technicolorwasteland

I thought that this movie was pretty darn good at detailing the gruesome exploits of one of the most famous serial killers of all time, Ed Gein. Steve Railsback's performance was absolutely breathtaking, and it was spooky how closely he resembled the real life Eddie. I thought the makers of the film did a good job of portraying Eddie's everyday life and how he slowly unraveled and became more and more dangerous with each passing day. The flashbacks with his mother - the also excellent Carrie Snodgress - added to the effect and made the mood even more intense. I don't know a lot of details about the case, but I've heard enough to know that the character of Colette was fictional. I'm not sure why they could include Mary Hogan, but not mention Ed's real life last victim, Bernice Worden. How she was murdered was still the same in the film, though, so I guess only the name is different. Also, another fact that seemed odd was that they didn't really show, in detail, any of the atrocities committed in Eddie's shadowy farmhouse. It seems like they should have, especially since this is a low budget type movie and I'm pretty sure it is unrated because of the nudity and violence already present. The camera seemed to shy away whenever Ed was going to mutilate a victim, and I think it would have made the movie even more realistic and effective if more detail was shown during his grave robbing and murder escapades. That's basically my only complaint, as overall I found this to be a good, factual, compelling account of what happened through Eddie's point of view and not to mention other people in the town who noticed his odd behavior. It is creepy how Steve Railsback manages to make Ed seem cute and cuddly one moment, babysitting some neighbor boys, and then next thing you know he's carving out a woman's genitalia. Many will think this film is very, very graphic, but again, it's not, there aren't really buckets of gore in the film - it basically relies more on the mood and eeriness of the small town and how Ed's insanity and his flashbacks of his domineering mother are driving him to commit ghastly acts of depravity. If you are interested in this case or are interested in true crime stories in general, I'm sure you would enjoy this film.

I really enjoy the "Chain Saw" films, even if some are more bad than others. Of course, nothing beats the original, but this one is probably my second favorite in the series, as it is better than the goofy, overlong Part 2 and the clumsy, laughable Part 4. Again, it's more of a remake this time out, with yuppies Michelle and Ryan, survivalist Benny (the great Ken Foree) and some mental chick fleeing Leatherface and his new clan, which includes the hunky Viggo Mortensen, who sadly does not show off his muscular, sweaty body, some older guy, a woman in a wheelchair who talks through this weird, robotic voice thing, and an evil little girl. This installment in the series starts off well enough, with Michelle and Ryan terrorized by two of the loony family members at the Last Chance Gas Station and then pursued by Leatherface after they have car trouble and have to pull over to change the lug nuts on one of their tires. Ken Foree basically tries to help Michelle and Ryan, and the crazed young girl attempts to warn the potential victims as she has been hiding out from Leatherface for nearly a week after her and her sister were run off the road by the crazy clan. I think what hurt this film the most is the terrible editing and the existence of various "cuts", some with alternate scenes, more gore, different dialogue/music, etc. The best would probably be the 85 min. unrated version which includes about 4 minutes more footage than the original R-rated cut. Overall, the movie just seems too short and near the end has a lot of huge logic loopholes and sloppy mistakes, many of which includes Leatherface's demise and what happens to Ken Foree's character. Kate Hodge, as Michelle, is basically doing the Marilyn Burns thing, becoming more crazed as the film reaches its peak. She was alright I guess, but I definitely didn't like the whiny character of Ryan. Viggo was good (and very hot) and Leatherface was only slightly effective. He was definitely better than the corny, womanish Leatherface of Part 4, but he still was basically there for a lot of comic relief (the scene with his "lessons" is absolutely hilarious). In short, this film makes very little sense but has a lot of gruesome, dark humor that works better than it did in Part 2, and it has great performances from sweaty men Viggo Mortensen and Ken Foree. It does have some elements that are frighteningly effective, including Leatherface stalking Michelle and Ryan as they try to fix their tire, and the torture endured by Michelle as she tries to free herself after having her hands nailed to a chair. If you're a "Chain Saw" fan, you should probably see this. And go for the unrated version.

I admire this piece of giallo cinema because of its great style and how director Sergio Martino contrasts the gorgeously beautiful Italian countryside with the bloody activities of a mysterious gloved killer. In this film, the killer is unique because he/she casts a very unique, eerie presence whenever hinted at or briefly shown onscreen, usually wearing some sort of ski mask to hide his/her face. I also like the plot revolving around the red and black scarf, and how it ties in with the identity of the murderer. The story follows a group of young, gorgeous Italian coeds frightened when their friends start dropping like flies at the hands of a brutal slasher, who likes to strangle, stab and fondle the nude bodies of his victims (another sick, effective touch which makes the film all the more nasty). Four of the girls flee to a villa in a small, scenic village to get away from all the atrocities committed on campus. Of course, the killer has followed them there and is set on killing them off one by one. This film is very perverted in ways, the killings are all sexually sadistic in nature, and the motive basically revolves around the dangerous sexual games played by the beautiful coeds. I can't say more without revealing clues which may give away the killer's identity. "Torso" is also loaded with female nudity, as the film starts right off with a wild orgy going on as the credits roll, complete with close up shots of naked breasts. There is also a slight lesbian subplot involving two of the girls, although we don't see anything that graphic at all. No male nudity is present, which is too bad, I was really waiting for one of my fav hot actors, John Richardson, to take something off, but no such luck. Again, this movie is creepily effective, well-acted, and has great photography, and even if you do find it slow-moving, keep with it, as the finale is probably the best part of the film as the heroine has to watch the killer carve up her friends, one of the most unnerving sequences I have ever seen captured on film. The music is pretty good for the most part, but at times it seems like music better suited to a porno flick. And another thing to mention is, the uncut version of this movie doesn't seem to have that much gore at all, I just figured it would since such a big deal was made about it being uncut with all the "grisly violence" finally restored. It still seems like you're watching the R-rated version. Oh, well. This is still a fun movie, especially for those who love Italian horror.