never seen tcm(original) why do you like it so much backfire

I just watched widescreen dvd last night.
my thoughts:

I thought it was an awesome horror movie. I was under the impression that it was going to be a little more gorey, but it still achieved a terrifying greatness. The Hitchhiker and Franklin were funny ****ers. The guy that played the hitchhiker totally achieved the whacked out of his mind personality. The 2 women were hot. I forget the name of the girl that survived .. but she did well at passing off that she was hysterical.. so what happened to the black truck driver ? did he just keep haulin ass ?

I have not read this whole thread..........but I'm sure Backfire will agree with me when I say this.

If you are a horror fan and you just saw the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie two days prior to posting in this thread, we don't care at all what you think. Like it, love it, dislike it, hate it..........all the same to us.

One could also make the argument that you're not as much of a horror fan as you like to fancy yourself as you've just seen one of the most respected and appreciated horror movies of all time two days ago.

I just read the rest of the thread........Zilverz.......that comment was not directed towards you. It was directed towards Jason somebody or another who was posting on the first two pages.

If you like the craziness of the characters in TCM and aren't really up for all of the great horror.......watch TCM 2. It's a bit over the top with the craziness of the characters that you liked in TCM.

TCM 2 is more of a cheesy comedy then anything, plus it has dennis hopper go crazy with a chainsaw....and comedy gold ensues.

I loved TCM2. For some reason it was banned in Australia but i ordered it from U.S ages ago and i loved it. Hopper is a legend in my mind.

is the original tcm like really violent or would it be a pg now?

Well, many people falsely percieve it as gory, when in reality only a few ounces of fake blood are ever seen on screen. The worst stuff that happens in the film is implied, meaning that it isn't explicity shown, rather, it we see a part of the horrid act, and the rest is left up to us to finish in our minds. The film would probably be rated R soley for the acts the film suggests, even though they aren't shown in their entirity.

Funny thing though, if the PG-13 rating existed when the film was made, it probably would have gotten that rating, since they were going for a PG rating at the time, which was the only rating between G and R.

lets face it, the remake had everything the original didint have, it had better acting(THATS A FACT) gory'er, scaryer(I didint jump from my chair one time when I watched the original, but did more then once in the remake, u can't say the original is better, cause it just isint, backfire, if u know so much about movies u should know better then saying the original is this god of all horror movies, cause it isint, no way!

I have watched both recently, I did like the new one, Biel is SMOKIN!!! however the original cant be beat!!!!!!

ive seen the original and thought it was brilliant. it was actually banned on video in England for years so when it finally was released i watched it and wasnt disappointed.

i thought the plot, characters and atmosphere were great.
i havent seen the sequels or the remake and dont plan to.

Originally posted by Lord_Andres
lets face it, the remake had everything the original didint have, it had better acting(THATS A FACT) gory'er, scaryer(I didint jump from my chair one time when I watched the original, but did more then once in the remake, u can't say the original is better, cause it just isint, backfire, if u know so much about movies u should know better then saying the original is this god of all horror movies, cause it isint, no way!

The acting in the new one was worse then the original, the original actors over acted to the point of being humerous, which made the extreme terror brought out on screen even more shocking, because we weren't expecting it.

The remake was a typical modern horror movie, nothing more, it didn't have anything unique, different, or creative in any way. The original, on the other hand, is one of the most innovative and creative horror films of all time, from it's style, to it's music, to it's storyline and presentation. Everything you said is so wrong that I can't even begin to comprehend how a person can be so glaringly incorrect.

Most people who know anything about horror movies recognize the FACT, that, like it or not, the original is a god among horror movies, it is a classic, and will always be remembered as such. All of the most knowledgable regulars here in the horror forum will agree with that.

but it ISINT better in anyway, show a person that dosent know shit about horror movies, the remake and the original, I'l bet my ass on that he will say the remake is better. I my self and 15 of my friends went too see the remake, and then a few days later, we all watched the original, after seeing the original EVERYBODY said that it sucked bigtime. and of story IT SUCKS!!!

This raises the question, why would I care what someone who is ignorant about horror movies thinks of a horror movie? That would be like someone who knows nothing about video games going up and telling me "hey, this game sucks, but I've never been much of a gamer". Bassically it's just showing that people who don't know anything about horror films aren't going to apreciate what is undeniably a great, innovative, horror movie.

And for you're information, since you decided to bring in your personal friends into this discussion, as if that gives you're shallow argument any credibility. My friends, some of which don't know diddley about horror movies, and some who are just as knowledgable in the subject as I am, all saw the original and the remake, and all think the original is far supperior.

The only thing the remake has that the original doesn't is better production value, but of course, no true horror fan will care about something as trivial as that, since most of the best horror movies have a very small budget, and are made using the directors skill, rather then loads of money, which was not the case for the remake. Made using loads of money, but very little skill, and did nothing new.

End of story.

lets say the remake version had been made instead of the original version, who then do u think would be the king, huh?, thats right the remake version

I don't think so, the original still would have been more unique and different from any other horror films ever made. The remake was a typical horror movie, nothing more.

i cant really take full part in this discussion as i have not seen the remake but the original is one of THE classic horror films. it is a superb piece of cinema.

just wait til u see the remake, ahell of lot better

Actually, most horror fans feel the exact oposite.

no they don't

Originally posted by Voorhees
I loved TCM2. For some reason it was banned in Australia but i ordered it from U.S ages ago and i loved it. Hopper is a legend in my mind.

bull shit. i've seen it availabole in the the loval vid shop,. oh and i'm still drnuk fsorru