New Line Cinema | Release Date: October 6, 2006
6.0
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 145 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
76
Mixed:
25
Negative:
44
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
LinT.Jan 18, 2007
I made the mistake of buying some fast food before sitting down to watch this one and all the meat certainly didn't make me want to take a bite out of my double melt. I've never seen a movie with so many people covered in (and I made the mistake of buying some fast food before sitting down to watch this one and all the meat certainly didn't make me want to take a bite out of my double melt. I've never seen a movie with so many people covered in (and becoming) meat. Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful
5
moviegrabbagJun 12, 2011
This movie actually really surprised me. When I saw the previews for this movie I scoffed at the thought of them trying to make a prequel. This movie actually did a pretty good job of explaining some of the habits of the family as well as aThis movie actually really surprised me. When I saw the previews for this movie I scoffed at the thought of them trying to make a prequel. This movie actually did a pretty good job of explaining some of the habits of the family as well as a little bit of leatherface and why he is the way he is. The acting was also pretty good for a horror movie. Overall not nearly as good as the original but still a fairly good watch. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
maestraretiradaApr 15, 2011
I Donno why people are so boring come on this was a good movie and i must say that the youngsters who starred in this movie were amazingly believable especially the blonde chick, i gave this a ten beacause it deserves it
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
8
NDAug 12, 2007
Really enjoyed this - loved the original remake too. R Lee Ermey makes this film - loads of blood and overall worth a watch.
1 of 3 users found this helpful
4
ClintM.Oct 8, 2006
All blood, all gore, no real scares, just lots of gross outs ... nothing like the initial remake, which was FAR superior.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
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
2
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
10
RickymOct 18, 2009
The Best Of the Best of the Chainsaw flicks Scary Suspenseful and Gory as hell Leatherface rules.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
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
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
ILHMFeb 2, 2013
TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE takes a step back in time to reveal the origins of the infamous Hewitt family in TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING. A deformed child is rescued and raised by a penniless family out in the sticks of Texas, a familyTEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE takes a step back in time to reveal the origins of the infamous Hewitt family in TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING. A deformed child is rescued and raised by a penniless family out in the sticks of Texas, a family that is forced into cannibalism when the local slaughterhouse is put out of business. Unfortunately for a group of travelers who are on their way to Austin to enlist for Vietnam, this means that they are the next item on the menu! For the most part, THE BEGINNING keeps up with the remake that preceded it, but as a prequel it falls into many unavoidable traps. The filmmakers feel obliged to as many questions as possible in only a limited amount of time, which leads to a number of plot contrivances. Here, we learn where Thomas Hewitt got his saw, why Hoyt became the sheriff, how Uncle Monty lost his legs, and where Leatherface got his nickname... All in the same night! For a family whose killing spree lasted over four years, this just seems forced. The political weight of Vietnam is also heavier load than the film can bear, and comes off as being ignorant and ungenuine. THE BEGINNING is the bloodiest of any of the CHAINSAW films, however, with many graphic and gory murder scenes. A decent follow up, and still one of the better sequels. -Carl Manes
I Like Horror Movies
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
HaithamBayazeedJan 15, 2013
That's what I call a horror, disturbing, vulgar, slasher, thriller, gory, amazing, shocking, breathtaking film! Not Micheal Bay's The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake for 9 years old, a PG horror, I HATE Micheal Bay's The Texas ChainsawThat's what I call a horror, disturbing, vulgar, slasher, thriller, gory, amazing, shocking, breathtaking film! Not Micheal Bay's The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake for 9 years old, a PG horror, I HATE Micheal Bay's The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the prequel "movie I am reviewing" is way to better, GOD! Worth the watch! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MikeOct 7, 2006
Great movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JeffFOct 10, 2006
[***SPOILERS***] It's amazing to me how a 300 lb guy carrying a 50 lb chainsaw can just pop up out of thin air. How the sheriff character can seemingly be in two places at once, and women were wearing low rider jeans in 1969. Andrew [***SPOILERS***] It's amazing to me how a 300 lb guy carrying a 50 lb chainsaw can just pop up out of thin air. How the sheriff character can seemingly be in two places at once, and women were wearing low rider jeans in 1969. Andrew Bryniarski had better find himself a tux come Oscar time. NOT! Boring and pathetic lets hope it kills this franchise. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MilesM.Oct 3, 2006
Classy gore...tasteful carnage truly in line with the Leatherface tradition
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TerryCOct 15, 2006
While the film generally sticks to the formula, it does it with a panache not seen in similar films. I'm a fan of the franchise hands down so this may be a bit biased but I found it to be an intense and stylish romp through the world of While the film generally sticks to the formula, it does it with a panache not seen in similar films. I'm a fan of the franchise hands down so this may be a bit biased but I found it to be an intense and stylish romp through the world of splatter films. Two thumbs up Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
[Anonymous]Oct 16, 2006
Not great or really much different from the last version, but still not bad. Didn't think it was deserving of being panned by most critics. Definitely was one of the goriest movies I have seen. I left the theatre feeling the same as I Not great or really much different from the last version, but still not bad. Didn't think it was deserving of being panned by most critics. Definitely was one of the goriest movies I have seen. I left the theatre feeling the same as I did after seeing The Hills Have Eyes: like I needed a shower. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JoseyS.Oct 3, 2006
Impressed, I was with this installment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EleanorS.Oct 4, 2006
I thought it was a worthwhile use of my time. I shrieked a lot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
MattO.Oct 9, 2006
All hamburger with no fear or suspense.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JosephC.Jan 30, 2007
I thought is was better than the first one (remake) and I thought they were both better than the original. I loved it..
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
AlecB.Feb 2, 2007
the movie is alright nothing spectacular or great. the movie shouldve been longer than 84 min to tell the story of how leather face became to be. no need for gore when u dont need it like half the movie does. i was suprised though with the the movie is alright nothing spectacular or great. the movie shouldve been longer than 84 min to tell the story of how leather face became to be. no need for gore when u dont need it like half the movie does. i was suprised though with the end and they did good on that part. still the 2 newer ones dont come close to being as good as the original one Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
TannerJJun 5, 2009
There is a difference between a movie being scary, and a movie just being nasty. This movie isn't scary at all, just very gruesome and loud. A waste of time imo.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
DanD.Nov 10, 2006
Im not really a fan of this type of movie. It doesn't scare me, or really get any emotion out of me- except "Gosh. That was gross." That said, this movie was amusing, and probably better than the first one, or even the original in my Im not really a fan of this type of movie. It doesn't scare me, or really get any emotion out of me- except "Gosh. That was gross." That said, this movie was amusing, and probably better than the first one, or even the original in my opinion. Which isn't saying too much. Two other movies of similar calibre would be HOSTEL, or WOLF'S CREEK. I would rate all three about the same. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
EfrenA.Oct 18, 2006
Although it does have the formulated Boogeyman storyline and yes the stupid teenagers (everything from gung ho to no go), this movie actually had a few parts that made me jump. Not sure if it was because most of the female audience members Although it does have the formulated Boogeyman storyline and yes the stupid teenagers (everything from gung ho to no go), this movie actually had a few parts that made me jump. Not sure if it was because most of the female audience members screamed and I wasn't ready or I was actually scared in some parts. What truly made this a good movie for me is that one final scare. When you see it, you may debate the formulated value of it and yes, you may even say it is predictable, but it's just that ONE moment that it happens that catches you off guard. One of the other things I liked about this version is that there was no reservations on the gore factor. My suggestion is do not see this on a full stomach if it is weak because it is a bloodbath at some points, but all in all it was a fun way to pass a couple of hours!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RDalviOct 26, 2006
Good movie. R Lee Ermey and Letaherface rescue this movie from sinking.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
danielb.Nov 30, 2007
Can't believe people went to see this in theatres. I know i would have asked to be refunded. Or left before the end to get it. Its THAT bad. Really. REALLY!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
NorandaJul 26, 2007
This is by far the best movie of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies. Its by far the most brutal movie, and includes such graphic scenes as Leather Faces first "face peel" and "the birth of the monster" Two thumbs WAY UP!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
ItisDoomAug 10, 2009
The movie was great but seriously. Jordana Brewster could have just ran away for her life and screw her friends.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JROct 12, 2006
This movie just follows the mold of the stereotypical horror flick that you
0 of 0 users found this helpful