#the texas chainsaw massacre reboot | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

via-the-ghoul · 1 year

Text

Monster High headcanons: What their favorite horror movies would be

(Mostly about gen1 but I also mention Gen3 Lagoona because I am so confident in my choice for her)

Frankie: They haven’t really seen many yet but they like The Fly (the Og one with Vincent Price). Don’t have a real explanation just the vibes.

Clawdeen: Likes Jennifer’s Body because look me in the eyes and tell me Clawdeen would not like Jennifer’s Body.

Draculaura: Also Jennifer’s Body but only because it’s the only horror movie she’s seen. Clawdeen picked it for a movie night once and Lala fainted multiple times so she doesn’t even really know what the plot is but the girls are cute!

Lagoona: depends what Gen this is. Gen1 would like Nope because of OJ and Angel’s dynamic and also because she loves themes and motifs while Gen3 would like Candyman (1992) because she’s a sucker for like, murder romance, definitely crushes on Tony Todd

Cleo: I don’t want to say Jennifer’s Body again (it’s a very MH movie) but I’m saying Jennifer’s Body again, she’d love “Good for Her” horror

Ghoulia: Alien, definitely Alien. She loves sci-fi obs and the girlbossing from Ripley

Deuce: “Uh I saw Jason Takes Manhattan as a kid once it was pretty cool” also would probably say Jennifer’s Body since it’s Cleo’s fav but I don’t want to say it again

Abbey: The Thing. She’d love how smart everyone is and, well, the cold. She’d also be impressed by the practical effects.

Spectra: Scream, she’d be a Scream fan def, she kins the shitty reporter I don’t remember the name of

Robbeca: The OG Night of the Living Dead. Again, vibes.

Rochelle: Candyman (1992). She’d like the dream-like theme and the soundtrack and the dynamic being Helen and Daniel

Venus: Candyman (2021). She thinks it’s a vast improvement over the og, she loves Anthony, it makes her upset, her and Rochelle keep arguing over which movie is better and Robecca, not having seen either movie, is just like

Toralei: Ginger Snaps. She loves the girlbossing and also Clawdeen hates the movie (she thinks it stereotypes werewolves) so that’s a plus (Toralei sucks) (Ginger Snaps is good but it would be insanely controversial in a universe where werewolves are real)

Heath: The entire Friday the 13th franchise including the 2009 reboot that I know nothing about

Nefera: American Psycho, girl who glorifies Patrick Bateman

Operetta: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, another “just the vibes” one

Howleen: She doesn’t watch many horror movies but she likes Nightmare on Elm Street because she loves Nancy (Twyla hates it tho)

Twyla: Hereditary, she loves how serious it is (Howleen hates it tho)

120 notes · View notes

hellboys · 2 years

Text

✨ KNOW YOUR LEATHERFACE ✨

a composite post that will go into detail of every known iteration of leatherface and exhibit the obvious differences between each version. this post is mostly for newcomers to the fandom who want clarification on the complicated timeline of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre films and for those who want to address their favorite leatherface as correctly canonically as possible. of course this isn’t official and yall may feel free to ignore this. however I spent a lot of time studying these films and characters, I’m hoping my knowledge will be somewhat useful. please feel free to add on any information that might’ve slipped my mind. so without further ado, enjoy! :D

first things first, I will be basing my research on Bloody Disgusting’s amazing timeline post they created.

instead of separating the characters by film, I will be separating them by timeline (i.e. Original, Remake, Reboot, and Legacy). let’s begin with the original.

ORIGINAL TIMELINE: BUBBA SAWYER

YEARS: 1974-1995 NAME(s): Bubba Sawyer, Bubba Sawyer, Jr., Bubba “Junior” Sawyer, Junior Sawyer, Leatherface

PERSONALITY: Bubba Sawyer is commonly known as the “shy” and “anxious” version. He’s timid and very obedient to his family. Famously believed to only kill people because his family demands it rather than killing of his own free will. This is never out right proven in the films, but the 1986 film could be evidence of this. Considering Bubba salvaged Stretch from being killed multiple times and was extremely hesitant throughout the film on killing her even after his brothers demand it. Could be classified as a romantic as well.

FAMILY: Bubba has three older brothers. Drayton, ChopTop, and Nubbins. The rest of the Sawyer family members differ from movie to movie but its clear Bubba comes from a long line of cannibals/murderers. In the third film (1990), its revealed that Bubba has a daughter. His daughter, who is never named, was the by-product of Bubba “playing” with a female victim. However that is the only film where she is referenced.

DEFORMITIES/DISABILITIES: This version of leatherface has NO facial deformities. Besides a common set of nasty teeth. Often mistaken for having a missing nose or cleft lip, however there is no evidence of this throughout the original timeline films. Also believed to have a troubling time functioning without supervision (1974). Strong evidence alluding to being on the spectrum through forms of stimming (1986), non-verbal communication (every version), and child-like interests (1990, 1995). This is not to say Bubba is a child, just that he enjoys activities a child might like, i.e. the alphabet game in the 1990 film.

SEXUALITY/GENDER: It has not been specified in canon Bubba’s sexuality or preferred gender. He is always referred to with he/him pronouns. However, it is common amongst Bubba fans to believe that this version of Leatherface is genderfluid, bigender, or genderqueer. This is due to Bubba’s preference for dressing like a woman and using women’s faces as masks (1974, 1990, 1995). His sexuality is often debated with a leaning towards women. Per the second film (1986), Bubba develops a crush on radio host/DJ Vanita “Stretch” Brock and per the third film (1990), has a child with a female victim. Ultimately, it is up to the audience to determine Bubba’s sexuality and gender preferences.

REMAKE TIMELINE: THOMAS HEWITT

YEARS: 2003-2006 NAME(S): Thomas Hewitt, Thomas Brown Hewitt, Tommy, Leatherface

PERSONALITY: Like the original timeline, Thomas Hewitt is very timid. Often seen as a loner. He was bullied throughout his youth due to his deformities which caused him to self-harm and begin crafting face masks out of animals. Unlike the original, Thomas has a natural affinity towards violence. He is seen mutilating dead animals and killing people without the pressure from his family members. In the 2006 film, his family (minus his uncle Hoyt) was actually disgusted by the killings before eventually encouraging Thomas to murder on their behalf. It is unclear if Thomas has the ability to speak or just chooses not to. This non-verbal behaviour mixed in with his habit of fidgeting/stimming in both films leads me to believe he is somewhere on the spectrum as well.

FAMILY: The Hewitts are a rather small and close-knit family. Thomas’s birth mother died while giving birth to him but he was discovered by Luda Mae Hewitt who raised him. Luda Mae already had a son when she brought Thomas home, his name was Charlie Hewitt before changing it to Hoyt sometime later. Hoyt is referred to as Thomas’s uncle even though they share the same mother. Thomas also has a younger sister and/or cousin named Henrietta. Henrietta had a son named Jedidiah. Thomas’s familial relationships are mostly unclear as they all aren’t defined in the films.

DEFORMITIES/DISABILITIES: This version of Leatherface HAS facial deformities. Thomas was born with a rare skin eating disease that predominantly resides on his face. This disease causes horrible red rashes and blisters and eats away at the skin. Due to this, Thomas has no nose. As a child, Thomas attempted to remove the blisters himself which eventually lead him to create masks to hide his scars/disease. Per my previous statement, Thomas’s antisocial behaviour in both films could be possible evidence for mental disabilities, which ones however are difficult to determine.

SEXUALITY/GENDER: There’s been zero evidence of Thomas’s preferred sexuality and gender. He is referred to with he/him pronouns and has no apparent evidence of any genderqueer tendencies. The masks he creates are all of men and he dresses in male clothing. It is commonly believed amongst fans that Thomas has a romantic leaning towards men due to his handsy interaction with a male victim in the 2006 film. Other than this though there is no other interaction that could possibly back-up that claim. Once again, it is up to the audience to determine.

REBOOT TIMELINE: JEDIDIAH SAWYER

YEARS: 2013-2017 NAME(S): Jedidiah Sawyer, Jed Sawyer, Jed, Jedi, Old man Bubba, Old man Jed, leatherface

PERSONALITY: Jedidiah’s personality shifts constantly between the two films. In the 2017 prequel, Jed was a nice, mannered boy who had a firm dislike for killing. In this timeline it is strongly apparent that Jed only murdered people because his family commanded him to, no matter how much he didn’t want to. It wasn’t until after he escaped the mental facility, lost his best friend, and was shot in the face that his animalistic need for killing emerged. His killings however are mostly performed out of anger and revenge rather than for the pleasure of it. In the 2013 film which is set 40 years after the 2017 prequel, we see an older and angier Jedidiah who is murderously eager to avenge the slaying of his entire family. Older Jed is often seen as angry, ridden with survivors guilt, and vengeful. When it comes to his family however, Jed is gentle and overly protective of them. He will do anything for his family even if that means dying

FAMILY: Jed comes from a huge hoard of Sawyers and Carsons. Verna Sawyer-Carson is referred to as his grandmother/mother/aunt throughout the two films. It isn’t definitively said what her exact relation to him is. Verna is filthy rich as she married into a family who owns a large oil mine in Texas. In this version, Drayton Sawyer is Jed’s father and Nubbins is his older brother. Its unclear how many siblings Jed has but its believed to be between 3 and 4. The only definitive relationship we see throughout the two films (besides Verna) is between his cousin Heather, who is the last remaining Sawyer other than Jed.

DEFORMITIES/DISABILITIES: This version of Leatherface HAS facial deformities. After he escaped the mental facility, Jed was shot in the face by Sheriff Hartman. This created deep scars on both sides of his mouth that stretch up near his eyes and ears. Jed’s teeth and tongue were also damaged during the shooting which disabled him from speaking again. Jed began creating masks out of human faces to cover his scars, much like Thomas. It is also said in the 2017 film that Jed suffers from many mental disabilities, all subdued by medicine the doctors gave him during his stay at the mental facility. After escaping however Jed suffers violent fits of rage and harm towards others as his medicine wears off. In the 2013 film, there is evidence of him being on the spectrum as well. Through the forms of fidgeting/stimming and child-like interests (i.e. children’s toys found in his room). Again, this does not allude to Jed being a child in a grown adult’s body. NOT what I’m saying here at all.

SEXUALITY/GENDER: Recently, it was confirmed by the actor that played Jed in the 2013 movie (Dan Yeager) that Jedidiah is genderfluid. Besides that, there is visual evidence of Jed’s gender fluidity in the 2013 film. While searching Jed’s room, a cop discovers a wardrobe of women’s clothing and a vanity full of make-up. Alluding that Jed likes to occasionally dress up like a woman. Also in the 2017 film, Jed’s first ever face mask is that of a girl to which he applies make-up. But his pronouns are always referred to as he/him though he is genderfluid. Fan’s may feel free to refer to Jed with he/she/they pronouns. Jed’s sexuality however, is never stated or identified. Commonly believed to have a romantic leaning towards women per the 2017 film.

LEGACY TIMELINE: OLD MAN LEATHERFACE

YEAR: 2022 NAME(S): Leatherface, Old Man Leatherface, Peepaw Leatherface, Peepaw Bubba

PERSONALITY: Not much is known about this leatherface as he only has one film so far (which didn’t mention much). But like Jedidiah, Old man Leatherface is angry, sad, and vengeful. He also has an intense need to protect his family. He is very strong despite his age and is known to be almost indestructible. Believed to only kill people who he has to, as he spared Sally in his bedroom ( eventually killing her only when she posed as a danger to him).

FAMILY: The only mentioned family during this film was Virginia also known as Ginny, Leatherface’s adopted mother/caregiver. After the events of the first film, Leatherface ended up in an orphanage for children and troubled teens in Harlow, Texas. Drayton and Nubbins from the 1974 film are never mentioned or even acknowledged, so I must assume they don’t exist in this timeline. Ginny cared for Leatherface all the way up to her unfortunate death, which eventually set him off on the rampage we see in the film.

DEFORMITIES/DISABILITIES: Like his original counterpart, this leatherface does NOT have any facial deformities. He is believed to have some sort of impaired vision and respiratory disease, but I’m assuming this is due to his old age. Old Man Leatherface is non-verbal with a tendency towards violence but it is unclear if this version falls on the spectrum like the leatherfaces before him. It is evident he suffers from some sort of mental handicap/disability however.

SEXUALITY/GENDER: As I said before, not much is known about this Leatherface. The movie doesn’t allude to his gender preferences or romantic leanings. He is seen putting make-up on himself in a short scene in the 2022 film but its unclear if he was doing it for him or for his mother Ginny. He wears obvious male clothes with no sort of reference that he likes to dress up in women’s clothing, like Jedidiah or Bubba. Will update if I discover something factual pertaining to his gender or sexuality.

❗ ENDING NOTES ❗

Obviously this is not science or official information, you are not obligated to believe or follow anything I’ve said in this post.

However it is in my belief that these are 4 VERY different characters who should be treated as such rather than being looped into one character.

Yes they are all “Leatherface” but they’re not the same

Just think of it like Ghostface. There’s more than one and they’re all different even if they share the same title

Bubba is not Thomas and Thomas is not Bubba. Bubba is not Jed and Jed isn’t Bubba.

I often see these characters in the wrong tag so I’m hoping this helps clear that up a little

again you can ignore this if you want to

if there’s any information I may have missed or am wrong about PLEASE comment or let me know and I’ll fix it

if you read all the way through this, thank you so much! I hope I did our boys justice 🥰

#yes ik im insane leave me alone #leatherface #thomas hewitt #bubba sawyer #jedidiah sawyer #jed sawyer #old man leatherface #the texas chainsaw massacre #texas chainsaw massacre #texas chainsaw #slashers #tw leo

409 notes · View notes

meat-wentz · 7 months

Text

reboots have a bad reputation but the thing about being a horror fan is that every reboot comes at a time when it’s needed and gets translated in a way that speaks to the culture it’s returning to. the texas chainsaw massacre, house of wax, sorority row, the last house on the left, i spit on your grave, halloween, the hills have eyes reboots of the 2000’s were bleak, gritty, horrific remakes that shoved our faces in the dogshit on the carpet, that leached all the fun out of the viewing experience and aimed to traumatize the audience, much like texas chainsaw came in the wake of vietnam, the 2003 texas chainsaw came in the wake of 9/11, it’s release following the official start of the iraq war by only two months. much of the gruesome violence seen in the films of the 70’s and 80’s were dealing with the horrific graphic images coming out of vietnam (tom savini has talked at length about the things he saw in vietnam and the ways his work in horror is informed by these experiences). it’s not a surprise our films in the 2000’s were so brutal in content and imagery, that their narratives were so bleak and nihilistic. in 2004 the abu ghraib torture photos become public. the public has to deal with the government-sanctioned torture and humiliation and death of prisoners in the name of “freedom.” so much of the cruelty in the horror of the aughts is a reflection of this. i think it’s time to re-evaluate so many of these films and give them the validity of importance in our cultural understanding of history because really and truly they did not come out of nowhere.

24 notes · View notes

tiannasfanfic · 2 years

Text

This may be an unpopular opinion, but I don’t really think Eddie Munson is a devoted fan of horror.

Wait! -holds up trashcan lid shield to ward off the rotten vegetables getting thrown- Hear me out!

I think it really depends on the sub-genre of horror it is, plus if we’re doing pre-S4 canon Eddie or post-S4 headcanon Eddie.

Here are my headcanons based on what we saw of his personality on the show and how that Spring Break may have affected his limits with horror movies.

Pre-season 4 Eddie:

Absolutely loves slasher movies.

The first Nightmare on Elm Street probably creeped him out and made him jump a few times. Theygot so ridiculous after that they became his favorite series.

The first Evil Dead probably creeped him out even more, but then they got ridiculous, so from Evil Dead 2 on he loves them. Would not have had the stomach for the reboot though, even back then.

Would not like the human on human torture porn sub-genre (like Hostel) probably for the same reasons I don’t. I watch movies to escape reality, not be reminded of how messed up humans already are.

Which is why things like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre that are billed as “based on a true story” even when they really aren’t get to him. It’s just close enough to real he doesn’t like it. While it didn’t bug me because by the time I saw it I knew it was only loosely inspired by serial killer Ed Gein, Eddie is from the time when everyone believed that 100% of the story was true.

With that being said, Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 is actually one of his favorite movies. It has a ridiculous chainsaw fight, of course it’s one of his favorites.

Creature features are mostly okay. Vampires, werewolves, ghosts, monsters, that sort of thing.

Body horror is usually okay.

Despite his metal aesthetic and freak persona he leans heavily into, movies dealing in possession, demons or violent spirits creep him right the fuck out. He probably watched The Exorcist and Poltergeist one time each and didn’t get much sleep after either of them.

Zombie movies are totally okay.

Post-season 4 Eddie (human or vampire):

Absolutely cannot watch the Nightmare on Elm Street series and Evil Dead series. He tries to watch Jason vs Freddy because Jason is his favorite, but doesn’t make it through. Freddy reminds him too much of Vecna now.

At this point, I’m not sure how he would feel about body horror. Something like The Fly or Reanimator might be okay. Hellraiser I’m not too sure on.

Absolutely do not try to make this man watch movies about telepaths, like Carrie or Scanners. Especially Scanners. It will trigger every bit of PTSD he has.

What does everyone else think?

#eddie munson headcanons #eddie munson #eddie munson x y/n #eddie munson blurb #eddie munson fluff #eddie munson x you #eddie munson x reader #eddie munson imagine #eddie munson fanfic #eddie munson fanfiction #eddie munson angst #eddie munson headcanon

124 notes · View notes

haveyouseenthishorrormovie · 4 months

Text

SUMMARY: A California couple and a survivalist encounter Leatherface and his family.

The mod has to admit something, she hasn't seen most of the Texas Chainsaw sequels/reboots, this one included. Viggo Mortensen is in this though, that's cool.

#texas chainsaw massacre 3 (1990)#texas chainsaw massacre franchise #slasher #1990s #united states #north american movie #horror #movies #poll

19 notes · View notes

thegayfangrrl · 4 months

Text

Killers I'd Like to Step On Me for Valentines Day

KILSOM Valentines (Round One)

Witches bracket:

the Grand High Witch (The Witches) vs. Zelda Spellman (The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina) Winifred Sanderson (Hocus Pocus) vs. Witch (Into the Woods) the Witch (The Witch) vs. Fiona Goode (American Horror Story Coven) Jadis (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe) vs. Melisandre (Game of Thrones)

Vampires bracket:

Carmilla von Karnstein (Carmilla) vs. Father Paul (Midnight Mass) Count Dracula (Dracula) vs. Armand (Interview with the Vampire) Eve (Only Lovers Left Alive) vs. Miriam Blaylock (The Hunger) Spike (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) vs. Lady Alcina Dimitrescu (Resident Evil)

Brains bracket:

Villanelle (Killing Eve) vs. Hannibal Lecter (Hannibal) Lucille Sharpe (Crimson Peak) vs. Dexter Morgan (Dexter) Annie Wilkes (Misery) vs. John Kramer (Saw) Khan Noonien Singh (Star Trek) vs. Harley Quinn (DC Comics)

Slashers bracket:

Norman Bates (Psycho) vs. Michael Myers (Halloween) Jason Voorhees (Friday the 13th) vs. Freddy Krueger (A Nightmare on Elm Street) Angela Baker (Sleepaway Camp) vs. Leatherface (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre) Ghostface (Scream) vs. Pearl (Pearl)

Machines bracket:

HAL 9000 (2001: A Space Odyssey) vs. WOPR (WarGames) GLaDOS (Portal) vs. Hexadecimal (ReBoot) Number Six (Battlestar Galactica) vs. Skynet (The Terminator) the Puppeteer (Ghost in the Shell) vs. the Red Queen (Resident Evil)

Fairytales bracket:

Maleficent (Sleeping Beauty) vs. Cruella de Vil (101 Dalmatians) Yzma (The Emperor's New Groove) vs. Scar (The Lion King) Jafar (Aladdin) vs. Chernobog (Fantasia) Ursula (The Little Mermaid) vs. Shan Yu (Mulan)

Kaiju braket:

Mothra (Mothra) vs. Kong (King Kong) Godzilla (Godzilla) vs. Clover (Cloverfield) the Shark (Jaws) vs. Stay Puft Marshmallow Man (Ghostbusters) Crocodile (Crocodile) vs. Sandworm (Dune)

Aliens bracket:

Venom (Marvel Comics) vs. Predator (Predator) Ra (Stargate) vs. Xenomorph Queen (Alien) Jean Jacket (Nope) vs. Rose Quartz (Steven Universe) Pennywise (It) vs. The Master (Doctor Who)

#kilsom valentines #horror movies #villains

8 notes · View notes

i-drop-level-one-loot · 3 months

Note

Who do you like more, Bubba Sawyer or Thomas Hewitt, like Bubba is absolutely adorable, but there's a certain unwashed blood stained quality I love about Thomas, idk maybe I just have a bias for Thomas because a Thomas Hewitt smut fanfic was the thing to get me into the slasherfucker fandom

That is a good question!

Going to get controversial under the cut, proceed with caution:

CW: Mental illness, abuse, trauma, sexual attraction and the morality of that attraction

If we're talking about characterization in relation to their movies, I would have to say Bubba! That first the Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of my comfort movies, and I have a lot of strong feelings about that movie; feelings that I cannot separate from the character. I don't find him sexually appealing, but I find him to be very interesting. Maybe it's me reading into the themes of the movie too deeply and equating them with my own personal trauma, however I feel very emotionally connected to the Sawyers of the first movie... Really, a lot of big ideas I kinda went into before, but they're too depressing for a light hearted response haha

Now, fanon characterizations and physical appeal.. I'm leaning towards Thomas Hewitt ❤️

Overall I didn't like the reboot/remake as much as the OG, but I liked what they did with Leatherface. I understand the very long history of demonizing the mentally ill and using people with disabilities as the monsters for horror movies, so I understand (and don't mind) the change in Thomas's personality. He's strong, quiet, and a little off, but you can still watch the movie relatively guilt free. Funnily enough, the attempt to make the Hewitts more sympathetic and to give them a backstory as to why they eat people, made them less relatable to me personally than the Sawyers of the first movie. However, it is that disconnect that makes it easier to fantasize about him, yeah?

Big guy with emotional baggage who would probably hug you a little too tightly out of fear of you leaving? Fucking rips.

Nubbins from the first movie will be my number one character out of any of them, but even then I have to ask myself that age old question: do I find this character romantically interesting, or do I see myself in them? Thomas is easy to read fanfiction for, because his movies just feel like movies to me.

Sorry if this was darker than you had hoped for! TLDR: Bubba in the streets, Thomas in the sheets (lmao)

#the texas chainsaw massacre #bubba sawyer #thomas hewitt #leatherface #thank you for interacting with me #comfort character #sorry if this makes no sense #nubbins sawyer #rat man #is it a savior complex if they're a stand in for myself?

18 notes · View notes

vampcubus · 6 months

Note

ashiiii it's spooky season!! and i feel like you're a halloween enjoyer <3 what are your favorite movies to watch for halloween?

yes it is!! and yes you’re very astute because i LOVE halloween!! <3

i usually watch a lot of horror during october, but i always circle back to the nightmare before christmas, the halloween series (micheal myers), house of wax, the texas chainsaw massacre (original & 2003 reboot), the friday the 13th series, nightmare on elm street, IT (2017)… and many more! i’m a big fan of slasher horror if you can’t tell hehe

#‧₊🌷˚⊹ ashi rambles #pom <3

10 notes · View notes

frankendykes-monster · 6 months

Text

This week marks the 20th anniversary of Marcus Nispel’s The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, a remake of Tobe Hooper’s iconic The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Nispel’s gory and grungy slasher is hardly a great piece of cinema, but it is a surprisingly important one. Texas Chainsaw Massacre altered the course of mainstream populist horror cinema, at least for a couple of years, by ushering in an era of horror remakes. Pop culture is inevitably guided by larger trends. This is particularly true of horror cinema, where the tendency to make movies cheaply and quickly allows studios to chase popular fads. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre arrived at the end of one such fad. The renaissance in teen slasher movies sparked by the release of Scream in December 1996 was already dying down, giving way to diminishing returns like Scream 3 and Urban Legend: Final Cut along with spoofs like Scary Movie.

That late ’90s slasher fad was self-evidently nostalgic. In Scream, film nerd Randy (Jamie Kennedy) pauses a pivotal scene from John Carpenter’s Halloween to explain the rules of the slasher movie. Scream writer Kevin Williamson would go on to work on the slasher sequel Halloween H20, which would include a sequence of its characters watching Scream 2. However, there was a layer of irony and self-awareness to this nostalgia. These movies referenced classics, but stood apart from them. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre removes that layer of self-reflexive irony. It doesn’t just pay homage to one of the classics of American horror, it straight up remakes it. It reboots the franchise and starts over, as if offering a young moviegoing audience a chance to witness their version of the beloved horror movie. The gambit worked. The movie grossed $29.1 million in its opening weekend. “To say that it exceeded [our] expectations is an understatement,” conceded David Tuckerman of New Line Cinema.

Nispel’s remake had a profound impact on both the franchise and the larger industry. While many other major classic horror franchises, like Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th, tended to slow down as they entered the new millennium, Texas Chainsaw Massacre roared to life. The franchise has released more entries in the past twenty years than it did in the previous thirty, including the reboot, a prequel to the reboot, two sequels to the original, and a separate prequel to the original. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre made an even bigger impression on the horror genre as a whole. For the next seven years or so, theaters were flooded with remakes of 1970s and 1980s horror classics: Dawn of the Dead, The Amityville Horror, House of Wax, The Fog, Assault on Precinct 13, Black Christmas, The Hills Have Eyes, The Omen, When a Stranger Calls, The Wicker Man, The Hitcher, Prom Night, Friday the 13th, Sorority Row, The Stepfather, My Bloody Valentine, and many more.

Of course, trends do not exist in isolation. These remakes overlapped with a similar push to adapt Japanese horrors like Ring and The Grudge for American audiences. More interestingly, they seemed to unfold in parallel with the “torture porn” fad, which really kicked into gear with the release of Saw in October 2004 and Hostel in January 2006. Both trends seemed to be displaced by the embrace of “found footage,” and many of these remakes were notably gorier than the originals. It’s worth revisiting this trend in general and Nispel’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre in particular. There is a tendency to overlook the horror genre in discussions of popular cinema. This is most obvious when it comes to awards recognition, but also applies to general discussions of the artform. There’s also an understandable impulse to dismiss these sorts of remakes as inherently unworthy of discussion or scrutiny. Five years ago, Keith Phipps noted that these remakes were largely forgotten.

One of the more interesting – and frustrating – aspects of Nispel’s remake is the fact that it is a horror movie that exists in the context of decades of slasher movies. Tobe Hooper’s Texas Chain Saw Massacre may not have been the first slasher movie, but it was released before Halloween codified the conventions of the genre. Even watched today, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is a delightfully and unsettlingly odd experience. It can seem uncanny to a viewer versed in the films that followed. Hooper’s Texas Chain Saw Massacre begins with a sense of a world that is unraveling, reflecting the chaos of the early 1970s. It begins with a news broadcast about the handing down of an indictment, an invocation of Watergate. Sally (Marilyn Burns) and Franklin Hardesty (Paul A. Partain) are traveling with their friends to visit their grandfather’s grave, following a series of desecrations in the region. There’s an apocalyptic vibe to all this, recalling George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead.

In contrast, Nispel’s remake is much more conventional in its framing. It is set in 1973, but there is no real sense that the larger world is collapsing. None of that apocalyptic dread hangs in the air. These teenage leads are not investigating a case of potential grave robbery. Instead, they are driving to a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert after purchasing drugs in Mexico. This is a standard start to a slasher like this. The teenagers transgressed, so will be punished. They broke the rules, so must die. In contrast to the irony that defined the meta-slashers of the previous few years, this is all played remarkably straight. The movie’s final girl, Erin (Jessica Biel), is entirely innocent. She is shocked to discover that her friends used the trip to Mexico as an excuse to buy marijuana. Her friend Kemper (Eric Balfour) jokes that she didn’t even drink the tequila down there. As such, Erin’s survival feels like it plays the socially conservative tropes of the slasher movie remarkably straight.

To give the movie some credit, it is at least somewhat equal opportunity in terms of the violence it inflicts on its teenage victims. In Hooper’s Texas Chain Saw Massacre, the male characters tended to die quickly while the female characters suffered longer. Nispel’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre reverses that dynamic somewhat. Pepper (Erica Leerhsen) dies abruptly in the distance, while Andy (Mike Vogel) hangs from a meat hook in place of Pam (Teri McMinn) in the original. That said, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is hardly a reconstructed slasher movie. Nispel’s camera lingers on Jessica Biel, particularly her exposed midriff. It seems to luxuriate in shots of her running and panting. It’s an approach that feels very similar to how Michael Bay’s camera would treat Megan Fox during the Transformers films a few years later. Biel may not be hanging on a hook, but there are certainly times when Texas Chainsaw Massacre treats the actor as a piece of meat.

There is a sense that the remake is revisiting the original through the lens of the decades of slasher movies that followed, smoothing down the rougher edges of the original film to make it more easily fit within an established template. This is true of most of the uninspired remakes that followed, which would take messy and clumsy original films that were figuring out what these horror movies looked like in real time, and apply a “one-size-fits-all” structure to them. These movies could be grungy and grimy. They could feature graphic gore. However, these remakes also tended to be products of a more ruthlessly efficient studio system than the films that inspired them. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre sets early scenes to Lynyrd Skynyrd’s Sweet Home Alabama, a song that the original could never have afforded to include. Biel and Balfour may not have been movie stars, but they are more established than any actors in the original. There is a polish to these remakes that exists at odds with the power of the original.

Notably, there is no sense of mystery or ambiguity to Leatherface (Andrew Bryniarski) in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The film offers the iconic horror villain a backstory involving horrific skin disease and even a name: Thomas Hewitt. Hooper’s original film was so scary because it suggested that this violence couldn’t be explained or rationalized. It had the logic of a nightmare. It’s very hard to replicate that sense of existential dread when so much of the appeal of a remake is the familiarity. Then again, perhaps this makes a certain amount of sense in context. As with the “torture porn” trend, these horror remakes were largely a product of the Bush era. They existed in the context of the War on Terror. This may explain why they were so much more graphic than the original, and why they tended to fixate upon torture and brutality. The War on Terror was defined by a desire to understand the horrors lurking out in the darkness, to understand, “Why do they hate us?”

Released a little more than two years after 9/11, Nispel’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre is rooted in that moment. The biggest alteration to the original narrative is the introduction of R. Lee Ermey as Sheriff Hoyt, a sadistic local law enforcement official who feels more at home in Deliverance rather than The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Hoyt is a product of the Bush era. A former governor of Texas, Bush was likened to a western sheriff when he boasted about posting “Wanted” signs in the wake of the attacks. Hoyt physically and psychologically brutalizes these teenagers. He forces Morgan (Jonathan Tucker) to reenact a suicide that the characters witnessed, pushing Morgan to place what he believes to be a loaded gun in his mouth. When Morgan resists, Hoyt handcuffs him and loads him into the back of his police car. He takes Morgan away, but not to experience due process. On the drive, he smashes a nearly empty bottle of liquor in Morgan’s face. It seems likely that Morgan is just going to disappear.

This is perhaps the most unsettling sequence in the film. It resonates with contemporary anxieties over the “enhanced interrogations” and “extraordinary renditions” that defined the War on Terror. Of course, Hoyt doesn’t have any authority to do what he is doing. In perhaps the film’s sharpest jab at the Bush administration, it is eventually revealed that Hoyt isn’t even really the local sheriff. None of this is as overt as the cultural context of Hooper’s original, but these are films of their moment. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is ultimately an underwhelming, generic, and gory imitation of a much richer film. It takes one of the most transgressive horror films of its era, and reduces it down to a standard slasher template. In doing so, it provided a sustainable model for mainstream horror over the next few years, an assembly line that could reliably churn out low-budget and low-effort films to solid box office returns.

In its own weird and grotesque way, Nispel’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre turned mainstream horror into a charnel house. It pushed away from the knowing detachment of the self-aware slashers, and embraced a more direct mode of recycling. It carved up the corpses of classic horror movies to be repackaged as subprime cuts.

8 notes · View notes