Ed Gein: The Butcher of Plainfield

Did we really need another movie-version of the life and crimes of Wisconsin serial killer Ed Gein? No, of course we didn't, but clever producers realize there's always room for one more, especially because all horror movie fans agree that Ed Gein simply is one of the most – perhaps THE most – fascinating sick individuals in history. And the producers of this movie were even extra clever, as they managed to cast no less than Kane Hodder in the titular role. Hodder is already a bit of a horror legend on himself (depicting Jason Vorhees multiple times in the "Friday the 13th series") and his name alone is guaranteed to attract even more viewers. I've lost count of how many movies – both fictional and non fictional – there already are closely inspired or loosely inspired by Ed Gein. There are the strictly factual and almost biographical ones, like "In the Light of the Moon" and "Deranged: Confessions of a Serial Necrophile", but of course the most commonly known horror classics simply used little morbid characteristics of Gein's utterly demented persona, like "Psycho", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Motel Hell", "House of 1.000 Corpses" and "The Silence of the Lambs". As you can probably derive from its juicy title as well as from the DVD cover art, this particular isn't too concerned with accuracy and merely just sets out to shock and provoke its viewers with a whole lot of gruesome images and perverted insinuations. It feels as if director Michael Feifer wants to make us believe his film version is truthful, but repeatedly "forgets" about the facts in favor of sheer horror movie excitement. Kane Hodder portrays Ed Gein like he was a muscularly shaped and relentlessly unstoppable killing machine, whereas in reality he was a scrawny and miserably timid guy whose horrendous psychopathic tendencies only gradually come to the surface after his arrest. Although Gein only ever got charged with two murders he commits nearly a dozen of vile kills here, so you know you don't have to check out this film for its informative value. Still I don't want to bash this straight-to-video production entirely, because there really are a handful of positive things to say as well. The make-up effects are effectively nauseating and the Californian filming locations were aptly chosen in order to recreate the depressing 50's Wisconsin atmosphere. And in spite of his unfit posture, Kane Hodder isn't such a bad choice to depict Ed Gein. He hardly has lines to speak but looks menacing throughout the entire playtime.

What a waste of time to watch this movie. Poor picture quality, poor sound, poor acting and definitely not based on actual facts. The deputy's "girlfriend" did so much overacting, as did the sheriff, that it was more comedy than horror. The deputy tries to make an emergency phone call by dialing 911...PROBLEM...in 1957 that emergency number was not in existence. That is just one example of glaring inconsistencies.

The "scary" aspect was way underdone. Just did not come across as horrific.

I did think that the actor playing Gein did the most admirable acting job in the whole movie. I could well see mental disturbances in his character portrayal.

Sorry...this one just does NOT get it!!

***May contain spoilers***

I had very high expectations for this film, based on the trailer. I knew a bit about the real Ed Gein, so I figured this was a medium-budget Hollywood version of the real events. Man was I wrong.

First, the writing apparently came from an eight-grader who barely knew anything about Ed's history and cranked out the script in about 20 minutes. The movie completely passes over the most interesting facets of Ed and his relationship with his mother (not to mention what the real police found in his house) and decides to focus primarily on the young deputy who looks like he just wandered onto the set. Likewise, all of the male characters seem to be ad-libbing their dialog throughout the entire movie. I'm not exaggerating.

Don't even get me started with the historical goofs in this movie. Seriously, who the hell directed this? This movie is supposed to take place around 1957, but the cops are carrying modern side-handled batons, some of the stuff in the hardware store look like they came from Lowes, and when the cop gets to a payphone he dials 9-1-1 (didn't exist back then). Also, Ed was a small guy, scary like Anthony Perkins' character in Psycho (who was supposedly based on real-life Ed), not this burly dude who ended up looking way too much like the bad guy in Men In Black.

Another thing that really bugged me was the appearance that the makers of this film shot the whole thing in an abandoned, 3 building set. Because of the "clever" camera angles, you never see any actual town, and the interior of the sets looked like old, long-abandoned shacks. Pop a cash register on a saw-horse and bam!--instant hardware store.

I'm usually pretty forgiving of low-budget horror films, but this one just begs for it. All you had to do was include most of the real events (even embellish them!), pay five good actors instead of 15 crappy ones, and for Pete's sake take 5 minutes and think about the time period once in a while. My advice: Google Ed Gein, you'll be far more entertained.

I stopped watching this film half way through. It was just terrible! Boring, contrived subplots. A complete lack of the pathos seen in Norman Bates, Buffalo Bill, or Steve Railsback's portrayal of Ed Gein. A movie doesn't have to be historically accurate, but the true story of Ed Gein is so much more interesting than this third-rate melodrama that was completely made up for no good reason! Ed Gein as portrayed by Kane Hodder is a cartoon sadist. The attempts to show the trauma inflicted on him by his mother are just weak exercises in recycled style. And this movie wanted to be stylish, but it even screwed that up. Fortunately, there is a better film of this story. 2001's Ed Gein told the story efficiently, and offered a few real chills as we watched a sick man not in control of himself. Steve Railsback, who played Ed Gein that time, was already famous for memorably portraying another famous serial killer: Charles Manson. His Ed had pathos. His film is the one to see. Avoid this mess.

Ever since he played a goon in Lone Wolf McQuade, actor/stuntman Kane Hodder has been busy. His film, Hatchet, got all the publicity last year, but he still makes a couple of more films every year. He should have skipped this one.

Hodder seems to be the king of the slashers. he has played Jason Voorhees from 1988's Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood (1988) to Jason X (2001). He is working on a new film that appears to be a Halloween remake. He is very much what I would call the serial killer type with his methodical, expressionless thirst for blood.

However, there wasn't much blood in this movie and very little action occurred on camera. It felt as if I was watching an episode of real law enforcement on A&E.

I won't put the blame entirely on Hodder's shoulders, as the rest of the actors didn't contribute much either.

Michael Berryman (The Hills Have Eyes, The Devil's Rejects) just ran his mouth until Gein shut him up. Adrienne Frantz ("The Bold and the Beautiful") was cute. Veteran actress ("Three's Company") and Penthouse Pet, Priscilla Barnes did a credible job. I am sure there are other horror favorites, but they all just seemed to run through their roles.