C.H.U.D.

Director: Douglas CheekCast: John Heard, Daniel Stern, Christopher Curry, Kim Greist, Laure Mattos, Brenda Currin, Justin Hall, Michael O'Hare, Cordis Heard.Running Time: 88 minutesRated R for language, violence, and gore.One of the opening images in the supremely cliched "C.H.U.D" (which stands for Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers) is a full-on shot of a truck banner reading "Slow Moving Vehicle." That's the most valid image in the whole film. Under Manhattan, mysterious creatures terrorize the homeless who live in the sewers, and begin striking those who walk the streets as well. When one disappearance involves a precinct captain's wife, the captain starts investigating the situation by asking around a neighborhood soup kitchen. The captain, Bosch, is played by Christopher Curry, a here-and-gone Martin Mull lookalike whose casual handling of his wife's disappearance would come off as absurd if we hadn't previously gotten a load of what she looks like. While Curry is the main actor, two better-known names have key supporting roles, Daniel Stern as the grimy soup kitchen director (only the destitute would accept a meal from him) and John Heard as a photographer. Heard's character has little to do with the story, and the way he's brought in is lazy and forced. He has some photos of streetpeople, and one homeless woman calls him for bail. He takes a photo of a gored leg that shows something sinister is going on, though all I saw was bad make-up. Through most of the film, we see him blow off deadlines and interact unaffectionately with his live-in girlfriend, played by Kim Griest. Heard here is smug and charmless, wasting away as "C.H.U.D." decomposes before the very eyes of the audience.Sewer creatures rising up in the big city is not a bad concept, but not only does the film fail to do anything with it, the audience get a lot of inert moments where people trade cliché-ridden dialogue and ridiculous characterization. There's a stonewalling government official played by George Martin who bulges his eyes and sneers at every question and gives us an obvious central villain since the budget is too cheap to show us much of the monsters. The creatures are meant to horrify but merely look like inept Halloween window displays, while the unbearable synthesized score sounds like a seven-year-old toying with a department-store display organ. The whole movie is like that, jumping from effect to effect, hitting us with little shock moments here and there, not tying anything in. This is not scary, just annoying. "C.H.U.D" gets mentioned as an askew satire, but just isn't in the same class as "Tremors" or "Return of the Living Dead," let alone an "Evil Dead film". To recite another cliché: You have been warned.9 people found this helpfulHelpful

Can't lie: I just finished watching this movie for what is probably the 10th time, spread out over the years, and each time, I understand it a little better. With a very limited budget ( these are not sets but actual sewer and subway scenes), the Director has given us a dirty , grimy, REAL NYC of the 80s, where it is almost perpetually night, and when it is day, they are under the subways and sewers where it is even darker. The streets where the main protagonists of the movie live, have a "life" of their own, with a barren desolate look that inspires nothing but creepiness.This movie absolutely requires multiple viewings: reason is, that there are a multitude of seemingly unconnected plots going on here: The Fashion photographer and his hot model live in gal, The Police Captain, Bosch, the supposed NRC head honcho and main villain; plus Daniel Stern in a fantastic performance as an equally gritty and dirty "reverend" who runs a soup kitchen, the weird underground people who come up to eat at his soup kitchen, and also a nosy reporter who is trying to make sense of it all. Trust me: when you finish the movie, and again, it may require several viewings, you will see that everything totally ties in together, as their paths cross to the extent that they get closer and closer, literally and figuratively.and then there are the monsters, but are they "monsters" ? Or are they really victims of an insidious government cover up! Yeah, it's men in suits, but they still look pretty scary and they are no joke. And all of this happens with a sense of urgency that builds up and up until maybe halfway through the movie, it has you on the edge of your seat as it all comes together.Anyone who is a fan of the "so bad it's good", this is a must see film...and in this case, the more you watch it and grasp the full plot and logic of it all, the more you will not think of it in the "bad" category.

CHUD is in my top five movies of all time. I saw it at a very young age and it has been giving me recurring (but sort of fun) nightmares for the last thirty years. I think the monsters came out pretty creepy and the sewer filming locations are so spooky. There is some very nostalgic mood and imagery associated from 1980s New York... a 'gritiness' and grungy old school flavor, and this film (along with Wolfen and The Warriors a few years earlier) captures it perfectly. The music is incredibly unique and unsettling. Some parts may have been considered 'cheesy' or 'low-budget', but people need to understand that over long periods of time these things can take on a different artistic effect than intended- in a really great way. Like how some records come out and aren't appreciated until decades later. The imperfections make it more unusual and frightening, if not fascinating. All the filmmakers and actors should take a lot of pride and credit for this film. There is nothing like it and never will be. It comes from a magical era in film. Modern CGI makes horror films fail the test of time in my opinion. CHUD is old school- the 'analog' make-up effects hold up, and the film shows *just enough* of the creatures to leave the rest to your imagination (the scariest thing about a horror film, in my opinion).

Often, reminiscing about experiences from your past brings more satisfaction than indulging in full nostalgia; nothing ever seems as good as we remember. This is exactly *not* the case, as this movie is every bit as fun and enjoyable as the first time I saw it as a child in the 1980's. It does everything a good monster movie should do, from plot development, character writing, dialogue and practical effects. Everyone should own a copy of this movie. It's too good to be a cult hit and deserves a place in movie history as one of the greatest ever made!

Perfect!!!!

C.H.U.D. (Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller), es una cinta de monstruos serie B, ochentera, que con el paso de los años se ha vuelto un clásico, es muy poco conocida, pero es de esas películas que hacían en los 80’s que aún hoy en día resultan un agrado al mirarlas.Protagonizada por John Heard y Daniel Stern (años antes de su colaboración en Home Alone 1 & 2), y también tenemos a un joven John Goodman en su primera -y breve- actuación.La cinta trata de un grupo de monstruos canibales que viven bajo la ciudad de Manhattan, y mientras los ciudadanos van desapareciendo uno por uno, es labor de un par de ciudadanos averiguar qué está pasando y porque esos monstruos no quieren quedarse más ocultos.El Blu-ray de Arrow es una belleza, incluye 2 discos Blu-ray: uno con la película en su edición integral de 96 min., y otro con su edición de cine de 88 min., ademas de toneladas de material extra.Sin embargo, esta re edición que aún incluye el Disco 2 (exclusivo edición limitando) ya no trae consigo el booklet que especifica en la contra portada.El Blu-ray tiene audio en inglés y subtítulo en inglés.NO contiene audio ni subtítulo en español.

Il aurait pu être bon. Il avait tout : un bon sujet, un acteur énergique et charismatique avec déjà un certain statut ( John Heard, "La Féline" ) et rien que ces deux éléments annonçaient une intrigue qui promettait un déroulement rythmé avec tous les clichés délicieux propres à un genre de ciné que de nombreux cinéphiles adorent, la série B.Seulement voilà : tout manquera. Malgré des images d'un réalisme saisissant, presque de documentaire ( La scène d'ouverture avec l'engin de nettoyage ), mais après un début trop prévisible et peu efficace, le scénario s'enlise vite suite à la présentation des personnages, préférant blablater et piétiner plutôt que d'aller droit au but en faisant preuve du rythme attendu qui aurait permis de présenter deux vraies séquences chocs supplémentaires entre les deux seules fois où le spectateur aura droit à l'apparition du mutant très mal conçu, ( Le comédien vêtu de la combinaison en caoutchouc de " La créature du lac noir " était nettement plus convaincant ) sans d'ailleurs le moindre véritable effort justement de conception, fait scandaleux si on considère l'époque et ses grands artistes du genre. Mais me direz-vous, budget oblige... Sauf que l'ingéniosité n'est pas dans le porte feuille, et bons nombres de navets de cette époque valent leur pesant de pop-corn justement grâce à elle. C'est sûr que les moyens de se payer Rick Baker, Carlo Rambaldi ou Rob Bottin pour les SFX ne devaient pas être alloués ici, ( Carl Fullerton l'aurait peut-être fait ) mais il n'y a pas que ça : on ne voit rien dans C.H.U.D. Il n'y a rien, point final. Il faudra attendre passer la première demi-heure pour voir deux secondes chrono en main cette créature de poubelle ( La scène de la cabine téléphonique ) qui ne fait même pas peur, pour sombrer à nouveau dans l'insuffisance scénaristique et la voir surgir à nouveau pendant, de même, deux secondes ( La scène de l'enlèvement du SDF dans les égoùts ). Pas la moindre scène gore ( Enfin si, celle de la douche, et on se demande pourquoi ), et un final des plus rébarbatif et bâclé, refusant toutes nouvelles idées. Dommage. Je suis un fan de petits films. C.H.U.D est mauvais.

Sorti en 1984, C.H.U.D. montre une fois de plus qu'avec un petit budget et de l'inspiration, il est tout à fait possible de tourner une œuvre solide et réussie.Annonçant avec trois ans d'avance le style urbain d'un Street Trash et possédant une connotation sociale inédite dans le cinéma d'horreur - le monde sordide des bas-fonds new-yorkais, avec son lot de paumés et de clochards - C.H.U.D. privilégie l'atmosphère et le réalisme, sans oublier pour autant quelques scènes sanglantes. Le résultat est plus que réussi. Que faire face à des politiciens corrompus, prêts à sacrifier des vies humaines pour étouffer un dossier écologique scandaleux ...Je vous recommande vivement de visionner ce film d'horreur, au charme typique des années 80, avec bien sûr quelques caractéristiques de série B (les humanoïdes cannibales !), mais très intéressant et réussi. C'est parti !

I had had the movie CHUD II for ages and thought I would like to try the original. I was disappointed it is no where near as good as the second film, But it is so bad it's good.