Customer Reviews

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Widescreen) (2003)

5 star:		(117)
4 star:		(58)
3 star:		(28)
2 star:		(20)
1 star:		(46)

 

 

I am a huge fan of the 1974-Tobe Hooper's film Texas Chainsaw Massacre and consider it one of the most intelligent horror films ever made.So I did have few misgivings about watching this new remake (and not another sequel), being very much disappointed before with similar ventures(one example that comes to my mind is Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes),but watch it I did and I have to admit that I did enjoy it very much.
You have to give credit where credit is due, and to be fair Marcus Nispel, in his first feature film, did a competent job in creating a dark and sinister atmosphere from the very start,and injecting an equal and effective dosage of tension/suspense and gore. All the actors were very good, especially the excellent R.Lee Ermey as the demented sheriff/head of the psycho family,(yes the one and only R.Lee Ermey from Full Metal Jacket fame, but it seems unfair that he is mostly remembered for Kubrick's masterpiece as he has done a large collection of work since).
Other actors who impressed me were Six Feet Under's Eric Balfour, and of course Jessica Biel!(she is a Goddess,it is official!!..but seriously she did a very convincing and sexy performance).
Now I have to point out a very important matter:
You will enjoy this film much more if you do not compare it too much with the original, as some reviewers did, but watch it instead as a 'new' film.
Indeed,the two Texas Chainsaw Massacre films are based on the same horrible events that actually happened in Texas's backyard, so in a way it is not a copy or a remake in the proper sense of the word.
Besides ,if comparisons are to be made, more recent films are more apt,and one can be made with Wrong Turn which was mediocre at best and not as well directed.
Although choosing the same title was a bold move and will inevitably draw much criticism (hence the very low marks from some reviewers) because no matter how good Nispel's version is, no one can possibly recreate the sheer raw and unrelenting power and brutality of the first.But I don't think the filmmaker intended to do that..with a screenplay based on the 1974 one by Kim Henkel and Tobe Hooper, I do believe that they acknowledged the classic status of the original,and I think, it is an indirect tribute to it, not a pretentious and haughty attempt to undermine it.
So Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a good film, that delivers good 'ole fashioned edge of your seat-popcorn flying' tension, one that you will enjoy much more if you forget the original for a while,and acknowledge a competent direction and acting.

This is definately one of my favorite horror films. When I saw the photos online I knew it would be good... but i didn't know it would be this good! Although i may get bashed for saying this but- its scarier, more explained, gorier, better acting/characters, and somewhat funnier that the original. Leatherface is also alot cooler looking. The beginning is excellent- the black and white police footage- there is not a boring moment in the film. It literally made my palms sweat- and i watch horror all the time. Every death in the film is full of eye candy. Overall it stands alone- not as a slasher movie but as a DARK film. If you obcessed with the original this may be somewhat of a rude awakening but a good one- to show you how lame the original was! There also will be a 2-disc set coming out with a new cover and TONS of extra stuff- im gonna get that one. I definately recomend this film to any movie watcher!

The remake of the 1974 chiller The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a stylish, atmospheric film, which unfortunately resorts to blood and gore to tell its story. It's a simple story that starts off like any other slasher pic from the 70s and 80s. A carful of sexy teens pick up a hitchhiker, get stranded and become prey to a murderous villain. Unfortunately for the teens in this film (and the original), the villian is not one, but a whole townful of grotesque, psychotic killers. What follows is definitely suspenseful, but uncomfortable to watch and truly hard to sit through. This is one of the most disturbing and violent horror films in recent memory, but did hold my interest because of the great cast and creepy atmosphere. Daniel Pearl, cinematographer for the original 1974 version of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, reprised the position for this movie, which I thinl greatly benefited it. However, while the original relied on suspense and a feeling of dread to scare the audience, this film just tries to gross them out. I wasn't expecting much, but was pleasantly surprised. I just wish it didn't have to be so violent.

The Texas Chainsaw massacre has some really good points, but also some very bad points. On the plus side,it took the series in a completely new direction. It was much more gruesome than the original, the lighting was amazing, it was suspenseful and eerie. On the downside, the characters were all slightly unbelievable. The addition of marijuana to the movie was done it a way that made it seem as if Micheal Bay was trying to support the stereotypes set in Scream. True, the classic slashers had drugs in them, but it wasn't an essential part of the plot. As expected, the survivor at the end is the one who wasn't doing drugs and being promiscuous at the beginning. Way to go on the originality scale, Micheal. Despite the fact that this aspect of the plot was lacking, the atmosphere created was good enough to make up for it. Had they changed the story so it didn't feel like a Scream follow up movie, this would be 5 stars instead of 3.

A WAY BETTER THAN I EXPECTED REMAKE OF THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, NOT THAT I HOLD THE ORIGINAL IN ANY FORM OF HIGH REGARD. IT WORKS PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE ACTORS AND THE FANTASTIC LOOK OF THE FILM. THERE ARE OF COURSE A FEW MOMENTS WHEN AUDIENCES CAN ROLL OUR EYES, AND THE PLOT OFFERS NOTHING WE HAVENT SEEN BEFORE, BUT THE FILM MANTAINS ITS DIGNITY THROUGHOUT AND IS ALL THINGS CONSIDERED A SIMPLE AND HONEST EFFORT.

Spectacular remake of a cult classic that in my opinion I felt would be a good remake if done by the right person.
When I heard Micheal Bays money and name were behind it I cringed and allmost gave up hope that is untill I saw the preview.
As soon as TCM was realeased here I ran to see it and was not disappointed not in the direction dialouge actors story/plot or the amount of violence and blood.
This is a big budget horror flick with massive amounts of teeth and claws.
It is not meant to be a throwback it is meant to be its own beast.
If you hated HOUSE OF A THOUSAND CORPSES dont bother cause Rob Zombies masterpiece is the best thing to happen to horror movies in multiplexes since The Exorcist and TCM comes in a close second next to it.
Viva La Zombie!!!!!

I am a huge fan of the original, and I'm not a fan of remakes in general. With that said, I'm not about to insult anybody by trying to put the original and this 2003 remake in the same category. I do think, however, that this movie is pretty good. What makes it work is that the two movies are very different. There are similarities to be sure, but you don't feel like you're watching a blow-by-blow replay of the 1973 classic. I saw the remake in a theater and expected to spend two hours laughing at a lame attempt to capture the classic's low-key horror. Instead, I found myself wrapped up in the new story because it strayed enough from the original to catch and, more importantly, keep my attention. There are a lot of extras on these two discs, including an interesting plot device that never made its way into the movie. Also, the commentary reveals some interesting facts. Overall, I think anyone who likes scary movies will like this movie. I definitely think people who haven't seen the original will enjoy it because they have no reference to compare it to. However, do yourself a favor and see the original too; you won't be disappointed.

This movie is a must have. It's a remake of the original,but it's better.Even though it's a remake it still scares you in better ways.This movie is AMAZING!!!

Where was the canabalism? Why did they spend so much money on a score for the movie when it worked so well to not have one in the first on? The other half leg was obviously sticking in the piano! I give it 4 stars in comparison to ANYTHING else that has come out since 1990. I am often bored by horror movies nowadays that have maybe one scene that is interesting. I am not including horror/thrillers like Silence of the Lambs. Leatherfaces sisters should have been axed. Terrible, annoying, and could have been much cooler. Not as unpredictable as the first, and the main "hook" scene was drawn out, he should have saved the screen time to lengthen the Pepper death scene. No movie in recent time has been scarier. Although, they could top it with a Prequel. How the girls family gets it...I mean we aren't talking about 5 people where 4 barely know eachother. We'd be talking about the girls mother, father, younger brother, and the fact that she is pregnant. I think that would make for a great, insanely scary horror movie.

This movie seemed a tad bit off from being a remake of the original. They rewrote the entire script changing the crazy brother hitchhicker to a girl who excaped the clutches of leatherface ,and showed no sign that the family was actully canibiles and completly made it look like they had no intrest in eating people at all ,as in the original we saw that the only reason he did kill people was to eat them. Overall this was a great film and one of the best slasher flicks in years with great acting and a great reimaging of leatherface and I would recomend buying the platnium series I bought. It comes with more than the regular realease. THANKS