Ed Gein, le boucher

This brilliantly eerie little film recounts in gruesome, and sometimes morbidly funny detail, the dastardly deeds of 1950's killer Ed Gein. Gein, who on the surface was a quiet, laid-back Wisconsin citizin, was really a raving lunatic who indulged in such gruesome activities as grave-robbing and out-right murder. This is the second attempt at filming the strange life of Ed Gein(the first was 1974's DERANGED), and I think the best(though DERANGED isn't too far behind). Steve Railsback is simply amazing as Gein. Railsback is such a gifted actor that he makes his looney-tunes character quite likable, and that's not easy to do. The supporting cast, which includes Carrie Snodgress as Gein's fanatical mother, is also excellent, but this is Railsback's show all the way, and what a perversely entertaining show it is!

This movie gets a lot more criticism than it generally deserves. Indeed, it is extremely low-budget, but it basically nails the whole point of Ed Gein better than anyone ever has, or possibly ever will. What seems to disappoint most people is the fact that the film sticks so closely to the story of what happened. The reality is, Ed Gein was not a serial-killer in any respect, and murdered two women who he may have felt resembled his dead-mother. What he is most remembered for, in-reality, are the ghoulish-excavations and "articulations" of dead-bodies.

It's very difficult for us to imagine in 2005 how much of a bombshell Ed Gein was in late-1950s America. In-fact, it's my own humble opinion that we still haven't entirely coped with the knowledge of such aberrant-behavior. Why do people do such things? Sometimes, there are no clear-answers, but the makers of "Ed Gein" have shed some much-needed light on what is known about Gein's metamorphosis into a full-blown ghoul. Surprisingly, a great-deal of the psychological subtext of his life has leaked-into films "based" on his "true story." Most successful-of-all--naturally--is Hitchcock's "Psycho," but Steve Railsback and Chuck Parello have shown us a very clear scenario into why Ed Gein became the man we know-of today. Gein was basically bisexual and had a strong-desire to BE a woman, like his mother.

As stated in "Psycho" so well, he wanted to "...become his mother," in a sad-attempt to "bring her back" to life. His father was a pathetic-drunk, and as is well-known, his mother had a god-like dominance (coupled with religious-fanaticism and sociopathic-attitudes)over the young boy. Ed was also deeply-traumatized by an incident on the family farm where he saw his parents slaughtering a pig--Ed was unable to assist them, and was often called a "panty-waist" by his mother. The incident, and a few others, are enacted convincingly by Parello and company, and much of the film takes-place in Gein's head (where it belongs).

There are a few continuity-errors: the headlights of a car are clearly from the 1990s in one insert-shot, and there are a few moments where the production-design could have been closer to what 1950s America looked-like. But, all-in-all, you have the definitive film on Ed Gein. It's all here, in all its pathetic-glory. This is what happens when someone is neglected by family and society spiritually and medically;this was simply a sick man who needed help. Nobody did until it was too-late. This isn't sexy and exciting to gore-hounds and thrill-seekers who come to a film like this not to learn something, but merely to stimulate their hunger for viscera. Excellent film! How can you lose with ole' Steve Railsback, anyway?

Postscript: It seems possible Mr. Railsback was a target-for-death of Mr. Robert Blake!

Ed Gein, appropriately titled, follows the life of murderer and cannibal Ed Gein. And what a lovely story it is. Ed and his dead mother have been the centerpiece for many movies. Of all the films based on Gein (Psycho, TCM, Silence of the Lambs), this may be the most reality based. However, it is also the dullest. I'm not saying it's a boring film. On the contrary it's very interesting. But when compared to those other films, it just seems lacking. There's not much gore and you don't really get to see him kill anyone. So why invest time with the film you ask. Because of Steve Railsback. Railsback performs wonderfully as the demented momma's boy. It's a joy to just sit back and watch him act. His last lines of the film are especially disturbing. This is the best of the current serial killer film craze that I have seen thus far however I do prefer the 70's film Deranged as a much creepier representation of Ed Gein's life.

True story of Ed Gein who, in the 1950s, killed women or dug up their corpses and...well, just guess! Gein was the inspiration for "Psycho".

This is a factual account of what happened. There is an earlier film (1972) called "Deranged" which basically told the same story. "Deranged" is a very good, very scary and extremely gruesome movie which played fast and loose with some of the facts. This one sticks to them. It's nowhere near as sick as the earlier film and isn't even that violent or bloody (except for a scene at the end), but it made me feel uneasy. Steve Railsback's excellent performance helps. You see the madness behind his mild-mannered exterior. Also there's a solid supporting cast and some good, spooky direction. The low budget does show (some of the sets look incredibly cheap) but the film does work.

Not for the screamish or weak of stomach.

I caught this film on cable expecting a real waste of time (hey, I wasn't busy), but was very surprised to see that there was a lot more to this movie than it seems on the surface.

Yes, 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre', 'Psycho', 'Silence of the Lambs', and numerous other films have been "loosely" based on the story of Ed. These are all far better horror movies and, with the exception of 'Psycho', depend very heavily on blood & guts. However, all three of those films were fictional accounts. There's something considerably more horrific about the fact that these events actually happened (although many names were changed to protect the innocent/dead/consumed).

Yet another case of showing what happens when children are raised without a sense of love, compassion or happiness. Jeffery Dahmer's problems had very similar origins, as did several other serial killers (and, I'm sure, many who are still out there). Instead of 'love and affection', Ed and his brother are given large doses of 'fire & brimstone'... Ed accepts this without question, although his brother does not (much to Ed's dismay), and the combination of the twisted religious concepts his mother imposed upon him (to her, there seemed to be no good in the Bible, only 'Revelations' and in particular the 'Whore of Babylon', which all other women seemed to be in her mind... upon which most of his killings are attributed to, granted through his schizophrenic delusions of his mother).

Regardless of what made him what he turned out to be, the sensationalistic qualities of the true events are better left for those who wish to learn more. This film touches on much of the creepiness, but explains little motivation (aside from his religious 'logic')... I believe this is intentional, as the movie is really telling the life story of Ed Gein rather than describing his tabloid exploits.

Oddly enough, I was not left with a feeling of disgust, repulsion or anger with Ed; Ed was a surprisingly sympathetic character that you feel more pathos for than anything else. Steve Railsback again has done a wonderful job of portraying a historical sicko (after his wild-eyed performance as Charlie Manson in 'Helter Skelter'), and is utterly convincing.

This is a psychological profile rather than a case history. They hint at several motivations in the film (his comment at the bar of "...any of y'all fellas ever considered changing your sex, like they do in Sweden?", his 'skin suit', his 'rituals' where he is attempting to resurrect his dead mother, etc), but ultimately it is simply the delusions of his mother that drive him to action... actions, which in most case, Ed really seems to object to; but being a loyal son, he obeys his mother.

They do not focus on the truly bizarre elements, such as the skull bowls or the skin lampshades, because for the most part this film is told through the mind of Ed... and these things would have been nothing special to Ed, just another hobby like books on Nazi atrocities, cannibalism, shrunken heads, and taxidermy. To him, these artifacts were simple furnishings that he didn't think twice about. I also question that the skull bowls were something that were used a lot; I believe that they were the equivalent of his 'fine china' that he brought out for special occasions (like have his next dinner over for dinner).

My wife felt that Ed should not have been found insane because he knew what he was doing was wrong. I disagree with that. While he may have known that what he was doing could get him in trouble, were he to get caught, he clearly felt that he was doing what mother told him to do, which for him was the 'right' thing to do... never mind the fact that he accepts these instructions from a delusion (compare this to Russell Crowe's character in 'A Beautiful Mind'... he has delusions as well, but he ultimately acknowledges them as delusions and can ignore them... Ed is so focused on bringing his mother back, that he wouldn't ignore his delusion even if he knew she was not real - it might seem strange to compare the two films, but I happened to see them back to back).

In the end, do we learn anything new? Not really. Do we learn anything about ourselves? Not really. Do we learn anything about human nature? Only that we seem to be fascinated with these sort of aberrations. Serial killers and mass murderers have become the 'freak show' of modern times, and it's ok to stare at them... at least, that's the way it seems. The film 'bookends' with actual footage of his neighbors at the beginning of the film talking about what a quiet, normal guy Ed was, and ends with actual footage of the real Ed being hauled away by the police.

To say that the aforementioned films were based on the life of Ed is like saying that a film about chopping down trees is based on the life of George Washington; they only take snippets of his tale. "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" takes the 'leatherface' mask, bone sculptures and indirect cannibalism (since they are selling the meat, it is a different type of cannibalism), but Ed certainly had no commercial operation; "Psycho" takes the aspects of his isolation, taxidermic skills, and the delusions of his domineering dead mother; "Silence of the Lambs" takes the cannibalism (true cannibalism, which Ed was a 'fan' of), the sexual identity issues, and the idea of dressing up as a woman (as opposed to dressing up LIKE a woman)... but none of these are as horrible as what really happened. To tell the true story of Ed Gein, in full Technicolor blood & guts, would be far more than what most audiences could stomach...

Not a bad film, not a great film. Great performance by Railsback. Best to see if you know a little bit about Ed to begin with, but not required... the actual atrocities are not as interesting as the man himself and how he came to be what he was.