This Child’s Play is the reboot of the long running franchise, ignoring every movie to update the mythos to fit modern times (the original is from 1988). Instead of a serial killer transferring his soul to a doll, this Chucky comes to life because of a disgruntled factory worker. When he’s yelled at by his boss for not working fast enough, he turns off all of the safety and behavior protocols of the high-tech doll before it’s packaged up. The original Good Guy Doll was like Teddy Ruxpin, it only spoke a few sentences. Here, the doll is called Buddi and is a connected device built by a huge conglomerate. It can talk and control a slew of other products and has the processing power and AI capability to learn and better interact with its owner. When 13-year-old Andy is gifted the doll by his mom, the AI begins to learn the wrong lessons from the other kids in Andy’s apartment complex. The priority for Buddi dolls is to become best friends with its owner and Chucky takes it a step further, becoming Andy’s protector by killing people it thinks are threats.

M3GAN, which came out 2 years later and did much better at the box office, is more or less the same movie. Child’s Play is rated R, unlike M3GAN, so Chucky sticks to the old-school horror and on-screen killing roots.

While this reboot changes the origins of Chucky, it sticks closely to the original themes and viewpoints. Andy is the new kid in the neighborhood and is isolated and lonesome because of it (single child with only his mom). Getting Chucky is really cool–it’s the hot toy of the year until the new version is released–and Andy makes some friends because of it. When Chucky starts getting aggressive, Andy does his best to get a handle on it. When it gets worse, it turns into paranoia and even greater isolation because no adult believes that the toy is dangerous, not him. As Chucky kills more, the guilt and panic escalate.

I think this take is 50% successful in revitalizing the movie series because it keeps much of what works so well in the series and does enough to keep it fresh. Today, tech going wild is more believable than a voodoo spell. It looks very good, most of the SFX are excellent, and the cast and suspense are good too. The kills are also sufficiently creative and gory for the franchise.

There are a few problems that are hard to overlook. This tech approach does take away all of Chucky’s personality. It’s a robot. You can hear the servos working as the doll moves its limbs and turns its head to look at people. It has a blank expression as it ‘thinks.’ In the other films (and the terrific show), Chucky is Charles Lee Ray, a psychopath hiding in a doll. When sitting still, he has the perfect camouflage as a doll. A ticking bomb that no one knows is there. The body has become bone and flesh on the inside. When he moves, his face becomes much more animated and expressive. That’s absent in this movie. The scary factor of a sinister person setting up traps to kill those in his way to transfer his soul into Andy is gone. That’s a fate worse than death for Andy. That notion of human intelligence and deceit is missing from the villain as is Andy’s body and soul being taken over to become a killer. It’s less scary.

While the movie is well-directed and does look very good, two things about the production bother me. The big one is Chucky’s redesign. The Good Guy was designed to look similar to Cabbage Patch Kids dolls. A round cherub face with freckles and a mop of red hair. He’s cute, something kids would want to pick up and play with. For some reason, they sculpted the face to look like Gary Busey. This doll that is supposed to appeal to kids looks like an old man with jowls. I don’t understand how anyone approved it. The cheek lines around the mouth aren’t round, they’re divots that look like they were molded from the side of a dirt road. The face looks weathered so it never looks friendly. No kid would ever want it.

The series has always had the problem of switching from what is obviously an actual doll being carried around/sitting on a chair/lying still to an animated puppet. The face is clearly different between the two as the detail, size, and shape are different (we won’t get into the jarring moments when a person that is too tall is used as a stand-in because making a puppet run and not look ridiculous is damn near impossible). I’ve always assumed that it’s because the animatronics wouldn’t fit into the size of the doll head so changes were necessary (especially in the ’80s-’90s). In this movie, that change never happens from doll/puppet/CGI Chucky so at least he looks consistent. But gad zooks is he always ugly. And oddly enough, the facial animation isn’t that good either. The puppetry on the Chucky TV show is also better.

Finally, the lighting can get so gaudy that it makes the backgrounds look fake. It is so theatrical like a stage play, that any realism gets ruined. There are times when everyday environments, like the back of a store, look like a club in Ibiza. Why are there so many different colored spotlights all over the place? I was getting flashbacks to the lens flares in JJ Abram’s Star Trek movie it’s so distracting.

I do admire the effort that went into this reboot. I think they really tried to re-ground Child’s Play and some of it does work out well. The problem is that the Child’s Play movies that are done by creator Don Mancini are so good because it’s a specific continuous world of escalating madness that doesn’t take itself seriously. I have no idea how Mancini consistently comes up with the wild story ideas that actually work. Each entry starting with Bride of Chucky are fresh and entertaining movies that build on the premise of the original. And he’s continued that love with the Chucky TV show. There’s no reason to settle for a so-so Chucky.

This vampire movie was released in theatres a few months ago and was more or less ignored. I remember seeing lukewarm reviews for Renfield and that’s a shame because I thought it was a lot of fun to watch.

Renfield is Draculas’ familiar. He’s been the thankless servant for around a century, trapped in the cycle of luring food to his master, cleaning up after him, and relocating the entire operation when Dracula gets too bold in public. As a young man, he gave up everything when he thought the job would benefit his new family but it just led to devastation.

Now in the modern day, Renfield has relocated the Count to New Orleans after Dracula’s close encounter with sunlight. He needs dozens of “pure” people to drink to regain his health and power. Renfield is sick of this cycle and soon after moving to the city, he finds a co-dependency support group. When Dracula finds out about this, he is not pleased that Renfield wants to get away from him and be a better person. He decides to hide no longer, the end of running from city to city. It’s time for Dracula to take over the world by turning every human into a vampire. For Renfield, this means a massive escalation in everything he hates about this life.

While Renfield tries to figure out his own life, Rebecca is caught in her own trap. She’s followed her father into law enforcement and finds herself surrounded by either lazy or corrupt cops. She wants to follow the code, working for the community and taking out only bad guys. When she gets mixed up with a prominent crime family, she runs into Renfield and they become a team of awkward heroes.

In short order, you find yourself in a buddy cop action movie. It’s funny, it’s stupid, the action sequences are great and because it’s vampire based (Dracula doesn’t play games here) it is crazy violent. A few people literally explode on screen and it’s a wonder to behold. Forget huge shootouts, you have all out superhuman brawls with bullets and ripped off limbs flying around. If you liked Blade or Day Shift, you’ll likely dig this.

I’ve been a fan of Nicholas Hoult since the Skins days so I’m always keen to check out the projects he decides to sign up for. He’s pretty adorable as Renfield. He’s a good person at heart but he does horrible things because of his bondage to Dracula. While he did sign up for it, getting out of it is far from easy. It’s not a job that he can simply quit and walk away. I liked watching his redemption arc, the guy truly benefits from group therapy. Awkwafina is well cast as Rebecca– she plays well with Hoult. But…Nicolas Cage steals every scene as Dracula. He completely commits to the role and is awesome. He loves playing the bad guy and portrays a powerful and intimidating monster that always gets what he wants when he wants it very well. There are a few scenes where he has to act through some very heavy prosthetic make-up and it doesn’t hinder him at all.

If you’re in the mood for some fun, spend 90 minutes with Renfield.

From Sweden, with love, The Conference.

I more or less picked this at random when I saw it recommended on my Netflix account. A straightforward horror movie that looked good, so I gave it a shot.

The Conference is about a group of co-workers from a local municipality on a team building retreat at a camp in the woods. They have just completed a major real estate project proposal to build a mall and construction is about to start. Lina has recently returned from a leave of absence and during a meeting to finalize the paperwork, she notices that the contract has changed since she last saw it and her signature is on it. She never signed this paperwork. She starts asking questions and the politics of the group swing into motion. Some don’t care, some want to know more, and some say everything is fine and it’s time to celebrate their latest success.

While Lina has questions, someone else shows up with an ax to grind and starts killing the attendees one by one. This leads to a deeper dive into what’s been going on behind the scenes as the group gets smaller and the goal to survive becomes harder to accomplish.

It’s a little bit like watching The Office merged with Friday the 13th which works surprisingly well. I can’t imagine a big budget for this, but every dime can be seen on screen. Nothing about the movie looks cheap. The cast is great, the cinematography is terrific, great sets and the horror gags are largely very good. The one makeup effect that I consider the highlight is when one of the men runs into a wire trap in the woods that gives him a huge gash across his forehead. It looks gross, realistic, and painful. The actor really sells it as he frantically runs around for the remainder of the movie.

This was a nice palate cleanser. Nothing complicated, just a straight-shot plot of corporate subterfuge and revenge. Yeah, it doesn’t do anything new for the genre, but it hits all of the right beats that make for a good horror movie.

No One Will Save You is an interesting alien invasion flick. The biggest element that sets it apart is that there is no dialog. It’s a heck of a goal that is hard to pull off, to say the least. Writer and director Brian Duffield largely pulls it off because lead actor Kaitlyn Dever who plays Brynn is so good.

Brynn is a young woman who lives alone in a rather rural area. The main town she lives near appears to be small, with one main street where all of the businesses are located. Her house is all alone in the woods. Going by the few shots of her road, you can’t see another mailbox or driveway. So when things pop off, she’s not running to the neighbors for help…not that they would welcome her with open arms.

At the start of the movie, it’s made clear that something happened in Brynn’s past that’s made her a loner. When she goes into town to do some errands, she’s anxious about being in public. All the side glances and murmurs aimed her way make for a rather uncomfortable experience. It’s hard to tell what this could be about. She looks like the girl next door who wouldn’t say or do anything bad to anybody. The way the scene is presented made me wonder if her anxiety was making her overreact. Maybe she was being paranoid, thus noticing unrelated things and attributing it to everyone being wary of her.

There is a lot of great foreshadowing done at the very beginning that quickly comes into focus before the second act starts. The aforementioned anxiety and then there’s the odd circular mark burned into her front lawn. It looks like it’s from the sun or animal urine. She puts some water on it when she notices and goes about her day. When she returns to the safety of her home, she gets a visitor at night.

And that visitor is an alien from another planet. I’m talking classic Grey. Humanoid with two arms and legs, a big head, two large black eyes, nostrils, and a mouth. Skinny too. One of the best parts of this movie is the phenomenal introduction to these creatures. I thought they’d be hidden from view for longer, but it works well. It’s an encounter, the alien isn’t trying to hide so the worry goes quickly from “What is that outside?” to “That’s not human and it is in the house, right by the stairs!”

The visitor is aggressively curious and Brynn wants nothing to do with that. It has wild telekinesis powers too, so there is a scary difference in strength despite Brynn being similar in height (my man clearly does not lift). So she manages the fight or flight response and survives the night, which is a wild time. In the morning, she makes it back into town to get help at the police station and that’s when the next layer of Brynn’s past is peeled back.

The movie deftly moves between and intertwines the mystery of her conflicted past and the mystery and danger of the alien invasion. Brynn is truly alone battling for her mind and body for the entire movie and it’s a harrowing experience. She’s constantly being chased, even when an alien isn’t around.

The action scenes are done well, I frequently found myself wide-eyed in anticipation. Brynn is a smart character who does logical things. She doesn’t get in trouble because of boneheaded decisions that were written to create inorganic danger and tension. While the CGI is mostly excellent, the lighting of the creatures frequently doesn’t match the scenery, so it’s obvious they’re digital. There are also mannerisms–the way the aliens communicate–that came off as really goofy to me. I definitely laughed when no laughs were intended, so that knocks down the spooky factor a few pegs. The sound design is 100% fantastic though, which helped suspend my disbelief when the visuals didn’t.

I’m on the fence about the ending. I thought I’d settle one way or the other, but days later from seeing the credits, I’m still not sure. It doesn’t ruin the movie, but I was hoping for more. I don’t think it reaches the highs of the rest of the movie.

Totally Killer is another Blumhouse production with a wacky concept to send you off on a wild ride. 17-year-old Julia Hughes is the daughter of Pam and Blake, who were part of a group of friends in high school that survived the rampage of the “Sweet Sixteen Killer.” 35 years later, the killer comes back, killing Pam the same way as the previous victims, with 16 stab wounds with a knife. Julia is then attacked by the masked killer and is accidentally sent back in time to 1987 where she tries to stop the killer to save her mother’s life.

This movie wisely doesn’t take itself too seriously. It feels a lot like the original Scream as it references a lot of horror movies and it balances out the mayhem with the culture shock of a Gen Z girl being thrown into 1980s society. Since the crux of the movie is time travel and saving people in the future, there are a lot of Back to the Future vibes as well (which is referenced by Julia). The conceit of getting Julia back in time works well enough, but it is a scenario that you just need to go along with.

Julia is played by Kiernan Shipka, who I know best from Mad Men (Don Draper’s daughter). She’s terrific, playing the character just right as she goes from ordinary girl to heartbroken daughter, to fish-out-of-water heroine. She puts some serious work in as she tries to figure things out to keep everyone alive while often running for her life.

The killer is in the Ghostface archetype who more or less only hides in closets to ambush their victims. The deaths are very straightforward and simple, so nothing on the intensity scale of the Halloween or Friday the 13th franchises. It’s just above PG-13 in terms of gore content. The Sweet Sixteen Killer has a stupid costume and the amount of comedy far outweighs the horror, so I didn’t find this scary at all. Scream does that more effectively. That said, Totally Killer still does the genre justice. It works well as a who-is-it, like Scream, and the killer is a menacing and intimidating presence. The deaths are effective when they happen. The cast is great and I did get attached to a few of them. I think that comes from Julia interacting with all of these people she knows as adults as kids her age, so the character building is done much better here compared to many slasher movies.

I’ve mentioned Scream a lot, but this movie’s tone and presentation are most similar to Happy Death Day (which I’m a fan of. The sequel, not so much). The main characters even look so similar they could be confused as sisters. Totally Killer actually feels like alt-Happy Death Day, which was also produced by Blumhouse. I don’t mean that as a slight in any way, in fact, you could watch them as a double feature and have a great time.