A mother gives her son a toy doll for his birthday, unaware of its more sinister nature.
I’ll never forget being terrified of the little red-headed, overall-wearing doll Chucky. Up until recently, I could not recall a line or the exact premise of the original 1988 “Child’s Play” so the other night I decided to watch it again. I was blown away by its sheer innovation and how much it held back on the horror. Written and created by Don Mancini, the reveal of Chucky takes about 45 minutes and it really pays off. In a pre-“Toy Story” world, I remember being terrified at the thought of a sinister doll coming to life to do their evil bidding. The franchise spawned many sequels but none came close to the original’s quality. Needless to say, I went into the new “Child’s Play” reboot with some high expectations.
In a cold opening commercial, the new Buddi dolls are introduced as a dual smart device and companion-in-one for a child. They are befitting with Alexa-like functions and sporting a likeness akin to Donald Trump. Pitched by a well-placed Tim Matheson as the CEO of the Kaslan Corporation, Buddi will make your child’s life more convenient and has a learning capability that never seemed to be thoroughly questioned or contemplated. Stephen Hawking always proclaimed that mankind’s greatest potential threat is Artificial Intelligence, and hey, that guy was pretty smart! Similar to the original screenplay, a single mother, Karen (Aubrey Plaza) is working retail and of course is overworked and underpaid. Karen works at ZedMart, clearly a riff on Walmart, which is similarly a soul-crushing big box store. Desperate to connect with her son Andy (Gabriel Bateman), she keeps a refurbished Buddi doll, which has been returned by irate customers frustrated with its glitching voice and fiery red eyes. Unbeknownst to them, this particular model previously had its regulation settings turned off by an overworked factory employee in Vietnam. I really appreciate the message of exploited labor for the benefit of a Silicon Valley company’s wealth and power. Besides that intelligent somewhat meaningful message, I feel like the writers went through system errors and really dumbed down the screenplay. More frustrating lately is that I’m noticing a large pattern of Hollywood studios not having any faith in the average moviegoer’s intelligence. There have been so many peanut gallery comments and banter to tell us why a situation is humorous, absurd, or scary. It might have worked briefly in “Guardians of the Galaxy” but every major movie has had an unbearable amount of meta-commentary. It’s like all of our movies have a “reply guy” at the core, answering or educating when we really don’t need to be spoon-fed emotional exposition. I long for movies of the past where a scene would just play out and I would do the stimulating labor of figuring it out.
Chucky’s voice is an integral part and those are some big (technically really small) shoes to fill. Brad Dourif provided the original menacing yet darkly funny voice of Chucky. This time out, he is replaced by Mark Hamill who has previously done some memorable work as the Joker in the Batman animated features and video game appearances. Hamill’s performance is subdued with a languid affectation that is underwhelming and I really wished he would have hammed it up just a bit more. The supporting cast puts in some solid work with turns from Aubrey Plaza and Bryan Henry Tyree who, personally, has been nailing it with roles in “Atlanta,” “Widows,” and “White Boy Rick.” His husky frame and warm presence are much needed. One of the major fatal flaws is the cast of Andy’s friends. They are one-dimensional characters, shoehorned in for the purpose of banking on the nauseatingly popular “Stranger Things” playbook. I loved “The Goonies,” “Stand by Me,” and other Speilberg/Stephen King type stories of misanthropic teens going on unique adventures because they contained actual substance. The violence does take a while to ramp up, just like the original but when it comes, albeit gory fun, it’s not memorable and the deaths are instantly forgettable. In the 1988 version, every death and moment was filled with tension and dread, an important ingredient sorely missing.
I appreciate what “Child’s Play” was going for but the execution left much to be desired. Ultimately, the story is missing, replaced with a bunch of set pieces crudely strung together instead of a unified narrative. The fingerprints of the dreadful (pun intended) “It” producers are all over this similar misfire. Maybe the franchise doesn’t need an upgrade, maybe it’s best to go back to analog.
In theaters Friday, June 21st
