Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning

[Bourne101]

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000HJFPFY.01-ATRH0YYR5UDM1._SCLZZZZZZZ_V61349736_.jpg

Directed by Jonathan Liebesman

Genre: Horror

Tagline: Witness The Birth Of Fear

Plot Outline: On one last road trip before they're sent to serve in Vietnam, two friends (Handley and Bomer) and their girlfriends (Baird and Brewster) get into an accident that calls their local sheriff (Ermey) to the scene. Thus begins a terrifying experience where the teens are taken to a secluded house of horrors, where a young, would-be killer is being nurtured.

Starring: Jordana Brewster, Taylor Handley, Diora Baird, R. Lee Ermey and Andrew Bryniarski.

Rated R for strong horror violence/gore, language and some sexual content.

[MisterTwister]

I'm seeing this on my birthday (Oct. 7th) and can't wait. The postive reviews are promosing and the TV spots look great.

[DarkKnight81]

I was one of the few that loved the remake so I'll definitely be there opening night.

[MadsenOMC]

Liebesman directed the atrocious Darkness Falls and I wasn't much of a fan of the TCM remake, so I really didn't expect much from this one. But the early reviews make it sound pretty damn good and I am looking forward to seeing it now. Just don't want to but into the hype too much.

[ilovemovies]

It looks like it's EXACTLY the same as the first one.

Still, I have to say, the trailer is pretty gripping.

[Tuukka]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
Liebesman directed the atrocious Darkness Falls and I wasn't much of a fan of the TCM remake, so I really didn't expect much from this one. But the early reviews make it sound pretty damn good and I am looking forward to seeing it now. Just don't want to but into the hype too much.

Darkness falls didn't give me much confidence in Liebesman either, but apparently the film had an extremely trouble production history and it was taken away from Liebesman and re-shot and re-edited by the studio.

His short movies have gotten a lot of praise and the flick is getting suprisisingly really good reviews, so I'll see it. It sounds to me that Liebesman is only now really getting a chance to show his chops.

[MadsenOMC]

Yes I am aware that Darkness Falls had a very troubled production and that at some point it was taken away from him. But his name is still on it and just about every frame of the movie is pathetically inept, so it's hard not to associate it with him. However the early reviews do seem to indicate that the guy can direct a horror movie.

I agree that it looks just like the last one. As long as it's better, which apparently it is.

[Joshmo]

Didnt care for the remake and the ending sucked ass. Doesnt come close to the masterpiece ending of the original...but I'll still check this one out.

[TylerDurden182]

I will probably see it sometime in the theater, but it isn't a top priority.

[slasherfan]

Originally posted by MisterTwister
I'm seeing this on my birthday (Oct. 7th) and can't wait. The postive reviews are promosing and the TV spots look great.

Oh my god! Oct 7Th is my birthday aswell and I was planning on seeing this but it got pushed back a week over here (eyes glow red from anger).

[ScaryFreak1827]

Originally posted by slasherfan
Oh my god! Oct 7Th is my birthday aswell and I was planning on seeing this but it got pushed back a week over here (eyes glow red from anger).

Creepy... Oct 7th is also my birthday as well lol and I'll definetly be seeing this (loved the remake/original.)

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Let's see....this film is the prequel to a remake. No thanks.

[Duke Nukem]

For those saying this looks exactly like the remake...watch the trailer again.

-The reason as to how the teenagers wind up at the mysterious house are different.
-The movie primarily set in 1969 apparently, and will very likely contain earlier flashback scenes to Leatherface's youth (the remake was set in 1973)
-There will actually be a dinner scene. The original had a dinner scene. The sequel had a dinner scene. The other sequels had dinner scenes. But, the remake didn't have a dinner scene. But, it is obvious this prequel will have a dinner scene.

Yes, there will probably cat-and-mouse chainsaw chases within and around the mysterious house and there probably is a chainsaw chase through the creepy woods as well. But, these are kind of obligatory. So, really, stop saying it's exactly the same as the remake, because it isn't.

[BloodyBoi]

Oh man, I can't *wait* for this. I've been excited since I first saw the (very excellent BTW) trailer attached to The Descent. I haven't had the displeasure of seeing Darkness Falls, so I'll be able to cast a better eye on Jonathan Liebesman since I don't have the knowlegde of his inept debut feature.

Personally, I thought the dinner scene in the original was incredibly cheesy, bordering on hysterically funny, which is quite the shame. Even now, when I watch the film, that scene always threatens to derail the carefully-crafted insane depravity that came before it. I always skip over it and watch from when Sally escapes. So I'm sure hoping the dinner scene in this film won't detract from it in the same fashion the original did.

I've also heard this film is quite gruesome and gory, and I really hope the gore is like the remake, which wasn't necessarily bloody, since its gore also consisted of everything else the human body has to offer: spit, snot, tears, sweat, piss. And I think a lot of people felt the remake was over-the-top gory because of all the sweat and puke, not necessarily due to blood.

I for one don't like bloody horror films unless the film has other elements to back it up, story-wise, acting-wise, directing-wise, etc. I'm not one of those fans who crave disgusting gore, and I'm not a squeamish prude. But seeing fountains of Karo syrup everywhere for no other reason than the gratuitous really takes me out of the film, and I'm left with tedium and boredom.

[Strider]

Originally posted by TylerDurden182
I will probably see it sometime in the theater, but it isn't a top priority.

Ditto. I wasn't a big fan of the TCM remake either, but I'll probably end up seeing this prequel later down the road. It doesn't look any better than the remake, but it doesn't look any worse.

Strider

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by Duke Nukem
For those saying this looks exactly like the remake...watch the trailer again.

-The reason as to how the teenagers wind up at the mysterious house are different.
-The movie primarily set in 1969 apparently, and will very likely contain earlier flashback scenes to Leatherface's youth (the remake was set in 1973)
-There will actually be a dinner scene. The original had a dinner scene. The sequel had a dinner scene. The other sequels had dinner scenes. But, the remake didn't have a dinner scene. But, it is obvious this prequel will have a dinner scene.

Yes, there will probably cat-and-mouse chainsaw chases within and around the mysterious house and there probably is a chainsaw chase through the creepy woods as well. But, these are kind of obligatory. So, really, stop saying it's exactly the same as the remake, because it isn't.

Um, your list of reasons don't go very far in supporting your belief that they aren't similar at all. And since you have yet to see it, you don't really know. People are just saying that based on the trailer they look very similar. Just an opinion. No reason to get all worked up.

[Bourne101]

Well this is great. It's rated R in Canada which means no one under 18 can see it, even with a parent. I snuck my way into Jackass, which was rated R. So I'll have to do the same for this, which is fine. But the whole time you watch the movie, you're just waiting for an usher to give you the boot.

[Suziecue]

I'll see it because I loved the original TCM so much and the remake was ok. But they do seem to be squeezing all they can from the story. It looks like it'll be worth the 10 bucks though.

[Duke Nukem]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
Um, your list of reasons don't go very far in supporting your belief that they aren't similar at all. And since you have yet to see it, you don't really know. People are just saying that based on the trailer they look very similar. Just an opinion. No reason to get all worked up.

Well, I'm not denying that trailers to this one and remake aren't similar. They are in some respects. But, if we're just talking trailers here, not the actual movies, I still respectfully disagree. Both trailers contain, yes, chainsaw buzzing, screaming, suspense clips and close-ups of Leatherface's fleshed out face. Kind of obligatory. But going by the token teenager clips, one can clearly see the different route in which the token characters end up at the house. (In fact, the trailer kind of spoils the basic framework of the movie; I would have showed less). And the fact that there appears to be a dinner scene. Going by this, I would never mistake it for the trailer for the remake.

[MadsenOMC]

Considering the opening weekend and final box office take of the last one, it makes sense to stick with what works and cut a trailer that is similar.

[Duke Nukem]

Originally posted by Bourne101
Well this is great. It's rated R in Canada which means no one under 18 can see it, even with a parent. I snuck my way into Jackass, which was rated R. So I'll have to do the same for this, which is fine. But the whole time you watch the movie, you're just waiting for an usher to give you the boot.

I wouldn't quelm over this. We need more hard R rated R movies right now. There are too many naturally PG-13 ones, R-turned-PG-13 ones, and even some R's that feel too light. I remember back in 1999 when "The Haunting" remake came out. I was younger then and prayed for it to be PG-13 so I could see it in theaters. Now, I look back and laugh at myself. It's better to be pacient and wait until you're older. Or, sneak in if you have. I snuck in for "Bride of Chucky" when I was even younger, lol. One of the coolest movie experiences.

Oh, and before a debate over the R/PG-13 ratings begins, I'm not complaining about all PG-13 horrorfests. Some are suckfests, but a lot of them really aren't that bad and are better suited with the rating.

[bob]

It looks awesome...for a horror flick. I'll see it. Although I question why it was even made...it has the exact same plot as the original, and the remake of the original, so this is essentially a remake of the remake.

[EDsoulsurvive*]

I loved the remake, and i love Jordana Brewster, so I'm definitly seeing this. I didn't know it came out this weekend though, i haven't seen a single commercial for it. is new line slacking or do i just have bad timing?

on a side note Liebesman's Rings short film was bitchin.

[Bourne101]

Duke Nukem, the R rating in Canada is like the NC-17 in USA. There is also an 18A rating in Canada which is equivalent to the R rating in USA. Movies like Crank, Hostel, The Hills Have Eyes and Clerks II (all R in US) are 18A in Canada. I just don't think movies like Chainsaw are NC-17 material. If a parent thinks it's okay and they are willing to take their kid, teen etc. they should be allowed to. I hate PG-13 horror too. Actually, I hate it with a passion, but Canada's rating system should have stayed like it was 2 years ago (was exactly the same as US)

[CreeperBEATNGU]

I think this looks like the remake, but without the cop-outs, which is what I'm hoping for.

I like the remake, but it was guilty of obvious flaws that wouldn't have been made by a director that understood and genuinally loved the genre. Based on the early fan reviews, this film won't be guilty of its numerous and obvious flaws.

[Duke Nukem]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
I think this looks like the remake, but without the cop-outs, which is what I'm hoping for.

I like the remake, but it was guilty of obvious flaws that wouldn't have been made by a director that understood and genuinally loved the genre. Based on the early fan reviews, this film won't be guilty of its numerous and obvious flaws.

What are you talking about? What cop-outs? What numerous and obvious flaws? I didn't love the remake or anything, but I am interested in what you're bringing up.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by Duke Nukem
What are you talking about? What cop-outs? What numerous and obvious flaws? I didn't love the remake or anything, but I am interested in what you're bringing up.

SPOILERS



The way Nispel held back on the violence because he thought it would be too upsetting for the audience.
Not to say brutal gore is necessary for a horror film, but the reason he gives for withholding it on the dvd is ridiculous considering its meant to be a ballsy horror film.

The pointless F13-esque cliches in the beginning of drugs and sex leading to death.

The idiotic Rambo type hero ending that they gave Biel, again completely unfitting of what's supposed to be an uncompromising, balls to the wall horror film.

I also thought the score was atrocious.

I like it, but it could've and should've been much better. Wrong Turn was much in the same mold.

[Duke Nukem]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
SPOILERS



The way Nispel held back on the violence because he thought it would be too upsetting for the audience.
Not to say brutal gore is necessary for a horror film, but the reason he gives for withholding it on the dvd is ridiculous considering its meant to be a ballsy horror film.

The pointless F13-esque cliches in the beginning of drugs and sex leading to death.

The idiotic Rambo type hero ending that they gave Biel, again completely unfitting of what's supposed to be an uncompromising, balls to the wall horror film.

I also thought the score was atrocious.

I see where you're coming from. Yeah, it did bother me that Nispel cut away from one girl's chainsawing and Morgan's crotch-chainsawing (Ouch!), but at least Morgan's full death was an extended scene on the DVD. I was also under the impression though that Morgan's full death was cut by the MPAA for being "too realistic," not necessarily Nispel's decision.

However, I disagree about the F13 cliches. They did do drugs and were naughty, but I wouldn't say the crazy family targeted them for that. I could have sworn they targetted them and anybody else that passes by simply because they're in "their" land (and their dinner).

Biel's bravery at the end didn't bother me either. She portrayed toughness and the ability handle confrontation from the beginning of the movie and her daringness towards Leatherface made sense in the end. I don't feel that it took away from the balls-to-wall horror. It, and especially her daring move to cut off Leatherface's arm, were very daring moves to add more newness to recycling of an already made movie.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

*SPOILERS*


I didn't mean the family targeted them for that, just that the film itself comes across in that way.

I don't mind a woman showing bravery, but having the heroine best one villain, kill another, then save the baby and heroically escape is the absolutely wrong way to end a horror film(for me anyway). Jeepers Creepers is a great example of the heroine showing bravey without it hurting the film, as is The Descent. They have strong-willed women that fight back, but they didn't put over the heroines at the expense of the horror like TCM03 and Wrong Turn did.
Sally had everything stripped away, even though she escaped, she still suffered 10x more and her ordeal was vastly more horrifying than Biel's was, because they turned Erin into Rambo, which ruins the sense of dread that a horror film should go out on. At best it works for her character, but against the tone of the film.
Their finale was more fitting of an action movie than a horror film.

As for the violence, Nispel himself said he felt going too far with the gore makes the film too upsetting for the audience and he made a conscious decision to pull back(when horror films like this are supposed to be upsetting), the MPAA may have been a factor in some spots, but Nispel deliberately tamed it.

[KillaMyers]

The way Nispel held back on the violence, because he thought it would be too upsetting for the audience.

I'm sorry WHAT?!, while certainly not an all out wall to wall gorefest the TCM remake was pretty damn brutal and gruesome in it's own right, for example in the first 5mins we see a young girl literally blow her brains out with the camera panning back through the hole, someone's head is bashed in with a sledgehammer, a dude gets his leg sawed off hung up on a hook then has rocksalt shoved into the stump of his leg then is later stabbed in the gut with a knife etc' etc', sure there were 2 scenes that had offscreen mutilation but it's still a very violent flick. Also if you watch the Special Features on the 2 disc dvd you'll see that it was actually producer Michael Bay's idea for the movie to be more suggestive with the gore not Nispel's, Nispel wanted it to be as graphic & brutal as possible(just watch the alternate Morgan death scene, damn that shit was harsh:eek:).


Anyways i can't wait to see TCM: The Beginning, from all the reviews i've read it looks to be a fantastic horror film i'll definitely be there first showing on friday!!

[Jig Saw 666]

I like what Im seeing from the trailers it looks like it will be alot more gore in this one then the 1st. The only things I dont like about the movie is how they will try to make us feel sorry for Leatherface and I dont want to feel sorry for him I want to be afraid of him and the other reason is this is suppose to be a prequel then why do the actors look older they could have worn make-up or something I mean the Sheriff and Mother look like aged about 10 years.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by KillaMyers
I'm sorry WHAT?!, while certainly not an all out wall to wall gorefest the TCM remake was pretty damn brutal and gruesome in it's own right,

I've seen the special features, Nispel himself admitted this right on the dvd special features. I don't remember his exact words, but it something along the lines of "The violence goes too far and gets upsetting and people don't want to see that..."

That's exactly the wrong mindset for a director that's helming what is supposed to be a twisted ballsy horror film; and I didn't find the film particularly brutal, I found it to be a standard Hollywood slasher pretending to be a gritty, ballsy horror film but not going far enough to pull it off.

[MadsenOMC]

Arrow says it's like a remake of the last remake.

[chinton]

I really don't get this idea that gore is suddenly the all consuming quality of horror films. So if the original remake added a few more limbs being sawed or gallons of blood it would have suddenly become awesome. Thats such a depressing sentiment.

Also since when is brutal gore necessary to a horror film. Thats the most pathetic sentiment I've ever heard that really sums up our entire generation. Despite the fact that the original TCM didn't have brutal gore we suddenly take it for granted nowadays that gore not characters, writing, directing, or even lighting is worth one iota of anything. Honeslty why even bother with coherent horror films anymore let's just two hours of people being tortured to death and watch as all the reviews flood into ACIN saying "hardcore and brutal and gritty" it is despite the fact that in reality it's a crappy film.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by chinton
Also since when is brutal gore necessary to a horror film. Thats the most pathetic sentiment I've ever heard that really sums up our entire generation. Despite the fact that the original TCM didn't have brutal gore we suddenly take it for granted nowadays that gore not characters, writing, directing, or even lighting is worth one iota of anything. Honeslty why even bother with coherent horror films anymore let's just two hours of people being tortured to death and watch as all the reviews flood into ACIN saying "hardcore and brutal and gritty" it is despite the fact that in reality it's a crappy film.

Damn chinton. When you're right, you are right. I could not agree with you more. I think this is the problem with modern horror, the fact that all of the emphasis in on the gore/blood and acting, writing, directing and all of the rest take a backseat. I like seeing severed limbs as much as the next horror fan, but it depends on the movie. Too many modern horror flicks think they are "fucked up" and "intense" and "scary" just because they liberally let the blood flow.

[Tyler_Durden_208]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
Damn chinton. When you're right, you are right. I could not agree with you more. I think this is the problem with modern horror, the fact that all of the emphasis in on the gore/blood and acting, writing, directing and all of the rest take a backseat. I like seeing severed limbs as much as the next horror fan, but it depends on the movie. Too many modern horror flicks think they are "fucked up" and "intense" and "scary" just because they liberally let the blood flow.
I second that notion.

[KillaMyers]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
I've seen the special features, Nispel himself admitted this right on the dvd special features. I don't remember his exact words, but it something along the lines of "The violence goes too far and gets upsetting and people don't want to see that..."

That's exactly the wrong mindset for a director that's helming what is supposed to be a twisted ballsy horror film; and I didn't find the film particularly brutal, I found it to be a standard Hollywood slasher pretending to be a gritty, ballsy horror film but not going far enough to pull it off.

I respect you're opinion definitely, but for me i'd rather have a "standard Hollywood slasher pretending to be a gritty, ballsy horror film" then something that pretty much makes a mockery out of what it came from like for example 'TCM 2,3 & 4'. I think what Nispel was saying was that he didn't want to make a full on gorefest because he felt that a horror film that has too much gore can take away from the atmosphere, intensity and suspense, meaning being completely gratuitous with the blood & guts just numbs the audience, and you know what i agree with him. Don't get me wrong i like me some graphic violence but i do really appreciate when a film makes me use my imagination to fill in the blanks(like the original TCM did so well) because i can come up with far more grusome things in my head then any top notch make-up effects can show me.

[chinton]

I see what you're saying.


Not to get off topic but part of my anger I have to a dmit comes from YET ANOTHER review on ACIN that reviews Black Christmas (after having not seen the original) and talks about apparently the best part about the film the gore. Being a huge fan of the original film I can say that while it is in the trappings of a slasher film Black Christmas is a relatively well-written, very arty, very grim, and very creepy horror film that has almost all of it's kills off screen. There is very little gore if any. But what does anybody care about in the remake gore of course. This is just another example emphasizing what I already said.


What's sad is there is A VERY SIMPLE lesson here that seems to not register to some. I think everyone is looking in the wrong direction as far as horror films go. First we had crappy PG-13 horror film such as Boogeyman, The Fog blah blah and everyone complained and complained about how they sucked becuase they were PG-13. Umm no THEY SUCKED CAUSE THEY SUCKED. If you added a ton of gore to The Fog reamke would it still suck. Of course, it would it would suck in a bloody way.

Now we have film after film such as Hostel, Saw, The Devil's Rejects that clealrly emphasizes gore. I'm not going to sit here and debate whether these are good movie or not, but yet again they force us to concentrate on the wrong thing. I mean just read any ACIN review on any of these movie or more as it seems like all they can do is stress about how hardcore it is, an expression that is getting seriously overused.

The simple thing is this a good horror film can be grotesque, bloodless, cheap, and expensive. The quality of a horror film is so much more complex than one irrelevant, yes irrelevant, part. I think not just the studios, but I think that simple idea is starting to get lost among many people.


I think I just ranted sorry.

[MadsenOMC]

Black Christmas is a fucking classic and vastly superior to pretty much every horror movie released in the last decade.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by chinton
I really don't get this idea that gore is suddenly the all consuming quality of horror films. So if the original remake added a few more limbs being sawed or gallons of blood it would have suddenly become awesome. Thats such a depressing sentiment.

Also since when is brutal gore necessary to a horror film. Thats the most pathetic sentiment I've ever heard that really sums up our entire generation. Despite the fact that the original TCM didn't have brutal gore we suddenly take it for granted nowadays that gore not characters, writing, directing, or even lighting is worth one iota of anything. Honeslty why even bother with coherent horror films anymore let's just two hours of people being tortured to death and watch as all the reviews flood into ACIN saying "hardcore and brutal and gritty" it is despite the fact that in reality it's a crappy film.

I do think gore can be a part of the tone, and/or the characters, but I stated in a previous post that gore isn't entirely necessary for a good/great horror film, it wasn't so much the lack of it that bothers me, it was the reason Nispel gave for why he pulled back (oh, and whether a movie is crappy or not is hardly a matter of fact by the way).

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by KillaMyers
I respect you're opinion definitely, but for me i'd rather have a "standard Hollywood slasher pretending to be a gritty, ballsy horror film" then something that pretty much makes a mockery out of what it came from like for example 'TCM 2,3 & 4'. I think what Nispel was saying was that he didn't want to make a full on gorefest because he felt that a horror film that has too much gore can take away from the atmosphere, intensity and suspense, meaning being completely gratuitous with the blood & guts just numbs the audience, and you know what i agree with him. Don't get me wrong i like me some graphic violence but i do really appreciate when a film makes me use my imagination to fill in the blanks(like the original TCM did so well) because i can come up with far more grusome things in my head then any top notch make-up effects can show me.

Personally I enjoyed TCM 2 and 3, I think 2 is atleast as good as the remake, 4 is terrible though.

I wouldn't have had a problem with the absense of gore if I felt the tone and overall feel of the film worked, which for the most part I didn't(and again, I think the reason Nispel gave for why he cut shows that wasn't much of a genre fan).
The original didn't have hardly any gore, less than the remake for that matter, but I think Hooper had much better reasons for why it wasn't and his film didn't have the same cop outs (use of violence only being one of several, and not the most crucial one) that took away from Nispel's film for me.

I like the remake, I'm not saying Nispel destroyed the movie, I just think it feels too Hollywood and doesn't achieve what it attempted to.

[chinton]

Is the fourth the one with Rene Zellwegger. That movie sucked like no other.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Yes.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation

[chinton]

uggh. That was my first TCM movie

[KillaMyers]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
Personally I enjoyed TCM 2 and 3, I think 2 is atleast as good as the remake, 4 is terrible though.

I wouldn't have had a problem with the absense of gore if I felt the tone and overall feel of the film worked, which for the most part I didn't(and again, I think the reason Nispel gave for why he cut shows that wasn't much of a genre fan).
The original didn't have hardly any gore, less than the remake for that matter, but I think Hooper had much better reasons for why it wasn't and his film didn't have the same cop outs (use of violence only being one of several, and not the most crucial one) that took away from Nispel's film for me.

I like the remake, I'm not saying Nispel destroyed the movie, I just think it feels too Hollywood and doesn't achieve what it attempted to.

I really liked the flashy stylized approach Nispel took with the remake i think it's exactly what he wanted to achieve. Rather than blatantly copying Hooper's gritty realistic visual style for the original(which would've been a big minus imo, if you're gonna remake something do things differently!!), the film has a very gothic surreal 'nightmare come to life' sort of feel, this is especially evident in the scene in which Pepper is killed instead of showing her getting sawed in half it cuts to a shot of the feathers from her jecket floating around Leatherface, the shot is beautiful and hideous all at the same time, which is pretty much how i'd discribe the look of the film overall 'beautifully ugly'.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

I prefer the home video shot by a serial killer look of the first film, but the remake was very well shot.

I'm disappointed Pearl shot the original and the remake and isn't back for The Beginning.

[FLAME_ON]

I hear you guys about the gore factor. When Hostel came out I remember asking my buddies if it was scary and all they could say is "Oh yeah, its so fucked up, the gore is out of control!" yeah ok... BUT IS IT SCARY?!
I later found out that it was far from it, but I think it's an act of inflation when it comes to horror movies these days... it's all about who can have the biggest blood-fest and get away with it, so the filmmakers are always trying to top the last big gore orgy... so they totally foget to go back to the basics with characteristics such as suspense, mood, tone, and music... the stuff that makes a movie truely scary!!
But hey! I'm still going to go opening week to see some limbs fly and Jordana Brewster (who I have been waiting to have another role since The Faculty)

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by FLAME_ON
But hey! I'm still going to go opening week to see some limbs fly and Jordana Brewster (who I have been waiting to have another role since The Faculty)

She's been in several other films since then.

[FLAME_ON]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
She's been in several other films since then.

Oh yeah... The Fast and the Furious! I might have to pop that in one of these nights

[CreeperBEATNGU]

She was also in a military film earlier this year called Annapolis and a comedy called D.E.B.S. a couple years ago.

[FLAME_ON]

Yeah I know about D.E.B.S. but that just looks stupid as hell

[X-Nightcrawler]

Marcus Nispel's job on the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake is one of my favorite directing jobs I've seen in horror. Goddamn beautiful cinematography.

But to tell the truth, the TCM remake is one of my all time favorite movies (horror or otherwise). If The Beginning, which I'm anxiously waiting for, turns out to be half as good as the remake was, then I'll be adding it to my favorite horror movie lists.

[MidnightAngel]

I've read a review of Texas Chainsaw Massacre;The Beginning in Arrow in the head.com and it said about the MPAA gave it an NC-17 due to some graphic scenes that were cut to give an R rating and at the end of the review said:"Expect an unrated dvd!"

[ilovemovies]

So much for good reviews. 25% over at rottentomatoes.

Even worse, it's Average Rating: 3.8/10

[MadsenOMC]

I never expected critics to like this, but I am getting worried that once again certain culprits are over-hyping a horror flick that can't possibly be as "dark" and "scary" and "intense" and "brutal" as they claim it is. Reading through some of the negative reviews, there's just no way.

[brode]

i dont know about this one i liked the original and all and the remake was decent but i dont have my hope set to high for this one..

[silverman82]

After thinking the 2003 remake was pretty much a dud, I wasn't sure what to expect from the prequel. I even caught the remake on Spike TV the night before I saw a screening of the new film, and felt I was destined to loathe TCM:TB. Let me just say, I was pleasnatly surprised! The new TCM rocked. I would even go as far as to say that it's my favorite horror movie I've seen all year long. Any fan of the franchise needs to see it--the film is downright brutal in its display!

[Mentiroso]

Gotta agree with Arrow, it is close to a remake of the remake. Ermy kicks ass in it though which helps make it a tad better.

I give it a 6/10

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
I never expected critics to like this, but I am getting worried that once again certain culprits are over-hyping a horror flick that can't possibly be as "dark" and "scary" and "intense" and "brutal" as they claim it is. Reading through some of the negative reviews, there's just no way.

It's quite brutal, but I still found it obvious that it was cut back a bit, just not enough to sugar-coat it.

It was what I expected and what I was hoping for, the remake but without the Hollywood gloss and cop-outs.

The cinematography was darker and dingier rather than the overly pretty look of TCM03, the score was visceral rather than typical, and most importantly it was unrelentingly brutal with Leatherface and Hoyt in all their glory and without the feeling that someone is going to make it out alive simply because of who plays them.


I also cared quite a bit about the victims. The two lovers reminding each other what they're going to name their children right before one is forced to see the butchery of the other was as heart-wrenching as it was stomach-turning, and I loved the false hope in the finale that gets ripped away from the lead rather than handed to her like it was at the end of TCM03.


The remake was a very good Hollywood slasher, but that was its very problem, TCM shouldn't be a Hollywood slasher. This film is the type of sick, no-holds-barred horror that films like The Devil's Rejects and Alexandre Aja's Hills Have Eyes showed me that made me think less of halfway horror like TCM03 and Wrong Turn.

I can't wait to see Liebesman's Jason film.

[DarkKnight81]

5/10 Not terrible but certainly far from great. It's true that this feels too much like the recent TCM remake. The look, the feel, the characters, and even the plot are all too familiar which gives it a stale taste. Only recommended to hardcore horror fans, which unfortunately, I am not. The best part of this predictable movie: the somewhat unpredictable ending. But in the end, not enough to save it from mediocrity.

[ScaryFreak1827]

I really liked TCM:TB. It was gorier than the first, grittier and a bit more intense. I found the characters to be sympathetic (the whole brother/couple thing) and the Hewitt origin was pretty crazy (loved how it explained some of the minor things from the first film.) I definetly recommend this for hardcore horror fans or simply those who liked the first film.

9/10

[SufjanWen]

exact same storyline as the TCM remake Girl in short hanging butt pants. kids dirving down road meet ugly old dude. Oh geeze. And I thought we were going to get a leatherface origin story. We didn't even get a story. this is as formula as it gets. I like the remake. I wish I didn't have to pay to see the same thing 2 year later.

[jaw2929]

Well I went to see this one... And after being distracted for the first 25 minutes of the fuckin film or so by a little kid who's dad almost ENCOURAGED him to continually make noises throughout... I scream "SHUT UP!!!!!" to which his dad finally took him outta the fucking theatre, and didn't return....

Anyway, I loved the 2003 remake of TCM, I thought it's what the ORIGINAL SHOULD have been.... I also loved the Beginning as well... It's gotta similar feel to it that 2003's version had, but it explains little things that show up in TCM.... So I liked that, I LOVED the gore and limbs, blood and tension throughout.... I didn't give a fuck about any of the characters, but unlike normal, this wasn't a BAD thing at all... I WANTED to see what sick and fucked up/twisted ways they were going to fuckin' die!

What I liked about this movie, is that it focused more on how fucking SICK the whole family is, and less on the teen characters.... R. Lee Ermey was good in TCM 2003, but he's even BETTER in The Beginning.... He hasn't kicked this much ass since Full Metal Jacket! Best line of the movie was:

"You shut your cocksucker, you son of a bitch!!"

Fucking brilliant! :D

While I enjoyed TCM 2003 just a tiny bit more, I would recommend this one to those horror/gore hounds who enjoyed the remake, and lookin' for some more gritty/bloody/tense scenes, and to learn a little bit more about the crazy fucked up family we've come to know and love! ;)

[Funnyman]

7 out of 10
Lots of Gore.

[Joshmo]

BIg let down for me. 6/10 And again, a stupid implausible ending how Leatherface got where he was. None of the sequels, prequels touches the ending of the original

[Bourne101]

.

[Ratlehed]

I really enjoyed TCM: the begininng. I thought it had more action than the remake. Also they toned the Sheriff down abit, which was good. He didnt have as much screen time or a one-liner for every step he took like in the remake. Also Leatherface had more screen time and was more of a charectar, not just another Jason like killer. Leather' had some better kills in this one too. Probably my favorite Leatherface preformance next too part 3.

The only problem was that I pretty much knew what was going to happen. Like with most prequels, you know who is gonna live and die. So besides a few "jump" scares, nothing was really suprising. Also there was a few "been there-done that" type scenes. If you have seen some of the other Chainsaw films you'll see alot of similiarities.

2.5 outta 4 stars. One of the better horror films I have seen in awhile.

My rankings:
TCM original 3/4
TCM 3 2.5/4
TCM: the begining 2.5/4
TCM the remake 2/4
TCM 2 1.5/4
TCM: the next generation .5/4

[Lord Raiden]

Originally posted by Trail_Blazer


What I liked about this movie, is that it focused more on how fucking SICK the whole family is, and less on the teen characters.... R. Lee Ermey was good in TCM 2003, but he's even BETTER in The Beginning.... He hasn't kicked this much ass since Full Metal Jacket! Best line of the movie was:

"You shut your cocksucker, you son of a bitch!!"

Fucking brilliant! :D



Fuckin' A...among many classic lines he had in this one. He absolutely stole the show AGAIN! Still like the Remake more but this easily beats it to death with a severed leg in the gore dept.

7.5 out of 10 (too damn short!)

[Moviefan02000]

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/new_line_cinema/texas_chainsaw_massacre__the_beginning/jordana_brewster/chainsaw.jpg

As much as I said I didn't want to see the sequel to the remake of THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, part of me was hoping for an entertaining, scary horror film. I remember quite fondly of me seeing the original remake on opening day, and being quite scared. This is definitely not the case with THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING. The worst part about the movie was that it was so boring. Seriously, it was uninteresting, and it never went anywhere. If I had a watch, I would've been looking at it constantly. Also, I don't know why people are calling it "one of the most brutal film in the past few years." There wasn't that much gore in it, and you could tell it was cut a lot. The best gore scene was probably when they hit the cow. That was pretty damn cool. Another horrible thing about this was it realied so much on boo scares. Do people not understand that these just don't work? I swear, there were more than there was in THE AMITYVILLE HORROR. It takes the boo scares to the max, and it got really annoying. The cast did all the could, but in the serious scenes, they were horrible (a scene that comes to mind is when Dean is telling his brother he is going to Mexico, and not Vietnam). While I didn't have high expectations for this at all, I am still disappointing. I was hoping for an entertaining horror flick. I recommend waiting for DVD, and only if you're a huge fan of the original or the remake. I might check out the unrated DVD though if they include all of the deleted material.

4/10 (D)

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by Joshmo
BIg let down for me. 6/10 And again, a stupid implausible ending how Leatherface got where he was. None of the sequels, prequels touches the ending of the original

[spoiler]

I noticed tonight(my second viewing)that there's a shot of Leatherface stopping to look at her when she's running outside, then he goes a different way.
I think they're implying he knew a faster way to get to that car than the way she was going.

[KillaMyers]

Saw this on friday, i'm not very good at writing reviews so i'll just share some thoughts i have about the film**SPOILERS**........


This movie is relentlessly and at times painfully brutal and unpleasant, it's not the goriest Hollywood horror film in the past decade but it's certainly one of the most brutal(big difference between gore and brutality folks). But that's just it there's no suspense ,intensity yes but there's no sequences of terror like the extended chase scene at the end of the 2003 remake, nothing new is brought to the table in that aspect it's just torture and sadism with nothing else to back it up. Which is quite disapointing in my view, sure it's brutal as hell but we've seen this all before it's just done a little bit different.

Like The Arrow said in his review, for a film with the subtitle "The Beginning" or the tagline "witness the birth of fear" there's not much of that to be found here at all, sure we see the literal birth of Leatherface and a very brief overview of his childhood in the opening credits, he mutilated himself and animals that's all we see none of the torture he apparently went through caused by other people, none of the fucked up things Hoyt most likely did to him, again just a very brief overview. In my view this is just lazy writing, we should see Leatherface put through things that are just as brutal as what he & Hoyt do to their victims, there's almost no depth given to the character other than that he's a severely insane killing machine.

Overall, yes the film is intense extremely brutal and quite gory, it looks fantastic, it's well directed and acted, however it's predictable(horrible cliche ending) almost completely unoriginal and not at all scary or suspenseful.

5/10

[tlc3377]

I want to start by saying how huge a fan I am of horror films.
This movie is full of blood and guts, lots of laugh, a little skin, and some general good fun. I personally liked the film.
I also liked the remake of the original from 2003.
R. Lee Ermey is absolutely priceless in his role as Hoyt. If they ever remake the sequels, they should pay this man whatever it takes to have him as Hoyt.
1 question about the movie though: Spoiler!!!!
The girl in the flower looking dress: did she get killed or what happened? I don't seem to remember what happened to her. She's the one laying on the bed screaming when the slice and dice the biker guy!
Anyone remember? Thanks!

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

Originally posted by tlc3377

The girl in the flower looking dress: did she get killed or what happened? I don't seem to remember what happened to her. She's the one laying on the bed screaming when the slice and dice the biker guy!
Anyone remember?

*spoilers*










She got her throat slit at the dinner table.














*End Spoilers*












As far as the film goes, I really liked it. In fact, I prefer it to the remake. While the remake seemed a little too glossy and Hollywoodized, this flick seemed a little more visceral. R. Lee Ermy steals the show of course, but man is Leatherface brutal!

Minor complaints would be the fact that we know













*spoilers*




that Jordanna Brewster wouldn't live, simply because she'd be able to tell the authorities. Although it was still quite sad to see her get diced through the backseat like that. It's been a while since we've seen the bad guys win in a slasher flick like this.

I also didn't care for the voice over at the end explaining how many people the Hewitt's killed between 1969 and 1973. It was the only voice over in the film and it felt very out of place.





*End spoilers*








But other than that, I highly enjoyed the movie. It ranks up there with Tobe Hooper's original.

8/10

[veddhead83]

***SPOILERS***

An absolute waste of time and film. The plot was weak and pointless - Leatherface kills because he was fired from the meat packing plant??? SCARY!!!! And what about those weak killings?? 60 minutes into the film and hardly anything has happened. I should have left when I had the chance.

By the way, a friend pointed this out to me - we know all of the villains are going to live because they are in the next film - so why watch it???

I enjoyed the remake, but this film tested my patience as a horror fan.

[chinton]

I won't see this.

[Duke Nukem]

Chinton, please don't skip the movie because of veddhead83's review. There is more to the movie than he/she said. If you want to give the movie a chance, please skip the following spoilers and see the movie. Whether you possibly end up liking or disliking the movie, I am interested to see your thoughts.
















WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD!!












Originally posted by veddhead83
***SPOILERS***

An absolute waste of time and film. The plot was weak and pointless - Leatherface kills because he was fired from the meat packing plant??? SCARY!!!! And what about those weak killings?? 60 minutes into the film and hardly anything has happened. I should have left when I had the chance.

By the way, a friend pointed this out to me - we know all of the villains are going to live because they are in the next film - so why watch it???

I enjoyed the remake, but this film tested my patience as a horror fan.

1) You're incorrect, Leatherface did not just kill, because he was fired from the meat packing plant. There were a number of things leading up to his madness. For one thing, the sheriff hinted Leatherface being picked on by kids in school. Given his facial deformity, I can more than see that happening. The influence of the crazy family would added a lot of crazy shit to his head too. And of all places, Leatherface seemed content at the meat packing plant chopping up pork. To be deprived of that opportunity must have been the bottom of the barrel.

2) 60 minutes into the movie and nothing happens? You're incorrect there, too. Leatherface uses a mallet for the first time (on his boss!), we see the beginning of the crazy family's takeover in that land, we see the two guys tortured, etc. More shit happens than you think. Either you missed part of the movie, or your expectations were way too high. More interesting shit happens than you're leading on.

3) Yes, these characters exist in the next film, so what? That shouldn't take away from an earlier look at them. For one, we see how the sheriff lost a few of his teeth, and two, we see how the older man lost his legs.





















SPOILERS OVER!!







So, there.

[chinton]

I really didn't like the remake so I'm not sure if this will make me feel any differently.

[DarkKnight81]

Originally posted by chinton
I really didn't like the remake so I'm not sure if this will make me feel any differently.

If you've seen the remake you've seen this one, just substitute Jordanna Brewster for Jessica Biel.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by DarkKnight81
If you've seen the remake you've seen this one, just substitute Jordanna Brewster for Jessica Biel.

And remove the overly Hollywoodized feel and wuss-outs.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Duke Nukem
Chinton, please don't skip the movie because of veddhead83's review. There is more to the movie than he/she said. If you want to give the movie a chance, please skip the following spoilers and see the movie. Whether you possibly end up liking or disliking the movie, I am interested to see your thoughts.
















WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD!!














1) You're incorrect, Leatherface did not just kill, because he was fired from the meat packing plant. There were a number of things leading up to his madness. For one thing, the sheriff hinted Leatherface being picked on by kids in school. Given his facial deformity, I can more than see that happening. The influence of the crazy family would added a lot of crazy shit to his head too. And of all places, Leatherface seemed content at the meat packing plant chopping up pork. To be deprived of that opportunity must have been the bottom of the barrel.

2) 60 minutes into the movie and nothing happens? You're incorrect there, too. Leatherface uses a mallet for the first time (on his boss!), we see the beginning of the crazy family's takeover in that land, we see the two guys tortured, etc. More shit happens than you think. Either you missed part of the movie, or your expectations were way too high. More interesting shit happens than you're leading on.

3) Yes, these characters exist in the next film, so what? That shouldn't take away from an earlier look at them. For one, we see how the sheriff lost a few of his teeth, and two, we see how the older man lost his legs.





















SPOILERS OVER!!







So, there.
First of all, I didn't realize how DEEP "TCM: TB" was, let me re-watch it with pen and paper and take notes because this script is Oscar-worty.

Second, 2 count'em 2 people meet there doom in this movie before the 60 min mark - that means there is only a third left and we haven't seen much murder and mayhem. Leatherface didn't even grab his chainsaw until after this point in the movie. They didn't show anything graphic nor was it hardly new from the 2003 film.

Third, this film didn't bring anything new to the franchise - Leatherface was found in a dumpster. Thats it??? Wow!! We needed another film to tell us that now didn't we??? Judging by the other film, we knew that the Sheriff was corrupt and not even a sheriff at all - we didn't need to see him kill the cop to get where he is at in the 2003 film.

Once again, this was a pointless film just trying to make $$$ off of the success of the 2003 film. Notify me when something new developes in the TCM department.

[KillaMyers]

Second, 2 count'em 2 people meet there doom in this movie before the 60 min mark - that means there is only a third left and we haven't seen much murder and mayhem. Leatherface didn't even grab his chainsaw until after this point in the movie. They didn't show anything graphic nor was it hardly new from the 2003 film.

Actually it was 4 people if you wanna get technical, Leatherface's mother, his boss, the sheriff, and the biker chick. While i agree that the film really had no depth or anything new brought to the table, it was at parts very graphic(Eric's multilation & death for example) and relentless with the extreme brutality there's no denying that from what i saw. Besides, violence & gore should never be a main deciding factor of a horror film's quality even one with the title "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", and quite honestly i feel that this film rides on it as a way out rather than building up genuine suspense and scares, and imo it wouldn't have nearly as many fans if it was on the same level of gruesomeness as the 2003 remake.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by KillaMyers
Actually it was 4 people if you wanna get technical, Leatherface's mother, his boss, the sheriff, and the biker chick. While i agree that the film really had no depth or anything new brought to the table, it was at parts very graphic(Eric's multilation & death for example) and relentless with the extreme brutality there's no denying that from what i saw. Besides, violence & gore should never be a main deciding factor of a horror film's quality even one with the title "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", and quite honestly i feel that this film rides on it as a way out rather than building up genuine suspense and scares, and imo it wouldn't have nearly as many fans if it was on the same level of gruesomeness as the 2003 remake.

I forgot about the biker chick. Which was ridiculous too - why would she travel by herself, without her overprotective boyfriend, to rob two males, two females in a Jeep???

The fact that one of the men had served time in Vietnam, he didn't do anything to protect himself or the others. For example, while riding in the car, he could have easily done something to the Sheriff, but didn't. He could have easily done something to the Sheriff who was DRIVING and not harming anyone at the time.

The thing about the gore - nothing they showed brought anything NEW to this series. We have been there, done that sorta thing. At least the Halloween, F13, and Elm St films came up with different creative ways to "off" the victims.

One more plothole - the sheriff who was killed by R. Lee Ermey, I'm sure he told someone of the murder at the meat plant. So why wasn't ther any police looking for a killer, or cleaning up the scene, or looking for the missing sheriff that called in the crime???? Pretty lame. And to add to that - the meat plant boss being killed - wouldn't someone be wondering why he wasn't home that night, like maybe his wife or family???

[moviemaniac8210]

I walked out half way through the movie and went to watch Jackass 2.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by veddhead83
First of all, I didn't realize how DEEP "TCM: TB" was, let me re-watch it with pen and paper and take notes because this script is Oscar-worty.

No, it's not bad enough to be.

[spoiler]

I don't recall ever seeing someone impaled on a chainsaw and hoisted up into the air before, or seeing someone have a hook jammed into their shoulder that they're then dragged away by while nearly escaping in a car.
The F13 films were quite tamed compared to this, except for the unrated version of Jason Goes to Hell. Of course the ANOES deaths are going to be quite innovative, they're happening in an entirely different plain of reality.
The brutality is part of the atmosphere, films that don't hold back feel much more intense than films that cut away because they're afraid of going "too far." Gore isn't always necessary for an intense horror film, but it can certainly be a useful tool.
I also cared more about the group here than in TCM03. Chrissy having to watch as her boyfriend is mangled in front of her is easily the most emotional moment in either of the two films.
He didn't attack Hoyt in the car because he didn't want to cause a potential car crash that could kill everyone, and because he didn't know Hoyt was not a real cop at the time. All he'd soon him do at that point was blow away a biker that was an obvious thug. Attacking someone with a shotgun less than 2 feet in front of them when you're unarmed isn't exactly the best idea either.
Oh, and the cop that Hoyt killed didn't tell anybody, since there was noone to tell. He made it clear that he was the last bit of law left in the town and every other cop had left.

[MisterTwister]

Saw it Saturday and Liked it. Not as much as the remake (which I loved) but far better then TCM 4. Wasn't a big fan of the teen charcthers this time around but the family was great, specially Hoyt and Leatherface. The violence was brutal and nasty, can't wait to see the unrated versoin. I didn't find this to be a repeat of the remake either like it has been reported and although it has simlar situatation i didn't find it to be same, nor different really.

Anyways, good TCM movie.

7/10

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
No, it's not bad enough to be.

[spoiler]

I don't recall ever seeing someone impaled on a chainsaw and hoisted up into the air before, or seeing someone have a hook jammed into their shoulder that they're then dragged away by while nearly escaping in a car.
The F13 films were quite tamed compared to this, except for the unrated version of Jason Goes to Hell. Of course the ANOES deaths are going to be quite innovative, they're happening in an entirely different plain of reality.
The brutality is part of the atmosphere, films that don't hold back feel much more intense than films that cut away because they're afraid of going "too far." Gore isn't always necessary for an intense horror film, but it can certainly be a useful tool.
I also cared more about the group here than in TCM03. Chrissy having to watch as her boyfriend is mangled in front of her is easily the most emotional moment in either of the two films.
He didn't attack Hoyt in the car because he didn't want to cause a potential car crash that could kill everyone, and because he didn't know Hoyt was not a real cop at the time. All he'd soon him do at that point was blow away a biker that was an obvious thug. Attacking someone with a shotgun less than 2 feet in front of them when you're unarmed isn't exactly the best idea either.
Oh, and the cop that Hoyt killed didn't tell anybody, since there was noone to tell. He made it clear that he was the last bit of law left in the town and every other cop had left.

He didn't know if he was a real cop wouldn't matter - his life was being threatened because he was accused of being a draft dodger. And the fact that he blasts a chick with a shotgun without probable cause would give me a clue that this guy isn't for real. Also, showing no sympathy towards the injured after the car wreck would also trigger that bad feeling of him being a villain.

Sorry, Michael Myers or Jason NEVER used an oblject to hoist a victim into the air - HELLO, they did that in almost every movie. Jason jabbed a knife into a guy's temple while driving a RV. Been there, done that. These killings were all just those killings, with different editing and music.

If that was the only cop around, why was there a guy getting a ticket from a HiPo just miles away from the Hewitt house???? Pretty lame answer dude.

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

Originally posted by veddhead83


One more plothole - the sheriff who was killed by R. Lee Ermey, I'm sure he told someone of the murder at the meat plant. So why wasn't ther any police looking for a killer, or cleaning up the scene, or looking for the missing sheriff that called in the crime???? Pretty lame. And to add to that - the meat plant boss being killed - wouldn't someone be wondering why he wasn't home that night, like maybe his wife or family???


*Possible spoilers*






R. Lee Ermy's character took over the role of the sheriff. To any outsiders, he WAS Sheriff Hoyt. All he would have to tell them is that they haven't found the killer and have made sure that the meat boss plant's family (although I doubt he had one, considering his ruthlessness
in tossing a baby in the trash) were aware of his death.










*end spoilers*

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Mr. Fred Krueger
*Possible spoilers*






R. Lee Ermy's character took over the role of the sheriff. To any outsiders, he WAS Sheriff Hoyt. All he would have to tell them is that they haven't found the killer and have made sure that the meat boss plant's family (although I doubt he had one, considering his ruthlessness
in tossing a baby in the trash) were aware of his death.










*end spoilers*

Even if he WAS the law - I would still fight back - they dude tried to injure me because of my draft dodging. He was clearly insane!!!!

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by veddhead83
He didn't know if he was a real cop wouldn't matter - his life was being threatened because he was accused of being a draft dodger. And the fact that he blasts a chick with a shotgun without probable cause would give me a clue that this guy isn't for real. Also, showing no sympathy towards the injured after the car wreck would also trigger that bad feeling of him being a villain.

Sorry, Michael Myers or Jason NEVER used an oblject to hoist a victim into the air - HELLO, they did that in almost every movie. Jason jabbed a knife into a guy's temple while driving a RV. Been there, done that. These killings were all just those killings, with different editing and music.

If that was the only cop around, why was there a guy getting a ticket from a HiPo just miles away from the Hewitt house???? Pretty lame answer dude.

*SPOILERS*

He didn't threaten his life, he acted like a non-sympathetic asshole, but he didn't threaten his life. There are cops(real ones)that have blasted away people on with no more ground to do so than Hoyt did with the biker, and the shotgun was visible at her side even though she attempted to hide it, he wasn't completely without probable cause.

I didn't say an object, I said a chainsaw. I've seen plenty of decapitations in movies too, they don't all look the same; the same applies to impalements.

He was getting a ticket because she had driven into the next town.
The cop said he was the only cop in THAT town.

[DaMovieMan]

Originally posted by moviemaniac8210
I walked out half way through the movie and went to watch Jackass 2.

Niice

DMM

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
*SPOILERS*

He didn't threaten his life, he acted like a non-sympathetic asshole, but he didn't threaten his life. There are cops(real ones)that have blasted away people on with no more ground to do so than Hoyt did with the biker, and the shotgun was visible at her side even though she attempted to hide it, he wasn't completely without probable cause.

I didn't say an object, I said a chainsaw. I've seen plenty of decapitations in movies too, they don't all look the same; the same applies to impalements.

He was getting a ticket because she had driven into the next town.
The cop said he was the only cop in THAT town.

1) He was torturing him in front of the Jeep because he was a draft dodger. Most cops at least try to get the criminal to drop their weapon BEFORE they blast them - that is only common sense though.

2) There can't only be one cop in one town. Maybe a couple per county...

[CreeperBEATNGU]

He didn't so much torture him as just belittle the shit out of him, and people from the Koren War often did harbor resentment toward peope involved in the Vietnam War, especially onces that had been involved in the war compared to someone that tried getting out of it.
The only time he touched him during that encounter was a shot to the gut when Eric grabbed him. Grab a cop and they probably would hit you.

It was going to be a ghost town soon, that cop was on the way out with just about everyone else.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
He didn't so much torture him as just belittle the shit out of him, and people from the Koren War often did harbor resentment toward peope involved in the Vietnam War, especially onces that had been involved in the war compared to someone that tried getting out of it.
The only time he touched him during that encounter was a shot to the gut when Eric grabbed him. Grab a cop and they probably would hit you.

It was going to be a ghost town soon, that cop was on the way out with just about everyone else.

The movie still sucked......

19% on RT - I think I am in the majority on this one......

[cdmiller]

I saw this movie last night and I must admit there was one horrifying and disturbing scene that I saw in my sleep last night.

How could these movie people take a beautiful 1969 classic Ford Bronco and trash it just for a movie ? ? ? ? ? (Sorry Veddhead83,its NOT a jeep) I was ready to leave when the finest 4x4 ever went flipping down the road it was so disturbing. How ?? Why ??

The movie itself ... not to much to brag about.

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

Originally posted by veddhead83
The movie still sucked......

19% on RT - I think I am in the majority on this one......

Um....good for you?

And you realize most critics hate all horror movies, right? Especially franchise horror movies.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by veddhead83
The movie still sucked......

19% on RT - I think I am in the majority on this one......

The movie still ruled, and I couldn't care less about the majority.

Popularity and quality are two different issues, and critics hate horror films in general.

[Lord Raiden]

I’m ashamed to admit that I’m really diggin’ this “it sucked vs. it ruled” banter n' stuff. Personally, I dug the film a lot and even though I could pick it apart, I remind myself that it’s just good ol’ fashion horror. Still, this isn’t as hilarious to me as some of the SAW-haters going into every single SAW thread no matter the subject and bashing on it relentlessly. Whenever I’m feeling a little down, I just go in and read what some of the haters have to say about SAW, and I get a good chuckle out of it. TCM: The Beginning is a great movie for what it is…mindless slashing (or in this case, buzzing) fun. :cool:

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by cdmiller
(Sorry Veddhead83,its NOT a jeep)
My bad - it is just a Ford though....

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Mr. Fred Krueger
Um....good for you?

And you realize most critics hate all horror movies, right? Especially franchise horror movies.

I know they do, however there have been many that they have liked. This not being one of them, and not being one I enjoyed. There was nothing quality about this film.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
The movie still ruled, and I couldn't care less about the majority.

Popularity and quality are two different issues, and critics hate horror films in general.

Your point being.................they may be two different issues, however this film lacks both. What exactly did it rule?? Not being as bad as The Grudge 2???

[CreeperBEATNGU]

It lacks both in your opinion, and my point that popularity has nothing to do with its quality, hence pointing out "I'm in the majority" is a pretty irrelevant statement, especially when falling back on a group of people thate the genre to begin with, which you do every time.
I explained how it ruled when I reviewed it, you disagreeing and throwing around irrelevant statistics doesn't refute it.
I also countered several of your complaints to which the best counter you could fire back with was "It still sucks."

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
It lacks both in your opinion, and my point that popularity has nothing to do with its quality, hence pointing out "I'm in the majority" is a pretty irrelevant statement, especially when falling back on a group of people thate the genre to begin with, which you do every time.
I explained how it ruled when I reviewed it, you disagreeing and throwing around irrelevant statistics doesn't refute it.
I also countered several of your complaints to which the best counter you could fire back with was "It still sucks."

What I am saying is that it lacks both QUALITY and POPULARITY. Critics aren't the kindest people to the genre because it hasn't produced much quality as of late. Had you read my review you would see why I didn't like the movie. "Throwing around irrelevant statistics," what are you talking about??? You countered my complaints with what - "This movie ruled!" Wow - sounds really in depth. I bring up critics because they are the "credible experts" in the quality department. According to you, JoBlo and Arrow are part of the group you dislike. They are critics and have issued their thought s on the film. Are they wrong too??

Debating with you is pointless. Move on dude.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

I know that you are saying that, your opinion has been noted, you don't need to keep repeating "the film sucks, it has no quality!" over and over.

Move on...*sighs* I'm not the one that repeatedly shoves my opinion down peoples throats in practically every thread I participate it.

and for the record, telling someone something sucks over and over and stating that critics agree is not debating, it's throwing around opinions as though they're facts and relying on something that has nothing to do with the issue to prove it.

Critics are not much of an indicitation of the whether the film is popular or not, since critics hate this type of film.

They are not a sign of the quality or lack there of of this film because of a.) the reason above and b.) quality is a subjective issue. To support whether a film has it or not involves bringing up examples from the film that explain why you feel it is good or bad.
It's a very simple concept, one that eludes you time and time again.

[Shockwave]

..i was shocked at how much i liked it.

Porably the best CHAINSAW movie ive seen. (I hated the orignal, and only found the remake to be 'kinda good".)

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
I know that you are saying that, your opinion has been noted, you don't need to keep repeating "the film sucks, it has no quality!" over and over.

Move on...*sighs* I'm not the one that repeatedly shoves my opinion down peoples throats in practically every thread I participate it.

and for the record, telling someone something sucks over and over and stating that critics agree is not debating, it's throwing around opinions as though they're facts and relying on something that has nothing to do with the issue to prove it.

Critics are not much of an indicitation of the whether the film is popular or not, since critics hate this type of film.

They are not a sign of the quality or lack there of of this film because of a.) the reason above and b.) quality is a subjective issue. To support whether a film has it or not involves bringing up examples from the film that explain why you feel it is good or bad.
It's a very simple concept, one that eludes you time and time again.

Once again, what are you blabbing on and on about??? Chill out. You are the one whose panties are all in a bunch. You are defeating your own argument on opinions - "Critics are not much indication of whether the is popular....and are not a sign of quality.." well that makes yours, mine and everyone elses opinions meaningless. What you are saying is that a critic doesn't matter. Well, how are your opinions or mine different than theirs?? We are all expressing..and if it isn't like yours you get pissed. Thats fine if you are going to live your life ignoring others points of view, whether it be about movies or in life in general.

I am bashing the movie, not you. Don't take it personal.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

For future reference veddhead, you're on my ignore list now.

Move on dude.;)

[daddiefatsacks]

Wow, i've never seen someone nitpick the logic in a horror movie like Veddhead has...why don't you question the logic of Nightmare on Elm Street, and how many times Freddy died, and how one time he was resssurected by dog piss?

anyways, this movies was pretty brutal (gore). It was a fun romp for the time i was there, 2 people puked in our theater, both at the same scene (killing jordanna brewsters boyfriend, ripping his face off). The unrated DVD should have some solid scenes, i'm think when that dude is lying on the chainsaw...yikes!!!

R. Lee Ermey was kind of annoying eventually, i liked how he was seldomly used in the Remake, and kind of overkilled his character in here, felt to "OTISy" from House on Haunted Hill.

6/10 - Jordanna Brewster is smokin

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
Wow, i've never seen someone nitpick the logic in a horror movie like Veddhead has...

6/10 - Jordanna Brewster is smokin

That's what happens with someone that goes to films looking more for excuses to tear them apart than to enjoy them, and indeed she is.

[Mr. Fred Krueger]

Originally posted by daddiefatsacks
Wow, i've never seen someone nitpick the logic in a horror movie like Veddhead has...why don't you question the logic of Nightmare on Elm Street, and how many times Freddy died, and how one time he was resssurected by dog piss?



Let's be fair here. It was piss-fire. ;)

[AWP82]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
That's what happens with someone that goes to films looking more for excuses to tear them apart than to enjoy them, and indeed she is.

EDIT: Nevermind. I misread.

[veddhead83]

Alrighty then...dry it up guys....move on.....

[Mr.HyDe807]

Review- 7/10

Saw it yesterday on friday the 13th (was gonna see The Departed, but i had work at a certain time and would be klate, plus it was friday the 13th, so it was kinda proper) and i had a good time with what i saw.

i enjoyed the main characters, the gore was verrryy messy, and the cap-off (although kinda rushed), was pretty satisfying (although i had it spoiled, i probably wouldve apprecaited more).

Overall, a satisfying horror movie, nothing great, but i enjoyed with what i saw

[Bourne101]

.

[NightStalkerGtx]

Saw the flick.

Violent? Yes

Scary? MEH

Why "meh"?

Its simple. What made Leatherface turn into a killer it cant be explained in 2 minutes the film needed to focus more on him and his family. Adding an extra 10 minutes of history on the charactors really woudlve helped. Like what made the whole family just start killing. Meat Shop closes down leatherface gets mad and kills someone. K... Why?! Show us how he's been abused in the past!!!

Bottomline- This flick isnt really a prequel they just used that reason as an excuse to have a sequel. 2 min through the childhood of leatherface isnt enough.

4/10

[CreeperBEATNGU]

IMO the only reason it was a prequel anyway was so that they could use Hoyt again after he was stuidply killed off in the remake.

I wasn't expecting any more backstory than we got, I just went in viewing it as another TCM film that hopefully wouldn't suffer from the same flaws as the remake, and I was quite pleased with the result.

[bob]

This falls under the category of movies I'm excited to see not because they're going to be "good", but because they're horror movies...and I love horror movies.

Good mood in the film, you really hate the bad guys, Jordana Brewster's ass crack is on display...but these good parts can't overcome the final flaw of the film, which is that it has no point. None whatsoever. We didn't need to see any of this to justify the original or the remake. Do you feel more enlightened now that you know Hoyt stole the uniform, and you've seen 35 seconds of what Hewett did at the slaughterhouse? I didn't, personally, and the ending of the film really sucked the air out of me, because I realized I had just paid to see a meaningless film. And not meaningless like most horror films are, but moreso, because it's explaining things that no one ever asked to have explained.

[NightStalkerGtx]

Originally posted by bob
This falls under the category of movies I'm excited to see not because they're going to be "good", but because they're horror movies...and I love horror movies.

Good mood in the film, you really hate the bad guys, Jordana Brewster's ass crack is on display...but these good parts can't overcome the final flaw of the film, which is that it has no point. None whatsoever. We didn't need to see any of this to justify the original or the remake. Do you feel more enlightened now that you know Hoyt stole the uniform, and you've seen 35 seconds of what Hewett did at the slaughterhouse? I didn't, personally, and the ending of the film really sucked the air out of me, because I realized I had just paid to see a meaningless film. And not meaningless like most horror films are, but moreso, because it's explaining things that no one ever asked to have explained.

And it did a poor job of explaining things as well. It spent like 2 minutes on leatherface.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

I wouldn't really expect inbred hillbilly psychos in real life to give much more justification for their actions than what was shown in the film.

[Moviefan02000]

Originally posted by bob
Jordana Brewster's ass crack is on display

I was actually wondering how far down her pants would go ;). I swear, I saw her ass crack at least four times :p.

[NightStalkerGtx]

Originally posted by CreeperBEATNGU
I wouldn't really expect inbred hillbilly psychos in real life to give much more justification for their actions than what was shown in the film.

Spoilers I guess.

I dont want their actions justfied i could careless if its right or wrong. I want them explained I wanna know the mental abuse that went inside the mind of Leatherface. I wanna know what made him finally tick. I wanna know all the anger he held inside.

The movie doesnt spend time on any of that, thats its major flaw. I recall someone in the movie saying "hes like one of the kids that picked on you in school" and then leatherface goes ape shit. A scene earlier in the movie of him in school or him with kids couldve made that scene powerful and more terrifying and it would have a bigger impact.

Also what made the sheriff go crazy? Leatherface killed someone thats what made him start killing people, but why? Why did he start then? Why didnt he start b4? What anger was he holding in?

The movie is a prequel and it ignores that. If i look past that point then the film is even more pointless since its just an excuse to see leatherface kill people atleast the idea of a prequel wouldve worked, but it wasnt done right.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Well explanation is pretty much what I meant, I doubt they'd have much more of a reason for why they do what they do than what's in the film. I think it was only a prequel anyway because of the reason I previously mentioned more than to explain the family.

As for why the Sheriff was crazy, he lost his mind because of the conditions he went through during the Korean War. Leatherface was a mentally deficient inbred hillbilly growing up around someone like Hoyt that wasn't exactly treated all that well, and like I said I wouldn't expect him to have much more motivation than what's seen in the film. He was

[KillaMyers]

Originally posted by NightStalkerGtx
Spoilers I guess.

I dont want their actions justfied i could careless if its right or wrong. I want them explained I wanna know the mental abuse that went inside the mind of Leatherface. I wanna know what made him finally tick. I wanna know all the anger he held inside.

The movie doesnt spend time on any of that, thats its major flaw. I recall someone in the movie saying "hes like one of the kids that picked on you in school" and then leatherface goes ape shit. A scene earlier in the movie of him in school or him with kids couldve made that scene powerful and more terrifying and it would have a bigger impact.

Also what made the sheriff go crazy? Leatherface killed someone thats what made him start killing people, but why? Why did he start then? Why didnt he start b4? What anger was he holding in?

The movie is a prequel and it ignores that. If i look past that point then the film is even more pointless since its just an excuse to see leatherface kill people atleast the idea of a prequel wouldve worked, but it wasnt done right.

I completely 100% agree could not have said it better myself. That's my biggest complaint about the film, there's almost no depth given to the characters(villians and victims alike), some might argue that knowing to much about Leatherface and his family takes away the 'mystique' but imo in this day & age we as an audience should be far past the point of settling for one dimensional killing machines.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

The victims had more depth than the group in any other TCM film, and the family had atleast as much.

[XCoRyX]

After hearing some positive things about this one,I decided to check this one out on Friday night...and I flat out just didn't enjoy it (much like I didn't enjoy the jessica biel TCM). I went into this with an open mind and wanting to enjoy it, but just didn't to say the least.

Don't know what anybody is seeing so good in this one,its just as bad as the Jessica Biel inspired TCM.

Call me an idiot, but i'll stick to the first 3 TCMs...Gunnar,Hopper,Viggo,Foree...yep.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by NightStalkerGtx
Spoilers I guess.

I dont want their actions justfied i could careless if its right or wrong. I want them explained I wanna know the mental abuse that went inside the mind of Leatherface. I wanna know what made him finally tick. I wanna know all the anger he held inside.

The movie doesnt spend time on any of that, thats its major flaw. I recall someone in the movie saying "hes like one of the kids that picked on you in school" and then leatherface goes ape shit. A scene earlier in the movie of him in school or him with kids couldve made that scene powerful and more terrifying and it would have a bigger impact.

Also what made the sheriff go crazy? Leatherface killed someone thats what made him start killing people, but why? Why did he start then? Why didnt he start b4? What anger was he holding in?

The movie is a prequel and it ignores that. If i look past that point then the film is even more pointless since its just an excuse to see leatherface kill people atleast the idea of a prequel wouldve worked, but it wasnt done right.
I agree. The only thing they show that pissed off Leatherface was him getting fired - they should have shown the neglect at home and at school. If they wanted us to feel for him, they should have given us a reason to care. And the sheriff being a psycho wasn't even touched, saying he was screwed up from the Korean War is a bit of a stretch considering he mentions the Korean War once. I don't think you can draw the conclusion based on that.

[Shockwave]

I smell an extended cut with a "shocking look into the past of a killer" included.:o

[chinton]

Has anyone visited the TCM Beggining Boards on imdb. my God maybe it's just me but it's so depressing. It seems like almost every topic is just "Who gets tortured the most?" "What's the goriest death?" or "I hope they get tortured for a long time." Nothing really about the movie but just the intricacies of the gore. Does that just seem slightly depressing.

[Shockwave]

It is untill u realize that thats just about all the TCM films have ever been about.

:(

[chinton]

Except the original wasnt gory and got its scares through great camera angles, sound, insane acting, and great use of tension. So no they haven't really all been about that. And of course mention the original on that board and all they can complain about is how it's not gory enough. The new generation is fucking pathetic.

[Shockwave]

The new generation is fucking pathetic.

The NEW generation is ALWAYS pathetic.

Once this new generation is no longer new, they will be saying the same thing.:p

[MadsenOMC]

SPOILERS

Fuck this movie. What a fucking piece of worthless shit. A shining example of all that is wrong with the genre right now. I can't believe how similar it is to the TCM remake. They just remade that movie with this one. I was sick of the boo scares about 15 minutes into the movie, and they never fucking stopped. Talk about lazy filmmaking. The bikers at the country store. The hand in the jeep after it has crashed and she's in the back. Seeing Hoyt through the window. And on and on and on. Add to the cheap boo scares insanely loud sound design, and you have some awful horror filmmaking. I despise this with a passion. It's not fucking scary! Then you have your random teenage idiots. Two couples that are just like every other couple in a horror movie. The acting is atrocious, especially in the jeep right before it crashes. When the brothers were having a "serious" discussion about Vietnam I nearly pissed myself from laughing so hard. Talk about bad writing and acting! Jesus Christ. "I'm going back for you!" Are you fucking kidding me?! Ugh. I couldn't wait for these morons to die, but they drag it out forever. I also love how Dean gets repeatedly beaten with a nightstick, including blows to the head, and miraculously is walking moments later. Best case scenario there is he's dead. Then at the end Hoyt's head is repeatedly and viciously slammed into the porch, but of course he's fine too. Give me a fucking break. Throw in the typical horror movie cliches, including characters doing idiotic things, and you have a textbook example of a laughably bad horror movie. To be fair, there are a few effective scenes. The one in the kitchen where the fat woman is slammed into the door, the cutting off of Eric's face and the final sequence when Leatherface gets her through the seat. Those were fairly intense and well-staged. But 95% of this movie is pure shit. Movies like this are raping horror. This was nothing but a cash-in sequel (prequel) made with no passion or creativity or desire to do anything even slightly different. Fuck this movie and others like it.

2/10

[Mystique963]

Before I review, I first want to say that I am a HUGE fan of the 2002 remake of TCM.

Saying that, I enjoyed this one. It had the same creepy feel throughout the entire movie and most of it really reminded me of the 'first' one which I liked. The best part of this entire movie I thought was Jordana Brewster's performance which I thought did Jessica Biel's performance in the first one justice. I didn't think she would do as well, but she did. And she's hot. :)

ANYWAY, what I did not like about the movie was that for one reason or another, it simply wasn't as scary. I couldn't put my finger on why, but it wasn't. '02 scared the hell out of my in certain parts, but I can safely say this one didn't scare me. Nothing about the story really bothered me or anything, and other than that I would have to say it was just a ho-hum kind of movie. Oh, and I thought the ending was a copout.

6/10

[God of War]

I made some more screens. Hope you don't mind. Once again, over two posts. I think the image limit is 10 or 12. Below are 15 images. :)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning4.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning5.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning6.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning7.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning8.jpg

[God of War]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning9.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning10.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning11.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning12.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning13.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning14.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v61/ChiefThunder/Movie%20Screens/texaschainsawbeginning15.jpg

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
SPOILERS

Fuck this movie. What a fucking piece of worthless shit. A shining example of all that is wrong with the genre right now. I can't believe how similar it is to the TCM remake. They just remade that movie with this one. I was sick of the boo scares about 15 minutes into the movie, and they never fucking stopped. Talk about lazy filmmaking. The bikers at the country store. The hand in the jeep after it has crashed and she's in the back. Seeing Hoyt through the window. And on and on and on. Add to the cheap boo scares insanely loud sound design, and you have some awful horror filmmaking. I despise this with a passion. It's not fucking scary! Then you have your random teenage idiots. Two couples that are just like every other couple in a horror movie. The acting is atrocious, especially in the jeep right before it crashes. When the brothers were having a "serious" discussion about Vietnam I nearly pissed myself from laughing so hard. Talk about bad writing and acting! Jesus Christ. "I'm going back for you!" Are you fucking kidding me?! Ugh. I couldn't wait for these morons to die, but they drag it out forever. I also love how Dean gets repeatedly beaten with a nightstick, including blows to the head, and miraculously is walking moments later. Best case scenario there is he's dead. Then at the end Hoyt's head is repeatedly and viciously slammed into the porch, but of course he's fine too. Give me a fucking break. Throw in the typical horror movie cliches, including characters doing idiotic things, and you have a textbook example of a laughably bad horror movie. To be fair, there are a few effective scenes. The one in the kitchen where the fat woman is slammed into the door, the cutting off of Eric's face and the final sequence when Leatherface gets her through the seat. Those were fairly intense and well-staged. But 95% of this movie is pure shit. Movies like this are raping horror. This was nothing but a cash-in sequel (prequel) made with no passion or creativity or desire to do anything even slightly different. Fuck this movie and others like it.

2/10
Thanks Madsen. I haven't read one of your reviews in a while. I like your thoughts. This movie was complete trash in every sense of the word. This IS what is wrong with the slasher genre. Hell, even the horror genre. This, The Hills Have Eyes, Wolf Creek and Hostel are films out there just to gross people out. They aren't creative, scary or memorable. I personally like Saw and Saw 2, High Tension, The Decent and Slither - they were great horror films of late. Too bad more films can't be like that.

[jaw2929]

Ah Madsen, a lotta people here respect your movie reviews (as do I) but I wanted to disagree, and break down your rant here a little bit:

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
I was sick of the boo scares. It's not fucking scary!


I didn't seem to be bothered by this like I was during a movie like "Boogeyman"... This movie had a few indeed, and yes they're not scary in the least... BUT the entire movie wasn't dependant on these, and I do appreciate that fact. :p

Then you have your random teenage idiots. Two couples that are just like every other couple in a horror movie. The acting is atrocious, especially in the jeep right before it crashes. When the brothers were having a "serious" discussion about Vietnam I nearly pissed myself from laughing so hard. Talk about bad writing and acting!

Well this IS a slasher/horror movie... This is NOT The Godfather... Understanding that, I judge all horror movies completely different from all the rest of the genre's... Simply because I'm NOT going to see a movie like TCM, and actually expect good acting/writing/dialogue... You pretty much answered your own gripe, in that they put the same old couple (just like in every other horror movie) because it's formulaic, and it works... People don't expect to see the inner working thoughts/loves/betrayals/desires of these paper-thin characters... They're counting down the minutes until they get to see them die! :D


I also love how Dean gets repeatedly beaten with a nightstick, including blows to the head, and miraculously is walking moments later. Best case scenario there is he's dead. Then at the end Hoyt's head is repeatedly and viciously slammed into the porch, but of course he's fine too.

Again, this is a horror movie.... Suspension of disbelief really helps when watching one! So many people try dissect these kindsa movies, and critisize them for not being "realistic" enough, right down to every detail... There've been TONS of movies that exaggerate, and do this very same thing... So I'm not sure why this movie gets a lashing for it... :confused:

Movies like this are raping horror. This was nothing but a cash-in sequel (prequel) made with no passion or creativity or desire to do anything even slightly different. Fuck this movie and others like it.

I'll disagree, and say movies like "Boogeyman" and "Cursed" are raping horror... So fuck a HUGE portion (if not all) of the slasher/horror movies made then? Cash-in prequel/remake yes. No passion or creativity? I liked some of the gore scenes... Creativity, prolly not since it IS a remake... But not too much like the 2003 remake, IMO... Same premise, different details... Plus they incorporated the dinner scene from the original TCM, which I thought was fun...

Anyway, I think you're being WAY too hard on this... Yes it's a cash-in on the remake trend happening... Yes it has bad writing/actings, etc. and yea, there's not a whole helluva lot in the way of creativity... But I was thoroughly entertained all the way through, and that's all ya can really ask of any movie, now isn't it? ;)

[MadsenOMC]

I hate that fucking excuse. "It isn't The Godfather and isn't trying to be." Tell me something I don't know. Jesus Christ. I know what to expect from movies like this. It would be nice to actually give a fuck about the people being beaten, tortured and slaughtered for a change. It would be nice if they weren't exactly the same every damn time. Neil Marshall developed four female characters enough in The Descent to make me care about them and their fate. It's not like it is impossible to do that in a horror flick. I do not think it's asking too much. I don't want to have bottom of the barrel expectations every time I see a horror movie. It would be nice if more respected the intelligence of the viewer. I would argue that the entire movie is dependent on boo scares. It uses them from start to finish. Listen, I don't expect complete realism in a movie like this. But there is a limit to what I can take. This is not a fucking Van Damme DTV movie. When someone takes a savage beating that would easily kill them and then walks a minute later, well, sorry, but I think that is fucking retarded. And I don't think that is being too picky or harsh. I think people like you are being way too easy on a worthless piece of shit movie like this. I hate that so many go out of their way to excuse and defend shit like this. Maybe if more of us started demanding more from horror flicks, we'd get better ones and wouldn't have to lower our expectations to a ridiculous degree just to enjoy a crappy movie.

[jaw2929]

I understand your point Madsen, but I've just got to disagree... If you want GOOD Horror movies, they're out there, but they're hard to find... Why? Because the "boo scares" and the loads of gore with under-developed characters is what people want to see (people, as in the general movie-going public who don't frequent movie critic message boards)....

I think that within the horror genre, wanting characters we can care about, etc. is (at this point in time) IS too much to ask for... With some rare exceptions of movies like High Tension or The Shining (at least IMO) horror movies aren't going to change these things to meet a few hardcore fans' expectations... Sad, but true.

And I've got to say, I've seen FAR worse fuckin' horror flicks than this... The Descent being one of them (I walked out after about 45 minutes or so, just a terrible fucking movie)....

But hey, to each their own... I can't entirely argue your point of view, because in a lot of instances I DO agree with it... But not enough to get too worked up about it, only because I expect horror movies to continue to be like this, and hell, I honestly can't complain if they're as good as this one was! :p

[chinton]

I would actually posta lot here but Madsen is saying exactly what I would say.

[ilovemovies]

I will forever defend The Hills Have Eyes and ESPECIALLY Wolf Creek. I think those are two excellent horror flicks.

I thought Pulse was quite good too. That is a horror movie that doesn't rely on boo scenes but actually manages to be geniunly unnerving and really get under your skin through it's incredibly eerie and creepy atmosphere.

Where as The Descent is probably the most well reviewed horror flick of the year and I found that one to be totally overrated. It was completely average. Not good, not bad.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by Trail_Blazer
I understand your point Madsen, but I've just got to disagree... If you want GOOD Horror movies, they're out there, but they're hard to find... Why? Because the "boo scares" and the loads of gore with under-developed characters is what people want to see (people, as in the general movie-going public who don't frequent movie critic message boards)....

Judging by the tepid box office reception of this movie, I would say that this is not true.

When I see that someone likes this movie but doesn't like The Descent, well, saying what I want to say about that would get me banned from here. This is horror at its absolute worst. The cabin in The Descent is scarier than anything in this movie.

[Shockwave]

I really liked this movie on a "dumb fun" level, but to me, it doesnt even come close to touching The Descent. Or Hills remake. Or Silent Hill.

..but then again, ive never been a fan of any of the TCM films. (not saying they arent good, but horror is pretty subjective, and non of the movies ever horrified me cause i never cared for any of the people in them.)

[thedamnwolfman]

I think the question we all should be asking ourselves is “Why?”. Why haven’t they remade a movie that needs a remake? Texas Chainsaw Massacre umm… DOESN”T FUCKING NEED TO BE REMADE!!! Nor does it need a remake style prequel to tell me were it all started. It all started when a creepy fucked up family let their retard out to kill people and wear there faces. It pretty much kicked ass the first time. Now ‘Wolfen’ starring Albert Finney deserves, I repeat deserves, to be remade. It is about naked Indians that live in run down houses that turn into wolves. Genius hindered only by shoddy early 80’s technology. Further more, stop transferring beaten to death long haired creepy girl Asian movies into a vehicle for Buffy the Vampire Slayer unless it involves Kristy Swanson and Donald Sutherland. Furthering the further more stop naming villains after something you do to occupy your time when the power is out on a lazy Saturday. Puzzles aren’t scary. I would shit my pants in frustration if I hadn’t been flushed out just twenty minutes ago by my intolerance to lactose.

[veddhead83]

I am not sure if I am at risk of being banned, but here I go.

I am going to have to agree with Madsen. I can't stand it when bloggers on this site defend garbage with lame excuses. There can be quality horror films. As with some mentioned before, The Decent, Shaun of the Dead, 28 Days Later, with the exception of Land of the Dead - all of Romero's Dead films, The Shining, The Exorcist, Halloween, Friday the 13th, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Slither, TCM, etc. are all better films than shit movies like Hostel, TCM: The Beginning, Cursed, The Covenant, Wolf Creek, Hills Have Eyes, Boogeman, Pulse, Stay Alive, The Grudge 1 & 2, etc. As fans, we should demand more from these films since we are the ones paying to see them. Studios should listen, although not too close - cough, SNAKES ON A PLANE!!! - to what we want to see.

I know you guys say critics are biased, but if the studios made better films you know they would start to come around.

Here is a list of horror films and their % on RottenTomatoes

Good Films IMO: ***Some of these are considered by almost everyone as Classic Horror films.***

The Shining 94%
The Exorcist 89%
28 Days Later 89%
Shaun of the Dead 89%
Night of the Living Dead 100%
The Sixth Sense 83%
The Descent 83%
Slither 83%
Halloween 100%
Friday the 13th 76%
Nightmare Elm Street 89%
Pretty high % with the critics and the fanboys.




Shit Films IMO: ***Some of these are considered by almost everyone as some of the worst horror ever.***

Boogeyman 14%
The Grudge 40%
The Grudge 2 8%
TCM The Beginning 18%
Hostel 61%
Cabin Fever 62%
Pulse 13%
Stay Alive 6%
Cursed 16%
The Covenant 2%
Wolf Creek 53%
Hills Have Eyes 48%
Some pretty low % from critics, but not the fanboys.

As you can see there is a huge difference from what I call quality and what I call shit. We need to demand more quality in our horror. Now don't get me wrong - I have my guilty pleasures too, but some of these are just plain awful. You can't love every piece of shit Hollywood produces, can you???

[Mase]

Huge horror fan here, The original TCM is one of my all time favorites, with that being said i was pretty disappointed in the 2003 remake.

I went into this one with low expectations and came out very pleased, lot's of fun, Plenty gruesome and seemed to pay a tribute to the original instead of trying to surpass it. One thing i found interesting "leatherface" was hardly the best villian here. Sherrif Hoyt is fucking wicked, This would be half the movie without him.

No this isnt' scary but for anyone who has seen at least 2 leatherface movies they know what they are getting into. For fans of the series and genre. I had a blast.

8/10

[RandalGraves]

After watching the TCM version with Jessica Beil, I really wanna check this one out...but I'll prolly just wait for the dvd.

[Bourne101]

.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by Bourne101
Wow, doesn't sound any different than any other reviews you've written. And Hoyt wasn't OK after getting his face slammed on the porch. He was out cold and we didn't see him again in the movie. In the remake it shows that he has false teeth that replaced his teeth that were removed when his face was beaten.

He would/should have been dead. Wow, you liked this. I am shocked.

[ilovemovies]

Maybe I would have liked this movie more if I hadn't seen it after Saw III, and I just got tired of all the bleakness and senseless gore but there is only so much gruesomeness and ugliness a person can take in one day.

It's well made, slick and the acting is decent. The scenes between the two couples early on I liked. And the car crash is a really great scene. But after that, the movie just because your run in the mill horror flick. It's just eh. And while I'm sure there was some gore in the first one, I don't remember it being quite this grizzly. Lots of screaming. Lots of running around. And not much else. It wasn't boring. It was too nasty to be boring. But I didn't much care about anything going on.

Also, the psycho killers were one dimensional bores. That's at least where Saw III has this beaten. Jigsaw and Amanda were interesting. Cherrif Hoyt and Leatherface are boring and over the top.

[InvaderZim]

Saw the movie last night (no pun intended), fuck all the haters! It had to be the best TCM since the original. The way they shot every scene made leatherface into one bad ass mo-fo. I really dont know how to explain the angles and lighting that they used btu it gave leatherface a whole new look that is far more intimidating than ever. Im not easy to please with horror movies but i gotta say i wet my undies at the fact they arent ruining such a favorite franchise of mine. Lets face it, the big wigs could have hired a bunch of morons to make the film and it could have ended up looking as lame as the saw movies.

10/10 fuckin loved it, its not often that i care weather the charecters die or not, but i did here.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by InvaderZim
fuck all the haters!

Wow!!! Pure genius here everybody.

[InvaderZim]

Originally posted by veddhead83
Wow!!! Pure genius here everybody.

Did i hurt your feelings?? Then why do you want to make me cry???

[poopontheshoes7]

Here we go.

I can really see some valid points being made on why some of you guys hate this movie, and I completly understand, but there are so huge contradictions.

Alot of people are bitching about how the characters suck and arent developed at all. Well, what made the characters in the original stand out? They were all thin as paper except for Franklin and he takes the cake for most annoying character in horror film history. The teens in this film arent developed much either, but they do have more than the teens in the original.

Others are bitching about it not being about anything but murder and torture with no plot. Again, what was the original about? Seems like they both follow the same linear story. And for the people bitching how for a movie entitled the Beginning there isnt much "beginning" going on. What more do you want? Ya, they could have explained a little bit more about Leatherfaces childhood, but I have a feeling if we did get more development on Leather like you all wanted, you'd bitch about there being TO MUCH development.

The movie does have a been there done that quality, which is somewhat tedious and can get old. But The Beginning succeeded in doing what no other Chainsaw film had since the original. It paid homage to it's father, the first TCM. All the sequels suck, the remake was to foax gritty and dirty, came off as a flashy poser trying to be nasty. While The Beginning was bleak and depressing all the way through. No flashy directing or hip cast members. It emmulated the grindhouse feel of the original greatly without seeming like a rip off. The family seemed crazy in this one (in the remake they only seemed, well, bizarre) and Leatherface was executed perfectly and actually kinda scared me. The film reminded me of the original alot throughout it's runtime (which is a good thing) and after the credits I was a little depressed and wanted to see some sunshine.

TCM: The Beginning paid homage to the original was great villians, a stark look, and one bleak ass ending.

8/10

[Shockwave]

Alot of people are bitching about how the characters suck and arent developed at all. Well, what made the characters in the original stand out? They were all thin as paper except for Franklin and he takes the cake for most annoying character in horror film history. The teens in this film arent developed much either, but they do have more than the teens in the original

Exactly. The teens in the original sucked ass. One of the reasons i dont hold it any higher then most other slashers. I didnt give a flying fuck what happend to them.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by InvaderZim
Did i hurt your feelings?? Then why do you want to make me cry??? No, you are just too obtuse.

[InvaderZim]

Originally posted by veddhead83
No, you are just too obtuse.

Does that meaan im fat.. geeez you are a bad guy :)

[ilovemovies]

Actually, that is what is so odd about the movie. I found the movie tiresome and not terribly suspenseful but I actually did like the four main characters, especially the two brothers. The whole thing about one of the brothers wanting to dodge the draft and go to Mexico I thought really worked and they were sympathetic. Good chemistry between them. They were believable as brothers. And the two women were fine. I liked the chemistry between the brothers more but their chemistry was fine as well.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by Shockwave
Exactly. The teens in the original sucked ass. One of the reasons i dont hold it any higher then most other slashers. I didnt give a flying fuck what happend to them.

I can certainly understand this. It can definitely be argued that the teens in the original TCM are just as one-dimensional as those in the recent updates. However, I would argue that the original TCM is still superior in just about every other way to the new ones. It is about more than just the teenagers.

[bigd23]

Originally posted by poopontheshoes7
Here we go.

I can really see some valid points being made on why some of you guys hate this movie, and I completly understand, but there are so huge contradictions.

Alot of people are bitching about how the characters suck and arent developed at all. Well, what made the characters in the original stand out? They were all thin as paper except for Franklin and he takes the cake for most annoying character in horror film history. The teens in this film arent developed much either, but they do have more than the teens in the original.

Others are bitching about it not being about anything but murder and torture with no plot. Again, what was the original about? Seems like they both follow the same linear story. And for the people bitching how for a movie entitled the Beginning there isnt much "beginning" going on. What more do you want? Ya, they could have explained a little bit more about Leatherfaces childhood, but I have a feeling if we did get more development on Leather like you all wanted, you'd bitch about there being TO MUCH development.

The movie does have a been there done that quality, which is somewhat tedious and can get old. But The Beginning succeeded in doing what no other Chainsaw film had since the original. It paid homage to it's father, the first TCM. All the sequels suck, the remake was to foax gritty and dirty, came off as a flashy poser trying to be nasty. While The Beginning was bleak and depressing all the way through. No flashy directing or hip cast members. It emmulated the grindhouse feel of the original greatly without seeming like a rip off. The family seemed crazy in this one (in the remake they only seemed, well, bizarre) and Leatherface was executed perfectly and actually kinda scared me. The film reminded me of the original alot throughout it's runtime (which is a good thing) and after the credits I was a little depressed and wanted to see some sunshine.

TCM: The Beginning paid homage to the original was great villians, a stark look, and one bleak ass ending.

8/10

I agree with you 100%. The Beginning referred to the beginning of all the killings. I actually loved this movie and thought it was great!

[Lost in Space]

Originally posted by InvaderZim
Does that meaan im fat.. geeez you are a bad guy :)
are you being intentionaly obnoxious. That out of the way
I enjoyed this, infact i saw it twice the end was a little lame, very predictable, but still fun, in a campy sort of way
8/10

[InvaderZim]

Originally posted by Lost in Space
are you being intentionaly obnoxious. That out of the way
I enjoyed this, infact i saw it twice the end was a little lame, very predictable, but still fun, in a campy sort of way
8/10

iM NOT TRYING TO BE OBNOXIOUS.. JUST havin some fun... I agree with you on the ned.. and yes i will see it again today... i also got the theatre to give me the 8' vinal banner and its hanging in my living room as we speak

[Shockwave]

I can certainly understand this. It can definitely be argued that the teens in the original TCM are just as one-dimensional as those in the recent updates. However, I would argue that the original TCM is still superior in just about every other way to the new ones. It is about more than just the teenagers.

I agree 100% Madsen. I still love the gritty realism of Leatherface chasing the girl at the end with the chainsaw.

I just hate when people talk about what great characters the original had compared to movies nowadays when it didnt.