Oh I know,
you’re surprised, right? Appearances by horror films on this blog are rare as
it is, much less the much sniggered-at slasher. I mean, I can’t deny it, I
snigger at slashers myself. But the point is, the horror genre is there and
there to say whether you like it, hate it or are too much of a scardy-cat to
watch a film or three and make a judgement on it. And every genre has a
history. Forefathers. Films that did things for the first time, that led the
way for other films that walked in their footseps and, for better or worse,
copied them. You can have a million different opinions on horror films like The
Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but you cannot deny its importance. Which is why we
are looking at it today. Plus, between you and me, I did rather like it. So,
yeah.
The premise
of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre is simple enough. We start off with a group of
five teenagers out on a drive on a barmy afternoon. We have two couples and the
invalid brother of one of the girls, a rather difficult young man stuck in a
wheelchair. They are exploring the
brother and sisters grandparents
hometown, the old family house etc and well… Getting up to the kinds of stuff
young couples get up to on trips like these. But the thing they don’t know is
things have changed around these parts since they were children. The old
abbatoir is closed, some townspeople have passed on and some of the survivors
are getting… Well… Restless…
The film
does everything it says on the tin. And it is what has become a “classic”
slasher. Characters being picked off one by one, one female survivor… The film
is not one to watch for originality. I mean, it was back in the day – but not
anymore. This is the film - or at least one of the films- all those slashers
you were watched as a teenager and then get bored of, copied. The thing is,
this is the original, this is the “first time” that was done and even as
someone who is not a great fan of horror films I have to admit, the original
idea is a lot more vivid and bright than many of the copies it spawned. I mean
take, for example the invalid brother, Franklin. Franklin is wheel-chair bound.
He is clearly bitter about his condition and not a little immature. He is an
all-round difficult character and all in all not the most pleasant. But the
point is, that as a paraplegic, he is an integral cast member and an important
part of the story. In fact his disability is, more than anything else, a vessel
to create tension and conflict in the film – ultimately red herrings of course
given the real antagonists in the film. Now, how many films can you think of
that have disabled characters with important roles? You have the odd “blind sage” type character,
a character as old as Homer but can you think of any deaf characters? Anyone in
a wheelchair? No. I mean ok, I can see the argument against not having
wheelchair users in action films where the acrobatics are almost as important
as the storyline if not more important in places (although I can fully imagine
some wonderful “acrobatics” being executed with a wheelchair and am a little
baffled as to why no one has even tried it) but what about other genres? The
hero of a romantic comedy never falls for a beautiful deaf girl… I mean I do
know that Hollywood is in the business of showing us “perfect” pictures but
hey… It is the 21st century.
And the indies aren’t doing an overly impressive job of including disabled
characters. I mean that, in itself, shows originality.
I was lucky
enough to get my hands on the edition of the film that includes a 72 minute
“making of” documentary. Do take the time to watch it if you get your paws on
this edition. It makes you even better appreciate the amount of work that went
into creating the creepy “family home” (you probably know what I’m talking
about) and the eerie family. It is a wonderful film that builds atmosphere very
subtly and even if, like me, you make a game of “guessing what’s coming next”
(yes, watching films with me in a venue where we can talk outloud (i.e at home
as opposed to in a cinema) is a very frustrating experience indeed) you will
jump. You will get startled and possibly (if you’re anything like me) wave
wildly at the screen yelling “Stop it you fool!” The scene that struck me most
was the first encounter with the family i.e. the segment with the hitchhiker.
This of course was largely fuelled by real life stories of serial killers and
hitchhikers, albeit in a role-reversal scenario where the innocent victims
actually pick up the hitchhiker. But of course the real life story that
inspired the film the most is the horrific recent (at the time) discovery of
serial killer Ed Gein. Now, it is not this blog’s aim to talk in length about
serial killers but you might want to check here
to give you a certain idea of what caused the film’s inception. If you are
into the macabre, I would advise you to take a closer look at Gein’s story, it
has inspired many a big-name film including Psycho and
Silence of the Lambs. It may be the fact that this film was made
relatively closer to the first discovery of Gein’s house of horrors that it’s rendition
(or re-rendition) of the story is more visceral, more striking. While other
films have taken a character inspired by Gein and put them into various
situations, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre creates almost an entire family clan of
Gein’s and puts them face to face with a bunch of very normal young people. In actual fact, the combination of real life
horrors put face to face with real people – young people who were more often
than not the principal patrons of horror films – meant that the film was a roaring
commercial success. And shall I tell you something else? Knowing about Gein,
knowing that something very similar to this actually did happen… Coupled with
Tobe Hooper’s masterful directing… Makes for… Well a chronic distrust of
hitchhikers. And little houses sitting all by themselves. Ehm.
Kayıtlar
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder