SummaryThe story begins with five innocent kids on their way to checkout reports of grave robbing. As Sally, (Marilyn Burns) her invalid brother Franklin, and three friends head out to inspect the gravesite of her family, they are soon side tracked on the ultimate journey of terror. One by one, they wander into the murderous clutches of Leather...
SummaryThe story begins with five innocent kids on their way to checkout reports of grave robbing. As Sally, (Marilyn Burns) her invalid brother Franklin, and three friends head out to inspect the gravesite of her family, they are soon side tracked on the ultimate journey of terror. One by one, they wander into the murderous clutches of Leather...
Tobe Hooper’s The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is not just a film—it is a seismic event in the history of horror. It is unrelenting, unapologetic, and utterly transformative. It redefined the boundaries of fear and birthed an entirely new kind of cinematic terror. Before this film, horror was scary. After it, horror became traumatizing. It was the first film to make audiences feel true, unfiltered terror. People didn’t walk out of theaters—they staggered out, shaken, crying, and disturbed. That kind of reaction can’t be manufactured. It’s earned through something rare: honest, bone-deep fear.Unlike the gothic horror or creature features that preceded it, Texas Chain Saw gave viewers something far more disturbing—realism. It wasn’t about monsters in castles; it was about monsters next door, in the sun-scorched backwoods, wearing human skin and speaking in screams. Hooper’s film was primal, suffocating, and raw. It took horror out of fantasy and made it **** a shoestring budget, the film crafted a nightmare that feels like it was never meant to be seen. The sweat, the grain, the sun-bleached terror—it all bleeds through the screen. The result is a suffocating sense of dread, a fever dream of madness and meat that burrows into your mind and stays there. It didn’t ask for your attention—it demanded your **** legacy is immeasurable. Texas Chain Saw is the blueprint. Ridley Scott famously cited it as a direct influence when crafting Alien, calling it “a chainsaw movie in space.” That sense of claustrophobic dread, the unpredictability, the feeling that nowhere is safe—all drawn from Hooper’s hellish vision. Wes Craven, Rob Zombie, Eli Roth, and even modern auteurs like Ari Aster and Robert Eggers owe a debt to it. From The Hills Have Eyes to Hereditary, its DNA runs through decades of nightmares. Even filmmakers outside horror have studied it—because this film isn’t just about fear, it’s about how fear is **** no, not even The Exorcist—for all its polished, Catholic grandeur—reaches the same level of raw, psychological damage. Where The Exorcist was theater, Texas Chain Saw was a descent into madness. One was frightening; the other was **** you call yourself a movie fan—especially a horror fan—and you dismiss this film with a negative review, you’ve said more about yourself than you have about the film. You’ve exposed your ignorance of the genre’s roots, your lack of appreciation for craft, and your addiction to the sanitized, soulless sludge that’s been spoon-fed to audiences for the last two decades. You’re not controversial—you’re just loud, young, and painfully out of your **** Texas Chain Saw Massacre isn’t here for your approval. It doesn’t need your validation. It has carved its legacy into the bones of cinema itself. It was the first to truly terrify, and nothing since has equaled its savage, enduring power. It stands alone—bloodstained, defiant, and immortal.
Eu achei esse filme muito bom só que por exemplo em panico já começa com o ghostface matando uma menina,halloween já começa com o michael myers matando a irmã dele só que esse o leatherface demora mais de meia hora pra aparece e esse filme em si já tá bem datado e não envelheceu muito bem
While nobody could seriously call it a work of art, it was in my opinion a quite formidable piece of directorial artifice, a horror comic brought to the screen with frenetic energy and life.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is as violent and gruesome and blood-soaked as the title promises -- a real Grand Guignol of a movie. It’s also without any apparent purpose, unless the creation of disgust and fright is a purpose. And yet in its own way, the movie is some kind of weird, off-the-wall achievement. I can’t imagine why anyone would want to make a movie like this, and yet it’s well-made, well-acted, and all too effective.
On the face of it, it looks pretty amateurish but looking deeper the extensive dolly shots, moody imposing angles and intense zooms make for very original cinematography. It is so gritty and so ugly but it fits the content perfectly. It sounds messy and the music is ill timed at places but this adds to the believability and intense realism. Compared to the relatively soulless remake The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) which utilises much higher production-values I think that the sound and vision really complement the content. This is really scary and so intense considering the age of the film. It contains many memorable moments and you can understand why it spawned so many sequels which took the characters and turned them into eighties franchise clichés. This first film was totally original and brutally fascinating to watch. It is unrelenting. I forgot how amazing this horror really is. Although technically not perfect this is the perfectly constructed horror.
It kind of pains me to have to criticize this movie for not aging well. I mean it was made it 1974 for crying out loud and it's not hard to imagine how terrifying it must have been to people back then. Today however it's not scary in the least and can be rather boring. Sometimes it's even annoying. The excellent portrayal of the crazy, backwoods family is still kind of creepy and absurd in a black-humor sort of way. However outside of that and the influence it had on the genre there's nothing else that stands out about it. At least not in a good way. The pacing has aged mostly well, but some scenes just drag on for too long. Was it really necessary to have a prolonged section where Marilyn Burns is just screaming non-stop for several minutes? It's old-school filmmaking decisions like that which make the film kind of hard to watch today. It's definitely a classic of the horror genre. However it's just not one that's aged well at all. Due to it's legacy it's one I can say I'm glad I watched. I just can't say that I enjoyed it. It's a piece of horror history that any hardcore genre aficionado should check out. However doing so means putting up with a lot of issues brought on by age. Because of that it really is only for the most hardcore of horror fans.
I quite enjoyed the 2003 remake and the two prequels that followed afterwards so I kind of wanted to go back to where it all began and see what the original was like. Considering it's mid 70's I still managed to enjoy it and can see how effective this would have been back then, perhaps not so much now but still its a very well done Horror film, and was probably the first of its kind back then. All things considered its not a great film, but I'll give it props for still making me jump!