We DESERVE a Problem Child/Child’s Play Crossover!

A Problem Child/Child’s Play crossover movie was proposed in the early ’90s … and could STILL happen, with a little creativity.

Junior versus Chucky makes WAY too much sense — and it’s STILL not too late to get that Problem Child/Child’s Play crossover movie!

A Problem Child/Child’s Play crossover is one of those brilliant, can’t lose ideas that seems like it should’ve happened 30 years ago. And it could have happened, if the suits at Universal Studios  actually wanted to make money and give audiences something they actually wanted to see at the cineplex.

Problem Child writers Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski recently announced that they at least pitched the idea to Universal back in ‘90s — which, of course, never came to fruition. Karaszewski later went on social media and added a few details regarding the movie-that-never-was, indicating that it probably would’ve been an Abbott and Costello Meets Frankenstein screwball comedy. He also said he would’ve preferred it be “unrated,” but we’re pretty sure that’s a joke … or maybe not, considering Problem Child 2 initially received an R rating from the MPAA.

Explaining why fusing the two franchises together is a phenomenal idea is self-evident. Both properties were owned by Universal and they were kinda like inverse movies; one was a movie about a killer doll terrorizing an innocent child while the other was about a borderline-sociopathic child making life a living hell for virtually everybody he comes into contact to. I mean, they main characters from the movies — with their flaming red hair — already sorta resemble one another; it wouldn’t take much of a leap of imagination to retroactively consider the Problem Child movies to be an unofficial prequel to the Child’s Play movies. Let’s face it — Junior Healy turning into Charles Lee Ray as an adult is MORE than believable.

Yeah, there might be a few thematic issues to tackle. As risqué as the Problem Child movies may be, Junior never kills anybody, while the Child’s Play movies are literally about a murderous toy who stacks up bodies like he’s playing Jenga with corpses. That’s the big stumbling block to what would otherwise be a super-obvious crossover event picture.

OK, so maybe it’s a little understandable why Universal didn’t push forward with the concept. One’s a hard PG-13 comedy franchise and the other is a hard R horror franchise (even though the latter would turn into more of an absurdist, dark comedy franchise as time dragged on.) It’s a tremendous concept … if only somebody could figure out those pesky issues of tone and making the crossover itself make any sense.

So here’s my attempt to get this thing in order. 

As we all know, Chucky spent the first three movies trying to find a kid to possess. The first two movies were focused on Andy Barclay, who isn’t exactly the most intimidating of characters. Part three introduced the sudden lore that Chucky could only possess the first person he told his secret identity to, which is a major canonical stumbling block for anybody trying to get the crossover in motion. So probably the easiest workaround is to set the movie after the second Child’s Play movie but before part three. Which is still breaking the canonical rules, but come on, like we’ve ever been sticklers for consistency in horror franchise logic.

The story line would be as simple as it gets. Somehow, someway Junior comes in possession of Chucky and Chucky, naturally, eyes Junior as his next vessel for possession. The difference, of course, is that Junior is no traumatized pushover like Andy — indeed, he’s an elementary school terrorist whose wanton love of chaos and destruction almost puts Chucky’s to shame. 

And in that, we’ve got the nucleus of our movie. A whole bunch of destructive incidents go down, to the point they start turning into outright murders. And instead of identifying Chucky as the killer, of course everybody thinks the deadly handiwork belongs to Junior. 

From there, it’s sort of a cat and mouse game, with Junior trying really hard to convince everybody that a.) he isn’t the serial murderer and b.) that this evil, sentient doll is the real culprit. And keep in mind, the Problem Child cast includes such heavy hitters as Jon Ritter, Gilbert Gottfried and Jack Warden. Can you imagine Brad Douriff getting a chance to go toe to toe with any of those three guys? Especially Ritter … imagine HIM doing a scene alongside the infamous Good Guy doll!

Heck, we could even get an extended cameo from Michael Richards, who was already playing a Charles Lee Ray-like character in the first Problem Child movie. The possibilities are practically endless there.

So yeah, the ship has sailed on Problem Child’s Play, for obvious reason. The kid who played Junior is almost 50 now and virtually all of the supporting cast from the Problem Child movies have been dead for a really, really long time. There would have to be a LOT of recasting to make a live-action movie work, which got me thinking: wouldn’t it make more sense for the proverbial crossover movie to be animated instead?

It’s not as absurd as it sounds. After all, there was a Problem Child cartoon for a couple of seasons, and the Child’s Play movies are so heavily dependent on voice acting performances already. There would be a few hoops to clear here and there, but it’s the best way of making the high-concept material work in the modern day. I mean, we’ve already gotten animated versions of Night of the Living Dead and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, so why not use the format to make an all-new, franchise-blending original movie?

Sure, it’s not as rewarding as getting a REAL Problem Child/Child’s Play movie circa 1993 or so, but it’s not a bad compromise, either. Some ideas are just too good to leave behind forever — and Problem Child’s Play is definitely one of them.