Child's Play 3 (1991)

Child's Play 3 (1991)

"Don't fuck with the Chuck!"

     It's generally a bad idea to produce a sequel to a film so fast that it comes out less than a year after the preceding film.  But that's just what David Kirschner, the producer of the Chucky series decided to do.  Now, it was going to be harder to do this one as Don Mancini, creator and writer of the films had used up most of his ideas in the first and second films.  And he had to write this new installment very quickly.  In case you've forgotten the end of the second film (and how could you, really...  it's the best ending in the whole series), Chucky's plastic is melted down in a big vat.  A vat big enough to make many many Chucky dolls.  Don Mancini's original plan was to have many Chuckys out there, as Charles Lee Ray's soul would have gone into the plastic of quite a few dolls. However, that just wasn't financially possible.  So sad, as that would have made a much better film.  Child's Play 3 is considered by most to be either the second worst or worst of the entire series.  And if you just count the original three films, most likely it'll be considered the worst.

     The plot to this one is set eight years after the last movie.  The Play Pals toy company is finally ready to reintroduce the Good Guys dolls.  Things have been quiet for eight years, after all.  The first made doll is given to the president of the company, who is killed that night by the doll, who is, unsurprisingly, Chucky.  This scene of the film is actually pretty good.  The president is in a luxurious penthouse with lots of toys and gadgets laying around.  And Chucky uses those to freak him out and eventually kill him.  With the president's computer, he finds out where good ole Andy is these days.  Andy has been in foster care for so long going from house to house that he ends up in military academy.  He's now 16 and is played by Justin Whalin, the guy who played Jimmy Olsen in Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman.  Anyway, Chucky has himself mailed to Andy in a package.  However, it's intercepted by the youngest cadet at the academy, Ronald Tyler.  He's the biggest mistake of the movie.  He's played by an actor that's about 11 years old, acts about 7 (he wanted the doll, after all), and is annoying as all hell believing Chucky is his friend and not believing Chucky's involved in the murders around him even after it talks to him.  (In a deleted scene only in the TV version, you learn he's 8 1/2.)  Andy would be getting along fine in military academy if it wasn't for Lieutenant Colonel Shelton.  A guy in his upper teens who bullies his cadets, especially Andy.  The climax of the film deals with the academy's annual war games.  Unbeknownst to the cadets, Chucky has replaced the paintball rounds with live ammo.  (I'm not sure how that works in real life.  lol)  Then there's a carnival, a big showdown, etc.  Don't ask me why a carnival was put beside a military academy or why the movie went there.  Even the writer, Don Mancini said it was a stupid idea.

    I'm not a big fan of this film.  It's got its moments of course.  There's death by trash compactor and Chucky's funny in some parts.  My favorite moment is when Chucky's about to kill the old Colonel, jumping out at him with the knife, and the guy dies right there of a friggin' heart attack!  

But mostly, the plot just isn't that great.  I mean, it's interesting having Andy in a military academy and Chucky still wanting to take over his body.  But so many people are horrible in this film, you just want to see them die.  And that's a first for the franchise, surprisingly.  Sadly the annoying kid doesn't die.  But man does everyone wish he did.  I think the film was shot in a military academy for budget issues as well.  With one place to film in, it cuts down on cost.  (Well, there's also the carnival I guess.)  The first two films were set in the city and required numerous locations.  I think here we have a board room, a penthouse, an academy, and the carnival.  That's it.  Also, the Chucky robot here is not as good, in my opinion.  Chucky's got kind of a fat face in this one, and more limited mobility in it.  Most critics back in the day said that Chucky's movements were the film's saving grace, but I just don't see it.  It's a step down from the second film.  He looks like a robot here.  A more evil cherub looking robot.  At least he's still voiced by Brad Dourif.  He's the only returning actor for the third film.

     The film would open on August 30, 1991.  That's a little under nine months after the second film.  I do give the film props for being written, produced, and post-produced in that amount of time and the film not being completely horrible.  One of the ways this was accomplished was by having a TV director, Jack Bender, direct the film.  He'd done TV shows from back in 1977.  Things like Eight is Enough, Falcon Crest, Fame, and The Paper Chase.   He still directs now.  He was a executive producer and was the lead director for Lost.  He's also directed episodes of Game of Thrones, Alias, Felicity, The Sopranos, Under the Dome, and The Last Ship.  All that despite directing this pretty lame film.  The critics didn't like this one either.  It's got a 23% on Rotten Tomatoes and I don't think Siskel and Ebert even reviewed it.  The movie also only made just under $15 million in the United States, which is a little over half what the second film did.  With the budget being estimated at being around $13 million, it just broke even.  

     Sadly, the movie is mostly known for being supposedly implicated in the murder of 2 year old James Bulger in February of 1993 in England.  Two ten year old boys stole the 2 year old from a mall when his mom wasn't looking, taking him by the hand and taking him 2 1/2 miles away.  Then they pushed him to the ground and threw a can of spray paint in his face.  They took him farther along and tortured him, stomping on him and kicking him and threw heavy things at him.  The boy was killed and they laid him across a train track hoping a train would run the body over and make it look like an accident.  The train part did happen, but the boys weren't counting on CCTV in the mall from earlier when they thought it'd look like an accident.  Days later the boys were apprehended.  They had blue paint on their clothes and blood on their shoes.  Blood that DNA matched to Bulger's.  The kids were convicted and became the youngest convicted murderers of the 20th century.

Now, what does this have to do with Child's Play 3, you ask?  Officially nothing.  But you have to realize something about UK newspapers first.  UK newspapers are like the supermarket tabloids are here.   They can print anything they want and a lot of the time it's not true.  See, the trial judge in the case stated that he thought violent videos may have been to blame and the UK papers got their scapegoat.  After all, 10 year olds don't kill, do they?  Jon Venables' father had rented Child's Play 3 not long before the murder.  There's no evidence that Jon watched the film, but that hasn't ever mattered to social crusaders.  See, there's a scene in the film where blue paint gets splashed on someone.  Apparently since blue paint was used in the crime, that meant the film had to be where the kids got the idea from.  (Yes, outside the BBC, the UK press is just as idiotic as America's.)  Even with the police inspector on the case, the Minister of State at the Home Office, and the detective from the case saying they found no evidence the film was linked to the murder, people still know the film for it to this day.  The murder of Suzanne Capper was also used by the press in an attempted link to the film.  Investigators on that case also deny it.

So there you have it.  A film only talked about today because of idiotic papers in the UK.  They sure do love their moral panics, just like us.

This film ended the Child's Play series.  It'd been worn out.  Or at least, it was supposed to be the end.  Later on in the late 90s, Don Mancini would bring the series back, but as a comedy-horror series very different from the first 3 films.