Leatherface (1974) Versus Leatherface (2003) Mini-Discussion

Gunnar Hansen as Leatherface in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Andrew Bryniarski as Leatherface in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)

For this short post, I thought it would be fun to discuss which version of Leatherface I believe would win in a fight between the original and the 2003 remake. After discussing their attributes and combat capabilities, I also intend on sharing which version is my personal favorite and why. Let us begin with the original, shall we. The original Leatherface is like a violent, rabid animal who inflicts horrible violence in the spur of the moment. The 1974 Leatherface does not seem to be heavily trained in combat, but is skilled at restraining his victims and using his chainsaw and sledge. What I always found fascinating about the classic Leatherface was that he seems incredibly anxious and scared of the outside world. When he murders his victims he seems to scream in terror with them, almost mimicking them. In a sense, the original Leatherface seems like he murders to protect his home and family, because murder and cannibalism is all he ever knew in life. The original Leatherface represents a truly captivating concept of the nature versus nurture argument. I believe the original Leatherface is deadly and horrifying, not only because of his chainsaw, but also because of the seemingly lack of understanding of what he is truly doing.

The remake Leatherface is a beast in his own right. In the remake, Leatherface is a hulking monster who commits horrible act of violence for more clearly explained reasons than in the original. 2003 Leatherface has a skin disease that makes parts of his nose and face look rotted and he was picked on because of this as a young boy. This Leatherface is the classic example of someone who is finally getting his revenge against the bullies. Remake Leatherface seems to truly enjoy inflicting pain as it makes the suffering he went through easier. It almost seems as though he was put on this earth to suffer and then use that anger to inflict suffering on everyone else. The 2003 Leatherface seems like he would have a better chance in hand to hand combat than the original Leatherface. This is because the remake Leatherface felt larger and more physically imposing, even without his weapons. The remake Leatherface is terrifying because he is a large physical force, he seems to know what he is doing and enjoys it. If the 1974 and 2003 versions of the character were to battle, I believe 2003 Leatherface would win. This is not simply because I think 2003 Leatherface is bigger, but also because of his character attributes. The original Leatherface was hysterical and almost scared, while the remake Leatherface seems to be driven more by rage. I believe the rage remake Leatherface has makes him more focused compared to the hysteria and madness of the classic Leatherface.

I love both of these versions of the character for different reasons and just because I think the remake Leatherface would win in battle does not mean he is my favorite. The 1974 Leatherface is still my favorite because of how mysterious, hysterical and out of control he was. I also find it more terrifying that the original doesn’t seem to truly understand what he is doing. This lack of understanding and morals is far scarier to me than someone who does bad things out of enjoyment, even though they know it is wrong. Which of these versions of the character do you think would win in battle and why? Which is your favorite? I wanna hear from you, so please drop a message in the contact section of my site! I am currently at work on a separate post comparing two different Texas Chainsaw Massacre prequels from different parts of the franchise: Leatherface (2017) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006).

Side note, has anyone played the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre video game? I love it so far! I am planning to discuss the game at some point in the future.