Recent Reviews for Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning
Recent Reviews
-
MCT:August 15, 2008Pretty much awesome. Probably the best prequel I've seen yet, except for Rob Zombie's Halloween. But the best part of the movie for me wasn't even in the movie itself. It was hearing my girlfriend's redneck dad scream "I bet you five bucks she ain't gonna make it." It was pretty much hilarious.
-
MCT:August 13, 2008An almost tolerable sequel to the down-right blasphemous (To cinema,not to religion.)remake that precedes it.
-
MCT:August 12, 2008The idea could have been good but unfortunately the filmmakers decided to to go for another dumb gorish festival.
I have nothing against gore although i don't quite appreciate it, but wouldn't it be much more intelligent if the plot covered the story of leatherface and how did he become what he truly is ? because I think that's what the movie should be about.
Just another bad slasher flick.....euhh....and it's disturbing. -
MCT:August 11, 2008Exactly the same as the first one, just different ending.
(first one: 1 girl survives, this one: no survivours) -
MCT:August 10, 2008Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning is the terrible prequel to 2003's remake of the original TCM. This film is basically a remake of that film with the twist that everything gets explained in this one. TCM:TB is not a scary film. It's main goal is to try to disgust you with some gory visuals that fails on impact. This is your typical coattails sequel to cash in on its predecessor.
If you have ever wondered why films like Halloween and the original TCM are considered classics is that the villains in those films have no explanation. They are there stalking and killing. The mystery is what makes the films scary. Explaining everything is just like a magician revealing how he pulled the rabbit out of his hat. -
MCT:August 9, 2008
I Probably The Other One Better Because At Least The Chick Got Out Of There And Doesn't Leave You With A Bad Ending Like This One!
-
MCT:August 8, 2008I find Jordana Brewster much nicer to look at than Jessica Biel but that was no redemtion for having to sit through this trash. Also, being a prequel you know that the baddies won't get any comeuppance - which makes it kinda pointless.
-
MCT:July 30, 2008
I have never watched the re-make of TCM, and obviously this so-called prequel relates to that film rather than the 1974 original. Not that the horrifying events that occur in the film have changed all that much. Care-free young Texans in the waning years of the hippie era encounter a family of murderous sadists during a summer road-trip and spend the rest of the movie trying not to become their latest victims. It's all been done before, and done much better. We get to see Leatherface stitching together his first mask, but the scene is not exactly akin to Anakin Skywalker being made into Darth Vader. To me, the scene felt as if an impostor was merely attempting a shaky imitation, rather than serving as the launching point of a familiar, creepy movie icon. There is an almost unrelenting cavalcade of gore splattering every object in proximity to the violent happenings -- trouble is, that overkill (no pun intended) is meant to shock and sicken, when the filmmakers ought to have been more concerned with developing suspense. Tobe Hooper understood this when he was making the original, and that film became a classic. I am aware that there is an audience that responds much differently than I to such gross displays, but no truly great horror film has ever attained classic status simply because of its gore. No argument here that plenty of great horror films contain their share, but in order to transcend the numerous limitations found in this particular genre, such films have to offer something more than guts and gouges. TCM: The Beginning does not bother striving to be anything more than an unimaginative retread.
-
MCT:July 28, 2008
The first time I watched this, I didn't much like it. But watching it again on DVD last night, I found myself loving it. Hmm...
Although Jonathan Liebsman's direction is nowhere near as stylish as Marcus Nispel's work on the 2003 remake, he gets the point across. This film is also has much more of the dark, gallows humour of Tobe Hooper's 73 and 86 films, missing from the 03 version. The gore here is superb, and I always admire a horror film in which all the "good guys" are killed. Brutally.
Another thing I noticed upon my second viewing was that this film actually had a bit of the "rural vs urban" and "tradition vs progress" subtext that many critics have read into Hooper's original. By making explicit the destitution of the Hewitt clan by showing the closing of the slaughterhouse that was their source of income, the filmmakers have in a way cast them as sort-of victims. Interesting. And pitting them against bikers and (what they see as) hippies, in other words, the counterculture of the time, they are made the defenders of the traditional American way of life.
And if you don't buy that, you get to see lots of people chopped up real good. -
MCT:July 26, 2008Well, it's ipressive because it's based on a true story, although i'm sure most of the details are just cinematics. As for the movie, not that impressive, only gory part was the peeling of Eric, other than that, pffftttt!!! lol
-
MCT:July 17, 2008Good enough to watch again a few too many things related to the first for me, but whatever it was good.
-
MCT:July 12, 2008
this show was crazy gore, runing and slashing, running and killing, crying and hitting, then running and dying; did u expect more?
-
MCT:July 4, 2008
"From 1969 to 1973, the Hewitt family murdered thirty-three people across the state of Texas. To this day, it is universally considered the most notorious and brutally sadistic killing spree in the annals of American history: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre."
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning is an additional inept Hollywood gore fest that endeavours to misrepresent itself as a terrifying horror flick. After all ideas for sequels have come and gone, Hollywood studios then move onto the prequels. The philosophy behind this prequel was ostensibly to inform the audience of the back-story of "Leatherface" (Bryniarski) who is the central serial killer in the series. Clearly, the motivation was to reveal why the cannibalistic family become the way they end up...what pushed them over the line? First of all, I must rip into the concept. Tobe Hooper's 1974 original The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was absolutely petrifying because of the inability to understand the characters and their origins. Therefore with no palpable motivations, the characters are frightening. Thus revealing the genesis erases all mystery surrounding Leatherface and his family, and no longer do they possess a scary screen presence.
The second fatal flaw in the screenplay is not even fulfilling the concept! The first five minutes show Leatherface's birth, and then all of a sudden the central character is an adult chopping up meat just like he was in the predecessors. Cue the brainless, incompetently-minded characters travelling through Leatherface's region...prompt the rest of the sadistic family who are suddenly cannibals eating people, and the stage is set for a pointless rehash of the original films with a different slate of characters. This time, though, you can predict how it will end. We know the events that will unfold a few years later, thus these characters can't tell the tale to the authorities and uncover the mystery. Hence the villains won't get their comeuppance (there's no vengeance at all), and the audience are exposed to endless scenes of mindless torture.
I've basically described the film's plot, but I will elaborate further: Thomas Hewitt - a.k.a Leatherface - is born in a slaughterhouse in Texas and is abandoned in a dumpster. He is adopted into a family, and he grows up to become a worker at the same slaughterhouse. Then the slaughterhouse is closed down, with workers left unemployed. Many of the local inhabitants desert the area. The Hewitt family stays put, but are on the verge of starvation. Leatherface's deranged step-father executes the local sheriff, assumes his identity and begins running the town his cruel way. Two young couples then venture into the region and become hopelessly stranded. The Hewitt family wait...with an enormous assortment of torture tools on hand.
It's impossible to point out all the flaws evident in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. The main flaw is its nature of nothing but a mindless gore fest. The film has no problem with moving from one unnerving torture scene to the next, with blood and guts spurting all over the place: showing more inventive methods to kill a human. I know, I know - I'm supposed to praise the low-budget affair for creating an authentic atmosphere with realistic gore, blah, blah, blah! The impressive gore effects aren't a redeeming feature. As a matter of fact, there are no redeeming features at all! With all the misogynistic scenes depicting horrible torture and rape of girls, I wanted to walk out of my viewing area and keep on walking.
Tobe Hooper's original film wasn't a gore fest. There was barely any gore at all! It was scary because of what you didn't see. Of course, modern movie-goers apparently search for endless amounts of blood and gore. If it's present in action movies I usually devour the violence as it's realistic and in an intriguing context. In the context of torture it's just stupid. The film is also plagued with stupid characters and villains that are stereotyped as having the superhuman ability to pop up anywhere at any time whenever things have potential to look up for the protagonists. The film has zero scares. Instead of suspense and terror, we have lots of blood flow with an equal amount of guts. Speaking in terms of successful relentless horror flicks, something like Wolf Creek does better. Even though that's largely a relentlessly gory affair it has more skill and class. This is crap! Stupid, pretentious, tasteless crap! -
MCT:July 4, 2008
One of the most worse horror-films at all time! This one is not that good at all, it's overwhelmed by short-sighted storytelling and it's just pointless.
It's neither as bad as it could have been, nor as interesting as it should have been is my view on it! No character, no commentary.
There is a bit of gore and it's absolutely sadistic, but it's never scary. I reckon that this is the most brutal Massacre since the 1974 original classic. -
MCT:June 22, 2008
If you liked the first remake, you'l like this. It contains a bit more gore than the first one, but it follows the same story and the same situations happen.
-
MCT:June 21, 2008Quite good, but could be better. Relies too much on graphic violence, and not on the macabre story of Leatherface.
-
MCT:June 20, 2008
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
-
MCT:June 13, 2008
Not an absolutely terrible remake, and the photography is actually quite stunning, considering the type of film we're talking about. Nonetheless, it's a far cry from the original and is nowhere near as creepy.
-
MCT:June 7, 2008
It could have been worse. What made this movie not too boring is that it goes fast to the gore fest and from then it never ends till the final second of the flick. I am a huge fan of horror movies, but of no series in particular. At least this one is not as ludicrous as 'The hills have eyes 2' or the stupid wreckage of 'The Devil's Rejects'. I catched it playing late in HBO and I was bored, that also helped.
-
MCT:June 6, 2008I was a good movie but it was gross in the beginning wen that lady gave birth while she was working.
-
MCT:June 4, 2008
I like how this movie showed how and why it all began. I think this was a pretty scary flick. The acting was good, the gore was good.
Catch it! -
MCT:June 3, 2008
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA it was disgusting, how can those person have no heart to go against that uncle of the boy i was crying during this film because i couldnt imagine how some people have no heart.
-
MCT:June 2, 2008
Extremelly gory, but suits OK in the storyline. Leatherface still looks cool, and the kills were enjoyable.
73/100 -
MCT:June 2, 2008
Didn't think it was scary at all. Very similar to the '03 movie ('03 one was better) Was hoping this one was better.
-
MCT:June 2, 2008
Pretty good movie. It did have some gorey parts. It's another stereotypical horror flick with hot chicks and their boyfriends, lots of blood and some painful scenes that made my back tense when as I watched them. The story was decent for a horror flick. I found myself a little frustrated. Movies with people getting trapped in little towns and everyone is out to get them or the bad guys are the only ones in town and there is absolutely no one who will help, really get on my nerves sometimes. This was one of those flicks. The hot babes made up for it though.
