entertaining as the gremlins are. If you can accept the film's goofy nature, then you'll find yourself having a ball watching it!

FILM ESSAY: GUILT NEVER SLEEPS

To further on the topic of psychological thrillers, I'm going to touch upon a two films made in the early 2000s which are Christopher Nolan's remake of "Insomnia", and "The Machinist". These two films aren't exactly horror films but they both contain a modern Hitchcocken style to them that I feel qualifies to be talked about during this time of year. Aside from these two being underrated thrillers dealing with the psyche of the main character, the reason why I bring both these films up is by looking into the main theme that both films contain, which is insomnia.

WARNING: THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!

The reasons why both characters suffer from this disorder is from the guilt of accidentally killing a person. However, how these events unfold are different in terms narrative, and the victim who died at their hand. In "The Machinist" Trevor (Christian Bale) runs over a child in front of his Mother after taking his eyes off the road to use the car's cigarette. Disturbed by this sight, he flees from the scene rather than confronting it. Because of his guilt for what he has done, with the thought of how the boy's Mother must feel about his death after being reminded of his own Mom who he loved so dearly, he develops a terrible case of insomnia. Sounds like an interesting lead-in to the plot, except we don’t know this information until the climax. All we get are hints and clues to the accident before the film’s conclusion, causing us to relate to Bale’s confusion of the things he sees. If this film explained the reason for his insomnia from the start, the film would fail to be intriguingly suspenseful since we already know what he has forgotten as we’re impatiently waiting for is for him to remember. It’d be like if a Hitchcock film or “Twilight Zone” episode started with the twist ending before the story unfolds, it would lose all the suspense and wonder.

Nolan’s remake of "Insomnia" is very straight forward where it’s not the mystery that’s the focus. The focus is how the main character Detective Will Dormer (Al Pacino) is caught between the crossroads unsure of where to turn as he’s driven into madness and guilt (just like Trevor at the end of "The Machinist" except his struggle with making the decision is happening constantly). During a pursuit for a murderer in the dark and foggy woods of Alaska, Will believing the man in the distance is the criminal he seeks shoots him only to discover that he had shot and killed his partner Detective Hap Eckhart (Martin Donovan). Unlike how Trevor just covers-up his involvement in the accident just because of his guilt, there is more at stake involving Will's actions. The man he killed wasn't some ordinary detective he was partnered-up with. Hap was going to testify against him at an investigation conducted by Internal Affairs for convicting criminals by using questionable evidence as soon as his current case is over. Will knows that Hap's testimony will undo all his work and credibility as a detective and should anybody know that he's the man responsible for his death, his involvement would look suspicious. After pinning his crime on the man they were hunting down, Will feels guilt for his crime, but also fear if anybody should find out what really happened. And for staying in an environment where the sun is always shining during a certain time of year, insomnia starts to take a great effect on him.

From not being able to sleep, Will gains a cranky attitude by lashing out irrationally at people during the investigation including his superiors. While having the energy to have sudden outburst at people, Will still feels weak from his insomnia where he doesn't contain the stamina nor the strength when being required to take physical action in his job. Making things more difficult for Will when trying to finish this case is his lack of focus. For not feeling as awake or active before the death of Hap, he has trouble acknowledging the dangers in his surroundings that nearly get him or others killed. There are times where he'll hallucinate things he fears that bring him deeper to his insanity of guilt. He tries to keep himself awake by chewing gum, but no matter how hard he tries he can't break free from his insomnia. It becomes insufferable to the point where a dark room that has little light becomes too bright for him causing him to blockade the windows with everything he has.

Trevor struggles with Insomnia are much worse than what Will has to grow through. Unlike how Will's Insomnia lasted for the last couple of days in his life (though is still strongly felt through Nolan's intense direction), Trevor's lasts him a whole entire year. After being awake for such a long period time and still not being able to get any sleep, his body becomes abnormally thin, making him resemble a walking skeleton for pale and bony his body appears. For losing his mind over the accident and the fact he can't sleep, he develops some strange habits like washing his hands with bleach and writing himself notes on the refrigerator to remind himself to do simple things.

What drives Trevor into pure insanity that harms himself and the people around him (just like Will) are his hallucinations. Through his insomnia he was able to repress his memories of the accident, but his sub-conscience refuses to let him completely forget about it by having his hallucination tying into the accident take the form of people we see him meet and greet for the first time. The Mother for example is imagined as a waitress named Maria (Aitana Sánchez-Gijón) at an airport diner he usually hangs at with a son resembling the boy he killed. But the figment in Trevor's imagination who is always following him is a carefree punk named Ivan (John Sharian), representing the dark side of Trevor for his accident. Due to Ivan's presence, Trevor (unknown that he isn't real) being so focused on figuring out who he is, and why he's suddenly part of his life causes to him to go into a violent rage for whenever he feels comfort and content with his surroundings. By focusing on Ivan at his job for never seeing him working in the building before, he accidentally causes one of his co-workers to lose his arm when fixing a piece of machinery. But after he and his co-worker bury the hatchet, when Trevor almost gets killed by one of the machines at work he believes one of his-coworkers did it as revenge after showing great disgust for his accident, and starts angrily assaulting the workers and his manager, which gets him fired. After finding peace by given the opportunity to live with a prostitute named Stevie (Jennifer Jason Leigh) who he knows will lead him to happiness for how the two share a personal connection outside of just having sex, and is willing to end her career now that she find someone she can settle down, Ivan comes back to haunt him. Only rather than appearing in front-of him, Trevor only sees his boots and a framed picture of him fishing, leading to him to furiously snap at her believing that she was part of his game of Cat-and-Mouse, consequently losing her forever by getting kicked-out of her apartment. Unless Trevor finally turns himself to the authorities, Ivan will go on taunting him for the rest of his life serving as his punishment that may even lead to suicide since at one point in the movie he nearly kills himself in order to report him to the DMV so he can find information on him.

Serving as Will's punishment isn't someone from his imagination but is the criminal he's been tracking down. The man responsible for the murder is an author who writes crime stories Walter Finch (Robin Williams). Much like Ivan, Walter serves as a reflection of Will's inner-demons for the crime he covered-up. Like Will, Walter was a good man who simply wanted to comfort the teenage girl Kay after finding out that her abusive boyfriend Randy (Jonathan Jackson) was cheating on her. When Walter kisses her, she starts laughing at him due to her intoxication from alcohol and doesn't stop. Feeling he’s being disrespected, he beats her, feeling she will respect him the same way she respects Randy through this treatment, only to find himself killing her, therefore hiding the evidence to cover up his accident. Now that Will knows who he is, Walter plans to partner up with Will by framing the murder on Randy because of his abusive nature, rationalizing this act of fraud by saving the life of a person he will eventually kill from his brutality. Will finds the whole act to be immoral, but with Walter witnessing his murder in the fog and having tape recorded evidence of him confessing his crime to him, he'd rather aid a criminal to keep his reputation than to see his life’s work go to waste. His participation in keeping his crime a secret only adds to his guilt than it does relieve him from it. The more time he helps and speaks to Walter, the more he realizes that he is no different to him. With Walter planting evidence to have an innocent man behind bars, Will's memory of framing a man who he believes killed a boy comes back to haunt his recollection. Learning that Walter committed a crime similar to his that brings him to a state of insomnia, hearing how he was able to see him commit his murder through the fog, and how he enjoyed killing the girl after it was over; a confused Will is unsure if murdering Hap was really an accident or not. It becomes clear that Walter is the dark side of Will that he refuses to accept, who in the end both get shot at the same time when firing their guns at each other. Will is given only a few moments of redemption by making sure a young local detective doesn't hide the evidence of his crime before finally getting the sleep he needs that's guaranteed not to wake him up.

Despite both films having opposite narratives and contain a different style when it comes to creating atmosphere (despite both looking dark), they share as much in common as “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari” and “The Most Dangerous Game”.  They both have character's suffering from insomnia through guilt, having an antagonist reflecting the main character who shadows them to almost no end, and showing the characters struggles with insomnia in a matter so intense that you'll be dying to sleep once these films are over. They're both top notch thrillers that deserve to be seen. You'll get to see Nolan succeed at creating a modern Hitchcock film, and witness one of Bale's most powerful performances in his career.