The 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is infamous for being one of the very few films to receive a zero-star review from critic Roger Ebert. While The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a truly iconic horror series, like many long-running franchises, some installments are much better than others.
The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a truly iconic horror film. I can still vividly recall the terrifying sounds – a door slamming open, then the sickening thud of a hammer hitting bone. It was a nearly impossible act to follow, and film critic Roger Ebert likely would have wished the filmmakers hadn’t attempted a remake.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Is A Remake Of The 1974 Classic
The 2003 film The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a remake of the 1974 original, and while it follows a similar story, it includes some new changes. Like the first film, it starts with a group of young people driving through the Texas countryside when they pick up a hitchhiker.
The meeting quickly turns disastrous, and Jessica Biel leads the group of teenagers in a desperate escape from the terrifying Leatherface. The movie is filled with gruesome scenes – skinning, dismemberment, and over-the-top acting – but ultimately feels like a pointless remake of the original, lacking a compelling reason to exist.
Roger Ebert Gave The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) One Of His Rare 0-Star Reviews
Throughout his career, film critic Roger Ebert rarely gave a movie a zero-star review, reserving it for films he found both poorly made and deeply offensive. As he explained in his review of Death Wish II – a film he dismissed with a blunt “Nothing!” – he only awarded no stars to movies that were both artistically flawed and morally objectionable.
Roger Ebert was even harsher when reviewing The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. He described director McG’s film as “vile, ugly, and brutal,” and bluntly stated there was absolutely no reason to watch it.
If you’re still considering watching it, his closing statement should change your mind: “There are plenty of good movies out right now… and this isn’t one of them. Don’t waste 98 minutes on it.”
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) Was Critically Panned Though It Has Its Supporters
Roger Ebert wasn’t alone in disliking the 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Many critics felt it relied too heavily on gore and offered predictable, uninspired scares. A common complaint was that the film was simply unpleasant and needlessly cruel.
Horror films should aim to frighten and disturb viewers, maybe even give them bad dreams, but they shouldn’t feel malicious or deliberately cruel. Film critic Roger Ebert and others pointed out that The Texas Chainsaw Massacre almost seems angry at the audience for watching and wants to punish them for it.
I have to say, I really appreciate that this movie tried to do something different and wasn’t just a beat-for-beat remake of the original. It had a certain style that I enjoyed! But, honestly, Roger Ebert didn’t seem to feel the same way. He seemed pretty over the whole Texas Chainsaw Massacre thing – and that includes this sequel, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning – way faster than they even made the movie!
Read More
- Heartopia Book Writing Guide: How to write and publish books
- EUR ILS PREDICTION
- VCT Pacific 2026 talks finals venues, roadshows, and local talent
- Gold Rate Forecast
- Lily Allen and David Harbour ‘sell their New York townhouse for $7million – a $1million loss’ amid divorce battle
- Battlestar Galactica Brought Dark Sci-Fi Back to TV
- Simulating Society: Modeling Personality in Social Media Bots
- How to have the best Sunday in L.A., according to Bryan Fuller
- January 29 Update Patch Notes
- Composing Scenes with AI: Skywork UniPic 3.0 Takes a Unified Approach
2026-01-29 16:58