At an exclusive boys' school, a new gym teacher is drawn into a feud between two older instructors, and he discovers that everything at the school is not quite as staid, tranquil and harmless as it seems.
Mrs. Voorhees is dead, and Camp Crystal Lake is shut down, but a camp next to the infamous place is stalked by an unknown assailant. Is it Mrs. Voorhees' son Jason, who did not really drown in the lake some 30 years before?
Funny short documentary asking 'what does gay mean'? Children and young people aged 4-22 years explain how the term gay is used in every day language, identifying the meanings of fun, ... See full summary »
Andy Barclay has been placed in a foster home after the tragic events of the first film, since his mother was committed. In an attempt to save their reputation, the manufacturers of Chucky reconstruct the killer doll, to prove to the public that nothing was wrong with it in the first place. In doing so, they also bring the soul of serial killer Charles Lee Ray back to life. As Chucky tries to locate Andy, the body count rises. Will Andy be able to escape, or will Chucky succeed in possessing his body? Written by
According to commentary by writer Don Mancini on the DVD of the first film, the reason the rest of the "Child's Play" films are released by Universal instead of MGM/UA (despite the first film being highly successful for them), was that United Artists was about to be bought out by a company that wanted to abstain to a "family friendly" slate of films. The property was then gladly sold to Universal. Ironically, Qintex, the company that made the bid to purchase United Artists, dropped the deal not long after the film set up shop somewhere else. See more »
When Chucky is being reconstructed and when the other dolls are made, you an see their legs are hard plastic or rubber, like a G.I. Joe action figure. However various times throughout the movie, when the doll is moved, its legs hang limp and swing like a rag doll. See more »
Come on, Andy. We've got to get out of the building.
[walks down stairwell with Andy before noticing Kyle]
Kyle? You did this didn't you?
[points to fire alarm]
He did it.
[gestures to Chucky]
Get into my office. Is this your idea of a joke?
[everyone stares at Chucky]
Oh, give me that!
Amazing isn't it?
[...] See more »
After the success of the Child's Play (1988), writer and creator Don Mancini knew that a sequel would be on its way. And of course, the smart thing to do would be to continue the story from the first movie. And for the most part, the sequel stays faithful to the story line. It does have a few areas that need to be addressed but all around it pretty much matches its parent. After the torturous event of Charles Lee Ray (The Lakeshore Strangler) attacking the Barclay home, it was time to move on. Sadly things didn't get better for Andy Barclay.
Andy's mother is sent to a psych ward for help and Andy is put into a foster home. Making matters worse, is the Good Guy Doll company somehow acquired the burnt dismembered parts of Chucky and decided to clean him off and put him back together. Unbeknownst to them, once re-assembled, Chucky comes back to life and begins his rampage of violence to find Andy again. And that's all there is to this. It is just another set up to have Chucky (voice by Brad Dourif) killing people to get to the boy that he told his secret to. Is it bad? No, it actually can hold its own as a good sequel.
The weakest area is Mr. Mancini's writing. For example, very few audiences are familiar with voodoo and it's never explained to why Chucky came back to life after being re-assembled. Was that apart of the voodoo spell? Besides, in the first movie, wasn't it shooting Chucky in the heart the only way to kill him? That's a big loophole. However, it's also forgivable because a lot of people like Chucky, so it's obvious a lot of people will not care too much. It's crazy though how similar this sequel is like Hellraiser II: Hellbound (1988).
The director of Hellbound was a crewmember for Hellraiser (1987) and then directed the sequel. Same goes for John Lafia, the director of this film. He too was apart of Child's Play (1988) and then went on to direct the sequel to this franchise. And both sequels are decent and have good continuity but suffer from weak reasoning for the logic behind the continuity. A very similar parallel that is interesting to think about.
As for actors, it's obvious that Brad Dourif is needed to play Chucky and his performance is always the best. Next is Alex Vincent whom fans should be happy to see because he's a key part of why Chucky exists and his performance is just as likable as he was from the first movie. Lastly is Christine Elise who plays another foster child named Kyle who befriends Andy. At a point she develops a strong will to fight and it's good that she wasn't written in as a scream and do nothing girl. But as for the rest of the cast, they aren't much to talk about. The foster parents and every other individual are the same. They don't believe a killer doll exists (and right fully so, IF this were a reality). Oh well, their loss.
The last couple of elements that viewers should enjoy is the cinematography by Stefan Czapsky and music. Unlike the first movie, which contained grittier and darker colors, this movie has brighter more elementary colors, which give something new for fans to look at. Plus, the music produced by upcoming composer at the time, Graeme Revell, did a much better job than the score from the first movie by Joe Renzetti. Here Revell actually uses an orchestra and not just synths. And, Revell even gives the Child's Play franchise a motif theme and some creepy tunes. A well developed horror score. Does it top its predecessor - no. Is it a good sequel - yes.
Like other horror sequels, it lacks clarification on logic but it still amounts to a decent sequel. The score has improved as well allowing to sound more like a horror film.
1 of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?