# Talk:The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://theenvelope.latimes.com/extras/lostmind/year/1997/1997st.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Over long stretches of time, an IP user keeps trying to alter the plot summary. I'm not sure why they are doing this, but I keep reverting it for reasons explained in the edit summary. The plot is made less concise, unexplained changes to the year, plot aspects (such as the major organisation subplot) aren't explained as well, ETC. I figured I should bring this here before it turns into an edit war. DarkKnight2149 14:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
I hate it when people do that. It's so annoying!--Paleface Jack (talk) 00:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Nowhere in the film or any official source is the family identified as the "Slaughter" family. That was made up and spread around by the internet. Do not add it without a credible source. Darkknight2149 03:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is the intro talking at length about the following films in the franchise? There's a franchise article for that. Kumagoro-42 (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I am a bit conflicted about whether or not the title of this article should really be Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation or The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The latter is its original title, and the film was released theatrically as such through Cinepix Film Properties in October 1995. It was not until 1997 when Columbia TriStar acquired rights that it was re-titled Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation, slightly edited, and given a second limited release (in conjunction with Cinepix Film Properties). While The Next Generation is the better-known title, it is not the title under which the film was originally released. Had the film not been given a proper release as The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre prior, I would lean toward titling the article/referring to the film as The Next Generation, but because it was formally released as the former first, I am not so sure. 
I have been unable to find a solid answer in the Manual of Style for films on here in regard to a situation like this, but for historical purposes, I tend to lean toward the article being titled/the film being referred to under its original name (The Return...), with the alternate title (The Next Generation) being addressed appropriately in the release section. Does anyone have thoughts or opinions about this? – Drown Soda (talk) 05:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I favour the original title, even if only on the basis that the former opening sentence "Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation is a 1995 film" was mixing information from two separate versions of the film - the one released in 1995 and the one titled The Next Generation. The article should pick one version as primary and stick to it, wrt plot summary, running time, release date, etc. Since the 1995 and 1997 releases were both limited, it makes sense to stick with the 1995 version, and therefore all its corresponding details. - Wetdogmeat (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Some sources may not be valid in the article per WP:RSP/VALNET. specifically the Screen Rant, Collider, and the Comic Book Resources articles. The Collider one is a review, its not really essential as the viewpoints its made are already made by more high quality sources and we are not short of any reviews of this film. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Yikes, I didn't realize these were regarded as such—I will try to remove/replace them as needed.Drown Soda (talk) 23:40, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
No worries. Its relatively new. And yeah, thankfully it didn't structurally gut this article. Great work btw! Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:48, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Drown Soda (talk · contribs) 00:19, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Jon698 (talk · contribs) 17:46, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Will conduct a review in due time. Jon698 (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Here are some comments I have so far @Drown Soda:  1. Is the "uniquely" necessary in the lede? It feels like an unnecessary adjective.  2. Could Principal photography took place in 1994 on location in rural areas in Bastrop and Pflugerville, Texas, with a largely Austin-based cast and crew. be changed to Principal photography took place on location in rural areas in Bastrop and Pflugerville, Texas, in 1994, with a largely Austin-based cast and crew.  3. I looked at another GA, Psycho (1960 film), and saw that it put the "Themes and style" section below reception, but above legacy. Would you be fine with moving the "Analysis" section to between the Reception and Legacy sections.  4. Could Elements of this subplot are referenced in Henkel's 2012 film Butcher Boys, which, although not an official The Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie in name, may indeed be the next chapter in the story.[26] Henkel's Butcher Boys was initially written as a sequel to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.[27] be changed to Elements of this subplot are referenced in Henkel's 2012 film Butcher Boys. It is not an official The Texas Chainsaw Massacre film in name,[26] but was initially written as a sequel to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.[27]  5. The sentence Another element noted by both critics and film scholars is Leatherface's overt cross-dressing, which was briefly explored in the original film but implemented to a greater extent. feels incomplete. Should something like "in this film" be tacked onto the end? Jon698 (talk) 02:16, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Noted—all of these changes make sense to me. I will move ahead with making the alterations. Thank you! –Drown Soda (talk) 02:58, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
@Drown Soda: Can you add alts to all of the images? Jon698 (talk) 04:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Nevermind, I added them myself. Jon698 (talk) 16:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
After going through the article and making some copyedits, along with requesting some edits from Drown Soda, I can find no more problems with the prose.
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section):  b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
I will conduct a review of 16 references representing 10% of the total.  1. Source 5 does list the length of the film as 95 minutes  2. Source 7 does list the budget as $600,000  3. Source 23 does state that McConaughey was an unknown actor, that he was in Dazed and Confused, and the quote that it sources.  4. Source 30 does state that Robert Jacks was a radio host and singer that was cast as Leatherface.  5. Source [36] "Horror Films of the 1990s" does cover the cameo appearances  6. Source 40 does list the working title The Taxidermist: Texas Chainsaw Massacre 4  7. Source 47 does cover Zellweger's quotes  8. Source 51 does state that the music was done entirely by people from Austin  9. Source 60 does list the film as being shown at the Paramount Theatre on March 12  10. Source 69 does cover the test-market release in Portland, Oregon.  11. Source 71 does cover the CCA lawsuit  12. Source 85 does cover CFP releasing the film under the Avalanche banner  13. Source 98 does cover the VHS reissue for the Halloween season  14. Source 103 does cover Scream Factory's announcement of a Blu-ray  15. Source 113 is accurately conveys Joe Bob Briggs' review  16. Source 130 does list its Saturn Awards nomination
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Covers the plot, production, reviews, analysis, and legacy of the film. I cannot think of anything that it is missing.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
I can find no neutrality issues. It offers both negative and positive reviews for the film and the reviews for the original and edited versions.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
No edit wars are ongoing
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
Good usage of images throughout the article and all of them have alts.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
I have no more issues with the article. All of the edit requests I made to Drown Soda were met, all of the sourcing that I checked is in line, and the article does not appear to be lacking any significant pieces of information.
@Jon698: thank you, it is very much appreciated. I have worked on this article on and off over the course of a number of years, so this is great news. Thank you for taking the time to review. –Drown Soda (talk) 04:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)