A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Texas Chainsaw Massacre -- in Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[haineshisway]

While I certainly respect everyone's opinion, I did have to laugh at Paramount passing on this but just a short few years later unleashing the far, far worse (both artistically and gore-wise) Friday the 13th. Although I doubt it was the same executives. Just more irony in a town filled with it.

Yes, the executives in 1975/76 lasted only a short time. And just for the record I also loathe the Friday the 13th series.

 

[Tom St Jones]

While I certainly respect everyone's opinion, I did have to laugh at Paramount passing on this but just a short few years later unleashing the far, far worse (both artistically and gore-wise) Friday the 13th. Although I doubt it was the same executives. Just more irony in a town filled with it.

Have to beg your pardon. The original Friday the 13th, trashy slasher flick that it may be, scared the bejesus out of a lot of people (yes, many of them teenagers but hardly just teens). Jason Voorhees was a human(?) Jaws*, especially in the early films. Like in "Jaws", the antagonist's theme/ parts of the underscore was a powerful suspense-builder. Besides this, many of the non-stalking scenes had a haunting (NPI) beauty to them.


*not to be confused with "Jaws" from the 007 films, of course. RIP Richard Kiel

 

[JohnMor]

Have to beg your pardon. The original Friday the 13th, trashy slasher flick that it may be, scared the bejesus out of a lot of people (yes, many of them teenagers but hardly just teens). Jason Voorhees was a human(?) Jaws*, especially in the early films. Like in "Jaws", the antagonist's theme/ parts of the underscore was a powerful suspense-builder. Besides this, many of the non-stalking scenes had a haunting (NPI) beauty to them.


*not to be confused with "Jaws" from the 007 films, of course. RIP Richard Kiel

But, of course, it wasn't Jason Voorhees in Friday the 13th.

 

[hanshotfirst1138]

Ah, they kept the mono! Thank God!

 

[Tom St Jones]

But, of course, it wasn't Jason Voorhees in Friday the 13th.

Of course, most people didn't know this going in the first time. T'was indeed a bit ironic that the first film was not (not quite) about Jason.

 

[Oblivion138]

I didn't lose money and had Paramount released the film they most likely would have lost money. It was their decision - I merely offered my opinion and he happened to agree with it. As to artistic sense, that is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure the film, if I bothered to watch it again, would seem tame by today's standards, just as Psycho, when shown to young people, seems tame - they have no idea what it was like to see that film in 1960. So, you may love the film for whatever reasons (did you see it when it was released?) and that is your OPINION. I was relating what I feel is an amusing story and the story contains my OPINION of the film - not yours, not anyone else's.

Don't get me wrong...it is an amusing story. It also slanders an excellent piece of genre film, based on the recollection of a single viewing, 40 years ago. No, I didn't see it in 1974. I wasn't alive. But I've seen it many times over the years, and my most recent viewing was yesterday. So I'd say it's more clearly defined in my mind than yours, with respect. And while critique of artistry may be in the eye of the beholder, to say that the filmmakers didn't know how to use a camera only reveals that you haven't seen the film in 40 years, and obviously don't remember it very well. You were apparently too repulsed by the tone of the film to appreciate - or even recognize - the rather obvious artistry at work.

Speaking in absolutes - never a good idea.

A good example of speaking in absolutes:

"Certainly one of the most vile films ever made."

 

[Tom St Jones]

Just to add one more thing, I think a horror film is usually only as good as it's (suspense) music, such as the tension and dread-inspiring antagonist theme in Friday the 13th, which is very good. Works best when you have a theme or even just a lone instrument to signify/ symbolize the unseen evil/ the unseen creature/ etc., sort of (if not quite) like the horn section that represents the wolf in recordings of the classic "Peter & the Wolf"

 

[Vincent_P]

Just to add one more thing, I think a horror film is usually only as good as it's (suspense) music, such as the tension and dread-inspiring antagonist theme in Friday the 13th, which is very good. Works best when you have a theme or even just a lone instrument to signify/ symbolize the unseen evil/ the unseen creature/ etc., sort of (if not quite) like the horn section that represents the wolf in recordings of the classic "Peter & the Wolf"

Which is another reason THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE is such an amazingly accomplished work of art. The "music", as it is, essentially exists as a collection of creepy discordant sounds. Have you even heard anybody hum the TCM "theme"? Even if you stripped away the minimalist "music score", this film would still be incredibly creepy and effective. Many other classic horror films, not so much (I'm reminded of the supplement on the original Criterion LaserDisc of John Carpenter's great HALLOWEEN that stripped a scene of its music).

So yeah, this film isn't "vile" at all, and it's certainly not one that "was made by insane people who'd been given film and a camera, not that they really knew how to use it." The lighting, camerawork, editing, sound work et al in THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE is genius. It's an incredibly effective horror film that was made with accomplished artistry and skill by its talented director, cast and crew, and it's one of the few films of ANY genre that will still be being discussed and revered hundreds of years from now when we're all dead and gone.

Vincent

 

[Vincent_P]

.....

 

[haineshisway]

Don't get me wrong...it is an amusing story. It also slanders an excellent piece of genre film, based on the recollection of a single viewing, 40 years ago. No, I didn't see it in 1974. I wasn't alive. But I've seen it many times over the years, and my most recent viewing was yesterday. So I'd say it's more clearly defined in my mind than yours, with respect. And while critique of artistry may be in the eye of the beholder, to say that the filmmakers didn't know how to use a camera only reveals that you haven't seen the film in 40 years, and obviously don't remember it very well. You were apparently too repulsed by the tone of the film to appreciate - or even recognize - the rather obvious artistry at work.



A good example of speaking in absolutes:

"Certainly one of the most vile films ever made."

But I'M speaking for myself, not others - so I'm not speaking in absolutes as the other poster was. I'm saying this is what I think, or thought. At that time. After this thread, I'll probably get the damn thing and watch it because I'm sure it will be interesting on some level to see it close to forty years later. The lesson I've learned in this thread, however, is that you can never criticize a horror film, not this one nor any other, because horror FANatics can't take it, hate when their obsessions are not pleasing to others, and get irate over someone thinking a film vile. Let me inform everyone, I'm not the only one who thinks this film is vile, and there are plenty of folks who find most violent horror films vile. Horror fans are almost like no other genre fan around.

 

[Oblivion138]

But I'M speaking for myself, not others - so I'm not speaking in absolutes as the other poster was. I'm saying this is what I think, or thought. At that time. After this thread, I'll probably get the damn thing and watch it because I'm sure it will be interesting on some level to see it close to forty years later. The lesson I've learned in this thread, however, is that you can never criticize a horror film, not this one nor any other, because horror FANatics can't take it, hate when their obsessions are not pleasing to others, and get irate over someone thinking a film vile. Let me inform everyone, I'm not the only one who thinks this film is vile, and there are plenty of folks who find most violent horror films vile. Horror fans are almost like no other genre fan around.

There you go speaking in absolutes again.

I for one have been nothing but civil in this discussion, and have raised valid points...which you've deflected by simply stating over and over that it's just your opinion, and not giving any support to back up said opinion. Which I guess is understandable, as you haven't seen the movie in four decades. But then, chiming in on a movie one hasn't seen in four decades, especially with such vitriol, is probably inadvisable.

At any rate, your overreaction to people not bowing down to your denunciation of the film is quite silly. And lumping horror fans together as a bunch of zealots exhibiting a mob mentality is simply further evidence of a lack of tact, and penchant for generalization on your part. Anyone and everyone will step up to defend what they consider to be good. Singling out horror fans as some mutant exception to the general rude is absurd. And insulting. Certainly more insulting than anything I've said to you.

 

[Vincent_P]

Frankly, I don't understand why Bruce felt the need to speak up in this thread if he hates this classic film. That smacks of trolling, pure and simple. He was obviously looking for a reaction, and he got said reaction, and then he complained about the reaction when he got it. Whatever.

Vincent

 

[haineshisway]

Frankly, I don't understand why Bruce felt the need to speak up in this thread if he hates this classic film. That smacks of trolling, pure and simple. He was obviously looking for a reaction, and he got said reaction, and then he complained about the reaction when he got it. Whatever.

Vincent

No, I thought the story was funny and I told it. The End. Trolling? You must be joking. Oh, I forgot about humor on this site, which is pretty much non-existent. I think this thread proves that pretty tellingly

 

[Vincent_P]

This coming from the guy who was ready to call out an army against the guy who dared to tell what was said in a public presentation re: MY FAIR LADY a couple weeks ago.

Yeah, you know all about humor, Bruce...

Vincent

No, I thought the story was funny and I told it. The End. Trolling? You must be joking. Oh, I forgot about humor on this site, which is pretty much non-existent. I think this thread proves that pretty tellingly

 

[haineshisway]

There you go speaking in absolutes again.

I for one have been nothing but civil in this discussion, and have raised valid points...which you've deflected by simply stating over and over that it's just your opinion, and not giving any support to back up said opinion. Which I guess is understandable, as you haven't seen the movie in four decades. But then, chiming in on a movie one hasn't seen in four decades, especially with such vitriol, is probably inadvisable.

At any rate, your overreaction to people not bowing down to your denunciation of the film is quite silly. And lumping horror fans together as a bunch of zealots exhibiting a mob mentality is simply further evidence of a lack of tact, and penchant for generalization on your part. Anyone and everyone will step up to defend what they consider to be good. Singling out horror fans as some mutant exception to the general rude is absurd. And insulting. Certainly more insulting than anything I've said to you.

And I have been nothing but civil in this discussion. What else do you want me to say other than it's my opinion, which I have every right to state? I don't have to back up anything - I saw the film, stated the circumstance, told the story. Then everyone reacted as if I'd slain their favorite pet, which I found odd but amusing. I'm missing the vitriol. Saying I found a film vile is not vitriol. Why is chiming in on a movie one hasn't seen in decades inadvisable. Chiming in on it if I hadn't seen it would be inadvisable. Please point out to me in any post I made the expectation that people would bow down to me? Oh, you can't, so I'm afraid the silly part doesn't rest with me. I haven't had any overreaction that I can see - I think the overreaction has come from others. I stand by what I said about horror fans. They are like no other genre fan. That's how it appears to me and it is proven to me again and again in thread after thread (especially on another board). You can't argue with them, they don't want to hear criticism, it's PERSONAL. Sorry, I find that odd. That doesn't really happen with fans of comedy, drama, melodrama, musicals - but does happen with horror and, to a lesser extent, with sci-fi and fantasy. But to put a point on it for you - nothing I said was insulting. You used the word "mutant" not I. And it is you who are trying to escalate someone's opinion into WWIII. Not sure why, but there it is.

 

[haineshisway]

This coming from the guy who was ready to call out an army against the guy who dared to tell what was said in a public presentation re: MY FAIR LADY a couple weeks ago.

Yeah, you know all about humor, Bruce...

Vincent

Do you really want to make this PERSONAL? I haven't called people out by name, I haven't gotten personal like this with any specific person. What is it with you people? Really, I'm bowing out of this thread because it's turning noxious.

I guess I missed the mandate that we must not post in threads unless we LOVE the film therein. I just missed that mandate. There have been plenty of threads about films I'm fond of right here on this site that have had people saying they don't like the film being talked about. They saw the film once, hated it, and say so. I don't go all ballistic about it, I just read their OPINION and move on, or discuss it. I don't go after them personally, don't insult them personally as you and others have done here, just because I'm not a fan of your "classic" film. Oh, well.

 

[JohnMor]

I have to say, I agree with Bruce here (although not about the film). But all he did was express his opinion. On a discussion board. In a thread called "A few words about... TTCSM." Not "Lovers of TTCSM Unite." or "How Awesome is TTCSM." I thought that's what this place existed for. One would think people could handle an opposing viewpoint with making it personal and attacking the poster (and his own film yet!)

Opinions don't have to be proven or justified to anybody. I disagree with Bruce about there being no artistic merit to this film. But I don't feel compelled to "defend" an inanimate object like a film. His opinion is simply that, nothing more. So is mine. So is everybody's. I don't understand why people take this so personally.

 

[Cineman]

Certainly one of the most vile films ever made. Ugly and disgusting. I'm sure it's not as potent now as it was back then, but I have no need to ever see it again. When Paramount bought my film The First Nudie Musical, I was on the lot quite often in meetings with the man who ran the studio and his second in command. One day, the second in command said, "I want you to watch a movie that we're thinking about buying and give me your opinion." I said, "Sure." We went into a screening room and he literally locked the door. We sat down and on came this movie - The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. I sat there, knowing I couldn't leave, hating every minute of it - I literally thought it was made by insane people who'd been given film and a camera, not that they really knew how to use it. At the end of it, the second in command laughed and said, "Sorry about the locked door but I knew you'd leave if I didn't." He asked what I thought and I gave him an earful of what I thought and he agreed with me. And they passed on the film.

I enjoyed your story and hope you continue to relate any recollections from your experiences in the film industry. I am a horror movie fan, a big fan of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), but was not bothered by your negative reaction to it at all. The part about your story that struck me most was how great it would be today to have someone in the business, someone who had already watched a particular movie, be so certain that my reaction to that potential wide release movie would be so intense he would have to lock the door to keep me inside the screening room. Wow. Can't honestly remember a movie in the past, oh, 30 years or so that would have prompted such an emotional consideration from either the presenter or in me. Most movies today are about as likely to prompt such an intense reaction as twice warmed over baby pablum.

As an aside, it was also mentioned in this thread that Stanley Kubrick was a huge fan of the movie, so I though it would be fun to cite the list his daughter put together where The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was mentioned as movies he liked:
Stanley Kubrick, cinephile – reduxOn the occasion of Stanley Kubrick’s 85th birthday, Nick Wrigley explores the director’s favourite films and viewing habits with the help of Kubrick’s right-hand man, Jan Harlan. Nick Wrigley Updated: 14 February 2014
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/polls-surveys/stanley-kubrick-cinephile

The only other authoritative list of films Kubrick admired appeared in September 1999 on the alt.movies.kubrick Usenet newsgroup courtesy of his daughter Katharina Kubrick-Hobbs, introduced with her premonitory words:

“There does seem to be a weird desire from people to ‘list’ things. The best, the worst, greatest, most boring, etc. etc… Don’t go analysing yourself to death over this half-remembered list. He liked movies on their own terms… For the record, I happen to know that he liked:

o Closely Observed Trains (Menzel, 1966)
o An American Werewolf in London (Landis, 1981)
o The Fireman’s Ball (Forman, 1967)
o Metropolis (Lang, 1927)
o The Spirit of the Beehive (Erice, 1973)
o White Men Can’t Jump (Shelton, 1992)
o La Belle et la Bête (Cocteau, 1946)
o The Godfather (Coppola, 1972)
o The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (Hooper, 1974)
o Dog Day Afternoon (Lumet, 1975)
o One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest (Forman, 1975)
o Citizen Kane (Welles, 1941)
o Abigail’s Party (Leigh, 1977)
o The Silence of the Lambs (Demme, 1991)

and I know that he hated The Wizard of Oz. Ha Ha!”

Wouldn't you love to know what he hated about The Wizard of Oz? lol!

 

[Robert Crawford]

We need to calm down a bit as some of you are taking negative opinions of this film a little too personally. Every film and film genre has it's critics and supporters. Points have been made so let's respectfully move on from there.

 

[ROclockCK]

Stanley Kubrick, cinephile – reduxOn the occasion of Stanley Kubrick’s 85th birthday, Nick Wrigley explores the director’s favourite films and viewing habits with the help of Kubrick’s right-hand man, Jan Harlan. Nick Wrigley Updated: 14 February 2014
http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/polls-surveys/stanley-kubrick-cinephile

I'm still scratchin' me wee old noggin' over what Kubrick saw in White Men Can't Jump?!? I mean, that's just...uhm...bizarre.

And where's Ophuls??? I thought he revered that filmmaker's work.