Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

ds21 · January 22, 2009, 08:28:37 PM

Should it be considered a B-movie?

vanlutz · January 22, 2009, 08:48:57 PM

Absolutely. It's a lo-budget flick (I think about $100,000 to make), shot on 16mm, and one of the best. It just elevated itself to "A-List" horror because it's magnificent and scary as hell.

For all you youngsters who don't agree; In 1974 it was the most original and horrifying movie to date. There was nothing like it before. It's just that with everything that came after, youngsters aren't scared as easily.

HappyGilmore · January 22, 2009, 09:18:58 PM

TCM was/is a great flick, for what it is. I'm fonder of TCM Part 2, starring none other than Dennis Hopper. But to each their own.

ds21 · January 23, 2009, 11:50:37 AM

TCM 2... only saw the final scene, which was horrifyingly bad (and I loved every minute of it). I love the original too. The very first kill is the thing that lives in my memory... so sudden and brutal, and the way the music starts up after Leatherface slams the door...the movie is brilliant in its B-movie-ness.

Doc Daneeka · January 23, 2009, 04:49:57 PM

It is a b-movie by design, but the final product is perhaps the most perfect horror film ever made. Every scene is scary or at least unsettling, without overdoing the mood so much as to look melodramatic. "Massacre" goes from ominous foreshadowing, to dreary exposition, to an increasingly frightening series of mounting scares, to a heart pounding conflict, climaxing in a repulsive interlude, and finally ending in a conclusion that never settles down.

TCM is true horror, not driven by simple suspense or exploitive thrills (I actually think The Evil Dead is overall scarier than this, but it isn't as well-crafted, the overall impact is a little bit spoiled with more frequent/prominent camp-value), but from the sense that you know what is happening and perhaps what will happen. The scary part is the sensory overload coming from HOW everything goes down, and the question of when the nightmare presented to you will end.

Yes, the sequels I've seen (2 & 3) were also brilliant, but they just don't have the same primal impact as the first. To this horror fan, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the best films ever made.

ds21 · January 23, 2009, 05:06:25 PM

Quote from: Mr. Briggs Inc. on January 23, 2009, 04:49:57 PM
It is a b-movie by design, but the final product is perhaps the most perfect horror film ever made. Every scene is scary or at least unsettling, without overdoing the mood so much as to look melodramatic. "Massacre" goes from ominous foreshadowing, to dreary exposition, to an increasingly frightening series of mounting scares, to a heart pounding conflict, climaxing in a repulsive interlude, and finally ending in a conclusion that never settles down.

TCM is true horror, not driven by simple suspense or exploitive thrills (I actually think The Evil Dead is overall scarier than this, but it isn't as well-crafted, the overall impact is a little bit spoiled with more frequent/prominent camp-value), but from the sense that you know what is happening and perhaps what will happen. The scary part is the sensory overload coming from HOW everything goes down, and the question of when the nightmare presented to you will end.

Yes, the sequels I've seen (2 & 3) were also brilliant, but they just don't have the same primal impact as the first. To this horror fan, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the best films ever made.

I agree... great horror film... but I didn't find it to be very frightening... unsettling, sure, but not frightening persay... still an amazing movie.

HappyGilmore · January 23, 2009, 08:16:58 PM

Quote from: Mr. Briggs Inc. on January 23, 2009, 04:49:57 PM

Yes, the sequels I've seen (2 & 3) were also brilliant, but they just don't have the same primal impact as the first. To this horror fan, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the best films ever made.

I haven't seen 3, yet. But I can tell you this, part 4 is an utter waste of celluloid in every sense of the word. First things first, it stars Renee Zellwegger as the female lead, and Matthew McCaughnahey (spelling) as the male lead. If that's not scary there, I don't know what is.

Javakoala · January 23, 2009, 09:13:19 PM

I like the original simply because of what it did with what it had. I can see it in its context. Yet I was disappointed in it because all I heard growing up was how gory it was, so when I saw it, I was wondering where the heck was all this blood I've been hearing about. Ain't there. But watching it later, I realized Hooper made it SEEM gory given what he was showing you. He tricked you into seeing things. Very crafty.

Funniest thing about the movie is that when I saw it the first time, my friend and I were laughing about it. After one of the more intense scenes, this kid gets up from the front row and is running down the aisle. He trips, hits the ground and projectile vomits. OMFG! That was worth the price of admission.

I'm a cruel, cruel man....

Doggett · January 24, 2009, 08:26:42 AM

Yes!!!!

archivesofthedead · January 25, 2009, 04:40:15 PM

Probably one of the best, imho.

indianasmith · January 25, 2009, 04:59:50 PM

The COMMERCIALS for that movie scared me to death when I was 10 years old!!!!!

I love the original, and I think I am one of the few around here that also liked the remake, done just a few years ago. To me, it preserved the spirit of the original, with more up-to-date gore effects.

HappyGilmore · January 25, 2009, 08:36:16 PM

Quote from: indianasmith on January 25, 2009, 04:59:50 PM
The COMMERCIALS for that movie scared me to death when I was 10 years old!!!!!

I love the original, and I think I am one of the few around here that also liked the remake, done just a few years ago. To me, it preserved the spirit of the original, with more up-to-date gore effects.

I quite liked the remake, actually. I felt it's 'prequel' that came out afterwards was pretty decent as well. Considering it's 'torture porn' label, it worked. Plus, Jessica Biel in a wet t-shirt for two hours is a good time killer.

vanlutz · February 19, 2009, 11:11:42 AM

I like 2. But, nothing can beat one. To me this movie is scary as hell, because of what the girl goes through. The whole family dinner. The bucket and hammer. CLASSIC CLASSIC STUFF. It was also the first time anything had ever been done like that. Look at the other horror movies from that time. Bad Dracula's and witchcraft crap. Not that they weren't fun, but, nothing like TCM.

ds21 · February 19, 2009, 12:12:11 PM

yeah, the hammer and bucket scene was pretty brutal. The dinner scene was too cheesy for me, personally. I thought the way that Kirk gets killed was well done. No leading up to it or anything. Just sudden and brutal. Same with Pam's death. In fact, I'd say the first half is better than the last half (although the last half is still brilliant).

I don't think any modern movie, with their Hollywood glitter and polish, can compete with the raw brutality that Hooper captured on film. Hollywood may have cutting-edge gore and violence...but not the sick atmosphere of TCM. Just watch the opening credits and you'll see what I mean.

meQal · February 19, 2009, 12:41:15 PM

I loved the original. It was/is one of the best films of it's genre. The remake blows big time. Sadly there are those out there who will never see the original because of the suckfest remake.
I never seen any of the trailers for the film when I was a kid becase the television stations where I grew up refuse to show them. Even theaters refused to carry the film because of fear of the film's subject matter.
It wasn't until I was an adult that even video stores would carry the film for rental. Joys of living in the Bible Belt.
The film is a great low budget film that does what it's suppose to do, scare the crap out of you.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Javakoala