In this corner comes a man from the centre of Australia. Armed with his trusty knife, shotgun and menacing laugh, he is as calculating as he is terrifying. He is Mick Taylor.
Let’s get ready to rumble.
Leatherface first made his mark in horror in 1974 with The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. Played by Gunnar Hansen, Leatherface was cruel, killing his victims with such fury that they were almost unrecognizable corpses. (Fun Fact: Despite being called The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, only one person was killed from a chainsaw)
The basic plot of the movie is this: Five friends visiting their grandpa's old house are hunted down and terrorized by a chainsaw wielding killer and his family of grave-robbing cannibals.
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre went on to have three sequels before being remade in 2003. The remake also got a prequel before being rehashed again in 2013. All up there are seven movies to date with Leatherface and his disturbing family. Like with all my Horrordome battles, this one will just be focusing on the original movie.
In 2005 an Australian film entitled Wolf Creek took the world
by storm, introducing a character so cunning and cruel that tourism to the
country, especially the outback, actually dropped. Mick Taylor was born and his reign of terror
officially began. Played by Aussie nice
guy, John Jarratt, Mick Taylor sent chills down the spine of all Australians.
The plot of the movie is this: Stranded backpackers in remote Australia fall prey to a murderous bushman who offers to fix their car, then takes them captive.
The story of Mick Taylor was left to a singular film although it was announced that there would be a sequel and low and behold, there is. Set for release at the end of 2013, Wolf Creek 2 will see Mick Taylor return to the screen, butchering backpackers and causing the country to shudder and wonder how it created such a cold-blooded killer.
So, the question remains, if these two were to share the screen where winner kills all, who would reign supreme? Would it be the boy from the bush or the Texas titan?
Let’s look at the characters a little closer. Leatherface is a mentally retarded man, with a sadistic family that worked in a slaughterhouse. When the slaughterhouse was closed down, they didn’t move away like most of the folk in the area, instead opting to stay and eventually turned into cannibals, turning on the people who passed through the area, killing them before eating them.
His weapon of choice was, obviously, a chainsaw, but he also resorted to using a meat hook and a hammer. The meat hook was to hold one of his victims while the hammer was to bash their heads in. Essentially whatever he could get his hands on, he would use. He also had the help of his family to gather victims and kill, offering to hold them down while the others got in on the action.
Mick Taylor is a loner, stalking the outback for potential victims. Nothing has been revealed of his past except that he was a kangaroo shooter, which means he has a steady hand. Turns out he’s also pretty good at stalking his victims before making his move and disassembling their cars.
What’s Mick’s weapon of choice? Well, he is partial to a large hunting knife which he uses to torture his victims, but he also owns a shot gun and because of his background as a kangaroo shooter, he’s a sharp shooter, being able to hit a target like a sniper. Like Leatherface, Mick is an opportunist and will often kill with whatever he has lying around.
Victim wise, Leatherface leads the count, killing four in the first movie, with a strong indication of many victims prior to those four and, not to mention, countless others in the sequels and remakes. Mick only murdered two, but, like Leatherface, there’s a strong indication that he’s done it before. (Fun Fact: The body in which Mick stabs in the spine to create the ‘Head On A Stick’ was actually the body of a dead pig). With a sequel in the works as we speak, Mick’s body count is sure to rise.
So, who would win?
When I posed the question, most people said Leatherface solely based on the fact that there were countless movies and that he is an icon of the horror genre. But what people don’t consider is he is also mad and tends to attack his victims head on with brute force and is an opportunistic killer, where as Mick Taylor is a hunter who stalks his prey, deciding on the best possible outcome for the attacks. Mick also taunts his victims mentally before physically destroying them. He is cruel, cunning and calculating.
If there were to face off against each other, Mick would easily be able to subdue Leatherface with a couple of well placed bullets before getting up close with his knife, dodging the swinging chainsaw and thus defeating him. If you think that Leatherface’s family would come to the rescue, Mick would be able to dispatch of them in much the same fashion. Mick Taylor would defeat Leatherface and his family with a long ranged attack, however going hand to hand combat would make it much more exciting. In the eyes of Mick Taylor, Leatherface is just an animal and he knows how to eradicate them.
Winner: Mick Taylor
No doubt this will create some debate and controversy. I will not condone personal attacks over this.
Whatever the outcome, Leatherface Vs. Mick Taylor would be one epic and very bloody battle.
The plot of the movie is this: Stranded backpackers in remote Australia fall prey to a murderous bushman who offers to fix their car, then takes them captive.
The story of Mick Taylor was left to a singular film although it was announced that there would be a sequel and low and behold, there is. Set for release at the end of 2013, Wolf Creek 2 will see Mick Taylor return to the screen, butchering backpackers and causing the country to shudder and wonder how it created such a cold-blooded killer.
So, the question remains, if these two were to share the screen where winner kills all, who would reign supreme? Would it be the boy from the bush or the Texas titan?
Let’s look at the characters a little closer. Leatherface is a mentally retarded man, with a sadistic family that worked in a slaughterhouse. When the slaughterhouse was closed down, they didn’t move away like most of the folk in the area, instead opting to stay and eventually turned into cannibals, turning on the people who passed through the area, killing them before eating them.
His weapon of choice was, obviously, a chainsaw, but he also resorted to using a meat hook and a hammer. The meat hook was to hold one of his victims while the hammer was to bash their heads in. Essentially whatever he could get his hands on, he would use. He also had the help of his family to gather victims and kill, offering to hold them down while the others got in on the action.
Mick Taylor is a loner, stalking the outback for potential victims. Nothing has been revealed of his past except that he was a kangaroo shooter, which means he has a steady hand. Turns out he’s also pretty good at stalking his victims before making his move and disassembling their cars.
What’s Mick’s weapon of choice? Well, he is partial to a large hunting knife which he uses to torture his victims, but he also owns a shot gun and because of his background as a kangaroo shooter, he’s a sharp shooter, being able to hit a target like a sniper. Like Leatherface, Mick is an opportunist and will often kill with whatever he has lying around.
Victim wise, Leatherface leads the count, killing four in the first movie, with a strong indication of many victims prior to those four and, not to mention, countless others in the sequels and remakes. Mick only murdered two, but, like Leatherface, there’s a strong indication that he’s done it before. (Fun Fact: The body in which Mick stabs in the spine to create the ‘Head On A Stick’ was actually the body of a dead pig). With a sequel in the works as we speak, Mick’s body count is sure to rise.
So, who would win?
When I posed the question, most people said Leatherface solely based on the fact that there were countless movies and that he is an icon of the horror genre. But what people don’t consider is he is also mad and tends to attack his victims head on with brute force and is an opportunistic killer, where as Mick Taylor is a hunter who stalks his prey, deciding on the best possible outcome for the attacks. Mick also taunts his victims mentally before physically destroying them. He is cruel, cunning and calculating.
If there were to face off against each other, Mick would easily be able to subdue Leatherface with a couple of well placed bullets before getting up close with his knife, dodging the swinging chainsaw and thus defeating him. If you think that Leatherface’s family would come to the rescue, Mick would be able to dispatch of them in much the same fashion. Mick Taylor would defeat Leatherface and his family with a long ranged attack, however going hand to hand combat would make it much more exciting. In the eyes of Mick Taylor, Leatherface is just an animal and he knows how to eradicate them.
Winner: Mick Taylor
No doubt this will create some debate and controversy. I will not condone personal attacks over this.
Whatever the outcome, Leatherface Vs. Mick Taylor would be one epic and very bloody battle.
Nicely done, And well backed up for your choices.
ReplyDeleteBefore anyone attacks and abuses in comments, If you feel otherwise put it in with evidence and back them up otherwise don't speak.
Ooh I don't know about the outcome when it comes to hand to hand, but I agree that Mick would shoot the shit out of Leatherface first. Great argument :D
ReplyDeleteI personally think Leatherface would kill Mick rather easily, if not by the chainsaw then at least by a sledgehammer to the head. But then again, Mick does have an advantage of being a hunter and more calculating. Hmm. This makes a great debating topic. Never would have thought that Mick Taylor could have ever competed against Leatherface let alone defeat him before tonight. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteNo, sorry, Leatherface is the more established villain therefore he'd win.
ReplyDeleteHmm, good argument, but I'd still back Leatherface. Yes, he might be opportunistic but he does have a larger body count, a more established iconic status and overall just a bigger presence within horror.
ReplyDeleteI do like Mick Taylor but I think he'd be better going up against someone like Patrick Bateman. No hate though ReiRei. Loved reading this. Amazing work as always.
I agree with you. Mick Taylor would kick the shit out of Leatherface. Mick's a hunter and far more skilled at killing from a distance where as Leatherface just kills those who cross his path. Mick goes out to hunt people, thus making him more deadly. Yep, Don't fuck with an Aussie ^_^
ReplyDelete1974? I thought the texas chainsaw massacre came out in 2003 with Jessica Biel? I love Wolf Creek. Mick was creepy.
ReplyDeleteThat was a remake of the original.
DeleteYou're kidding right? That was a remake
DeleteI prefer Leatherface and his deranged family. I just thought Mick Taylor and Wolf Creek was a blah movie at best. Nice article though.
ReplyDeleteI love the original TCSM movie and I honestly don't think Mick would be able to defeat Leatherface. I just think the brutality of Leatherface's nature would be too much for Mick. You certainly gave me something to think about especially with Mick's long range advantage.
ReplyDeleteI just can't really see him turning Leatherface into a head on a stick - it would be interesting, but I just don't think it would happen.