The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning

New Line Cinema | Release Date: October 6, 2006

6.3	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 203 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

MovieMasterEddyApr 6, 2016

For those who have lost track of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, here's the deal with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning: It's a prequel to the 2003 remake The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, not a prequel to Tobe Hooper's originalFor those who have lost track of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, here's the deal with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning: It's a prequel to the 2003 remake The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, not a prequel to Tobe Hooper's original 1974 The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. And it has no connection with Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation, starring Matthew McConaughey and Renée Zellweger before they knew better. Got it? Okay. Here's everything else you need to know about The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning: It's really gory and really dull. Mostly just dull. And it's far worse than a cash-in prequel to a mercenary Texas Chainsaw Massacre sequel has any right to be.

Hooper's film has a blood-drenched reputation, but it built its scares out of skillfully crafted suspense. Like its 2003 predecessor, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning relies on made-you-jump shocks and more fake entrails than a Jaycees haunted house. It wastes no time in getting to either, but it's still a tremendous waste of time.

In drill-sergeant mode, as always, character actor R. Lee Ermey returns as the patriarch of an inbred, cannibalistic Texas clan which, this time out, terrorizes two attractive, unfortunate couples. The male half of one (Matthew Bomer) is on his way to re-enlist for service in Vietnam, not knowing that his brother (Taylor Handley) plans to dodge the draft in Mexico. That whole question quickly becomes moot once Ermey and his adopted, leather-faced "nephew" start chopping them up one by one, a process that sadly takes up much of the movie.

There's a lot to dislike about TTCM: TB, beginning with the fact that it repeats whole scenes from its immediate predecessor. They didn't work that well the first time around, and they aren't improved here. Really, the film is only worth considering as part of a trend of films that seem to exist to show audiences what torture looks like in graphic detail, almost as if torture had become some kind of national anxiety. But that couldn't be the case, could it?… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

TetsuoJul 3, 2013

This completely rehash the remake and the original '74 classic. What it does is answer questions that were never asked in the first place. It fails like every horror prequel ever made, it relies on blood and cheap scares instead taking theThis completely rehash the remake and the original '74 classic. What it does is answer questions that were never asked in the first place. It fails like every horror prequel ever made, it relies on blood and cheap scares instead taking the basic steps in making a horror movie. A complete failure.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

MeghanR.Nov 2, 2006

The beauty of the original Texas is its almost total lack of blood and gore. The Beginning could be the most disgusting movie I have ever seen. Its abuse of blood and violence was unnecessary. It's chilling premise could have been as The beauty of the original Texas is its almost total lack of blood and gore. The Beginning could be the most disgusting movie I have ever seen. Its abuse of blood and violence was unnecessary. It's chilling premise could have been as effective as the original, but it was lost. There's a difference between scary and gory. This was not in the least scary. Covering my eyes was my way of protecting my dinner and maintaining it in my stomach. A waste of time, money, and brain cells. Disgusting.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

JoeS.Feb 24, 2007

As if the horrible remake of the 1970s classic wasn't bad enough, here comes the prequel. Even worse than the remake. The original was so great because it was terrifying without being gruesome. It also stayed close to the truth. But As if the horrible remake of the 1970s classic wasn't bad enough, here comes the prequel. Even worse than the remake. The original was so great because it was terrifying without being gruesome. It also stayed close to the truth. But this movie is the exact opposite. It's a ridiculously gory and a ridiculously absurb movie. So, what do you get? Another horrible slasher film. What should you do to escape this movie? Rent the original or get it off eBay. But unless you REALLY want to see someone get their face cut off, run. And fast.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

ClaytonT.Oct 8, 2006

Jordana Brewster was the only likable character of the ones your supposed to like. The gore was excessive and not at all creative. And it lacked any suspense because with the exception of one small tidbit in the end, It is the same exact Jordana Brewster was the only likable character of the ones your supposed to like. The gore was excessive and not at all creative. And it lacked any suspense because with the exception of one small tidbit in the end, It is the same exact movie as the first one. Its ridiculously bad, but I'll give it 2 points for Jordana, at least she tried.… Expand