texas chainsaw massacre. over-rated?

Napoleon Solo

I don't know is it just me or does anyone else think the texas chainsaw massacre is over-rated? My friends disagree but are they just going with whats cool? Sure, it's shocking in parts but for the most part i thought it was poor. And the ending was just embarrassing. Anyone else have views?

Mr. Fancypants

The original or the remake?

Napoleon Solo

mbroaders wrote:

The original or the remake?

The original. All of the others are so poor it goes without question.

Fysh

Well, eh...no. The remake/reimagining was crap - a film that took something that was actually original for its time, then bent it out of shape by slapping in a few slasherflick clichés and trying to increase the "boo" quotient.

But the original...well, yes, it does have something of that B-movie feel. But the entire point is that we're talking about a film that came out in '74 - before the advent of the slasher flicks that started with Halloween in 78 - and featured a horrific plot and some at the time extremely shocking scenes of violence, not to mention the fairly contentious subject matter. I have it on DVD and think it still stands up against many more recent films, not because the cinematography's swish or the cast are easy on the eye or there's "boo" moments, but because as a horror film it works for me. It builds up an atmosphere, the characters don't feel as generic as in most teen horror films, and the villain is eerie rather than just some invincible fool with a carving knife.

Of course, I'm a bit of a horror snob, so you can probably ignore me.

TerrorFirmer

Got the remake off boards in the for sale thread, havent seen it yet....

The original was and still is excellent.

Mr. Fancypants

Love the original Texas Chainsaw. It feels so damn unclean that you aren't sure what will happen when you are watching it. So unlike the typical MTV style horror films that are being made today.

Hugh Hefner

The original was very good although it got a bit trippy, almost, when the whole

cannibal family dinner-time scene

started and the ending was a bit crap but it suited the style of the film. A sensationalised ending would just have seemed contrived.

Yes, it's better than most modern horrors.

The part

where the guy cuts his hand and the preceeding conversation stands out as one of the best scenes I've watched, in my opinion

.


MobileInfantry: I freakin' love your sig.!

Basq

Hugh Hefner wrote:

MobileInfantry: I freakin' love your sig.!

I concur.... Ash is the coolest character in any film, without question!

nlgbbbblth

the original is a supreme horror film, great to watch on DVD after years of shoddy VHS copies.

Last House On The Left surpasses it though

as for the sequels - TCM2 is fun.,

This is an arguement myself and a friend had no so long ago. My firend was argueing for the remake, while I was argueing for the original.

First off Im going to say that I did enjoy the remake and there were for two reasons for that.
1. The fact that it had a number of original ideas.
2. The way in which it was shot was very impressive.

The original is a much better film, but I will admit that it took me a while to warm to it. I was expecting a gore drenched slasher film, but got something much more. The original is a master class in building tension, the way that Hooper takes things slowly. There's a constant fell of dread, which just builds and builds. And to sustain and build on that for 90 minutes is no small feet.

It's just a shame that Hooper has never matched his initial sucess, though I've heard good things about the Toolbox Murders.

garred

I agree, thought it was the most over-rated film ever. Was waiting years to see then Dublin Film Centre had it so bunked off work to see it. With all the hype that surrounded it and the fact it was banned, I think I cried leaving the cinema. It was like a Benny Hill sketch with the chainsaw chase scene. Pure and utter crap!! :mad:

Tusky

I actually really enjoyed the remake.

*Angel*

I thought the remake sucked!

TerrorFirmer

The remake, while certainly not in the running for greatest horror/slasher film of the year, provided me with ample entertainment.

Not great, but not bad either. Wasn't really expecting much so was always bound to be pleased with an anyway interesting movie.

Original one rules though....

Edit - ooo yeah, sig is back in business, i just edited it to make the words fit : D

Glazun

Meh, not really, it was an original film in it's day, it revolutionised films. And it's still quite a lot better than films today. Which rely more so on visual effects. Apparently it has no blood in it the entire time, which isn't true.. because the hitch hiker scene, all though, maybe that's only in the un-cut version.

Saying that I wouldn't obsess about it, and go as far as buying the dvd, watching it once is enough. What I find strange is that there seem to be a lot of films out now about real life murders, the manson family have a film, and so forth..

bonzai bob

Well leatherface is based on a real murderer, Ed Gein. Buffalo Bill and Norman Bates are also based on Ed Gein.

As you can imagine, Ed Gein was one fúcked up person. :eek:

humanji

I think the film suffers from the same problem as the original Star Wars. It's great if you saw it when it first came out, but when you watch it now a days, it looks dated and crap.

ferdi

basquille wrote:

I concur.... Ash is the coolest character in any film, without question!

pfff, popeye doyle anyone?