The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning (2006) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
369 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
7/10
Wow
mbworm14 October 2006
Impresively taking "Texas Chainsaw" back to its roots, horror fans and cinema-goers alike should definitely give this prequel to the daring 2003 remake a chance. Although the remake in 2003 was excellent and had a tighter, more involving plot than this film, it breaks a barrier because rather than directly approaching the style of the remake and trying to live up to its success, this equally grisly thriller ignores all of the gloss, cinematography, pacing and story that it was inspired from. Instead, it goes back to the film style which made the nightmare in 1974, a more direct homage to the in your face horror that started it all.

This story is in 1963, right before the events of the 2003 film which took place in the early seventies. Jordana Brewster plays Chrissie, who is on a fun road-trip across Texas with her friends, Eric, Dean, and Bailey, played well off of each other by Matthew Bomer, Taylor Handley and Diora Baird.

Shortly after the terrifying, recognizable psycho Leatherface commits his first murders, a cross story involving an encounter with some nasty bikers throws the doomed teenagers flipping across the road in a surprisingly brutal accident.

After Sheriff Hoyt arrives (R. Lee Ermy in another chilling performance), to take control of the scene, the nightmare begins for Chrissie's friends as she watches them get taken away in his police car, unknowingly headed for the house which would become a place of torment and nightmares for years to ensue.

Appropriately gory and no-holds barred, Jonathan Liebesman creates a tight, slick and sadistic thriller in the eyes of Chrissie as she endlessly attempts to rescue her friends from a demented madman's clutches. This is a highly worthy and satisfying entry in the horror series that will make an indelible mark on your imagination, if not already done by the seemingly endless spew of remakes and graphic horror films.
59 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Don't expect anything new
zahana7 October 2006
Please don't get me wrong, this is a good horror film. To those looking for gore, it is there any there is plenty of blood shed. I would speculate several scenes have been cut to appease the mpaa. Had this film been release before Hostel, The Hills Have Eyes, or the Saw Franchise, more of the film would have ended up on the cutting room floor. The film is being advertised as it will show up how Tommy Hewitt became Leatherface. Anyone looking for any real discovery to this information will have to look somewhere else. Truthfully the only real incite into the Hewitt family origin is how a homicidal sexual deviant was able to become a Sheriff. Being a prequel, the lack of background information is, to say the least, disappointing.

I don't want to get into specifics, but there are several parts where the film feels as though it being recycled. Some scenes feel as if they were rehashed from other Chainsaw films, needless to say they did not live up. Add to this the typical slasher clichés (don't go upstairs/down to the basement, etc) and it only adds to the predictability.
109 out of 148 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Unpleasant and disturbing...as it should be
preppy-36 October 2006
Prequel to the 2003 "Texas Chainsaw..." giving us the origin of Leatherface and his twisted family. That's all done within the first 20 minutes...then it's just a virtual redo on the original with four likable 20-somethings being captured and tortured by Leatherface and his family. Considering it's basically a remake of the 2003 film, it works remarkably well.

It takes place in 1969 and has two brothers (Taylor Handley and Matthew Bomer) going to enlist (after being drafted). Along are their two girlfriends (Jordana Brewster and Diora Baird). But they're stopped by crazy Sheriff Hoyt (R. Lee Ermey) who is Leatherface's uncle...and the "fun" begins.

Very grim and graphic with no humor and shot in muted color...just as the 2003 one. The gore is strong and disgusting (this got trimmed to get an R rating) and I can't say I liked it...but it did it's job. It scared me. I was cringing in my seat a few times and jumped more than once.

Another plus is ALL the acting is good. Brewster, Handley, Baird and Bomer are all good-looking and likable--when the violence starts you really are horrified at seeing such great characters being tortured. Ermey is on hand giving another terrifying performance as Hoyt. His character is so twisted, violent and sick that when he got a taste of his own medicine my quiet audience broke out in applause. Also there's good old Leatherface and his chainsaw chasing everybody.

In some ways I applaud a grim, graphic R rated horror film that pulls no punches--I HATE the watered down PG-13 crap we usually get. But unlike some (like "Scream") this is pretty unrelenting and wears you down. But it scared me and that's exactly what it's supposed to do. An 8.
118 out of 161 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
8/10
Very Good...Full-On Chainsaw. Lots of gore. Very little cheese.
wes-11526 September 2006
The movie is very good...if you're into this kind of thing. It's nice to see a franchise splatter film that is intense and gory without being cheesy. Many of the current crop of splatter films are played intentionally cheesy for humor. Which is fine, but they shouldn't ALL be like that. This movie has some humor in it, but it's a darker humor, and not meant to be cheesy or campy.

Everything that comes to mind when you hear the words "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is in this movie. No wussing-out in this one! Murder, torture, cannibalism, insanity and a touch of the surreal. Oh yeah, and a chainsaw. No punches are pulled, so this flick is not for the squeamish.

Tonally it wasn't as surreal as the original, but it had a better (read: creepier) tone than the 2003 remake. Plenty of blood and guts. R. Lee Ermey plays a major character instead of a bit-player like in the 2003 remake, and the film benefits from this.
132 out of 188 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Welcome to Texas!
Esken23 November 2006
I saw this when i was in L.A. screening my own horror short October 2006. It was at the Chinese theater, and i was so delighted that i'm still talking about it. I love the original and the remake, and i feel the same way with this one. It shows how f****d up things can get when you accidentally end up in places you shouldn't be. Ermey is a true horror star, and really shows of here. This is a very gory film, and those of you who can't watch much blood, stay away:) For those of you who can, come on in!!! :) When i watched it i almost felt that it might turn me off of making horror films, but the feeling of course came right back:) Leatherface shows no mercy! Just as us horror freaks like it. The thing that shocked me was that i heard that they cut 17 scenes to get it an R-rating? Then i'm thinking, i can't wait to see what they cut. Hopefully the DVD will show us the goods. This might sound dumb coming from a horror fan of a long time, but i hope they make another one:)
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
This Chainsaw Still Ain't Rusty
lovadoll30 September 2006
Texas Chainsaw Massacre:The Beginning is a fantastic slasher film that brings us back to the classic era of 1970's slashers.I loved this chainsaw film simply because it answers all the whys and provides you with leatherface's history.Definitely gorier than the previous film and far more cringe inducing.This is first non cheesy slasher i've seen in ages which is a very nice change for me personally.

The acting in the film is very good there are some very intense performances and some graphic scenes.It's shot very 70's slasherseque which overall gives it a creepy aura.The storyline is very easy to follow yet very disturbing and depressing at the same time.Overall fans of The Devil's Rejects and The Hills Have Eyes see Texas Chainsaw Massacre:The Beginning it's well worth the admission fee.
109 out of 178 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Pointless and Insulting
errolforprez16 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was gore merely for the sake of gore. There was zero suspense knowing that all of the characters would die. The problem I've always had with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies is this idea that the state police never seem to come knocking after these gruesome deaths occur and the victims go missing. It's a kind of oh well we'll just overlook that one glaring plot hole, but unfortunately it's a big one and just too big to ignore. This Chainsaw film just seemed utterly pointless based on that fact and completely insulting to average intelligence. At least in the 2003 film, the main character, Jessica Biel, manages to escape. Every single character is so one dimensional and disposable that I didn't feel anything for the characters. What I did feel was sympathy for the actors playing these meaningless parts. I just sat there waiting for the next one to die and other than being mildly curious about what kind of morbid way they would be offed, I was far from being on the edge of my seat. The first act of the film is by far made the least amount of sense and just seemed like filler to get to the gory stuff and chainsaw scenes. The subplot with the bikers made zero sense. There is absolutely no explanation why the biker chick just suddenly starts pursuing the jeep out of nowhere to rob it. Uh where was her boyfriend and what was he doing? At least in the 2003 film, there were a lot better struggles and chase sequences and at least the setup made more sense. This film's ending was by far the biggest slap in the face of the horror genre. After sitting through 91 minutes of grotesque, sadistic torture the one single remaining character is killed in the most clichéd ways imaginable. This movie deserves to be banned - banned for being stupid beyond belief.
63 out of 100 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
the 2nd best chainsaw film?
sifort201212 October 2006
I've been a Texas chainsaw fanatic since i saw the original (when i was about 8) and all the sequels obviously tried hard (except the one with Bridget Jones in which was an utter waste of time) but ultimately failed to be worthy of following up such a classic. the remake was OK, it looked great and had some quality violence but didn't really hit the spot.

but when i had finished watching this one (a prequel to a remake?) I've got to say i was very impressed, of course it had problems. the odd character didn't seem to have much of a purpose other than to die horribly and scared teenage girls still have that tendency to walk towards the screams of pain rather than leg it, but the grimness and violence of it all was pretty much relentless. there was no crap attempts at humour (other than the 'sherrif' but thats laughing at how out of order he is) and once it gets going it doesn't stop until the abrupt ending.

it looks great, the violence is above and beyond what you expect to see at a cinema (i don't know all the cuts made to the us version but the UK version seems to be about 8mins longer) and it felt like i was watching something that deserved to have 'texas chainsaw massacre' in the title.

if you like horror and gore films you should have a great time, go see.
53 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
10/10
Not one to miss!
xchloex1471 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I've been sat here reading through all the different user reviews of this film and have really found a mixed bag. One minute I will read a review laden with positive feedback and singing the praises of the film. The next I am met with someone complaining about every single aspect of the film, so to say that this was a universal success would unfortunately be a lie. In my humble opinion, I found this film to fulfil everything I wanted when I picked up the disk and more. New to this franchise I was happy to finally know the context of it all. The performance of Matt Bomer (Eric) should be highly commended and this is no surprise considering his other endeavours. I have seen people complain about the colour filter used in the film but I actually thought that it added to the atmosphere of the story and enhanced the thrilling nature. While watching the film I did wonder how on earth it was going to end but I was more than satisfied with the ending that I was provided with. As I have the film on DVD, I then looked at the additional features to find the alternate endings and I must say that the final one was by far the best. This is definitely one for gore fans because there is more blood than you can shake a stick at. In particular the scene when Thomas gets his 'new face' to become Leatherface is subtle yet effective. The scenes preceding this (withholding some information, I don't want to ruin the film) are definitely not for the fainthearted and even as a fan of gore of this sort did find myself wincing. Overall, as seen in my star rating, I thoroughly enjoyed the film and cannot recommend it highly enough and will be sure to watch it again. All I am saying is watch the film for what it is, not comparing it to the others. If you keep an open mind (as I did) you're sure to enjoy it. Happy watching!
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
The Beginning? Are you kidding?
andell8 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
There are a lot of things that astonish and disappoint me in this world...but this ridiculous piece of garbage film getting a 5.9 rating on the back of a LOT of perfect ratings is one of the most disappointing and disturbing of all. In fact, I dare say when I was leaving the theater, the only crime I felt had taken place was fraud! The cast is essentially the same...two girls (one brunette and one blonde) and two boys (one brunette and one blonde) are substituted for the "original" two girls and two boys with the same hair color and the same general appearance. Insert a couple of bikers, some inane "facts" about how "Hoyt" became sheriff, "Leatherface" was born and raised, and so on...and what you have is the original remake remade with a B class feel.

The contradictions in this are appalling. For instance, Leatherface is one bad mutha...he's huge, he's powerful (lifts one guy up off the ground, impaled on a chainsaw), and he causes the ground to shake when he walks. Yet he hides in a car, he can't be seen by a passing vehicle, and his stealth like nature allows for a very stupid and very gory finale that perhaps gives this wretched fraud the only genuine feeling of originality it deserves. Its original in this...but its also very, VERY stupid! This movie is throughly pointless. Hoyt wasn't the actual sheriff...well there's a shocker. Gee, could a man in a dead town be pretending to be a sheriff? Or that Leatherface had birth defects? Or that his mother gave birth to him on the floor of the slaughterhouse as she was dying (yeah, this was one grotesque scene...I can't even imagine someone being proud of producing that scene...let alone choosing to keep it in the movie), and he found a home away from home in the confines of the slaughter house? I'm of course off on a tangent here...but literally there is NOTHING in this movie...nothing at all. Simply put, this is a rehashing of the remade TCM, repackaged as a beginning chapter that simply was not needed. If you want to see Leatherface, do yourself a favor and watch the DVD of the remake- it makes more sense than paying money to go to the theater and watch the same movie for an inflated price!
30 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews