Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Franchise

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Se7en XxSinzXx View Post
    The remake is easily the better film, but I like & enjoy the original more, if that makes sense.
    I'm kind of the opposite, the original is probably the better movie yet I enjoy the remake more.

    Comment


    • The remake is a stupid, but enjoyable movie. But it did nothing new, nothing special, and it did nothing really good. The original on the other hand revolutionized the horror genre, and holds up until this day, as one of the scariest movies ever=Original is the better movie.
      I have to pee on her.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Citrus3000 View Post
        The remake is a stupid, but enjoyable movie. But it did nothing new, nothing special, and it did nothing really good. The original on the other hand revolutionized the horror genre, and holds up until this day, as one of the scariest movies ever=Original is the better movie.
        Yeah, I don't think anyone is going to deny you that.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Citrus3000 View Post
          And the remake does everything wrong the original does right-everything you didn't see in the original (which made it way scarier) can be seen in the remake
          That makes no sense. Seeing what you have already imagined doesn't make it less scary but merely confirms your suspicions or realizes the horror. It is unrealized horror that pisses me off, as of course, I am using my brain to imagine what's next while watching a horror movie. It is the duty of the filmmaker to provide the visual element of horror.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Se7en XxSinzXx View Post
            The remake is easily the better film, but I like & enjoy the original more, if that makes sense.
            No. It doesn't make one ounce of sense.

            Originally posted by SYL View Post
            Nowadays, when I watch the remake... It's just boring to me. It's a pretty blah movie.
            Agreed.

            Originally posted by Citrus3000 View Post
            The remake is a stupid, piece of shit movie.
            fixed

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Se7en XxSinzXx View Post
              The remake is easily the better film, but I like & enjoy the original more, if that makes sense.
              That's an incredibly confusing statement.

              Just because a movie got a bigger budget, doesn't mean it's better. Especially in this case, because you're comparing a Michael Bay/Platinum Dunes remake, to one of the best horror movies ever.

              That alone is astonishing...
              Last edited by Yggdrasil; 09-02-2011, 10:12 AM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Klownz View Post
                fixed
                You know, sometimes I really like you.

                I have to pee on her.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Se7en XxSinzXx View Post
                  The remake is easily the better film, but I like & enjoy the original more, if that makes sense.
                  How? Let's take a look at the facts:

                  The original has beautiful editing, especially for such a low-budget horror film from the 70's. Tobe Hopper has a very artful eye, and it shows in the cinematography and the editing.

                  It is filled with great themes. I mean, come on, the feminine oppression theme is still relevant in cinematic terms today. It is a portrait of human suffering and the effects of poverty - to me it explores this theme almost as wonderfully as Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven, albeit completely differently.

                  It is also a love letter to Texas. Texas is portrayed in a very beautiful light in the film despite the fact that such atrocious horrors are being committed there.

                  The remake literally could've been set anywhere had the state not been in the title. Everything was dark and had a sepia tone.

                  It has absolutely no themes to show for itself. It watered down the original to it's bare essentials and turned this classic exploitation tale into a straight slasher.

                  TCM is so much more than just a horror film. The remake is nothing but.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Citrus3000 View Post
                    You know, sometimes I really like you.

                    Sometimes, I really love messing with you, because you make it so easy.

                    Back to the topic.


                    The remake is an insult to the original.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by OpenThePodBayDoorsHal View Post
                      How? Let's take a look at the facts:

                      The original has beautiful editing, especially for such a low-budget horror film from the 70's. Tobe Hopper has a very artful eye, and it shows in the cinematography and the editing.

                      It is filled with great themes. I mean, come on, the feminine oppression theme is still relevant in cinematic terms today. It is a portrait of human suffering and the effects of poverty - to me it explores this theme almost as wonderfully as Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven, albeit completely differently.

                      It is also a love letter to Texas. Texas is portrayed in a very beautiful light in the film despite the fact that such atrocious horrors are being committed there.

                      The remake literally could've been set anywhere had the state not been in the title. Everything was dark and had a sepia tone.

                      It has absolutely no themes to show for itself. It watered down the original to it's bare essentials and turned this classic exploitation tale into a straight slasher.

                      TCM is so much more than just a horror film. The remake is nothing but.
                      That is a fine analysis, but I prefer the remake because it manages to combine a typical slasher villian like Leatherface with a supreme villian like Sheriff Hoyt; it is a one-two punch more powerful than the ENTIRE Sawyer family in the original. I also prefer slashers to exploitation flicks. For me, the primacy of horror is always greater than any underlying theme. Anyone can associate a theme with given content, but not everyone can strike the primal survival need. The original's pacing, especially in its final act, vitiates its attack.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Heathen View Post
                        That is a fine analysis, but I prefer the remake because it manages to combine a typical slasher villian like Leatherface with a supreme villian like Sheriff Hoyt; it is a one-two punch more powerful than the ENTIRE Sawyer family in the original.
                        Hoyt is a pretty scary character. Too bad the rest of the family in the remake isn't that interesting. Also, I like terrified manchild Leatherface more than pissed off Leatherface.
                        54 Hookers and Counting....

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Heathen View Post
                          For me, the primacy of horror is always greater than any underlying theme. Anyone can associate a theme with given content, but not everyone can strike the primal survival need.
                          This is demonstrated greater in the original.

                          I have never done drugs and I never will. I was even the best student in the D.A.R.E. program back in the 80s.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Heathen View Post
                            That is a fine analysis, but I prefer the remake because it manages to combine a typical slasher villian like Leatherface with a supreme villian like Sheriff Hoyt; it is a one-two punch more powerful than the ENTIRE Sawyer family in the original.
                            I disagree. It's more of a one punch, as Hoyt was the ONLY good thing about PD's TCM movies. Leatherface was degraded from a batshit CRAZY motherfucker to a typical deformed "so I wear a mask" slasher cliche. It's basically the equivalent if the Hewitts adopted the Jason Voorhees of Ft13 2 and 3 as their son. Original Leatherface wasn't deformed, he was just totally fucked up in the brain that he'd switch personalities depending on what mask he wore. That's a pretty cool distinguishing trait for a horror villain, and it makes Leatherface more than just another brutish mask-wearing villain. Of course, what do remakes do? They degrade everything unique about the original into cliche slasher stock. Now every horror villain's going to go the Jason Voorhees route, large, brutal and inhumanly strong. They did that with Michael Myers too. I'm surprised they actually DIDN'T do that with Freddy. Like I said elsewhere, I was expecting some pro-wrestler to step in and portray Freddy with a raspy ring-side voice.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by H.P. Pufncraft View Post
                              Hoyt is a pretty scary character.
                              I loved this character. It would be kinda cool if that character had a stand alone movie.

                              I loved the remake.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Yggdrasil View Post
                                That's an incredibly confusing statement.

                                Just because a movie got a bigger budget, doesn't mean it's better. Especially in this case, because you're comparing a Michael Bay/Platinum Dunes remake, to one of the best horror movies ever.

                                That alone is astonishing...
                                Never did I say the movie was better because of it's budget.

                                Originally posted by OpenThePodBayDoorsHal View Post
                                How? Let's take a look at the facts:

                                The original has beautiful editing, especially for such a low-budget horror film from the 70's. Tobe Hopper has a very artful eye, and it shows in the cinematography and the editing.

                                It is filled with great themes. I mean, come on, the feminine oppression theme is still relevant in cinematic terms today. It is a portrait of human suffering and the effects of poverty - to me it explores this theme almost as wonderfully as Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven, albeit completely differently.

                                It is also a love letter to Texas. Texas is portrayed in a very beautiful light in the film despite the fact that such atrocious horrors are being committed there.

                                The remake literally could've been set anywhere had the state not been in the title. Everything was dark and had a sepia tone.

                                It has absolutely no themes to show for itself. It watered down the original to it's bare essentials and turned this classic exploitation tale into a straight slasher.

                                TCM is so much more than just a horror film. The remake is nothing but.
                                The film's a classic for a reason. I don't think remakes should be revolutionary masterpieces that are completely awesome, they should be a re-imagining of a previously told story, and I felt that the remake improved on things that the original failed at.


                                Put "2 Fast 2 Furious" in B&W and Se7en thinks he's watching a Bergman film.
                                I find the Metal Gear Solid series to be mediocre at best.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X