by Jonathan Little
Rating: B
I consider the first Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake a shining example of what a remake should be. It honored the original without trying to impersonate it. Too often it seems that big studios decide to do remakes knowing that they can cash in on the name recognition alone. Usually this line of thought yelids an unoriginal rehash.
What the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake did was take the character of Leatherface and what's at the core of the established mythos and build a new story around it. Even the supporting baddies in the remake are all original creations. There are no "Hitchhiker" or "Chop Top" villains in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. Instead, we're introduced to the Hewettes.
One of the things I liked about the remake was the contrasts I could draw between it and the original. But at the same time, when I left the theater, I still felt like I had just seen a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie. Still the differences are plenty. The biggest case in point, the obvious differences in the Bubba Sawyer Leatherface from the original and the Thomas Hewette Leatherface from the remake. Both are fairly similar in outward appearance. Superfiicially, it's easy to see what makes them scary. They're both big, crazy, chainsaw-weilding men. But the difference in motivation is what intrigues me most. Bubba Sawyer, in my opinion, was unaware that when he was killing people, he was committing murder. To him, killing a person was no different than slaughtering a cow. And in a way, that is more scary than a person who makes a conscious decision to commit attrocities. Because a person who is cognizant of their actions can sometimes be made to listen to reason. But a crazy chainsaw-swinging retard who's out to kill you because he thinks he's supposed to, cannot be made to listen to reason.
Thomas Hewette on the other hand was a bit different. With Thomas, it can be inferred that he also had probably been driven insane by some horrific things he had endured from his past. But Thomas Hewette does not seem incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong. Thomas seems to have a more underlying malevolence to his actions. He isn't just out to slaughter, he is out for revenge.
Even the motivation for wearing the mask is different. In the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Bubba Sawyer is given no motivation for the "Leather Face". In the remake, Thomas Hewette wears the mask to hide a skin disease that is rotting away the flesh on his face. It was always clear to me in my own mind that Bubba Sawyer wore the mask for no reason, other than he was crazy. And in the context of that movie, Leatherface wearing the mask needed no further explanation. It always made sense to me.
But it is these differences that illustrate very clearly that we are dealing with two very different movies, and not just the original and a rehash. Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning takes place in 1969.( with the exception of a flash back scene, early on depicting the birth of Leatherface.) Here we are given a little more background on Thomas Hewette's beginnings. It is made very apparent to the audience that this is a person who was badly mistreated. And interestingly enough to me, Leatherface is made a bit sympathetic for the first time in this incarnation of the series. I still stand by my position that Thomas Hewette is not mentally retarded and therefore , blameless for his actions. But it does give you a peek into what made this ruthless killer so ruthless.
Perhaps the weakest part of the film, is once again, the hapless victims. This time we're given a little more time to invest an interest in whether these people live or die. But for the most part, they're still just lambs to the slaughter. As they're first introduced to us, Eric, Chrissie, Dean, and Bailey are all in a motel, enjoying their last few days before Eric and Dean go to Vietnam. Eric has already been to Nam once but has decided to go back. Dean on the other hand, hasn't yet been, and it is revealed early in the story that he has no intention of actually going. Eric discovers this when he catches Dean burning his draft card. An argument ensues, which is cut brutally short by a terrible car wreck. The cause of the wreck? Well, I won't give that much away. Suffice to say, things just get worse for these kids from there.
This far into the review, maybe you're starting to ask "Does he like this movie or not?" Yes, I do. Will everyone like it? No. Of course not. While it could easily be said that this is the best supplemental entry ever made thus far, for any of the "Chainsaw series," the biggest criticism I've heard from others is that this movie is too similar to it's 2003 counterpart. I can see that being a viable argument. That's a difficult claim to dispute. I mean, after all, it's a few kids who, lost and disoriented, are chased down and murdered by a chainsaw-wielding monster of a man. But on the other hand, who goes to these movies and expects anything other than that? And if you left the movie having seen something else, would it even still be a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie? Would the other half of the audience still like it?
What I like about this movie is that it promises an early look into the characters of the previous Chainsaw Massacre movie. And that's exactly what it delivers. There is some very interesting insight into both the Hoyt and Letherface characters. And yes, you learn how Monty loses his legs. And for the die-hard fans of the original, the cannablism aspect that the 2003 remake carefully avoided, is finally addressed here.
My final thoughts are that if you liked the 2003 remake, you'll probably like this movie. If not, then it's difficult to say. Casual fans of the original who were turned off by the very thought of a remake will definately want to avoid this. And I think it goes without saying that this movie is definately not for the squeamish. But I think 99% of the people who go to a movie called "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" know what they're getting into.
