![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
philosoraptor42Technically this is the third installment of my Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie marathon. However, since I decided to make things interesting my making this a "Texas Chainsaw Massacre + Tobe Hooper filmography" marathon, this is the fourth installment of that wider review series.
My review of the first "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" movie can be found here (scroll to the end). My reviews for Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and 3 can be found here (along with a review for "The Loved Ones"). You can also find some of my reviews for other Tobe Hooper movies here (along with a review for "Creepshow").
First review is of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie that was buried for fear of killing Matthew McConaughey and Renee Zellweger's careers. Second review considers what appears to be (in some quarters at least) viewed as the best of the Platinum Dunes horror remakes. Read what I thought below!
Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994)
My Geek Blasphemy didn't so much recommend this movie, so much as promote its snarkability. A buried, straight-to-video embarrasment for Matthew McConaughey and Renee Zellwegger, the DVD case features both of their faces blown up large.
Renee Zellwegger appears amongst a whole group of expendable schoolkids at their prom. With the DVD cover to go by, we know that Renee Zellwegger's withdrawn and shy character is going to become significant in the long run and is most likely going to be movie's "final girl".
I was hoping this film would turn out to be fun and there were, initially, some good reasons to expect this. Matthew McConaughey's character is pretty jolly when he turns up and starts killing in people in fairly quick succession. He spouts neat lines like "I'm gonna kill ya. It ain't no f-ing biggie!" This was okay to begin with. Another character introduced early on is the completely nuts estate agent lady who, for me, was the most interesting character in the film. She's over the top, unpredicatable, self-confident, slightly loopy and compellingly watchable.
Leatherface has sadly, at this stage in the franchise, become the dullest character in the whole film. It's a bad sign for a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie where the bits with people being chased by a big man with a chainsaw now rank as the most boring part of the film. It's been quite pleasant how well previous films have managed to ensure that long bouts of Leatherface running around with a chainsaw and chasing loud screaming women WASN'T boring, but this film has finally ended the series' streak. More than ever before these scenes with Leatherface in "Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation" feel like filler, with very little sense of threat. This is particularly odd, since I cared when McConaughey was people off sadistically, but the mad man with the chainsaw? Nah, not really. Leatherface seemed almost like the mother of the family (staying at home doing the cooking) in the original movie, so I think dressing him up as a woman was supposed to freak us out. Instead it just looks stupid.
Eventually McConaughey's madness seems to run out of steam and his craziness starts feel tired and repetitive. At this stage, the script reaches yet another dinner table scene, now executed less well than ever before, before a mysterious figure enters the fray to give misleading hope that something interesting might happen. This new direction in the story is certainly different, but in the end it's another pointless addition to an incomprehensible script. I've been following the Now Playing poscasts of this series and they suggest that this new element in the story might be intended to cash in on the popularity of the "X Files"series. If that was intention, I'd say it was a failure since I couldn't see the connection myself, but looking back I can see how that might explain this rather odd decision by the writers.
One podcaster from Now Playing suggests that a particular line from the mysterious character the appears towards the end should be taken as a message from the director: "I'm so sorry. This was supposed to be spiritual, but it turned out terrible." That's about as fitting a review as you will get. I'll give the film credit for being watchable and having the occasional (somewhat) fun moment, but in general the film is an interminable, incomprehensible and pointless dirge which fails to even live up to the relative low standards of parts 2 and 3 in this series.
E+
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
I've already mentioned the Now Playing podcast. When I started these reviews, all I'd seen of this movie series was a bit of the remake. I hadn't been impressed. The Now Playing podcast, however, seemed to suggest that this was as good, if not better, than the original. How did I react to this? First I was worried that I wouldn't like ANY of the films, so it was a huge relief when the original film made such a strong positive impression. So I went on to wonder whether perhaps I had misjudged the remake after all.
The opening scenes involves some documentary footage and unfortunately it's a pretty dull opening. While the original featured body parts lying around in the house being lit up by the flash of a camera, giving us only a vague sense of the horrors to come, the remake shows us unclear black and white footage of a seemingly empty (albeit run-down) house. Why should we care?
We are then introduced to a van full of 'teenagers' only this time they aren't going to check out a house belonging to their grandfather or to respond to stories of grave defilement. No, this time they're just driving through after a nice little holiday in Mexico where some of them, it turns out, have smuggled drugs back across the border.
None of the characters in the van has any kind of realistic personality. While I felt drawn in by the wheelchair-bound character, Franklin, from the original film, I found it difficult to relate to any of the protagonists in the remake. Some of the lines feel like they might indicate personality traits, but the way the conversations progress feels entirely unnatural. These just don't ever seem like real people.
In the original film they pick up a hitchhiker who turns out to be more than a little unhinged. Now I'm going to go with a mild spoiler here by telling you what happens to the hitchhiker in the remake. This is very early in the film and while I'm revealing an early shocking moment I don't think it matters too much. (Not least since, in case you haven't noticed, I don't really think this film is worse your time.) Anyway, in this film there's a hitchhiker, only this time around it's a girl. She's not so much excitable and unhinged as shook up and traumatised. She complains that the 'teenagers' are driving the wrong way and then reaches between her bloody thighs to retrieve a pistol and shoot herself in the head. Now our van full of protagonists have no choice but to go to the authorities to deal with the body.
The first stop is a gas station where blatantly rancid pork (including a whole pig's head) with flies eagerly buzzing around it is for sale. The lady at the counter sounds entirely unphased by the news that the 'teenagers' have been driving around with a dead body in the back of their van. Suspiciously, the lady does not give them the option of phoning the police themselves, but instead phones on their behalf, informing them that the sheriff is waiting at a mill in the middle of nowhere.
In all the previous films in this series the victims have faced what appears to be a bizarre and twisted parody of 'southern hospitality'. Also the victims have never been COMPLETE outsiders. In the first film they are visiting their grandfather's house, meaning they have family ties to the area. In the second film, the protagonists are a sheriff and a local radio host, both of whom are southern themselves. In the third film admittedly the main protagonists are outsiders who are merely driving through, but early on we are made aware of a prior survivor who lives more locally. In the fourth film all of the protagonists are attending a prom at their school in the same basic area where the killers live. Yet in this remake, all the protagonists are complete outsiders and while our protagonists are shown as good-hearted, every single southerner seems to be portrayed as, not only absurdly creepy, but also wholly inhospitable.
While Tobe Hooper was drawing from his own experience of southern US culture, this film seems to have nothing but contempt for southerners. This theme is seen somewhat in the Friday the 13th remake (also made by Platinum Dunes) where we see some locals actually praising the murderous antics of Jason Vorhees.
Some of the plot elements in this film make absolutely no sense whatsoever. When the protagonists reach the mill they find no Sheriff, but they do find an odd malformed child who plays very little role for the rest of the film.
One protagonist finding herself in some locals' trailer at one stage looks at a photo and finds herself less concerned with the fact that these locals are probably in league with the same mad killers causing her so much grief and more worried about the fact that their baby is not their own. She gets so upset by this that she exclaims her accusations loudly (and much more confidently than I would have thought the photo she found allows for) "YOU STOLE HER!" I mean seriously, let's get some sensible priorities! The baby is not in danger, but she is. Why would she announce to these people that she knows they are not normal lovely people? Particularly considering that they are the only southerners to give the remotest suggestion that they might be somewhat interested in being hospitable to guests.
Oh and when you are running out of options, where better to go than into the middle of a slaughterhouse, eh? "Oh look I've run into the middle of nowhere and there's nowhere else to go but inside this massive building used to store dead meat. What luck!" *facepalm*
The dinner table scene does not occur in this film. Leatherface appears threatening, but oddly unimpressive. Leatherface didn't become popular because he was a big savage chainsaw murderer who wore human skin. There was more to him that that. The whole original Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie had a very important aspect that the makers of this remake do not appear to understand: A sense of fun.
The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre is definitely the worst film in the entire series because it is the first film in the series to have absolutely no sense of fun whatsoever. This film is an entirely joyless experience and appears to have been made by people with no understanding of the appeal of the first movie. It was actively painful to sit through this monotonous dirge and have no idea how anyone could enjoy this film. Platinum Dunes movies gradually become more colourful each time, so as the first of their output this remake is composed of a bland selection of greys and browns. I would actually suggest that fans of Texas Chainsaw Massacre steer well clear of this rotten husk of a remake.
E-
My review of the first "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" movie can be found here (scroll to the end). My reviews for Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and 3 can be found here (along with a review for "The Loved Ones"). You can also find some of my reviews for other Tobe Hooper movies here (along with a review for "Creepshow").
First review is of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie that was buried for fear of killing Matthew McConaughey and Renee Zellweger's careers. Second review considers what appears to be (in some quarters at least) viewed as the best of the Platinum Dunes horror remakes. Read what I thought below!
Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994)
My Geek Blasphemy didn't so much recommend this movie, so much as promote its snarkability. A buried, straight-to-video embarrasment for Matthew McConaughey and Renee Zellwegger, the DVD case features both of their faces blown up large.
Renee Zellwegger appears amongst a whole group of expendable schoolkids at their prom. With the DVD cover to go by, we know that Renee Zellwegger's withdrawn and shy character is going to become significant in the long run and is most likely going to be movie's "final girl".
I was hoping this film would turn out to be fun and there were, initially, some good reasons to expect this. Matthew McConaughey's character is pretty jolly when he turns up and starts killing in people in fairly quick succession. He spouts neat lines like "I'm gonna kill ya. It ain't no f-ing biggie!" This was okay to begin with. Another character introduced early on is the completely nuts estate agent lady who, for me, was the most interesting character in the film. She's over the top, unpredicatable, self-confident, slightly loopy and compellingly watchable.
Leatherface has sadly, at this stage in the franchise, become the dullest character in the whole film. It's a bad sign for a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie where the bits with people being chased by a big man with a chainsaw now rank as the most boring part of the film. It's been quite pleasant how well previous films have managed to ensure that long bouts of Leatherface running around with a chainsaw and chasing loud screaming women WASN'T boring, but this film has finally ended the series' streak. More than ever before these scenes with Leatherface in "Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation" feel like filler, with very little sense of threat. This is particularly odd, since I cared when McConaughey was people off sadistically, but the mad man with the chainsaw? Nah, not really. Leatherface seemed almost like the mother of the family (staying at home doing the cooking) in the original movie, so I think dressing him up as a woman was supposed to freak us out. Instead it just looks stupid.
Eventually McConaughey's madness seems to run out of steam and his craziness starts feel tired and repetitive. At this stage, the script reaches yet another dinner table scene, now executed less well than ever before, before a mysterious figure enters the fray to give misleading hope that something interesting might happen. This new direction in the story is certainly different, but in the end it's another pointless addition to an incomprehensible script. I've been following the Now Playing poscasts of this series and they suggest that this new element in the story might be intended to cash in on the popularity of the "X Files"series. If that was intention, I'd say it was a failure since I couldn't see the connection myself, but looking back I can see how that might explain this rather odd decision by the writers.
One podcaster from Now Playing suggests that a particular line from the mysterious character the appears towards the end should be taken as a message from the director: "I'm so sorry. This was supposed to be spiritual, but it turned out terrible." That's about as fitting a review as you will get. I'll give the film credit for being watchable and having the occasional (somewhat) fun moment, but in general the film is an interminable, incomprehensible and pointless dirge which fails to even live up to the relative low standards of parts 2 and 3 in this series.
E+
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
I've already mentioned the Now Playing podcast. When I started these reviews, all I'd seen of this movie series was a bit of the remake. I hadn't been impressed. The Now Playing podcast, however, seemed to suggest that this was as good, if not better, than the original. How did I react to this? First I was worried that I wouldn't like ANY of the films, so it was a huge relief when the original film made such a strong positive impression. So I went on to wonder whether perhaps I had misjudged the remake after all.
The opening scenes involves some documentary footage and unfortunately it's a pretty dull opening. While the original featured body parts lying around in the house being lit up by the flash of a camera, giving us only a vague sense of the horrors to come, the remake shows us unclear black and white footage of a seemingly empty (albeit run-down) house. Why should we care?
We are then introduced to a van full of 'teenagers' only this time they aren't going to check out a house belonging to their grandfather or to respond to stories of grave defilement. No, this time they're just driving through after a nice little holiday in Mexico where some of them, it turns out, have smuggled drugs back across the border.
None of the characters in the van has any kind of realistic personality. While I felt drawn in by the wheelchair-bound character, Franklin, from the original film, I found it difficult to relate to any of the protagonists in the remake. Some of the lines feel like they might indicate personality traits, but the way the conversations progress feels entirely unnatural. These just don't ever seem like real people.
In the original film they pick up a hitchhiker who turns out to be more than a little unhinged. Now I'm going to go with a mild spoiler here by telling you what happens to the hitchhiker in the remake. This is very early in the film and while I'm revealing an early shocking moment I don't think it matters too much. (Not least since, in case you haven't noticed, I don't really think this film is worse your time.) Anyway, in this film there's a hitchhiker, only this time around it's a girl. She's not so much excitable and unhinged as shook up and traumatised. She complains that the 'teenagers' are driving the wrong way and then reaches between her bloody thighs to retrieve a pistol and shoot herself in the head. Now our van full of protagonists have no choice but to go to the authorities to deal with the body.
The first stop is a gas station where blatantly rancid pork (including a whole pig's head) with flies eagerly buzzing around it is for sale. The lady at the counter sounds entirely unphased by the news that the 'teenagers' have been driving around with a dead body in the back of their van. Suspiciously, the lady does not give them the option of phoning the police themselves, but instead phones on their behalf, informing them that the sheriff is waiting at a mill in the middle of nowhere.
In all the previous films in this series the victims have faced what appears to be a bizarre and twisted parody of 'southern hospitality'. Also the victims have never been COMPLETE outsiders. In the first film they are visiting their grandfather's house, meaning they have family ties to the area. In the second film, the protagonists are a sheriff and a local radio host, both of whom are southern themselves. In the third film admittedly the main protagonists are outsiders who are merely driving through, but early on we are made aware of a prior survivor who lives more locally. In the fourth film all of the protagonists are attending a prom at their school in the same basic area where the killers live. Yet in this remake, all the protagonists are complete outsiders and while our protagonists are shown as good-hearted, every single southerner seems to be portrayed as, not only absurdly creepy, but also wholly inhospitable.
While Tobe Hooper was drawing from his own experience of southern US culture, this film seems to have nothing but contempt for southerners. This theme is seen somewhat in the Friday the 13th remake (also made by Platinum Dunes) where we see some locals actually praising the murderous antics of Jason Vorhees.
Some of the plot elements in this film make absolutely no sense whatsoever. When the protagonists reach the mill they find no Sheriff, but they do find an odd malformed child who plays very little role for the rest of the film.
One protagonist finding herself in some locals' trailer at one stage looks at a photo and finds herself less concerned with the fact that these locals are probably in league with the same mad killers causing her so much grief and more worried about the fact that their baby is not their own. She gets so upset by this that she exclaims her accusations loudly (and much more confidently than I would have thought the photo she found allows for) "YOU STOLE HER!" I mean seriously, let's get some sensible priorities! The baby is not in danger, but she is. Why would she announce to these people that she knows they are not normal lovely people? Particularly considering that they are the only southerners to give the remotest suggestion that they might be somewhat interested in being hospitable to guests.
Oh and when you are running out of options, where better to go than into the middle of a slaughterhouse, eh? "Oh look I've run into the middle of nowhere and there's nowhere else to go but inside this massive building used to store dead meat. What luck!" *facepalm*
The dinner table scene does not occur in this film. Leatherface appears threatening, but oddly unimpressive. Leatherface didn't become popular because he was a big savage chainsaw murderer who wore human skin. There was more to him that that. The whole original Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie had a very important aspect that the makers of this remake do not appear to understand: A sense of fun.
The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre is definitely the worst film in the entire series because it is the first film in the series to have absolutely no sense of fun whatsoever. This film is an entirely joyless experience and appears to have been made by people with no understanding of the appeal of the first movie. It was actively painful to sit through this monotonous dirge and have no idea how anyone could enjoy this film. Platinum Dunes movies gradually become more colourful each time, so as the first of their output this remake is composed of a bland selection of greys and browns. I would actually suggest that fans of Texas Chainsaw Massacre steer well clear of this rotten husk of a remake.
E-
That's all the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series reviewed now. (I currently have no plans to check out Platinum Dunes follow-up movie "Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning". If you want to convince me to do so, feel free to explain why in the comments.) However, more movies from director Tobe Hooper are still to come!
And naturally I'll also be continuing my Hitchcock marathon. And according to the big horror franchise poll, the next two franchises for me to check out are Child's Play and The Omen.
