Alright, grab your microwave popcorn and settle into that comfy armchair, because tonight we're dusting off a VHS tape that defied all expectations… mostly by ignoring them entirely. Remember the grimy, subterranean dread of 1984’s C.H.U.D.? Well, forget it. Toss it out the window. Because 1989 brought us C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud, a sequel so tonally different, so cheerfully bizarre, it feels less like a follow-up and more like a prank played on the original film’s legacy. And honestly? Sometimes, that’s exactly what you needed from a Friday night rental.
### From Sewer Scares to Suburban Silliness
Let's be clear: this isn't your older sibling's C.H.U.D. Gone is the urban decay, the paranoia, the genuinely unsettling Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers. Instead, director David Irving (who also gave us the Cannon Films oddity Sleeping Beauty in 1987) serves up a frothy, almost Troma-esque horror-comedy concoction. Our heroes are a couple of affable high school slackers, Steve (Brian Robbins) and Kevin (Bill Calvert), who accidentally swipe a military cadaver named "Bud" (Gerrit Graham, perfectly cast) from a secret lab. Why? Science project? A prank? The logic is delightfully thin. Naturally, Bud reanimates, develops a taste for human flesh (and spreading his condition via bites), and retains a surprisingly charming, almost friendly demeanor, even while craving brains.
The plot, penned by Ed Naha (who also wrote the equally bizarre cult classic Troll) and Mark Stern, essentially becomes a race against time as Bud inadvertently creates an army of smiling, suburban zombies just before the big Halloween dance. It’s Return of the Living Dead meets John Hughes, filtered through a distinctly late-80s, low-budget lens. Interestingly, rumor has it the script wasn't originally intended as a C.H.U.D. sequel at all, but was retrofitted by the producers, possibly hoping to cash in on the name recognition before distributor Vestron Video famously collapsed. This definitely explains the complete lack of connection to the original’s lore.
### Meet Bud, Your Friendly Neighborhood Zombie
The real heart of the movie, surprisingly, is Bud himself. Gerrit Graham absolutely nails the role, playing the titular Chud with a goofy, almost endearing menace. He shuffles, he grins, he bites, but he never feels truly evil like the creatures from the first film. He's more like a shambling, decomposing party guest who just happens to be contagious. It’s a performance that understands the assignment: lean into the absurdity.
Our teen leads do their best with the material. Brian Robbins, pre-Hollywood producer/director mogul (Varsity Blues, Smallville), has that quintessential 80s cool-guy charm. Bill Calvert provides the slightly nerdier counterpoint. And Tricia Leigh Fisher (yes, daughter of Eddie Fisher and Connie Stevens, making her Carrie Fisher's half-sister – a fun bit of Hollywood lineage!) is the resourceful love interest, Katie. They’re likable enough to carry us through the increasingly ridiculous scenarios, reacting to zombie poodles and flesh-eating neighbors with the appropriate level of frantic energy.
### Practical Effects, Party Style
Now, about those effects. This wasn't the era of seamless CGI, folks. We're talking good old-fashioned practical makeup and gore gags. Bud's decomposing look is suitably oozy, and the transformation of his victims involves some fun, if budget-conscious, prosthetic work. Remember how those glowing eyes looked kind of cool, kind of cheesy on a fuzzy CRT screen? The zombie bites have that satisfyingly rubbery, pulpy quality common in late-80s horror comedies. There’s no attempt at the gritty realism of the original’s monsters; here, the effects are deployed for comedic beats as often as scares. It’s all part of the film's charm – it knows it's a bit silly, and the effects reflect that B-movie spirit. You can almost feel the constraints of the reported $2 million budget, but they make it work through sheer enthusiasm.
### A Sequel in Name Only?
Did audiences flock to see Bud? Not exactly. C.H.U.D. II wasn't a box office smash, and critics were largely unkind, often baffled by its departure from the original. But like so many films of this era, it found its audience on home video. This was the kind of tape you’d grab when the blockbusters were rented out, intrigued by the title, maybe remembering the first film, only to discover something completely unexpected. I distinctly remember renting this from the local 'Video Palace', expecting scares and getting laughs instead – a pleasant surprise late on a Saturday night. It became a minor cult favorite precisely because it wasn't a serious sequel, but rather a goofy, unpretentious zombie romp.
Rating: 4/10
Justification: Let's be honest, C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud isn't high art. The plot is nonsensical, the connection to the original is non-existent, and it operates purely on late-80s B-movie logic. However, giving it a purely dismissive score misses the point. It earns its 4 points through sheer, unadulterated goofiness, Gerrit Graham's delightful central performance, and its status as a prime example of weird, opportunistic sequel-making from the VHS era. It's entertainingly bad, knowingly campy, and provides genuine laughs, even if unintentionally at times.
Final Thought: Forget subterranean terror; Bud just wanted to party. C.H.U.D. II remains a bizarre, baffling, but strangely watchable artifact – the kind of movie perfectly designed for fuzzy tracking lines and low expectations, delivering chuckles where its predecessor delivered chills.