Rating: 
Summary: Surprisingly good but too violent and gory
Review: I was quite surprised to find that I actually enjoyed this film. For one, it is actually scary, and the director increases the tension throughout the film, making it a tense and often terrifying experience. I also thought Jessica Biel was excellent in the lead role. Like Jamie Lee Curtis before her, Biel can scream well but creates a sympathetic character we can root for (and she's a much more satisfying horror heroine than Jennifer Love Hewitt). The film is also exquisitely shot, with vivid colour and texture not usually seen in cinematography in a Hollywood film.The main drawback is that the film is unnecessarily gory with the chainsaw killings. Perhaps that is just personal taste, but I would have preferred that the director leave that to our imagination rather than being so salacious with the murders.
However, I am not in agreement with Roger Ebert's review that this is sick. It intends to scare audiences, and it does succeed in that. At least with me, it did. I also think this remake will help audiences rediscover the original as I have.
Rating: 
Summary: Heart Pounding, Gut Wrenching Fun
Review: Ok, considering I have not seen the original (and I have nothing to compare the re-make to), I thought this movie was really effective in its gut wrenching surprisingly disturbing approach. I am the sort of person who goes into "scary" movies not expecting much because on a general basis horror movies are either too unrealistic, funny, and/or pointless...but not this one. I came out of the theater in a cold sweat, slightly shaken from its suspenseful climatic conclusion. Although "gross" at points, the movie is not really bombarded by bloody images but instead is complimented by them and because of that, the movie forces its viewers to loath the antagonist Leatherface. If you are a lover of Horror movies I really suggest you watch this movie because it really is a diamond in the ruff. In a time of "Darkness Falls", "House of the Dead", "Ghost Ship", and other tragic horror films, one needs to see this film, for it really does give back the horror in Horror.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding!
Review: Absolute thriller! Kept me hanging on until the last second!
Rating: 
Summary: Better than I expected
Review: Look, its not the original. You don't beat original classics. This is a more real feeling movie. The situations seems a little more probable, but the Addam's family like dinner sequence is gone and the house isn't quite as weird. I do miss the jump out the 2nd floor window. Overall, I was entertained. The acting is good and the look of the film is sharp. If you like horror movies, go see it. If not, why are you reading this review. At least they changed the story from the original. It helps give some new twists and different visuals. There are a couple of hidden jokes in it. Look for Harry Knowles head (www.aintitcoolnews.com) and look at the name of the meat factory and then check out the set designer's last name in the credits.
Rating: 
Summary: Loosely is the key word.
Review: This movie was LOOSELY based on the Ed Gein case, and I do mean loosely becasue of the fact that he only killed 3 people, the rest he dug up and took body parts and or bodies. I was looking forward to seeing this movie, I mean the previews looked great and it looked like the perfect remake. Then I heard it was directed by the same man who directed "Bad Boyz II" among other terrible newer movies, I was a little worried but I was still excited to see it. Then I was reading some reviews from people who had seen it stating that they ruined it and they were disapointed, I still wanted to see it. It starts out ok but goes down hill fast, I felt so embarased I dragged my friend to see that instead of Kill Bill (which I had already seen). Now we all know when directors remake a movie that isnt theres they tend to change things to make it interesting, but what he did to this movie was awful. This is a list of new things that happen in the movie that shouldent be there.1. They are going to a Lynard Skynard concert instead of a cemetary so it takes away from the fact that they were there for a reason.2. The police officer is disgusting and vastly malcast, from what I recall about the other one there was no perverted washed up drill sargent playing the police officer that was given so many new lines it draws away from the fear of leatherface because there are two "monsters" in the story.3. The director trys his hand at "dark humor" but fails, if I wanted a dark comedy I'd watch Evil Dead 2 or Re-Animator.
Now all of a sudden Leatherface has a "skin disorder".4. The director is not a horror director, that should be a warning sign from the second you hear it.5.The budget was so big the film turns into a "we're trying to gross you out" movie instead of a bulding sense of terror that the other one gave you from the grainy and candid feel to it.6.There is no terror in "fight scenes". Its plain and simple, when the anoying protagonist is blatently fighting the antagonist its not scary, not at all.7. Leatherface was atleast 3 times bigger than he was in the original, which could have worked in there favor if they diden't a very noticeable thinner man to play leatherface in the running sequences.8.The mask looked way to overdone, the other one was so creepy because it gave the impression that it was smiling at you.9.What happened to the butchers cloths? They were scary because you could see the blood all over them and they looked so average for such an abnormal character to be wearing. This one looks like a bunch of greasy rags that a kid would wear in a witch costume for halloween.Those are just a fiew I can think of off the top of my head, either way your better off seeing the original. There was no spirit or honor behind this remake. It was a shameful way to cash in on a horror movie that needed no remake.Pros:Polished looking camera and angles that would fit any other movie nicely.Cons:It wasent ment to be a polished looking movie.See the original.
Rating:
Summary: Pleasently surprised
Review: I was expecting this re-make of the horror classic Texas Chainsaw Massacre to be, well, let's say less than satisfying. However, when I saw this last night, I was pleasently surprised for the most part. While this re-make bears plenty of similarities to the original film, this version manages to stand on it's own thanks to a surprisingly good rookie director, a solid cast, plenty of blood and gore, and a hulking Leatherface that is much more creepier here than he has ever been (yes, you read that right). The story is somewhat identical to the original: five kids in a van going to a Skynyrd concert pick up a hitchiker, and after a string of bizarre and bloody events, are picked off one by one by a very large man who wields a very large chainsaw. The cast, mostly unknowns except for Jessica Biel, is solidly put together. Biel makes great eye candy, and a memorable scream as well. R. Lee Ermey (Full Metal Jacket, Willard) is here as well in a lively role that adds to the fun. Leatherface himself looks more creepy and scary than he ever has before, but his family doesn't have the same amount of creepiness that they did in the original which does hurt the film. All that aside, this new Texas Chainsaw Massacre may not get under the skin like the original did, but it is a surprisingly good horror film that I would recommend to fans of the other films in the series.
Rating:
Summary: A well-done remake--one of the best remakes ever made.
Review: The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a unique horror film and can never be outdone by any remake--the same can be said about George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead. (I really hate it that they are going to remake Dawn of the Dead). The original Chainsaw was made in 1973 and the events in the film took place in 1973; therefore, the audience will always have the feeling of aunthenticity in the original film's atmosphere. The remake, on the other hand, is sort of like a technical upgrade of the film. The sound is better than the original and Jessica Biel's performance is very convincing. But then again, the female actor in the original film was also brilliant. I give this film 4 stars because it did not try to make the serial killer family over-the-top silly (like the last Chainsaw movie). The approach to the movie's atmosphere and horror is serious. I always respect a director who is making a horror film and is trying to treat it seriously and dramatically. For example, I have no respect for the filmmakers who made the stupid movie, House of the Dead--what a total waste of the viewer's money and the studio's money. The remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre is not bad. It is a very good horror film. The ending was I think unnecessary, however.
Rating:
Summary: A well-done remake
Review: The original Chainsaw was made in 1973 and the events in the film took place in 1973; therefore, the audience will always have the feeling of aunthenticity in the original film's atmosphere. The remake, on the other hand, is sort of like a technical upgrade of the film. The sound is better than the original and Jennifer Biel's performance is very convincing. But then again, the female actor in the original film was also brilliant.
Rating:
Summary: Holy Poop I was terrified
Review: I am a scarey movie fanatic I watched them alone and am fine with it but once i saw this i still have nightmares about Leatherface. Hes freaking terrifing after the movie i was shaking and i loved every second about it I find the story very scarey and intresting but i can't find the actual true events any where any way i'm off topic i loved it and if you loved scarey movies you will too>>>>>
Rating: 
Summary: Stupid.
Review: An insult to the original. Not scary at all. The original is scary, this one isn't. got it.
|
