๐Ÿ””Alerts
Login to get notifications!
๐Ÿ—จ๏ธForum

๐ŸŽž๏ธMovies & TV


๐ŸŒJunk

๐Ÿ”
Search keywords
Join Now!   or       ๐Ÿ”ฝ Forgot Password?

Jan 2018
This movie is definitely something. Matthew McConaughey really goes off the deep end in this movie, in all the best ways.

Talking about the Illuminati could be a spoiler but I don't think anyone is worried about that.

What did you think of their appearance in this movie?

[youtube=3OZmzFrifxk]


๐Ÿšธ
avatar
Box_a_Hair says:
#1

Jan 2018
I've always been terribly fond of this movie. Maybe because it's the black sheep of an already psychotic family, so that must mean it's different, right? To be honest, I love the whole series. Not a damn one in there that I don't find ample enjoyment from, but this one takes the cake for weirdest. No doubt about it.

Everything about this movie is awkard. Jenny is a pretty dull, no-backbone type of character, and she's our protagonist. Whenever she's supposed to act tough, she's still ridiculous. Bary is an absolute dick, and he's hilarious. Heather is as ditzy of a character as they come, and she excels at it. Sean is probably more dull than Jenny, and we haven't even gotten to the Sawyer family yet...

We already know McConaughey is great as Vilmer, but all the family is vastly amsuing in this entry. Grandpa is half-dead, and only ever walks away from it all. W.E. thinks he's smart, but he's absolute redneck. Darla is a sexy, rubber-breasted and brainwashed fool, but she's the only one who carries on with a smile. And Leatherface? Contrary to all other entries in this series, he's a pussified, whiny piece of shit.

I wonder if Kim Henkel was intent on turning this series on its head when he made this. There's a documentary about it, and as much of a fan as I am of this movie, I've never seen it. Hell, I own three copies of this on dvd, and by God, there just ain't enough Next Generation in my life. emoticon


The illuminati is such an awkward thing to add to this series. It's probably some metaphor for the filmmaking business or something, but clearly, it got lost in translation. Now, Rothman is just telling this arbitrary psychotic family in the woods to scare people? To show them "true horror"? Maybe this was a commentary on the state of 90s horror. 90s horror sucked, and wouldn't get its "revitalization" for another couple of years. Kim Henkel is either a genius, or a madman.

There isn't much else these guys seem to do in the movie. They come, if only to make themselves known to the audience, just to tell Vilmer he's not cool enough to be in a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie, and he takes it personally. At this time in his career, McConaughey is still trying to become that reputable A-lister. He isn't there yet, and when Rothman tells him he sucks at life, Matthew takes it personally, and goes fucking nuts! I don't know about you guys, but that's when he won me over. This, and Killer Joe (2011).

Of course, Rothman is also there to show us that he's into kinky stuff, too. I guess those higher-ups like their pierced torsos, and licking people. Buy hey, a loss is a loss, so he's a stand-up guy. He figured... the runtime of the movie is almost over, and it'd be a pretty shitty thing to do letting a girl get killed by this "leatherface". So Rothman's like, "fuck it", and takes her to the police himself. Not so much a frightening ending as the original, but rather a bizarre, "what did I just watch?" ending, that leaves you wondering where it all went wrong.

That's why the remake came out a few years later. To clean the slate. For what it's worth, I thought the '03 remake was top-notch, so kudos to them for making it scary again, after this tame, comical sequel.


๐Ÿšธ
avatar
Shadow-345 says:
#2, Reply to #1

Jan 2018
Nice response.

It's kind of weird that Texas Chainsaw Massacre feels like it has no follow up, even with a string of sequels.

They feel more like hypothetical sequels, or spin-off sequels. Like what if this was a sequel to Texas Chainsaw? and here it is. Even the current Leatherface prequel feels like that.

Guess the remake benefits from being a definite seperate continuity in that way. More like a what if Texas Chainsaw Massacre was made as a slicker modern horror production? And once again, here it actually is.


๐Ÿšธ
avatar
Box_a_Hair says:
#3, Reply to #2

Jan 2018
That's the truth. Every one of these movies is quite different from each other, except for the remake and its prequel.

Part 2 was the goofy and now defunct canon, but always canon in our hearts because of Jim Siedow's cook. He's the only one who grounds it into face (and beef). Part 3 is way off, and Leatherface is an angrier retard in this one, more resemblant of the remake's Leatherface, only not nearly as intimidating.

It's at this point that you realize you're not actually disregarding the state of these sequels in the franchise, so much as you are disregarding the family. I feel that these are all clearly different characters each time. Different branches of the family, perhaps? Texas is a big state, and there's a lot of inbreeding going on... That's why I can treat each of these sequels/remakes/prequels as yet another separate incident, with families that have mighty similar habits.

And for fun, I like to think of "Butcher Boys" as a spiritual sequel as well, because it has so many makings of a chainsaw massacre, only without the chainsaw.

You saw no follow up, but the 2013 "Texas Chainsaw" did a direct continuation. I really don't know why people hate that movie. I really dig it, and they paid a lot of respect to the original. They only thing they didn't pay attention to was the timeline, casting a 20 something girl to be a 40 year old character, but everything else about it was really fun.

The recent prequel felt like it wanted to pay respects to both the original and the remake. The fat dude was built up to be the '74 film's Leatherface, and yet the fitter regular guy is more reminiscent of the Bryniarski '03 Leatherface.

One thing these movies want to do is keep it simple, which usually means keeping things in the past, even though the original was made to be rather contemporary. Yet, the remake sets it back in the past. It's prequel does likewise, and when Texas Chainsaw finally takes us back to the "present", the new film throws us right back in the past, farther than we've ever gone before.

What if the Texas Chainsaw Massacre happened in the wild west times? Well, chainsaws didn't exist yet, so that's the criteria. You at least need to set the film in a time when chainsaws exist, even if you don't use them. Nobody dies by chainsaw in Next Generation. How is it a chainsaw massacre then? Questions, questions...


@ am
You have reached the end of Trash Epics.