"...and that's when the C..H.U.D.'s got me"

Show of hands, who reading this really wanted to watch this when they were younger, but couldn't because the video store wouldn't rent it to you because it was Rated R? My guess is most of you. When VHS was still the king of kings in home entertainment, the horror section of the local video store (Video Villa 4 Life...) was the temple that most young boys worshiped. And why wouldn't we? Try finding random acts of violence in "Pretty Woman," or convincing severed heads in "Arthur 2: On the Rocks," or random boobs in "The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes." Oh sure, you might find a movie or two that has one, some might have two in them, but only a horror movie would have the holy trinity all in one package. And for a 14 year old boy, how else were you going to get your daily nutritional value of blood and boobs without watching a corny 80's horror movie (in the pre-internet world of course). Movies like "C.H.U.D." and the "Friday the 13th" series were not just fun pastimes for us back then, they were necessities. They were important coming of age moments for us, separating the time of boyhood into the blood-soaked time of manliness.

Unfortunately, even in these internet fueled times, a vast majority of the crap we would cram into our VCR's on Saturday nights with reckless abandon are still hard to find, and, on occasion, damn near impossible to find (Night of the Creeps would be gone forever if not for a few bootlegs flying around as we speak). Horror movies rarely get picked up as "classics" or even as slightly important, so we loose many older movies to the rigors of time, and the destruction of VCR's. Luckily for me, whomever is in charge of Netflix does a decent job of finding copies, even if they are old VHS versions, of some pretty terrible films. You can stream "The Stuff" on your computer, right now. Before this, you had to find a video store that had it, or luck into finding it at a garage sale (I still don't know how I have a copy of it on VHS, I just know it has a clam-shell case, as opposed to the cardboard ones you normally see. With this in mind, I present to you a scene.

Setting: Chris' brain, midnight.

We see Chris hunched over his wife's iPad, looking for something to watch on the Netflix app. His finger swipes with disdain for the library laid out before him.

Chris' Brain: "No Netflix elves, I don't want to watch "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas" nor "No Strings Attached". I have been using your services for years, haven't you figured out what type of movies I would like to watch at midnight on a work night?

Netflix: Hey Chris. maybe you would be interested in C.H.U.D.?

Chris' Brain: How are you talking?

Netflix: I'm not.

Chris's Brain: Damn right you're not. Anyway C.H.U.D. sounds great! I have always wanted to see that one, but never got around to it. I wonder if it will still be creepy when those little guys bursts out from the toilet.

Netflix: Um...that's not C.H.U.D.

Chris' Brain: Did I ask you Netflix?

Netflix: No sir.

Chris' Brain: Now make me a sandwich forthwith.

End Scene.

We worked for 6 months on that production. Really we are more like a family than coworkers.

Sooo, I remembered about 10 minutes into C.H.U.D. that this was not the movie where the furry tings jump out of crappers, that would be "Critters". I almost quit at that point to look for the poo balls, but decided to stick it out, because I'm a professional dammit. And I am not regretting that decision, however I do still need to find "Critters."

The movie stars Daniel Stern (Home Alone), John Heard (Home Alone...) and Christopher Curry (Home Alone 3...huh) and a metric ton of crazy lizard people. On a quiet New York block people seem to be going missing a lot more than the average amount that people tend to go missing, however no one really seems to be looking into this fact or really even to care about it. Eventually a soup kitchen owner (Stern) and a Cop (Curry) get to the bottom of it. Toxic waste is turning the homeless population into evil, shape shifting monsters of various height and strength. Oooohhh...

"C.H.U.D." is a hard movie to review, and I think that I will have to do it in two forms. The first is reviewing what was presented to me by the film itself. While 80's horror films are rarely --good-- they do tend to stay moderate in their production, In fact, it isn't until the mid-90's that we really see the low-budget horror films start to look like low budget horror films (bad acting, bad lighting, etc.). That said, "C.H.U.D." feels like one of those movies. The acting feels like it was made up on the spot (for reasons I will get into later) and the whole film feels like no one really knew what was supposed to be filmed before they actually started filming. Entire scenes will take place that have no relationship to the story itself, and some characters seem like they are there just to pad the story. From a special effect standpoint there isn't anything to complain about, the C.H.U.D.'s are well made, and look 80's scary. Of course the scariest monster in the world really wont do a whole lot if the story is disjointed and confused, and, truth be told, that is exactly what "C.H.U.D." brings to the table. In that regard it really isn't very good, and only shines thru once and a rare while.

On the other hand, when one learns of the backstory and the internal politics that went into making this movie, things get a little more impressive. The original story was written (very, very roughly) by Stern and Heard one night after they came up with the name "C.H.U.D." the quasi-script (think of the same sort of rough script a film like "This is Spinal Tap" would have used) was picked up for production and right away things were changed. This normally wouldn't be a thing, scripts are always changed, but the problem came when they kept Stern and Heard in the production line up. Changes were made to the tone, and the pacing and the monster design itself. In the end, very little of the original story remained and Stern and Heard got more than a little miffed at the whole situation and began a campaign of improvisation on the set (and believe me, as I mentioned prior it feels that way). They stacked the cast with friends and family and looked like they were really glaring at the camera almost all the time. I honestly think they were sabotaging the shoot at times.

So in the end you have a movie that, while not all that wonderful on the surface, feels fantastic if only for the sense of deviance watching Daniel Stern ham his way thru his performance worse than playing the crook in "Home Alone," or watching John Heard literally not give a crap in any scene he was in at at any given time. Or really just seeing every time a scene was put in and you just know it was put in via committee (woman sees dead dog in her basement, calls cops, takes shower).

I can't rightly recommend "C.H.U.D." because it really isn't all that good of a movie, however if you can manage to find a DVD copy of the movie with the commentary from Stearn and Heard, it is totally worth your time and the $4 you will probably have to drop on it. Throughout the whole movie they do nothing but bad mouth the director and the studio, and boo whenever injected scenes come up. To the director's credit, however, all of this is denied by the studio.

If you do decide to give it a go, watch for a young John Goodman playing a horny cop near the end and make sure to stay as far away from the sequel "C.H.U.D. 2: Bud the C.H.U.D." as you possibly can.

Rating: C-

Leave a Reply.