The Texas Chainsaw Massacre...

[Gert T 0]

Dayton Daily News gave it 0 stars too, but the trailers was sweet, and after hearing all your opinions, I'll probably catch at the cheapo theaters.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

My local paper gave it *** (out of 4) and my friend said that the 11:35 showing tonight was sold out.

[cabbageboy 0]

I'm going to see it mostly for R. Lee. We all know the Sarge is the man.

 

I'm not really that against it being remade, I mean hell there were about 2 or 3 other bad sequels to it. The only one besides the original that anyone likes is TCM 2 with Dennis Hopper gunning for Leatherface.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I should mention that selling out a movie here isn't easy, as there are no less than 10 movie theaters in easy driving distance.

[Downhome 0]

I'd also like to say that I loved the trailer. As a matter of fact, in my opinion, it's one of the greatest trailers ever put together for ANY film.

[Guest JumpinJackFlash]

It might be a good movie, but I'm only a fan of remakes if it is a remake of a good, yet unpopular, movie from the 50s or further back. So, its a remake, but it will seem original to the 95% who have not seen it. The 5% critics and film geeks will say its a good remake that shows that old movies can be good, and how it reintroduced a classic film to a young audience.

 

At least, if I were a directer, I would make a remake like that.

 

But, if I had the choice of seeing Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Kill Bill for the second time, I would definately pick Kill Bill.

[Guest Urine Sane]

Question: was there use of a meat hook in this one?

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

Yes, and it's pretty disturbing at times, since the character stays alive for quite sometime on the hook.

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

For people still calling this a remake, I'm still not so sure it is.

 

I mean it obviously it is technically, but it still plays to me like a sequel or hell, even a prequel to the first movie. They don't use many of the scenes from the original movie and when they do use them, it is drastically different. Smart move IMO, it doesn't leave you there going "Well that was cooler the first time around"

[Downhome 0]

They don't use many of the scenes from the original movie and when they do use them, it is drastically different. Smart move IMO, it doesn't leave you there going "Well that was cooler the first time around"

Nope, but it just might leave te viewers saying that same thing about the entire film as a whole.

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

Certainly a good point, but I think it does a good job of distancing itself from the original while still remaining quite like it. It has a similar vibe, obviously not as creepy and just in general chaotic as the first, but theres still always a bit of an unease to it and they managed to keep it from being too Hollywood so to speak. A respectable job, shoulda just called it TCM 5 or 3 depending on if they wanna forget that 3 and 4 exist.

[LivingLegendGaryColeman 0]

I saw this. Definately had fun watching it with some friends, even though the disturbing moments. I never saw the first one, but I went with my buddy who is a horror buff and like is being said, nothing too much is like the original. This one does have a lot of blood, some pretty disturbing things, but there are key parts of story (from what I hear) changed.

[justsoyouknow 0]

I just got back from seeing it, and I loved the entire thing. It was a nice compliment to the original, without shitting all over it. There were moments when the ENTIRE THEATRE jumped out of their seats. Couple that with the hot 23-year-old sitting next to me constantly grabbing my arm, burying her head in my chest and jumping in my lap, and you've got yourself a great movie.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

I'd also like to say that I loved the trailer. As a matter of fact, in my opinion, it's one of the greatest trailers ever put together for ANY film.

 

That camera sound effect is fucking creepy the way they used in the trailer.

 

I just got back from seeing it, and I loved the entire thing. It was a nice compliment to the original, without shitting all over it. There were moments when the ENTIRE THEATRE jumped out of their seats.

 

Yeah, we all fell for the 3 "Get cha" parts lol

[Youth N Asia 0]

I'm going to see it mostly for R. Lee. We all know the Sarge is the man.

Damn right sonny!

 

I think the trailer looked decient. I'm going to see the 4:35 showing today.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

R. Lee was awesome in this.

[Youth N Asia 0]

When you get past the screaming and whatnot, he's not a bad actor

[Guest NaturalBornThriller4:20]

I shall be at the Noon showing, so we'll see...

 

Note to self:

 

Sit next to beautiful female your age during the movie.

 

::Snickers::

[Secret Agent 0]

TCM is brutally awesome! I've seen both, and this is actually a damn good remake. Espically from a music video director.

[godthedog 0]

Don't ever trust Ebert, he's a pawn of the studios and whomever pays him the most

what the hell? where did this come from?

[Lil' Bitch 0]

^ No idea, but I believe it

[slimm44 0]

I saw the 12 am showing and it was awesome. It was very scary and enjoyable too

[Boner Kawanger 0]

Don't ever trust Ebert, he's a pawn of the studios and whomever pays him the most

what the hell? where did this come from?

It came from Ebert's zero star review posted before it, natch.

 

I've got a date for tomorrow and we're going to see this. Having a cell phone finally paid off. I'm a hot tub away from getting some. I'll share thoughts tomorrow.

[dubq 0]

For people still calling this a remake, I'm still not so sure it is.

 

I mean it obviously it is technically, but it still plays to me like a sequel or hell, even a prequel to the first movie. They don't use many of the scenes from the original movie and when they do use them, it is drastically different. Smart move IMO, it doesn't leave you there going "Well that was cooler the first time around"

I 100% agree with your theory there. After just screening the movie, I too think that it plays more like a sequel - as in something that happens a day to a few weeks after the first/original movie. Sure there are some differences and continuity aspects that prevent this from being true.. but the story for this movie was completely different, so I definitely don't see it as a remake.

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

I don't know who put it up, but somewhere I kept reading that R. Lee's character was a "sadistic sheriff who'd do anything to bring the Hewitt's in." Which was obviously BS, since he's more or less got the "fathers" role from the first movie. Did anyone else just figure that "Junior"/R.Lee simply killed the real sheriff and was masquerading the whole time?

[Lil' Bitch 0]

^ I was used to the sheriff being the hero in these types of movies. Especially after Dennis Hopper's awesome potrayal of the role in part 2, but...

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

I had no clue R. Lee was in on it the whole time until I saw that he was driving the stoner guy back to the house. I was like damn, talk about a swerve. That one surprised me.

[Downhome 0]

^ I was used to the sheriff being the hero in these types of movies.  Especially after Dennis Hopper's awesome potrayal of the role in part 2, but...

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

I had no clue R. Lee was in on it the whole time until I saw that he was driving the stoner guy back to the house.  I was like damn, talk about a swerve.  That one surprised me.

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

You must be pretty damn slow, as it was very obvious that he was fucking crazy, as well as OBVIOUSLY a member of the clan, the very first moment he was ever on the screen.   Hell, I thought it was obvious the very second that when they got to that old house, the old man said that it wasn't where the sheriff lived.

 

No offense.

[Downhome 0]

Oh yeah, my thoughts on the film.

 

Let's just say that it's one of my favorite straight up, balls out, toally hardcore horror films, that I've ever seen in my life. I loved the feel, most of the acting in it, all of the scares, Leatherface himself, and everything else about it.

 

Sure, it isn't perfect, but a film like this doesn't have to be.

 

This film just felt good to me, in terms of a horror film. I just loved it, plain and simple.

 

 

As always, if you want a full review or want my opinion on specific parts or just want me to answer some of your questions, then feel free to let me know.

 

Out of five *'s, I'd give it ****1/2, once again, in terms of a horror film.

 

I've also come to the conclusion that Leatherface is my favorite horror villian of all time. It's one thing for a crazed psycho to be chasing you around with a knife all silent like and poping up out of nowhere, and it's another for a crazed psycho to be chasing you around with a chainsaw, with it running almost all of the time, where you know just where he's at at every moment, and feeling as if there is just about no way to get away.

 

It's some fucked up shit. Oh yeah, speaking of fucked up...

 

Spoiler (Highlight to Read):

When Leatherface killed off Pepper and then looked around at Erin, and he had Kemper's face on as a mask, well, THAT was some fucked up shit. That sincerely freaked me out.

 

...yeah, one hell of a film.

Edited October 19, 2003 by Downhome

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

sigh.

 

Went. Saw. Disapointed

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

Leatherface is the best horror film villain for me too personally, namely because there very easily could be a Leatherface out and about right now.

 

Didn't like the new motivation for his mask compared to the original's though, it was a lot less mental related.

[Damaramu 0]

If I remember right the only connection that it has to real life was that a bunch of kids were killed with a chainsaw...and it was in Wisconsin.

[BlackFlagg 0]

If I remember right the only connection that it has to real life was that a bunch of kids were killed with a chainsaw...and it was in Wisconsin.

Dunno about that, the main connection is that Leatherface...along with most of the major killers in horror movies is based off of Ed Gein. Ed Gein