Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

jadavix I couldn't remember if I'd seen "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning" before. After watching it, I'm still not sure. It's that kind of movie, but then none of the recent "Chainsaw" retreads have had anything to distinguish one from the other.This one, I guess, is supposed to be a prequel to the classic original, which was made (and set) in 1974. "The Beginning" is set in the '60s, with two characters who are staring down the barrel of an imminent tour of duty in Vietnam.All setting the movie closer to the time of the original "Texas Chainsaw" does it make it look more like garbage by comparison. That movie was made on a shoe-string budget, and yet it was a work of genius with style to spare. It wasn't even that violent, and yet the film's atmosphere was so oppressive that people let their imaginations do the work, and Tobe Hooper spoke of fans coming up to him and describing brutally violent scenes that they swore were in the movie, but in fact, were not.Alas, this prequel, if that's what it is, does nothing to ignite the imagination. It's a tedious, humdrum, dreary affair, which doesn't even really get the violence right. It would have cost millions. Why not go crazy with the gore? Face it: that's the only reason anyone watches this stuff. Why not let them have it? Sure, it has some pretty violent bits toward the end of the movie, but you have to wait so long to see it, and you'll probably be asleep by then.Lee Tergesen, of "Oz" and "Generation Kill" and "Weird Science", has a strange walk on role that is not utilised at all. Knowing what a great actor he is, why did they cast him and give him nothing to do?R. Lee Ermey is really the main antagonist of the film, but I think by 2006 he was really long past his intimidating heyday. He looks like a sad and angry old man, not the demon the movie requires.Leatherface, never really allowed to be the 'star' of these films like Freddy or Jason were the stars of theirs, is predictably pushed into the background, showing up every once in a while when someone needs to die.

Leofwine_draca And so the cycle goes on. This time, the latest film in the Texas Chainsaw series (the sixth to date) is a prequel to the remake, claiming to reveal the origins behind Leatherface and show the viewer how this sadistic, inhuman killer and his mad family came to exist. That's the claim, anyway. In reality, the first twenty minutes are the 'prequel' bit, and then the film becomes just another formula movie with the same elements – a vehicle full of youths runs foul of the inhabitants of the remote farmhouse and are butchered one by one.Those expecting enlightenment will come away sorely disappointed – but maybe that's the point. Leatherface has no origin: he's just a brutal, faceless killer, a hulking he-man with a taste for flesh. His 'family' are all crazy and have always been that way. However, THE BEGINNING does manage to capture some of the raw grittiness of the original film, something that the last few sequels and the remake were missing; perhaps it's the period setting or the bleached cinematography, but this is a film that has the right 'look' to it. It's just a shame that look is wasted in such a mundane and routine film.You know, I'm getting mighty tired of these backwoods/rural/mutant/woodland killer films of late, because they're all the same: no story, just endless chases, captures and escapes. I'm thinking of the likes of WRONG TURN, MANHUNT; none of them are offering anything new, just more of the same. Jump scares and outrageous gore are no match for a good script and atmosphere, and THE BEGINNING is missing the latter two, although the gore is here in spades. In a film market saturated by the likes of HOSTEL and SAW, this is a film that goes all out to become the grisliest Texas Chainsaw movie yet. Skin is flayed off, people's faces are removed and the living are chainsawed into pieces, all shown in gritty, close-up detail. The blood flows freely and there's an emphasis on sadism and repellent torture and barbarity that makes this hard to watch; at the same time, you quickly become desensitised to it all, unlike in a film such as HOSTEL where my heart was pounding throughout.The cast members are pretty predictable – the usual bunch of bland twentysomethings who you don't really care about or engage with as they get variously slaughtered in gruesome ways. Jordana Brewster, the skinny heroine, is particularly bland and unremarkable, and I think the buxom blonde Diora Baird would have made for a far better 'scream queen'. Bryniarski looks the part as Leatherface but lacks the hulking, quiet menace that Gunnar Hansen brought to the role, although R. Lee Ermey has a ball as an absolutely despicable bad guy. And so there you have it – more gore than before but no new ideas in another ultimately bland and pointless teen terror flick.

SnoopyStyle Thomas Hewitt/Leatherface grew up working in the Texas slaughterhouse despite being discarded as a baby by Uncle Charlie Hewitt (R. Lee Ermey). In 1969, the slaughterhouse is condemned. Thomas and Uncle Charlie kill the entire Sheriff's department and Uncle Charlie impersonates Sheriff Hoyt. Meanwhile, Dean (Taylor Handley) is on his way back to fight in Vietnam. His girlfriend Chrissie (Jordana Brewster) is concerned. He thinks his brother Eric (Matt Bomer) is joining him. Instead, Eric and his girlfriend Bailey (Diora Baird) intend to head for Mexico. After encountering a group of bikers, the foursome is pursued by biker Alex. The brothers fight about Eric burning his draft card. Dean is distracted by the gun waving and the fighting when they crash into a cow on the road. Hoyt arrives and kills Alex. He takes Dean, Eric, and Bailey prisoner while Chrissie remains hidden. Chrissie flags down Alex's biker boyfriend Holden.This is a prequel of the 2003 remake. There is nothing new added to the franchise. With a prequel, the ending is pre-determined. They are mostly going through the motion here. It should explain why Alex is chasing the group waving a shotgun when its happening. The whole setup is weirdly unsatisfying. It's a lot blood and gore with nothing scary. There is no emotional intensity. The characters are not that compelling. It's basically a lesser repeat.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is a prequel to 2003 remake of The Texas chainsaw massacre. The Texas chainsaw remake is better. And that is actually a very bad movie. The original version of The Texas chainsaw massacre from 1974 is a great movie. The Texas chainsaw massacre 2 is a great movie. Leather face Texas chainsaw massacre 3 is a great movie. The forth Texas chainsaw massacre movie. Texas chainsaw massacre the next generation is a great movie. The fifth part to old series Chainsaw massacre 3.D is a better movie. And the movie is terrible. This movie as a story line so similar to the original Texas chainsaw massacre that there is no point to it. It is not scary. It just predictable and boring. One of the only things that makes it different is that it as an awful ending.