I recommend Slasher: Flesh & Blood if you have Shudder.
The first 4 eps are out now (new eps drop every Thursday) and while the characters are almost all awful, the kills are some of the most vicious and gory I've seen in a minute. Really entertaining.
“The streaming giant has picked up global rights to the latest installment of Texas Chainsaw Massacre from Legendary Pictures.
David Blue Garcia directed the horror movie, which shot last year in Bulgaria and is produced by filmmaker Fede Alvarez and Rodolfo Sayagues via their Bad Hombre banner, as well as Kim Henkel, Ian Henkel and Pat Cassidy of Exurbia Films, and Legendary Pictures.
The original Chainsaw, released in 1974 and directed by Tobe Hooper, is considered one of the most influential horror movies of all time. It introduced the character of Leatherface, a member of a family of cannibals who is a hulking figure with a deformed face, hidden by the skin of his victims. The character has been a constant in the many sequels, prequels and ancillary appearances in other media.
The new movie takes place years after the shocking events of the original, in a setting where Leatherface hasn’t been seen or heard from since. Per Netflix and Legendary, the film seeks to pick up where the Hooper and Kim Henkel film initially left off, bringing the most notorious horror franchise back to life in the same bold and provocative manner that it was first introduced to the world. Chris Thomas Devlin wrote the script.”
Alright fam, I watched all three Candyman movies, read/listened to the short story that inspired it The Forbidden, and then took a family trip to the movies to see the new film on a big screen with my nieces and nephews. Suffice to say, I've got thoughts...Let's go with the good, the bad, and the ugly. But first a summary:
The new film is a direct sequel to the first Candyman, but seems to toss out the sequels which isn't a bad idea imo. The Cabrini Green projects have been mostly torn down and replaced with high rises where the protagonist, Anthony Mccoy, now resides. Anthony's drawn to the story of Helen (aka the protagonist from the first film) and it's his investigation into her story that leads him down a path straight to Candyman. Mccoy is an artist looking for inspiration and he finds himself connecting with a particular story connected to our favorite hook wielding killer. As Anthony begins to share his urban legend-inspired art, people begin to die and he becomes more and more obsessed while finding himself more and more connected to Cabrini.
Alright, there's the ground-work, let's dive in...
The good: My praise for this joint has to start with Nia DaCosta. It HAS to. This movie is shot beautifully! Events are framed in unique ways (my godson spotted eye shapes framing some shots which I'm pretty sure he was mistaking with honeycomb patterns). She takes interesting approaches to typical scenes. A murder scene might play out from the limited view of a small hand mirror's reflection where the worst is just outside of our view. The sounds and score play heavy on this too, as DaCosta plays to the audiences imagination without showing some of the more gruesome moments but just letting us hear the chaos and see bloody aftermath. She's getting high-praise from everywhere and it's 100% earned. The performances are great from all of the leads as well. That goes especially to Colman Domingo and Teyonah Parris. They were so good that I had to name them, but everyone stepped up for this.
The plot does a pretty dope job of tying this new experience to the original movie. There are a bunch of call-backs and even a brief recording from the original movie and what's especially cool is that we get to see how time and word of mouth as transformed the story we witnessed in 1992's version. The broad strokes are accurate but the details have changed in a manner that reflects third-parties interpreting what happened from a limited scope. There are some really strong motifs built into the script and limited viewpoints/understanding are a big focus. Gossip and oral histories are damn-near interchangeable by the end of the movie, EVERYONE is an unreliable narrator here. It's engaging from start to finish as we pull back the layers of Candyman lore with new victims and stories being birthed along the way.
The Bad: But that limited view motif does get a bit overplayed in the kill scenes. I assume that was a goal and not a mistake, but it means that virtually every true horror scene is hidden from view and left to our ears and imaginations. Reaction shots are trying to lift more than they can handle. There's also a lack of likeable characters (not even our protagonist tbh)...you won't cry for any victims in this movie. That combo of not seeing any kill scenes clearly and not caring about the victims really saps this horror movie of the actual "scary" part we expect from horror. It's compelling, there's enough creepiness and gore around, but I don't think there's a single scene that stands out for being scary as opposed to being stylish and well-shot.
As an addition here...I wonder if the new legend being too sympathetic played into this "it's cool but not scary" vibe I carried. The original slasher had a sympathetic backstory, but it wasn't fleshed out until the second film. This new story fits the narrative really well, but it also combines with hateable victims to the extent that I kinda rooted for the ghost...in fact, I think by the end we're SUPPOSED to be. This is a few clever edits away from being a super hero origin story.
Speaking of how cuts could change this entirely...there are a gang of exposition dumps in the form of stories. I know that lore and oral history play a big role in the narrative, but it's still kinda cheating against the "show, don't tell" rule with unreliable narrators attempting to cover up the exposition.
The Ugly: Not enough Tony Todd...He shows up for a two second cameo right at the end and that's it. Otherwise, we either don't see the character at all or it's the new face with the new sympathetic backstory. I don't necessarily think that's a problem in itself, but it does drive me to my biggest complaint about this one in comparison to the first film...
A brief spoilerish rant:
I've always considered the original movie to be a possession film. Nobody except for Helen survives encounters with the vengeful spirit and there's an implication that everyone who dies is her fault. It feels like we're meant to wonder whether she has a hand in manifesting him or even if she's actually the physical manifestation of his acts. While those intense scenes happen, Tony Todd is talking to Helen in a hypnotic tone and trying to "seduce" her into being his victim. These direct interactions with the ghost, that no one can disrupt without being cut down, embody damn near all of the most memorable spots in the original. It also forces you to wonder whether Helen "wanted" or "invited" this all to occur. How much she's a passive viewer or at fault is up to interpretation but it's ambiguity in the best way.
That makes the complete disconnect between our new protagonist and the revenge spirit a huge disappointment. Anthony's not present or even nearby for most of the murders which takes away one of the best aspects of the original. Our protagonist is a passive player through and through; a messenger for someone else sure...but that's it. The missing ambiguity hurts and it also takes away the chances for temptation or hypnotism to add some creep factors.
The other source of frustration for me is the chaotic and rushed ending. It feels like there were ideas that never led anywhere. Mccoy's girlfriend has a messed up past that doesn't serve any purpose other than throwing in one extra trauma. One character makes a complete 180 in personality that feels forced because it's so abrupt. Some of the ritual behind the final act lacks any real explanation. We probably could have done with a couple of less superfluous characters so that we could connect with others more or so that some of the lore could be fleshed out in more meaningful ways. There are also some oddities that feel like plot-holes or just dumb character logic throughout. I won't say too much on that, because I think it'll be obvious where I'm coming from.
Closing thoughts: Even with my complaints, I still think this was a really good movie...but I don't rate is a great horror, just a really good movie with GREAT direction. It does some very cool things with the original plot even though one of my favorite aspects of the original was all but erased. I'm a horror snob who thinks the original is an absolute classic. There was no way this would hold-up to that lofty height...but it still almost did and that's enough to call this a satifsying entry. When I tell you that my Gen-Z family left the theater with enthusiasm and hype, I'm not kidding. The film's got some on-the-nose discussions about "controversial" topics, but still managed to connect with my youngins in a manner where I might be able to really talk to them about some deeper concepts behind gentrification (and my family's from around NYC's Cabrini which is a cool way to link it) and also about modern mythology forming in our media (because I'm a nerd).
Even with some glaring plot-holes, a rushed ending, and way less Tony Todd than I'd have liked...the movie works. It's entertaining and satisfying, which is a feat when you consider that this was a big production that probably had a lot of pressure to appeal to a broader audience. With that in mind, I think it's a serious success. Maybe not a home-run, but a solid double.
Good review...I'm a fan of the "Good/Bad/Ugly" review style.
I also totally agree with your spoiler rant.
Anthony was pretty much passive in every aspect of his life in this movie: with his art, in his relationship, and in the supernatural stuff that was going on. It was an odd angle to take considering that left no one for the audience to root for versus Candyman because Anthony was just along for the ride and no one else in Anthony's life knew what was happening except for William who was basically a villain.
The latest installment in the long-running horror franchise The Texas Chainsaw Massacre will officially arrive on Netflix. Since making its debut in 1974, Tobe Hooper’s horrific tale of a backwoods family of murderous cannibals has both frightened and repulsed audiences around the world. Banned or censored in numerous countries upon its release, today the film is seen as a benchmark in horror movie-making. It continues to inspire both aspiring and established filmmakers and has moved beyond films into a wide range of media
The latest installment in the long-running horror franchise The Texas Chainsaw Massacre will officially arrive on Netflix. Since making its debut in 1974, Tobe Hooper’s horrific tale of a backwoods family of murderous cannibals has both frightened and repulsed audiences around the world. Banned or censored in numerous countries upon its release, today the film is seen as a benchmark in horror movie-making. It continues to inspire both aspiring and established filmmakers and has moved beyond films into a wide range of media
No one asked you to leave your house or for your worn out excuses. Ole Grumpy Smurf headass.
How does it feel that Rob Zombie and Texas Chainsaw are taking over these horror streets with back to back releases in 2021-2022?
Alright fam, I watched all three Candyman movies, read/listened to the short story that inspired it The Forbidden, and then took a family trip to the movies to see the new film on a big screen with my nieces and nephews. Suffice to say, I've got thoughts...Let's go with the good, the bad, and the ugly. But first a summary:
The new film is a direct sequel to the first Candyman, but seems to toss out the sequels which isn't a bad idea imo. The Cabrini Green projects have been mostly torn down and replaced with high rises where the protagonist, Anthony Mccoy, now resides. Anthony's drawn to the story of Helen (aka the protagonist from the first film) and it's his investigation into her story that leads him down a path straight to Candyman. Mccoy is an artist looking for inspiration and he finds himself connecting with a particular story connected to our favorite hook wielding killer. As Anthony begins to share his urban legend-inspired art, people begin to die and he becomes more and more obsessed while finding himself more and more connected to Cabrini.
Alright, there's the ground-work, let's dive in...
The good: My praise for this joint has to start with Nia DaCosta. It HAS to. This movie is shot beautifully! Events are framed in unique ways (my godson spotted eye shapes framing some shots which I'm pretty sure he was mistaking with honeycomb patterns). She takes interesting approaches to typical scenes. A murder scene might play out from the limited view of a small hand mirror's reflection where the worst is just outside of our view. The sounds and score play heavy on this too, as DaCosta plays to the audiences imagination without showing some of the more gruesome moments but just letting us hear the chaos and see bloody aftermath. She's getting high-praise from everywhere and it's 100% earned. The performances are great from all of the leads as well. That goes especially to Colman Domingo and Teyonah Parris. They were so good that I had to name them, but everyone stepped up for this.
The plot does a pretty dope job of tying this new experience to the original movie. There are a bunch of call-backs and even a brief recording from the original movie and what's especially cool is that we get to see how time and word of mouth as transformed the story we witnessed in 1992's version. The broad strokes are accurate but the details have changed in a manner that reflects third-parties interpreting what happened from a limited scope. There are some really strong motifs built into the script and limited viewpoints/understanding are a big focus. Gossip and oral histories are damn-near interchangeable by the end of the movie, EVERYONE is an unreliable narrator here. It's engaging from start to finish as we pull back the layers of Candyman lore with new victims and stories being birthed along the way.
The Bad: But that limited view motif does get a bit overplayed in the kill scenes. I assume that was a goal and not a mistake, but it means that virtually every true horror scene is hidden from view and left to our ears and imaginations. Reaction shots are trying to lift more than they can handle. There's also a lack of likeable characters (not even our protagonist tbh)...you won't cry for any victims in this movie. That combo of not seeing any kill scenes clearly and not caring about the victims really saps this horror movie of the actual "scary" part we expect from horror. It's compelling, there's enough creepiness and gore around, but I don't think there's a single scene that stands out for being scary as opposed to being stylish and well-shot.
As an addition here...I wonder if the new legend being too sympathetic played into this "it's cool but not scary" vibe I carried. The original slasher had a sympathetic backstory, but it wasn't fleshed out until the second film. This new story fits the narrative really well, but it also combines with hateable victims to the extent that I kinda rooted for the ghost...in fact, I think by the end we're SUPPOSED to be. This is a few clever edits away from being a super hero origin story.
Speaking of how cuts could change this entirely...there are a gang of exposition dumps in the form of stories. I know that lore and oral history play a big role in the narrative, but it's still kinda cheating against the "show, don't tell" rule with unreliable narrators attempting to cover up the exposition.
The Ugly: Not enough Tony Todd...He shows up for a two second cameo right at the end and that's it. Otherwise, we either don't see the character at all or it's the new face with the new sympathetic backstory. I don't necessarily think that's a problem in itself, but it does drive me to my biggest complaint about this one in comparison to the first film...
A brief spoilerish rant:
I've always considered the original movie to be a possession film. Nobody except for Helen survives encounters with the vengeful spirit and there's an implication that everyone who dies is her fault. It feels like we're meant to wonder whether she has a hand in manifesting him or even if she's actually the physical manifestation of his acts. While those intense scenes happen, Tony Todd is talking to Helen in a hypnotic tone and trying to "seduce" her into being his victim. These direct interactions with the ghost, that no one can disrupt without being cut down, embody damn near all of the most memorable spots in the original. It also forces you to wonder whether Helen "wanted" or "invited" this all to occur. How much she's a passive viewer or at fault is up to interpretation but it's ambiguity in the best way.
That makes the complete disconnect between our new protagonist and the revenge spirit a huge disappointment. Anthony's not present or even nearby for most of the murders which takes away one of the best aspects of the original. Our protagonist is a passive player through and through; a messenger for someone else sure...but that's it. The missing ambiguity hurts and it also takes away the chances for temptation or hypnotism to add some creep factors.
The other source of frustration for me is the chaotic and rushed ending. It feels like there were ideas that never led anywhere. Mccoy's girlfriend has a messed up past that doesn't serve any purpose other than throwing in one extra trauma. One character makes a complete 180 in personality that feels forced because it's so abrupt. Some of the ritual behind the final act lacks any real explanation. We probably could have done with a couple of less superfluous characters so that we could connect with others more or so that some of the lore could be fleshed out in more meaningful ways. There are also some oddities that feel like plot-holes or just dumb character logic throughout. I won't say too much on that, because I think it'll be obvious where I'm coming from.
Closing thoughts: Even with my complaints, I still think this was a really good movie...but I don't rate is a great horror, just a really good movie with GREAT direction. It does some very cool things with the original plot even though one of my favorite aspects of the original was all but erased. I'm a horror snob who thinks the original is an absolute classic. There was no way this would hold-up to that lofty height...but it still almost did and that's enough to call this a satifsying entry. When I tell you that my Gen-Z family left the theater with enthusiasm and hype, I'm not kidding. The film's got some on-the-nose discussions about "controversial" topics, but still managed to connect with my youngins in a manner where I might be able to really talk to them about some deeper concepts behind gentrification (and my family's from around NYC's Cabrini which is a cool way to link it) and also about modern mythology forming in our media (because I'm a nerd).
Even with some glaring plot-holes, a rushed ending, and way less Tony Todd than I'd have liked...the movie works. It's entertaining and satisfying, which is a feat when you consider that this was a big production that probably had a lot of pressure to appeal to a broader audience. With that in mind, I think it's a serious success. Maybe not a home-run, but a solid double.
No one asked you to leave your house or for your worn out excuses. Ole Grumpy Smurf headass.
How does it feel that Rob Zombie and Texas Chainsaw are taking over these horror streets with back to back releases in 2021-2022?
But you’ll watch the 20,000th sequel of SAW dust. You are such a damn hater. Now I have more Texas Chainsaw material content to spam, oooops, I mean, provide to this thread. Be quiet, Jellous. Spooky Season is upon us.
Good review...I'm a fan of the "Good/Bad/Ugly" review style.
I also totally agree with your spoiler rant.
Anthony was pretty much passive in every aspect of his life in this movie: with his art, in his relationship, and in the supernatural stuff that was going on. It was an odd angle to take considering that left no one for the audience to root for versus Candyman because Anthony was just along for the ride and no one else in Anthony's life knew what was happening except for William who was basically a villain.
Yeah, def wait to watch it and form your own opinions. I'm excited to hear how everyone else feels about this joint on first impression. I'll end up watching it again sooner than later.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
