The Iconic Film Franchise CHILD'S PLAY Will Be Rebooted

....Whaaat??? Pinch me. With a pair of freakin' garden shears. This can't be.

Of course, this seems to be the trend these days with the likes of Halloween sort of having received that remake, and other films as of late getting the same treatment. However, the success rate of those remakes and reboots seems pretty slim when you look back. Albeit a couple or a few breakout hits that did the original proud and maybe even transcended the classic versions.

But CHILD'S PLAY? Chucky? Wanna Play, Wanna Play?

The controversy behind it isn't just surrounding the whole idea of the horror movie reboot, though. It turns out that Don Mancini, the franchise writer of the classic killer doll, actually intends to further the franchise with a TV series as well as continuing sequels (that's right, folks -- we're getting more of Brad Dourif and his antics as the psychotic Chucky doll).

Interestingly enough, you'd think there would be a bitter legal war here. However, while Mancini's CHILD'S PLAY projects get to work at Universal, it just so happens that the original brand itself actually began at MGM. That company still holds all the "remake rights."

That studio can, in fact, legally produce a completely new version of that first film if they like. And they are.

You Just Saw the First Look of the New Chucky Doll (Most Likely Not Voiced by Dourif)

The film's currently shooting in Vancouver, written by Tyler Burton Smith. With Aubrey Plaza and Brian Tyree on the stage of blood-soaked bodies left behind by an Osh-kosh-wearing plastic pal with a knife, you can expect this one to be a bit more "toned" down in terms of the B-horror shenanigans.

The question remains if that's a good thing. Chucky's a staple of crazy B-movie horror. After so many follow-ups, it got to the point that we almost wanted to root for the tiny ginger in tennis shoes, and we wanted to even giggle at his antics. It's almost looking like this version will try to even beat ANNABELLE at her own game.

What do you think? Smart move, or should the classic B-movie icons be left alone?

(Honestly that new Chucky doll does look a little ominous, right up my alley, nothing against Mr. Brad Dourif, of course.)

UPDATE: You can now watch the newly released trailer!

HEREDITARY Has Become a "Different" Kind of Hit on the Silver Screen

This isn't, of course, an isolated incident when a film somehow becomes a hit but is terribly eviscerated by none other than the audience! That's right: the very audience that would go see a film and make a studio tons of money ends up actually not liking it. One of those situations where the pure marketing and the critical acclaim puts the butts in seats, but those butts don't like being in the seats at all once they're well into the movie -- which that film is HEREDITARY.

HEREDITARY Made An Amazing $13MM Over the Weekend, But....

We know what you're thinking (*cough cough* Infinity War, Star Wars, blah blah). $13MM isn't a whole lot to scream about until you realize that the film only cost a measly $10MM to make. After one weekend in theaters, and a film already makes a profit, theoretically that makes the film a hit.

And honestly it has every right to be with a remarkable 92% score on ROTTEN TOMATOES. Word of mouth, people. Word of mouth.

That's not what kills me about this story, though.... Want to know what the audience CINEMASCORE is? That other score detailing how the audience reacted to the film, typically tending to be much higher than what the critics would rave and judge. Such as TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT (all you die-hard Hasbro fans) and maybe even JURASSIC WORLD. We love a good tentpole film even when the film generally sucks and perhaps doesn't have much of a chance for an Oscar or Golden Globe.

Heck, even the more artsy films out there -- while not as "tentpole-ish" -- generally rub some movie-goers the right way, but also won't blow up the box office. Money made doesn't necessarily mean audience satisfaction, people.

It seems, though, that the horror genre has hit a note for critical acclaim but with some loss for appeal.

So You Want to Know What Audiences Thought of HEREDITARY?

Cinemascore currently has it at a sad D+ rating. Wow. And yet this is a film already hailed as a hit.

Consequently, as we've seen before, this isn't isolated. Remember that Jennifer Lawrence flick "MOTHER!"? Repugnant. Controversial. But genius. We saw the same with the moody horror film THE WITCH, which while it ravished critics with a stunning performance ended up only mildly tantalizing audiences with a C- rating on Cinemascore.

....HEREDITARY might actually be the worst great horror film of all time.

CATCH THE TRAILER RIGHT HERE.

Do we like this trend happening right now? Do we like more controversial break-out horror that doesn't necessarily appeal to the masses? Or do we like the dumb, cheap, fun jump-scares more?

Will the Latest Cinema Nostalgia Trend Prove Profitable for the Horror Genre? Ask Jamie Lee Curtis!

You have to admit that part of what makes a horror icon are the actors themselves. Simple as that. Well, maybe except for hooded or masked figures, because as long as the actor knows how to walk "menacingly" or deliberately while holding some sort of sharp object, the effect's definitely doable. More importantly, what makes that horror icon shine happens to be the protagonist -- Nancy Thompson of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, Ellen Ripley of ALIEN, Sarah Connor of THE TERMINATOR. They are the beacons.

And We Can't Help But Say the Same for One Other Iconic Scream Queen: Laurie Strode, of Course Played By None Other Than....

Jamie Lee Curtis!

Returning to the role that made her the phenomenon she's always been to this day. Of course, I can't help but think that this is a trend we've been seeing quite often: Harrison Ford returning for THE FORCE AWAKENS and BLADE RUNNER 2049, Mark Hamill for THE LAST JEDI, Sylvester Stallone for the remarkably well done CREED.

And the trend isn't really the same as, well, they're coming back after maybe five years. No, they're coming back after freaking decades of not touching the material of the roles they made so popular back then. It accounts for a lot of remembrance and backstory, making the roles that much richer to experience. I think that's honestly one of the reasons why these films ended up doing so well (with the slight exception of BLADE RUNNER 2049, although a true masterpiece in my opinion).

How is this trend different than your average "sequel"? Laurie Strode is not the same person we saw at the very latest back in 2002 when HALLOWEEN: RESURRECTION came out. In fact, this Laurie Strode for the newest film tackled by horror studio Blumhouse will be a true-to-form return, an actual sequel to the original film.

In other words, the other films you may remember? -- They're, for lack of a better term, "de-canonized" from the cinematic universe (especially, if you remember, Laurie Strode ended up dying in the 2002 film! That, and Resurrection kind of sucked testicles.).

Blumhouse's take on this will hit theaters on October 19, 2018, and they just wrapped on the filming. Jamie Lee Curtis had mentioned on Instagram that the newest film will make everyone "very happy and VERY scared."

This Bit of Horror News Is Crucial For a Lot of Reasons:

The truth is those Halloween movies declined gradually over the years. H20 probably held onto the icon a bit more, but after that Michael Myers ended up being nothing more than a disturbed man wearing an old William Shatner mask. The feel just wasn't there anymore.

The honest truth is that's largely the case for a lot of horror films. As they release those sequels, the brand loses luster. Remember what I called it: sequelitis? The bane of all horror films. Even horror remakes aren't impervious to the suck factor....

However, perhaps this new trend we've been seeing will be just the right kind of fresh air tainted with the smell of coppery blood that'll nourish those brands in the correct way. You have to remember what we'll be dealing with come October: this is Blumhouse, man; and the true Laurie Strode, back in the game -- but in a way that's not "shoehorned" in -- and anchoring the brand and the story in a way that Han Solo and Luke Skywalker anchored episodes 7 and 8 for Star Wars.

Who Knows: You Think We May End Up Seeing Robert Englund Bring the Claws Back for Freddy Krueger? Or Maybe Heather Langenkamp in her '50s?

Should we remind you that Linda Hamilton will be returning to her iconic role of Sarah Connor, too?? Along with the true director of the machines, Mr. James Cameron? Are we convinced now that this nostalgic universal trend of actors returning to their roles from way back when has hit full force? Bring it. I think the horror genre will love it.