HorrorMovieFans.com

but are we ready to see so much of the mad and macabre?

zombie wrote:but are we ready to see so much of the mad and macabre?

I just figured I would start up the thread with a pic. I thought maybe we could at least start one in case new members may be fans of the franchise. I know some of us regulars are fans. *shrugs*

never said i wasn't a fan. but i do prefer pt. 2.

zombie wrote:never said i wasn't a fan. but i do prefer pt. 2.

As do I, I am guessing this would be for the entire franchise.

maybe so, but "chain saw" only applies to the first film.

zombie wrote:maybe so, but "chain saw" only applies to the first film.

I see your point.

1,2,3 and Texas Chainsaw are the ones I like. I have not seen the new Leatherface, but I've been hesitant on yet another fuck'n reboot. Just continue, just fucking continue!

The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

I saw the thread title and thought you were talking about the last movie.

It was pretty good right until the ending. That I didn't like. Not worth owning. I may be a completionist, but did not care for 3D or this last one's ending. So not going to rewatch it. The character, though, is iconic. It's a shame what they've done to him.

Foo wrote:The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

i haven't seen the third, but i think leatherface has as much to do with what made the movies good, as horror movies, as anyone else did for the ones i've seen. it would be nice if they got back to having a whole family for him though, for sure.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

i haven't seen the third, but i think leatherface has as much to do with what made the movies good, as horror movies, as anyone else did for the ones i've seen. it would be nice if they got back to having a whole family for him though, for sure.

I like 1-3, after that they fell a bit short, although I do like the remake with Jessica Biel.

I just watched the new one. Looks like someone had a script for an escaped mental patients/killer kids film, but didn't know how to finish it, so they tacked on the TCM intro and ending. Otherwise, it was ok. Probably would've been better as a stand alone film, though, instead of forcing the connection.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

i haven't seen the third, but i think leatherface has as much to do with what made the movies good, as horror movies, as anyone else did for the ones i've seen. it would be nice if they got back to having a whole family for him though, for sure.

Drayton, Nubbins, and Choptop really set the tone in the first two. I also believe them to be scarier than Leatherface, because they are personifications of evil, while Leatherface is basically a conflicted retard enforcer. I love Leatherface, but less of him is definitely more.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

i haven't seen the third, but i think leatherface has as much to do with what made the movies good, as horror movies, as anyone else did for the ones i've seen. it would be nice if they got back to having a whole family for him though, for sure.

Drayton, Nubbins, and Choptop really set the tone in the first two. I also believe them to be scarier than Leatherface, because they are personifications of evil, while Leatherface is basically a conflicted retard enforcer. I love Leatherface, but less of him is definitely more.

leatherface seems to enjoy it as much as the rest of the family. he has as much to do with the tone of the film, as anyone else does, as far as i can tell. but if you want to expand on that, maybe it will change my mind.

i do agree that less is more, as in i don't need to know the life story. but that's true of most horror baddies.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:The supporting characters are what made the first three movies so good. I hate that the movies have been boiled down to Leatherface v Final Girl.

i haven't seen the third, but i think leatherface has as much to do with what made the movies good, as horror movies, as anyone else did for the ones i've seen. it would be nice if they got back to having a whole family for him though, for sure.

Drayton, Nubbins, and Choptop really set the tone in the first two. I also believe them to be scarier than Leatherface, because they are personifications of evil, while Leatherface is basically a conflicted retard enforcer. I love Leatherface, but less of him is definitely more.

leatherface seems to enjoy it as much as the rest of the family. he has as much to do with the tone of the film, as anyone else does, as far as i can tell. but if you want to expand on that, maybe it will change my mind.

i do agree that less is more, as in i don't need to know the life story. but that's true of most horror baddies.

Leatherface is the heavy. He is also portrayed as one who can be emotionally influenced towards doing good. He is a romantic. The others are rotten to the core. The best Chainsaw movies are ones where others drive the plot. The first two are about Drayton's family and outsiders being immersed into a fish out of water story. When they start to make it all about Leatherface, it enters cliche slasher territory.

Foo wrote:
Leatherface is the heavy. He is also portrayed as one who can be emotionally influenced towards doing good. He is a romantic. The others are rotten to the core. The best Chainsaw movies are ones where others drive the plot. The first two are about Drayton's family and outsiders being immersed into a fish out of water story. When they start to make it all about Leatherface, it enters cliche slasher territory.

first, your favorite type of horror is slashers, no? second, yeah. i'd like the focus to be on the family, including leatherface. i said that in the post that started this convo.

the "romantic" thing only came in with pt. 2 (and maybe played a part in the other sequels too) and yeah, the others aren't manipulated. they're just kind of inept. (except for choptop) without leatherface, it wouldn't really be a horror movie in my mind. or it would be very different, at least.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Leatherface is the heavy. He is also portrayed as one who can be emotionally influenced towards doing good. He is a romantic. The others are rotten to the core. The best Chainsaw movies are ones where others drive the plot. The first two are about Drayton's family and outsiders being immersed into a fish out of water story. When they start to make it all about Leatherface, it enters cliche slasher territory.

first, your favorite type of horror is slashers, no? second, yeah. i'd like the focus to be on the family, including leatherface. i said that in the post that started this convo.

the "romantic" thing only came in with pt. 2 (and maybe played a part in the other sequels too) and yeah, the others aren't manipulated. they're just kind of inept. (except for choptop) without leatherface, it wouldn't really be a horror movie in my mind. or it would be very different, at least.

I meant romantic as a character trait, not literal romance. The character trait does make him apt for romance, which is why he is susceptible to manipulation by both his family and the protagonist, in contrast to Drayton, Nubbins, Chop Top, Alfredo, Tex, Etc.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Leatherface is the heavy. He is also portrayed as one who can be emotionally influenced towards doing good. He is a romantic. The others are rotten to the core. The best Chainsaw movies are ones where others drive the plot. The first two are about Drayton's family and outsiders being immersed into a fish out of water story. When they start to make it all about Leatherface, it enters cliche slasher territory.

first, your favorite type of horror is slashers, no? second, yeah. i'd like the focus to be on the family, including leatherface. i said that in the post that started this convo.

the "romantic" thing only came in with pt. 2 (and maybe played a part in the other sequels too) and yeah, the others aren't manipulated. they're just kind of inept. (except for choptop) without leatherface, it wouldn't really be a horror movie in my mind. or it would be very different, at least.

I meant romantic as a character trait, not literal romance. The character trait does make him apt for romance, which is why he is susceptible to manipulation by both his family and the protagonist, in contrast to Drayton, Nubbins, Chop Top, Alfredo, Tex, Etc.

yeah, i didn't mean romance either. there was no literal romance, from the movies i've seen. he's susceptible to emotional manipulation. but i think he does enjoy killing all the same. one could argue that that makes him a more interesting character than some of the more one note "evil personification" characters around him.