The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) (Movie Review)

  I’ve been around the block with horror movies for years, and there’s no shortage of popular titles that have stuck with me as favorites … including “Halloween”, “Psycho”, “Poltergeist”, “A Nightmare on Elm Street”, “The Haunting”, and even “The Exorcist” to an extent have all had their place as films I enjoy watching around October. However, there’s one iconic horror movie that’s just never really done anything for me … not to say it’s bad, it just didn’t leave much of an impression … and that’s the original 1974 horror classic "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre". This is one of those early scary films of the 70’s that’s often been credited for re-shaping the genera, and it’s inspired independent, low budget filmmakers for decades. While I can’t dismiss the impact it made for its time, or the influence it’s had on young filmmakers … I just can’t say that it’s stuck with me as any kind of favorite. I for one have never been a fan of exploitive or grizzly horror, and this film came out right at the dawn of “Grindhouse Cinema”, so it’s generally never peaked my interest. What did catch my attention was the word of moth stating that, despite it’s intimidating title, the movie is not a “gore fest”, which got me thinking … okay, maybe it’s like “Halloween” in which it was less about the kills, and more about the thrill of the chase. After my initial viewing, there was nothing about “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” that turned me off, but I just can’t say that it gave me much either.

  Things are off to a strong start, as the film presents itself as a real-life documented event, and it puts you in an uncomfortable mind-set. In truth, the film is only loosely based on real life serial killer Ed Gene, and everything else was made-up for the film. Still, it effectively puts you in this state of unease, like these are real events, and your stuck watching the story of the survivor unfold. 

The opening credits themselves are chilling, with an ominous score droning in the background, radio reports of incidents revolving around grave robing, all set to a strange red-filtered backdrop, (supposedly shots of the sun or another nearby planet), and we get a chilling opening shot of a corpse that’s been dressed up as some kind of decorative display. The premise is about as simple as they get, as we follow five youths on a road trip into the outback’s of Texas in search of an old family house that’s been rundown over the years. Things get more and more desolate the further they go, and like dominoes toppling over, there’s one creepy encounter after another. The first being a mysterious hitchhiker, who turns out to be mentally unstable. The second is a secluded gas station that’s run by a shady owner. At last, when they reach their destination, there seems to be a new house with new neighbors next door … only the family isn’t very nice. It is in fact the dwelling place of a family of deranged Psycho Paths, and one particular member wields a frightening Chain Saw.

  This film is often cited as one of the scariest movies ever made, but for me, I wouldn’t call the movie “scary” exactly … I think the better word to describe this film is “disturbing”. Weather the film was based on real events or not, it still creates an eerie atmosphere that it could be real, and many of the scenes convey a genuine sense of urgency. Director Tobe Hooper also gives the film a very grizzly and realistic look, almost documentary style in the way it’s shot and edited. The bear bone set-design just adds to the film’s uncomfortable realism. 

Likewise, this movie met my expectations in which it wasn’t overly exploitive in its violence, and the terror comes largely from what’s implied as opposed to what’s shown on screen. Actually, I think the “Indiana Jones” movies contain more horrific imagery and violence then this film. Again, the disturbing nature of the film comes from what’s implied, and that’s something I genuinely admire. The most horrific scene of the whole film is the Psycho’s family dinner, which has no violent content at all … yet is extremely unsettling. It’s all framed from the perspective of a young girl tied to a chair in a room full of creeps. Nothing physically horrific is happening, yet the intense camera shots, tight closeups and quick edits convey an unbearable sense of dread and unease. While I can always respect a filmmaker for accomplishing so much from a technical perspective, this dose lead me to my first big issue with the movie. Unlike “Psycho” or “Halloween”, which balanced its chills with a thoughtful examination of what drives someone to be either evil or psychotic, this film is less of an “examination”, and more of a straight forward “observation” of a day in the life of these horrible people. While the film succeeds in putting me in a simulation of what feels like real-life horror, I just don’t feel like there’s much substance underneath the experience.

   Another thing that brings the film down is that I don’t really connect with any of our main characters. 

The acting is consistently good, but aside from the kooky brother in the wheel chair, there really isn’t a character that I latch onto. Even the female lead is really just “the one that survives”, and there’s not much else to her. By comparison, the female leads in “Halloween”, “Scream” and “Nightmare on Elm Street” were multilayered, very distinct, and the connections I made with them gave me an anchor to carry me though the frights, and made those films feel like they had something of substance. 

Even the highly marketed villain Leatherface is more of a weakling servant to an abusive master, and it slightly diminishes the tension when you see him acting like a whimpering dog. Although, this dose shed an interesting light on the titular title character, as he’s less of a mastermind, and more of a rabid animal set off his leash. There’s a curious detail in which, after claiming a victim, he slumps on the ground with a look of confusion … like he didn’t know why he did that, or why he’s provoked to do so, which adds some layers to the character. Of course, Leatherface would become the first in a long line-up of marketable horror villains in masks. For me, it always begged the question … remove his mask, his trade mark weapon, switch the movie’s title to “Psychopaths of the Texas Outback”, and keep everything else the same … would this movie have still made as big an impact as it did? Obviously, it still would have been an effectively disturbing experience, but would it really be as famous?

  In the plus column, I was pleased that there was only one chainsaw death in the whole film, and everything else with the weapon is utilized in a riveting chase sequence. Seriously, despite my overall feelings for the film, the climactic chase between Leatherface and the blond girl is one of the best that the genera has to offer. 

Keeping with the tone of the film, the chase feels very grounded, and it puts the viewer in the characters shoes … like we feel we’re on the run from this ruthless chainsaw wielding maniac. It also covers a lot of ground, as she gets trapped in prickly trees, runs through the house, and she even jumps through a glass window … twice. Not only a great spectacle, but I love that its pure adrenaline propelling this girl to jump through these windows. One thing I find hilarious is that the girl manages to outwit a two-tone gorilla of a man with a chainsaw, but gets bested by an old man with a broom stick. Another funny detail is when the old man ties her up, puts her in his car, and just before he takes off with her, he gets out of the car to turn the lights off in the station … just because he doesn’t want to waste electricity ... what an amusing detail to put in your frightening climax. The chase works its way out onto the highway, and there’s yet another amusing moment when a truck driver picks up the girl, only to climb out and run away on foot when he could have clearly just driven off. Then we get one of the most abrupt endings I’ve ever seen in a horror movie, in which the girl escapes, but the villain isn’t defeated, and he just dances off into the sunrise. Yeah … while the movie certainly wasn’t boring, this ending leaves me scratching my head wondering why I spent an hour and a half of my time watching it.   

  In the end, “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” certainly has its place in horror history, but it doesn’t have a place among my personal favorites of the genera. While the films low-budget production, laced with a solid direction, and even a smart script is credible, there was just nothing to the experience that really stuck with. When I think back on 1978’s “Halloween”, I remember it’s absorbing atmosphere, it’s two memorable leads, it’s riveting music, and despite its bare-bone premise, it still felt like a rewarding experience. This film kept me engaged in the moment, and had some highlights, but nothing that made me want to give it a second viewing. Again, I can’t call this a bad movie, just one that didn’t leave much of an impression.

Thanks for reading my review of the 1974 Horror classic “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” … and treat yourself to one good scare this October.              

                           

Horror movie Remakes: My Best and Worst

     

Horror movie remakes are becoming more and more frequent in the 2000’s and it’s only gotten more and more tiring. Most of them are uninspired and unoriginal, but to be fair there are some remakes that stand out as classics in their own right. To qualify as a good remake, it doesn’t have to be better than the original, just good on its own terms. For this post I’ll be counting down my five favorite Horror Remakes as well as my five least favorite. It’s a mix of best and worst today, and I’ll start from the ground up with the worst followed by the best. 

My Top 5 Worst Horror Remakes

#5 The Hitcher (2007) 

While you could easily right a film of this sort off as just pointless, it’s honestly worse when a horror remake almost works and fails. 2007’s remake of “The Hitcher” actually had some potential going, especially with Sean Bean giving his all with his portrayal of the titular villain. Unfortunately, rather than explore both the motive and even emotion of the villain, the filmmakers were far too caught up in exploitive content and cheap shocks.     

#4 The Wicker Man (2006) 

Okay, so this movie is bad, in fact it’s downright cringe worthy when compared to the original, but this one almost works on a so bad it’s good level. There’s something genuinely amusing about a film aiming for scares that result in unintentional comedy, in fact if this movie marketed itself as a spoof it might have done better. Also this film features one of Nicolas Cages most unforgettable “bad” performances, which alone might just make this terrible film worthwhile.

#3 House of Wax (2005) 

Here’s a strange case in which a remake bares very little resemblance to the original and really could have just been its own thing. It’s a remake that takes all the charm, sophistication and atmosphere of its predecessor and turns it into your basic teen slasher flick with nothing special to offer. I don’t even understand why a wax museum is present in the film when it's predecessor was all about a mystery slowly being unraveled, and this is just a strait forward premise revolving around two killers and a group of interchangeable victims.

#2 The Haunting (1999) 

Oh boy, most bad horror movies can just be burred and forgotten, but this one was just so offensive when compared to the original classic that it’s hard to ignore. While the original Haunting was a big influences on the haunted house genera, it didn’t actually feature any ghosts and was as much a study of one’s psychology as well as whether or not a building could be cursed. This remake throws all that out the window for strait forward ghost attacks, bland characters and especially laughable special effects.   

#1 Psycho (1998) 

What’s worse than a pointless remake of a timeless classic ... how about a film that’s a blatant shot by shot remake of the original with absolutely nothing new or improved. Yeah, Van Sant’s 1998 remake of Hitchcock’s immortal classic has quiet the reputation as one of the worst remakes of all time and for good reason. Not only is this a waist of film, but the equally iconic characters are all miscast, the atmosphere is lacking and it just begs the question ... what’s the point of this?

So those are what I consider the five worst horror remakes, but now let’s switch gears to my personal five favorites ... not better mind you but good on their own.  

My Top 5 Best Horror Remakes

5. The Thing (1982) 

John Carpenter’s Brilliant remake of the 50’s Sci-Fi classic will always stand as a benchmark in the history books of iconic remakes. This remake has in-fact become a classic in its own right, thanks to sharp performances and amazing gross out special effects.  

4. Fright Night (2011) 

It’s the story of a suburban kid who lives next to a mysterious neighbor who just happens to be a vampire. Was it necessary to remake one of the most beloved cult classics of all time ... no, but they sure did a good job, giving this modern remake lots of fun style, a few laughs, and a well-rounded cast that’s clearly having a blast with their roles.  

3. The Fly (1986) 

The original movie “The Fly” from 1958 was a smart and classy flick that warned us of the dangers of science ... then the remake takes all that good stuff, and goes the extra mile. Instead of an accident transforming our lead character immediately, this film depicts the transformation happening gradually. This allows more drama to be felt between characters, and it leads to some impressive makeup, and awesome special effects with a gross out factor on max.  

2. The Mummy (1999) 

Most of the classic Universal monsters have been remade over the years, and the 1999 rendition of “The Mummy” is a rare case in which the remake is more popular in the public continence than the original. Purists will always prefer the 1932 original starring Boris Karloff, or the 1959 remake starring Christopher Lee, but common audiences will probably be more aware of the 1999 version. It’s my favorite example of perfect popcorn entertainment, giving the Mummy a new look and feel, while still keeping a few horror elements of the original source material alive.   

1. House of Wax (1953)

This is another great example of a remake becoming more of a classic than the original. Vincent Price’s performance as the creepy museum owner is still just as bone chilling as ever, the look and tone of the film is very colorful, while still feeling very eerie and haunting. It’s just a perfect horror classic, with lots of mystery, suspense, and memorable characters.

Thanks for reading my countdown ... and treat yourself to one good scare this October.            

Universals 8 Classic Monster Movies Ranked

    Welcome back to Mr. Movies October Marathon, and to properly celebrate this Halloween season, we need to take a look back at the most famous movie monsters of all time ... the eight classic Universal movie monsters. Dracula, The Wolf Man, Frankenstein, The Bride of Frankenstein, The Phantom of the Opera, The Mummy, The Invisible Man and The Creature from the Black Lagoon are Universals most celebrated, marketed, and memorable movie monsters, all of whom have had countless adaptions in film and media. 

Rather than giving my thoughts on every individual creature, or go through every sequel, remake and spin-off, I’m just going to keep it simple, and rank every monster’s first classic film in my own personal order of least favorite to favorite. So, here we go, time to sink our fangs into some classic horror flicks. (WARNING: With the exception of 1943's “The Phantom of the Opera”, all these classic horror movies are Black and White, which is absolutely how they should be watched and preserved ... but for this countdown list alone, I thought the colored stills were more appealing)

#8 The Phantom of the Opera (1943)

   While the original silent film from 1925 is often sighted as the best classic, Universals 1943 release of “The Phantom of the Opera” was still the first to have sound and dialogue, which is why it's grouped with the others. With that said, I never felt that this version was quiet on the same level of quality as the other classic monster films. It's certainly a great looking movie, was the only one originally shot in color, and it makes the sets and interiors genuine spectacles to look at. Claude Rains likewise is fantastic as the phantom, and even Susanna Foster is an above average female lead for the genera of the time. Unfortunately, there's a number of details that keep this movie from surpassing it's peers. Most of the supporting characters drag things down, there’s some really annoying hummer, a sub-plot involving a pointless lovers triangle, and a villain who doesn’t get enough attention. There’s also a noticeable lack of mystery, as the Phantoms story is told from the ground up, and hindering his screen presence less exciting as a result. Honestly, while this isn't a terrible movie by any means, there's just better versions of “The Phantom of the Opera” that I would recommend over this film. Personally, I'd suggest the 1962 Hammer studio remake, as I find that one largely superior. 

#7 Dracula (1931)

   This was the very first "Sound" horror movie, a true classic in every sense of the word ... but for me personally, it doesn’t hold up as well for repeated viewings, at least in comparison to the others.  Bela Lugosi’s performance as Dracula is still one of the greatest villain performances of all time, and I highly recommend the Dracula special edition, because of the added score by Philip Glass, which is one of the most atmospheric, and haunting musical scores I’ve ever heard. Never the less, I still find this a rather sluggish and dull film, with an anti-climactic ending that always leaves me feeling empty. I won’t deny that this film is a classic, with a rich mood, but if you want a really good Dracula movie, I’d personally recommend the 1958 classic “Horror of Dracula” starring Christopher Lee instead. That to me is about as great as vampire movies get.  

#6 Frankenstein (1931) 

   From one landmark classic to another, "Frankenstein" is next, and while I have more feelings for many of it's successors ... I still consider this one of the greats. I absolutely feel that "Frankenstein" has aged better than “Dracula”, but I still don’t think it’s quit on par with some of the others. It certainly holds your interest while watching it, and everything from the opening in the cemetery, to Doctor Frankenstein’s lab, to the angry villagers are all very memorable. Most unforgettable of all is Boris Karloff’s performance as the monster. His image under that makeup is just so iconic, and he just lights up the screen. Overall, it’s not a huge re-watch film, but it’s certainly worth watching if you haven’t seen it.

#5 The Mummy (1932) 

    Surprisingly, this film is far more sophisticated then a movie about a cliched, bandaged mummy killing people. It’s all about an evil spirit that simply wants to bring back its long-lost love, and for an older 1930’s film, it boasts a spooky atmosphere, and creates an eerie mood. Boris Karloff once again shines as the mummy, and in my opinion, is even better here than he was as Frankenstein’s monster. He has such a hypnotic and creepy feel whenever he’s on screen, especially with him staring at you half the time with those lifeless eyes of his. The rest of the characters do a great job holding your interest, most notably the female lead named Helen, who’s easily the most attractive lead from any of these early monster films. This is all around a very unique horror movie that doesn’t rely on common horror movie conventions, and instead treats the audience to a competently constructed film. Its only real weakness for me is that it looms in the shadows of personally one of my favorite movies ever, the 1999 remake of The Mummy staring Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz. That was the film that originally introduced me to the character, and it’s been a personal favorite ever sense ... but the classic is still great. 

#4 The Wolf Man (1941)

    Now, things are starting to get really good. Unlike Dracula or The Mummy who were purely evil, The Wolf Man is an innocent civilian that has an uncontrollable monster living inside of him. You couldn’t ask for a better actor to play both the werewolf and the victim than Lon Chaney Jr. This is a character that’s very menacing, but at the same time we feel so much sympathy for him. All the characters are great, the emotional levels are high, there are plenty memorable lines of dialog, and you really just want a good outcome for this pore soul. The film does lack a cool transformation, as well as a good shot of the full moon, but it makes up for that with its chilling atmosphere, foggy streets, foreboding cemeteries, forests and the music is awesome. This film also features one of my favorite moments from any of the classic Universal monster movies, and it’s when our lead has a chilling nightmare, which leads into a spooky montage featuring nightmarish imagery. The Wolf Man is a first-rate Horror classic, and highly recommendable.

#3 The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) 

  This movie is often regarded as one of the greatest movie sequels of all time, and stands on its own as a classic, perhaps even more so then the first film. There’s no denial there, as this really is a sequel that matches the the original, and then goes twelve steps further. Despite what the title may lead you to think, the actual bride (played fairly well by Elsa Lanchester) doesn’t come tile the very end of the film, and is only seen for a few minutes ... yet, she still has a place in the monster hall of fame. Regardless, the main attraction of this film is the actual Frankenstein monster itself. Boris Karloff is back in the role, and turning on a far more effective and emotional performance. The creature can now talk, and it exposes both his monstrous side, and a rather tragic, sympathetic side. There’s a pivotal moment in which the monster makes friends with a blind man, who brings out a good side to the creature. It might just be the most touching moment between man, and monster to be viewed on screen. There’s also an awesome new evil doctor, a terrific score, some very impressive special effects, and some genuine chills. This is one old monster movie that has aged remarkably well, so I say check it out if you haven’t seen it. 

#2 The Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954) 

   Speaking personally, I’m a huge fan of 50’s sci-fi films, so naturally, “The Creature from the Black Lagoon” stands as one of my favorites among all these classics. The cast is great, in that campy, and traditional kind of way. The creature (or Gill Man) on land is played by Ben Chapman, but the real star is Richard O' Brown, who played the creature under water. Not only did he Incorporate some very unearthly swimming moves to the creature, but also while warring that heavy monster costume, and holding his breath between takes (because he couldn’t get breathing equipment under that costume). In others words, this guy deserves a freaking metal, because that’s very impressive. The creepy swamp scenery is great, and the underwater cinematography is brilliant. It might be the most innovative camera work for its time. The buildup is equally strong, the characters are good, and the payoff is exactly what you’d expect. This is a fun, fun monster movie that to date hasn’t been surpassed ... not including the superior creature design seen in “The Monster Squad”.

#1 The Invisible Man (1933) 

    Anyone who decides to sit down and watch “The Invisible Man” is in for a really fun time. The visual effects are amazing, the tension is great, and its hands down the funniest of the classic monster movies. For my money, of all the talented actors who’ve brought these classic monsters to life, no one excites me as much as Claude Rains in the roll of the Invisible Man (the same talent who played The Phantom of the Opera). Not only is his voice perfect, but his personality is outstanding. He perfectly balances the line between being intimidating and hilarious. Just like The Wolf Man and Frankenstein’s monster, he’s both sympathetic and ruthless, which is always an awesome combination. This film is just great entertainment, complete with plenty of thrills, laughs, and the unforgettable screen debut of Claude Rains. Personally, it’s the most recommendable of all of the classic Universal monster movies, and one of my all-time favorite horror films.

       

Thanks for reading my Ranking List ... and continue to enjoy the movies you Love!