DVD Review HTF REVIEW---The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) (1 Viewer)

[NeilK]

This movie is degrading towards the whole genre as well as all of humanity. It is impossibly incoherent as well as violent to the extent of poor taste. Not that violence is an issue here, it's just so blatantly used in such a sick context that it makes this particular viewer feel rather ill and depressed. However, its most unredeemable quality is this; it totally, injustly (once again)takes a classic piece of horror (arguably the best film in the genre) and changes the whole meaning of its representation of violence and horror by making it all so obvious and grotesque to the point of nausia. Sure, its well shot and contains nice booby shots, however this film is just grim and uses excess of violence and terror in all the wrong ways. All in all, it just doesnt pay respect to the films aetheticism which was the only reason the original film in that franchise was the only good, let alone it being an all time classic. The original was subtle in its portryal of violence and this film was the complete opposite of that by being rudely explicit and unredemptive for no valuable reason or explanation whatsoever. Only for screen entertainment; in other words we're all psychopaths who enjoy a good snuff film?

 

[Ryan Wishton]

I thought the movie was passible...

Better than all that I Know what you did last summer trash that tries to pass off as horror...

Nothing special, but better than most recent offerings like Halloween: Ressurection, etc...

This should have been labeled as a sequel though considering it was so different from the original...

I do think naming this a remake was a mistake... It succeeds better as a sequel...

 

[earl_roberts]

Haven't seen the film and won't be buying this DVD but just thought I'd comment on peoples stinginess
For $39.95 you'd get a criterion disc with a lot less then what is here. Even Amarcord and High And Low from criterion are this price and they have non-anamorphic transfers and literally NO extras. Plus the price won't be that bad if bought from the net?
This does sound like an amazing DVD, it's just a shame I have no interest in the film.
Good review too

 

[Scott Burke]

Hank,
The trailer is better than the film. I disliked the original TCM, but because the trailer was so good for the remake, I went. I was bored to tears. Once the price drops, I'm going to buy Freddy V. Jason so I can have the trailer.

 

[Robert Ringwald]

I don't recall any female nudity in the film. Unless you mean through the shirts. Even then... I can't remember any shots that were obviously trying to show off the actresses.

 

[Malcolm R]

And as noted above, there have been plenty of New Line 2-disc releases for the same price as 1-disc releases: Lord of the Rings, Freddy vs. Jason, Blade 2. Why are they suddenly raising prices on this 2-disc release?

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Well said. THHE is a stunningly effective horror movie, and it does deserve a lot more noteriety than it currently earns.

As far as TCM goes, I adore the original, I can tolerate Pt. 2, I hate the rest of the sequels, and I really liked the remake.

Not happy about the price bump, but I'll happily be picking up this CE.

 

[Justin_S]

Yeah, The Hills Have Eyes is one of my all time favorite films, and though the original TCM is as well, Hills tops it in my book. Easily the best film of Wes Craven's career as well.

Anyways, personally, I don't really mind the price increase. There's so many extras, and the disc has been receiving such good reviews, thus it doesn't bother me. I'm willing to pay that much for a fantastic release of a film I'm a fan of, even if previous SEs have been cheaper.

 

[Ryan_Guah]

The high price is for the metal plaque cover, the digi-packaging, and the extras. The movie will probably be around $20-$25 on release day at Best Buy, and I don't think that's too bad of a price. I'll be getting the SE.

 

[NeilK]

I meant booby shots as in Jessica Biel running around in a white, tight undershirt with her "unexposed" breasts creating more atmosphere and viewer interest than the entire film itself. I would suggest that she quit acting and just have her breasts blown-up, superimposed and just floating around the screen with the soundtrack of her incessant screaming in the background.
And yes, The Hills have Eyes is classic, probably Craven's best; however it doesn't come close to the original TCM which is aruably the best horror film ever made.

 

[Justin_S]

That's your opinion, and I can't help but detect a possible sense of sexism in such derogatory comments. Biel is great in this film, and I don't mean just great looking. Your comments just because some people think she is attractive are ridiculous. She can act, and your suggestion of what she should do is just really lame. The rest of the cast put in good performances as well, especially Ermey. I also found the film to be very atmospheric with some gorgeous cinematography. Its a very interesting reimagining in my book, and its not just because Biel is hot.

 

[Ryan Wishton]

I have to agree with Justin...

I dont think Biel did all that bad... She wont win an oscar, but she wasnt bad IMO... She at least attempted to do something... She at least tried...

Truly Bad acting is Lori in Freddy vs Jason... The actress admits she didnt do much for the role and didnt really attempt to do anything... It definately shows... Almost the whole cast in Freddy vs Jason is utterly terrible... From the two nobodys in the corn field to the main characters... 90% sucked all ways around...

Freddy and Jason gave better performances than all of the human characters... Even both of them have had better days... They should have just skipped out on the human plotlines (The characters sucked anyways) and just paid more attention to the 2 title characters...

 

[Jack Johnson]

In my opinion, the TCM remake fundamentally misunderstood the strengths of the original: its naturalistic atmosphere, its documentary-like realism. There was no glamour, no efforts to mythologize the action. It was just terrifyingly down to earth. All too real in feel, leading some to charge the film with being borderline snuff. And it was all the more harrowing for that reason. It was actually a very subtle film. Even when Tobe Hooper's working in over-the-top mode--as he deliberately did in his hilarious, satirical sequel--he's still a meticulous director.

The re-make went the sledgehammer route of slick schlock. It was over-produced, un-distinguished dreck that had almost exactly the same sensibilty as "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" (yes, that's "I STILL Know," not "I know," which--for what it was--was a much better film). Whereas the original film's realism disqaulified the ol' "it's only a movie" mantra oft invoked by terrified filmgoers, virtually everything about the style of the remake signalled IT WAS JUST A MOVIE; the super-slick visuals, the "wall of sound" film score (another bad knock-off of the Howard Shore sound created for The Silence of the Lambs), the uber-attractive teens...including the mythically sexy Jessie Biel...

You know, there IS something to be said for slick schlock, and I watch a lot of it. But this film's called The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. That's a hell of a pedigree to live up to. Maybe they should've called it something else, like Tanktop Tina and the Midnight Rampage of the Randy Saw Boy? I like it better already.

And hey, if you want glossy and spiritedly over-the-top, try Hooper's underrated and misunderstood send-up of a sequel, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part 2. It's Just about the most crazily manic thing ever.

 

[NeilK]

Well put. This is why casting the chick from 7th Heaven, who really, in my personal opinion, is a dreadful actor (regardless of sexual appeal) who basically just screams and shouts arbitrary one-liners all the while reminding me that she comes from the all-time lamest, sap-fest program in the universe, that being the aforementioned show. Unknowns would have been a more faithful casting decision, but seeing as they probably never even saw the orinigal TCM for what is really was, rather than an exploitational, sensationalist, trite, depressing, ostententatious, crass piece of dung; then why would they want to appeal to a cult following and reputatable film when they can just sign on some music video director and make another MTV video for children who shouldn't even be going to see this hideously violent film. Kids dying in really degrading, depressing ways, no redemption or rational thought or subtext behind all the violence, sounds like a killer movie, i'm stoked.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I personally don't think the remake misunderstood the strengths of the original film. I think the producer (Bay) and director were smart enough to kno here was no way they could match the original film. They could have shot it scene for scene and there was no way to improve on it. Instead, they tried to do something different with the characters, the "scares" and even the look. Had they went for the look of the original film then they would have failed and I'm sure fans of the original would have been a lot more upset. We certainly didn't need something like the PSYCHO remake.

As for the acting, I might get my house burned down for this but here goes. How many horror films from the past 30 years REALLY have "great" acting? I mean, was an actress hired because she could win an Oscar or because she had the breasts which came in handy for the nude scenes? Perhaps better direction could have gotten more from an actress but I don't think for a second that the director was going for an Oscar worthy performance. Most of these characters are put on the screen to get naked, get drunk, have sex and then get slaughtered. The "main" character usually has a story to tell to make us like her but other than that these people are just here to get slaughtered. I've always overlooked bad acting in a horror film and will continue to do so.

I don't think Biel should have gotten an Oscar nomination nor is her performance "good" but it is better than what we saw throughout the 1980's slashers. I think the likes of Neve Campbell, Jennifer Love Hewitt and others in the SCREAM type film were still better actors than what we saw in the F13 films, HALLOWEEN sequels and even the NOES sequels. I think SCREAM changed the genre because director's were going for performances rather than just nudity (which there was none).

Perhaps I'm wrong in this but I always looked at the 1980's slashers as teenage boy fantasies. Every five minutes some hot girl would get naked for us and then she'd get killed. I remember reading something from Joe Bob Briggs where he said that in the 1980's, a horror actress was hired for one film and when that character died, so did her career. I've seen countless horror films where someone was killed and we pretty much never saw her again.

 

[NeilK]

They could have changed the remake's plot without disgracing the original's aesthetic i.e. the total opposite to what we have here. The film could have at the very least been called TCM 5 rather than boasting it to be a remake of the original. That's why i'm not complaining about the other three crappy sequels; at least they are honest about their intents.

 

[Robert Ringwald]

Even though the 4th one was intended to be a remake...

 

[Ryan Wishton]

Technically, TCM 4 was an official remake when they started working on the film...

Robert is right...

No matter how bad the other movies were, none were as bad as the 4th one... Most movies on earth arent as bad as Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre...

The 3rd one is even a remake to some extent...

Then again, I never thought the original was really all that good... The acting in the original wasnt very good IMO... Franklin was just too laughable for his own good... This series never really appealed to me as a whole...

I just cant believe that some people actually think the Freddy vs Jason actors were better than those in this remake...

 

[Justin_S]

There were only three sequels, thank you very much.

I agree, Ryan. The actors in Freddy vs. Jason were some of the worst I've ever seen. I'm definitely with you on that one.

 

[NeilK]

Okay okay, three sequels, it was typo (as I stated that this was TCM 5), still, this has nothing to do with the matter that TCM... the remake, was junk, as were it's sequels.
And yes, the acting in Freddy Versus Jason was abysmal (especially from the main chick from Underclared and the Destiny's Child chick).