Watch C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud For Free

Just perfect...

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

The best things about monster movie C.H.U.D. were the creepy critters - all rubbery claws, snaggle fangs and glowing eyes - and the juicy gore (at least in the Director's Cut). C.H.U.D. II: Bud the Chud does away with the creatures, the C.H.U.D now resembling bargain basement zombies with painted faces and joke-store teeth; it also replaces the blood and guts with terrible '80s comedy, making this a serious contender for worst sequel in horror history (yes, even worse than Return of the Living Dead Part II).Brian Robbins stars as obnoxious student Steve Williams, who accidentally loses the cadaver intended for his biology class. So what does he do? He convinces his pal Kevin (Bill Calvert) to help him steal a replacement body from the Winterhaven Disease Control Centre. What the lads don't realise is that their new stiff is actually a frozen C.H.U.D. called Bud (played by Gerrit Graham), the result of a military project to create reanimated super-soldiers who just happen to have cannibalistic tendencies.A really dumb script full of lame humour and dreadful performances all round (Robert Vaughn giving a career worst as military top brass Colonel Masters) go to ensure that this film is utterly cringeworthy from start to finish. Freddy Krueger himself, Robert Englund, has a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo as Man in Trenchcoat Walking with Trick-or-Treaters; and he's the best thing about the whole sorry mess.1.5 out of 10, rounded down to 1 for the dancing zombies and the killer poodle.

I did see the original "C.H.U.D." movie years ago, but it's been so long that I hardly remember a thing about it. But that didn't hurt any chances of misunderstanding this sequel, because it's a sequel in name only. While I can't compare this sequel to the original, I can safely say that sequel or not it's extremely lame. The movie makes the tragic mistake of trying to be extremely goofball and comic in nature. This doesn't work, because every character comes across as an idiot, and it's hard to give a darn about characters when everyone acts extremely stupid. The movie should have gone the route of "The Return of the Living Dead", which did have plenty of laughs but also enough serious moments to give it some smarts.Come to think of it, I guess the goofball approach COULD have worked had the humor been extremely funny, but it isn't. The level of humor is extremely juvenile and simple-minded, and it didn't make me laugh once. But the movie doesn't just miss with the humor, but also with the horror angle. For the life of me, I don't know why this got an "R" rating - the very limited blood and gore is at a PG-13 level. (There's also no nudity or sex.)The movie doesn't just miss when it comes to horror and laughs, but with basic storytelling. It's easy to see why the screenwriter used a pseudonym. There are a significant number of moments when plot developments come across in an unclear fashion, and even individual scenes sometimes come across in a garbled fashion. (Though it's possible the blame for these story faults might be due to the director's incompetence.)You may be wondering if there's anything of merit to be found in this sorry sequel. Well, as Bud the Chud, Gerrit Graham does give it his all; he really tried to wring some laughs out the lame script. It's a futile effort, but you do have to admire him for giving it his all.

The first time I seen this movie I was a kid that snuck out of bed while the parents where sleeping. That's how I was introduced to a lot of horror movies watching Up All Night. I remember it but never the name. It took many years to find out the name of the movie. The ending is what I remember mostly. I found it on Ebay on a 8 horror movie DVD set and bought it. This movie as soon as I started watching it, everything came back.CHUD 2: Bud the chud is a sequel of CHUD 1, it is a corny, campy, funny, & considered a horror movie. For many who don't know the name Bud Oliver he is the main chud in CHUD 2. I don't know if he was a private that signed up for a army experiment or what. If he was just a dead guy they brought back, or whatever. From what I have read the chud's in the 1st movie they were mutants living in the sewer. In this version the chud's are more zombie like or even ghouls. I mean a lot of people have really hated this movie, & I'm sorry I like it. This movie is not like the first one, and should be seen as not a sequel at all.The thing that works for this movie is Bud's facial expression's. Bud's facial expressions are what tells you happy, sad, relaxed, confused, and even mad. Bud speaks very little, but has good comic timing. I don't know if it is for every bite Bud gets a little smarter or more talkative. Plus he has these wicked looking teeth. They look like Christopher Walkens teeth in Sleepy Hollow. I still liked the ending of the movie, sort of feel kind of bad for the guy at the end. Plus it's the only movie I have ever seen where the guy offer's up his heart to a girl.There's a scene in the movie that still cracks me up and it is where Bud is watching a woman doing exercises. Kind of following along with her, then she goes out to feed her cat. He's standing in front of her, as she looks up she goes "What big feet you have, then big thumbs, & starts talking to him". I mean it's funny cause he's standing there listening to her go off asking questions. Gesturing/thinking about it then he smile's, and another chud is made.This movie lives up to the 80's series of horror comedy's out there. It's well worth a watch, maybe a laugh or 2. It has the same song repeating through out the movie, kind of annoying. The movie has little bits of humor throughout the movie. True, to the 80's is the fashion, now of days we worry about all that hairspray. I think they even make a little reference to Frankenstein w/Bud wearing a black coat with short sleeves. The writing's not the best, then again maybe that is what makes it fun to watch. The poodle is cute even takes out a few people, and drags a post man down the road. There's of course a Halloween Dance that all the chuds decide to crash. Bud does has the final word in the movie with "Good-Bye!" Anyway still love this movie, laugh at some of the lines, goofs, but that's what makes it one of my favorites to watch.

So basically you should forget everything established in the first movie and about the cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers as this movie has absolutely nothing to do with that movie. That movie while not all that good did at least look like a major motion picture while this one has the looks and is a B movie that tries to be a comedy. Basically, this movie is more of a zombie feature than the creature feature the first movie was. I am betting they did this to save money on make-up and monster effects as these creatures only have dark circles around their eyes and some deformed teeth. They did not bother making this movie a true zombie movie as that would have had to perhaps have decaying effects and wounds. In the end this movie is more like the film "Night of the Creeps", but not as nearly as good as far as the effects and gore or the humor for that matter. In the end the movie is a sequel in name only. The only reason this movie is called CHUD II it seems is to have the little subtitle Bud the Chud for the cuteness factor and comedy factor which is basically none existent for my tastes. The plot just has Bud infecting others and the horde of zombie like creatures grows and grows. Nothing new or funny being brought to the table in this one, but I did rather like the infected poodle.