The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Original: Tobe Hooper 1974
Remake: Marcus Nispel 2003
Also based on a true story, “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” introduces America to the Hewitt family farmhouse killings and Leatherface, the chainsaw-wielding maniac who hunts tourists to feed his family while wearing his victims’ flesh as a mask. When a group of hippies travels through Texas in 1974, their road trip soon turns into a desperate race for survival. Who will survive and what will be left of them?
Winner: Tie
The movies are too good and too different from each other to choose a clear winner. The original barely shows any blood, but leaves plenty of gore for the imagination. In this movie, the suggestion of the violence creates even more fear than actually displaying it. The original also features some hilarious arguments between the deranged family members, adding a sick humor to the film that the remake lacks.
Because Leatherface terrorized numerous victims over several years, the 2003 version feels more like a sequel than a remake. In this version, the gore leaves little to the imagination, yet maintains the intensity and horror of the original. The characters are less obnoxious and the ending is far more satisfying.
Also check out “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning.” You really can’t go wrong with this franchise.
House of Wax
Original: André De Toth 1953
Remake: Jaume Collet-Serra 2005
The original Jaume Collet-Serra “House of Wax” features a disturbed wax sculptor who opens his own wax museum using corpses as the models before eventually setting his sights on living figures. In the remake, twin brothers turn a ghost town into an entire wax attraction, catching unsuspecting tourists to use for future figurines.
Winner: Remake
The remake’s plot bears little resemblance to the original, but excels by taking the initial idea and running over-the-top with it. While the 1953 version boasts a better cast (horror idol Vincent Price vs. Chad Michael Murry and Paris Hilton), the 2005 remake turns up the gore. From plenty of slicing and dicing to characters being “waxed” alive, the new version delivers the butchery scares. An explosive ending blows the original out of the water. Don’t let the heiress’s lack of acting abilities scare you away from this cliché-busting horror flick.
Halloween
Original: John Carpenter 1978
Remake: Rob Zombie 2007
Both “Halloween” movies focus on one of the most feared horror villains of all time, Michael Myers. It’s the story of a little boy who brutally stabs his older sister (and other family members in the remake) to death on Halloween night. His parents admit him to a mental institution, where he escapes on Halloween 15 years later and begins a killing spree in his hometown. The cast of characters and basic plot are the same in both movies, but Rob Zombie takes several creative liberties with his “re-imagining” of the classic.
Winner: Original
This is probably one of the most debated remakes in horror film history. While Zombie has produced several classic movies in his own right, many fans consider the original “Halloween” to be flawless. The main difference between the two movies is the source of the terror. In the original, Michael Myers is scary because he kills simply to kill. He is a bad seed and nothing can be done to restore his deranged mind. The remake gives Myers a history. Audiences learn that Myers kills because he was picked on as a little kid and came from a dysfunctional family. Given this scenario, Myers could be one of the thousands of abused children growing up in a less-than-ideal home. But people fear what they don’t understand. Even the psychiatrists can’t understand Myers in Carpenter’s version. This creates a much scarier, and far better, “Halloween” film.