User Reviews

Ed Gein - (Special pre-release preview) USA/2001/18. Dir. Chuck Parello.

Hailed as the inspiration for many of Hollywood's greatest murderers, Ed Gein was a real-life serial killer operating in 1950's Wisconsin. We were treated to a special pre-release preview of this forthcoming biopic. Many may have been left with a strange sense of déjà vu.

'Psycho', the novel upon which Hitchcock's classic horror is based was inspired by the activities of the reclusive farmer, with the author Robert Bloch living just fifty miles from the town of Plainfield where Gein lived. The domineering mother character is consequently a big part of both films, as she instructs her wayward son to kill from beyond the grave. The skin wearing antics of 'Buffalo Bill' in Jonathan Demme's `The Silence of the Lambs' (based on the Robert Harris novel) were also a part of the twisted Gein routine as his butchered and ate his way through his victims, spreading fear through small-town America.

`The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' and `American Psycho' also owe a debt to this true tale, which demonstrates the full extremes of human depravity. Such was the myth attached to this story that it is surprising that no one has tried to bring it to the big screen before. The character of `Psycho's' Norman Bates is undoubtedly far better known than his real-life inspiration but director Chuck Parello takes a brave step and tackles the monster head on.

Ed Gein's shy existence from abused child to grave robber and murderer are carefully charted, with his obsession for anatomy and his mother always in the background. Whether completely truthful or not, the film portrays Gein as more of a misguided bumpkin than a cold-blooded maniac. The opening shows apparently authentic news footage from the time, with neighbours expressing their shock that such a `nice, quiet young man like Ed' could be involved in such horrific crimes. This adds a touch of realism to the proceedings, but the remainder from childhood through killings to capture is standard fare, with few surprises en route.

Though some of you think The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was

based on a true story, no it wasn't. Look it up before you start

screaming, "But the new movie has police footage! and it says its

real!" well its not, if you want the real story, watch this movie. Its not

terribly good, but the story is pretty accurate to the real events that

inspired films like "Psycho" "Don't Go In the House" "Silence of the

Lambs" & "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" It has some decent

but subtle gore, has the true story, and some cheesey special

effects. If your into American history of serial killers and cannibals,

this is for you, but if your not interested at all, I wouldn't rent it. Just

look him up on the internet and you'll get all the info you need on

Ed Gein.

"Ed Gein" is a mediocre telling of the story of a once notorious and still infamous Wisconsin psychopath, murderer, cannibal, and necrophiliac. The film attempts to portray the man and spares the audience much of the horror of his deeds as it become a muddle of fact, flashbacks, apparitions, sundry visions, and vignettes of Gein's deranged activities with no clear purpose. Not a documentary or biopic, "Ed Gein" barely works as a docudrama with minimal entertainment and educational value.

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.

Notorious Wisconsin serial killer Ed Gein served as the inspiration for many horror movies already; either films that are loosely based on his vile acts ("the Texas Chainsaw Massacre") or more factual re-tellings of his case ("Deranged: Confessions of a Serial Necrophile"). Chuck Parello now takes the credit of creating the most accurate and faithful portrait of this historical psychopath (not even changing the name of killer & victims like it was the case in "Deranged"), but he wasn't capable of delivering a disturbing and/or compelling horror movie with the subject matter he gathered. "Ed Gein" is a sober (...better make that VERY sober) and monotonous drama about an emotionally unstable bachelor, still under the influence of his dominating mother who's been dead since 9 years already. Despite everyone in the little village being friendly and patient with Ed, he's very introvert and suffering from delusions in which his dead mother orders him to kill "sinful" people in his surrounding. This film is not scary at all, since Parello wastes too much time on pointless flashbacks and amateurish psychology. The film merely just hints at Gein's bizarre and perverted sexual preferences and shows very little, apart from a totally out-of-place sequence in which he dances around (in the light of the moon) wearing the skinned face of one of his victims. The acts of violence Gein eventually does commit are rather tame and not nearly as unsettling as the real thing. The obvious lack in budget can hardly be used as an excuse, since the 1974 film "Deranged: Confessions of a Serial Necrophile" was a poverty row production as well and that film DID deliver genuine shocks and gruesome images. I strongly advice to watch that one instead, even though it's a lot more difficult to track down.

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.

Ed Gein /In the Light of the Moon is about the life of a murderer and cannibal who,lived in the 1950s.

I didn't have any expectations for the movie, and I got almost exactly what I expected. I found it quite boring. The story of Ed Gein is a very crispy story and by seeing the film you really get a good story, but it is told in a very boring way. I actually sat throughout the whole movie waiting for it to start and then realizing what a grate story it is. But that is the only thing that I find good in the movie, and it is not enough to have a good story to make a good movie.

The movie lacks some action, something to keep you interested in seeing the rest of it. I don't feel that the actors gave a 100% performance although Steve Railsback (Gein) was quite good. I found the framing and editing a bit boring too, but considering it a Low Budget film then I guess it is OK...

I have a mixed feeling about this one...although the movie itself is good and amusing, I can't stop thinking the director could have made it even better...The Hollywood syndrome affects the film, by that I mean it is predictable, it's made for a wide audience, not for horror-fans...The movie doesn't contain any real splatter scenes, just some teasers like the heads hanging on the bedroom door :-)

So if you want to lay back and relax, Ed Gein is a nice, good made 'scary movie'. But if you are in for a 'splatter-bad-taste-gore night special', I would recommend skipping this one in the horror-section...

Ed Gein was the seriously messed up Wisconsin individual whose nefarious activities in the 1950s—murder, dismemberment, grave-robbing, amateur furniture design, and the wearing of the skin of his victims—inspired the creation of several infamous cinematic sickos, most notably Psycho's Norman Bates and Leatherface from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre series.

But where Gein's real-life activities should easily make for a thoroughly absorbing and disturbing biopic, this account actually proves rather dull and lacking in shocks, director Chuck Parello (Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer 2) opting for a frustratingly reserved approach that focuses far too heavily on the more mundane aspects of Ed's life and on presenting him in a sympathetic light when it should be delivering the grisly goods.

Factually correct it may be, but Ed (convincingly played by Steve Railsback) shooting the breeze with locals in the town bar, discussing why he enjoys pork and beans for supper, and performing babysitting duties for a couple of kids hardly makes for particularly enthralling viewing, while his frequent delusional flashbacks and hallucinations are predictably staged and repetitive. Only two scenes stand out in so far as they actually manage to prove genuinely unsettling—Ed taking his skin-suit for a late-night airing and a quick glimpse of a decapitated, gutted human corpse hanging in his basement—but these are all too brief.

5.5 out of 10, rounded up to 6 for IMDb.

Low budget, well acted, pseudo non-fiction horror movie. I was looking forward to a grisly recitation of the killings of Ed Gein. Instead, it's more of an A&E style picture with a little blood and guts sprinkled in. Fascinating movie, but don't expect to be bathed in blood.

This really is a pretty good film about the notorious killer Ed Gein, who inspired films like Psycho, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Silence of the Lambs. Despite that the film (of course) has it's weak points. First of all there are the bad effects which are caused by lack of budget, but there also is another thing not too good about this film. That would be the script. OK I admit that the story itself is really accurate and makes good use of the mysteries revolving around Gein's activities, but there is one thing there that is badly executed. The director and scriptwriter, actually to give us a picture of Gein's schizophrenia, by letting his mother surface numerous times (directly and indirectly). On some of these occasions I felt that only making us (the viewer) hear her voice would have been sufficient. Otherwise this was pretty good and interesting. I kind of enjoyed this one, but then again, I'm studying psychology (maybe that's why I like this film).

7 out of 10

Maybe some would dispute that this was a B flick, but I think it qualified. With that said, I think this movie delivered what I expected. It was entertaining and portrayed some pretty gross behaviors without grossing out the viewer. A good movie to rent.

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.

I really wanted to see this movie after reading about it and before you know it my best friend said he rented it at Blockbuster. Well, first of all my friend has bad taste in movies and where he rents his movies, so I was skeptical. But, I went and rented it anyway(NOT AT Blockbuster!!!) and I should have known that since my friend liked it it could not have been too good. It felt like a made for tv movie with some violence. It's not a bad movie and worth a cheap rental (that wouldn't be Blockbuster) but for true horror fans, you may be disappointed.

This was clearly made for the small screen, although I do remember it passing through western New York theaters briefly. I didn't see it on original release, because I happen to be somewhat fascinated by the Ed Gein story and have read up on it, and I was afraid the film would be a B-movie exploitation of one of the most bizarre episodes in the history of American crime. Gee, I wish it were.

This film is really a pretty mediocre docu-drama that attempts to explain away the more disturbing aspects of the Gein story with cheap and easy Freudian references, down to having Gein see and listen to his dead mother urge him on to do "God's work" by "punishing" wicked women for their sexuality.

Unfortunately, this explanation doesn't tell us anything at all about Gein's cannibalism, nor about his almost childish fascination for body parts. In one scene in a bar, Gein suddenly asks the other customers whether any of them know about sex-change operations. I take it this was cut into the movie to explain Gein's efforts to wear the skin of some of his victims, and certainly the real Gein was interested in the issue. What gets lost here is all the rich sense of transformation that might go into a sick fascination for donning the skin of another human being. This isn't simply changing one's sex - this is becoming something other than human.

One other point - as a Freudian explanation, the film has Gein denying responsibility for his murders - either he can't remember them, or it was "mom's fault". Wait a minute - could Gein have just ignored all those body parts cluttering up his house? Obviously not; in fact the real Gein was aware of what he was doing - he just didn't think there was anything wrong with it. The only reason we know parts of his story is because he was able to give detailed descriptions of what he did. He approached murder, dismemberment, and cannibalism with a clinical disinterest in any of the moral implications of these acts. It was simply Gein's way of living in the world.

Now that is truly frightening. The terrible thing about Gein was that he was utterly bland - he was the guy next door, the quiet neighbor, not very interesting, not much to say.

Few films have managed to capture this quality about any serial killer. This film certainly hasn't. A real missed opportunity.

This movie was CREEPY to say the least. Knowing that it is based on a true story makes it even more so. The music and flashback sequences made nice additions. Great acting especially on the part of Gein's mother. Having read a little into the actual Ed Gein, I was a little disappointed that some of his more famous "one-liners" were omitted. The movie seems to keep a single pace throughout, but over all a very enjoyable horror film.

I saw this movie a few days ago while browsing the horror section at Blockbuster and thought it would be cool to watch a film about a serial killer's story that spawned the creation of Psycho and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Since watching the film I feel Blockbuster made a mistake in putting this movie in the horror section, comedy would have been a much better befitting genre. This movie is just plain rubbish and crap. And the gore scenes (or lack thereof) are completely laughable! You would think they would have at least had the decency to make the gun shot scenes a bit realistic than just some cheap red paint and no shot wounds. In fact I find it hardly believable at all that someone could POSSIBLY live through being shot in the back on your left side by a rifle 4 feet away! What the heck is THAT all about I ask? I don't know...Mid-way through the film my friend and I started to look at the cover of the DVD to see when this movie was made and it took us by complete shock when we saw it was made in the year of our technology 2000!!! The only other film I have seen that is worse than this is The Item (a stupid retarded indie horror film that should DEFFINITELY be in the Special Interest section at Blockbuster.)Don't see this movie! I warn you! It's complete bollocks! I could give you a 100 better things to do in your time than waste your money on this crap! 1/10 for me!

The completely abnormal characteristics that distinguish a serial killer from the common homicide, as well as the disturbing psychological behavior found in their cases, are probably the reasons of the people's old fascination with Serial Killers. As this fascination is fueled basically by the natural interest on the unknown, it's not a surprise that Serial Killers have become the source for fictional stories of many different genres, with of course, horror being the most representative. Among the many Serial Killers in history, Ed Gein is one of the most interesting, not only because of the horrid acts he committed, but because of the complex and disturbing mind behind them. A mind so deranged that served as inspiration for movies like "Psycho", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Silence of the Lambs", and the theme of this film, which attempts to reconstruct the events that lead to his capture.

"In the Light of the Moon" (now renamed as simply "Ed Gein"), is the story of Ed Gein (Steve Railsback), based on the reports of his capture, accounts of witnesses and the interviews he gave after he was captured. Told from his perspective, we follow the quiet and apparently normal Ed Gein as his relatively simple life becomes drastically changed when his disturbing obsession with his dead mother, Augusta Gein (Carrie Snodgress), grows stronger and takes him to commit acts of grave robbery, necrophilia, and finally, the murders that made him tragically famous. We get a glimpse of his family history and the reasons that made Gein a killer, as well as a fairly realistic theory of how his schizophrenic mind worked and the way he devised the horrific methods of his murders.

Written by Stephen Johnston (whose work has been focused on serial killers since "The Midnight Hour"), the film is a fairly accurate representation of Gein's case, and while some names were obviously changed, it's safe to say that it's one of the best documented films based on the case, as well as probably Johnston's best work. Probably because of the real pathetic melancholy of Gein's life, it's in this film where Johnston finally succeeds in creating a story where the main character is both likable and repulsive at the same time (something he attempted without the same success in "Ted Bundy" and "Starkweather"), to the point that one can feel sympathy for Gein, although not to the point of making him likable. It's a fine line that Johnston works out effectively, in a nicely done script.

Director Chuck Parello, better known as the man behind the sequel to "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer", recreates Gein's life in a surprisingly restrained way. Rather than going the easy way out by building his film as a horror movie (after all, three classics of the genre were "inspired" by Geins' story), he creates a compelling docudrama that attempts to remain as accurate as his limited budget allows him to be. While nothing groundbreaking or original, Parello's slow paced and notoriously restrained approach works remarkably well with Johnston's script, and allows a slightly truer, more realistic glimpse to Gein's sad story.

While it's true that both Johnston and Parello do good jobs, the true star of the film (and basically the reason to watch the film) is the outstanding performance by Steve Railsback as the title character. Railsbeck literally owns Gein's character making the sad, disturbed man alive in a haunting, realistic way. While Railsback is the highlight of the film, Carrie Snodgress also delivers a terrific performance as Geins' religious and dominant mother, and while her screen time is considerably smaller than Railsback's, she steals every scene she is in without problem. Sadly, the rest of the cast is not as convincing, although most do a fairly good job.

The worst mistake one can make when watching "In the Ligh of the Moon" is to take it as a horror film (and even worse, to compare it to the 1974 classic, "Deranged"), as that approach will surely end up in a big disappointment; it's certainly better to see it as an attempt to make a dramatic biopic of a deranged man that became a monster, as that seems to be what Parello intended with his slow, subtle style. However, this is not to say that the film is perfect, far from it, as sometimes the same restrained approach that works effectively in some scenes, becomes painfully tiring at times. Still, like most independent films, this movie shows its biggest flaw in the very cheap special effects (they look as taken out of a cheap TV series) caused by the budget constrains. Once again, the low-budget hurts what otherwise could had been a much better film.

To those familiar with Gein's life, this unpretentious film won't offer anything new, but will be a pleasant surprise due to its fairly accurate retelling of the story. Sure, this movie is nowhere near the level of "Psycho", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "Silence of the Lambs", but as a serious docudrama of Ed Gein's life, it's a very effective film. Not really as bad as one may believe. 7/10

Ed Gein may have been the inspiration for "Psycho" and "The Texas Chain saw Massacre", but on his own he is not interesting enough to be the centerpiece of a film. What was shocking about his crimes is that they happened in a relatively peaceful community and that he was considered by most to be a harmless person, if not a little strange. This film decides not to show that perspective of the story, rather we are told the story through the point of view of Ed. The biggest failure of the movie is that the film makers don't seem to have any idea as to what made Ed Gein tick. We are simply shown that he had an overbearing mother and that her death affected him in a negative way. The film is more interested in the grave robbing and murders and less interested in the underlying motivation. I will go easy on the actors in the movie, I think that they do as well as they can with the material they are provided. Many scenes in the film were probably conceptual nightmares for any intelligent actor. But the main reason why the film doesn't work is because the film makers decided that Ed would make a good protagonist and if this is the case who do they suppose would be the antagonists, the people that he killed?

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!

After the gruesome discovery residents of Plainfield had made when entering the house of Ed Gein, no one knew the genre of horror would change forever. With Robert Bloch publishing his thriller novel "Psycho" in 1959, Hollywood would end up taking the story and twisting it into various iterations. Alfred Hitchcock's adaptation of Psycho (1960) of the same name frightened many at the time. Skip a decade or so and Tobe Hooper would do the same thing in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974). Without Ed Gein or his contorted history, the stories of horror, fans have today to enjoy would not exist. It is unfortunate though that such events had to occur in order to develop such iconic creations. Up until that point though nobody had really made a movie based on the actual inspiration himself. Ed Gein had only been written about prior and was still alive up until the mid 1980s. Putting a production together that solely focused on the background / life of Ed Gein is just as intriguing as the other popular horror movies.

The running time mainly follows Ed Gein (Steve Railsback) to the point of where he begins to commit his heinous acts that many never saw coming. Inserted at different points are flashback sequences that show what brought him to that point. These flashbacks pursue his upbringing from young boy to middle-aged adult. Living under the strict rule of his mother (Carrie Snodgress), Gein transforms from a timid adolescent, to a man with a distorted sense of reality. Writing the screenplay to this indie film was Stephen Johnston. For the most part, the story feels pretty solid. Certain scenes within the movie do contain moments that are unrealistic, but this appears when Gein has already hit his psychosis so it can be assumed that only he is seeing these things. However there are factual errors to the story. Certain names and events were changed. For example, the owner of the hardware store that Gein had killed was Bernice Worden. In this feature it was Collette Marshall (Carol Mansell). Maybe it was legal issue?

Or the deputy who arrested Gein was named Arch Sly, but here his name is Sheriff Jim Stillwell (Pat Skipper). Even the way of which Gein's disgusting hobby was discovered has a slightly altered telling as to what other sources say. Perhaps director Chuck Parello modified these scenes to make it more dramatic. But why - a true story is way more convincing. Aside from this, the rest of the story execution is captivating enough. The subplot between Gein and Mary Hogan (Sally Champlin) is fascinating. Parello even delves into what might have happened to Ed's brother Henry (Brian Evers), since his death still remains unknown. This is by far the best personification of the life of Ed Gein in the most realistic fashion. From an upbringing with his religious mother, to his plunging mental health on his own. After this movie, Johnston also wrote for psychotic films like Bundy (2002) and The Hillside Strangler (2004). Parello is best known for directing this feature and Henry II: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1996).

Gein is displayed as a truly lost individual with no clear sense of control or guidance. Steve Railsback as Ed Gein puts in the right amount of effort to show how much he studied the role. Railsback brings the deranged individual to life with quiet and restrained intent. There's enough to show that there's something not all there. Railsback has been in several film productions, his most famous being The X-Files and Lifeforce (1985). Carrie Snodgress as Augusta Gein is even more convincing being that she was the force that drove her son into lunacy. Citing biblical stories and forewarning her sons of the dangers of sinful people. Snodgress was also in other films like Easy Rider (1969) and Pale Rider (1985). The third actor that best fits the mold of their character was Sally Champlin as Mary Hogan. Not only did she fit the character visually but matched Hogan's described personality as well. All other cast members within the film work well too but do not stand out because their roles are not as prevalent.

Being that this is an independent film, the visuals are not as perfected but help paint the story. Some of the digital effects look lightly rendered onto the picture, which isn't horrible but not great. There are practical effects though for the skin / bone cannibal like activities that Gein was interested in and what psychologists suspected. The cinematography shot by Vanja Cernjul worked for the film. It wasn't filmed in a wide aspect ratio, but it did get the needed shots in order to convey the correct atmosphere for how Plainfield might have felt at the time. Cernjul was also the cinematographer to American Psycho II: All American Girl (2002). For music, Robert McNaughton composed the film score. For an unreleased film score the music does its job efficiently. It's unfortunate that there was no main theme of any sort. McNaughton also scored both Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986), its sequel and is related to the director of the first; John McNaughton.

By no means is it a gory horror film with the most recognizable icon. The script also adapts certain parts of the history correctly, while other times is misses the mark completely. No matter what though, the main leads fill the shoes professionally, the story is tempting to watch, the music fits the atmosphere as well as the visual style.