The Hills have Eyes

[Wolf-J-Flywheel]

I really enjoyed this movie for some reason most other people I have talked to didnt really like it but its full of the things that I love Blood and Guts

[Dr. Briggs]

I guess with "blood and guts" you mean the remake? X)

Really, I think The Hills Have Eyes is a good example of a movie that could have used a remake, and though what we got wasn't perfect, it was a definite contender. For one it had good actors and a good (But not perfect, for reason I'll get into later) script, which made you really feel for the good guys in a way not even the original managed! On the horror side, suspense was built up a lot better in this one with the deserted town and the overall monstrous presence of the mutants (Pluto made me cringe the first time I saw him...). The action/choreography was good, grungy, and fairly tense: They actually kept up to par with the original trailer massacre! (I nearly shed a tear when the wife spasmed and Doug told her it would "be allright" )

On the other hand I felt the direction coulda been MUCH better. There was too much completely unnecessary, and even bordering on childish "speeding up" of action which could have been downright heartstopping if it was kept realistic. There were too many "fancy cuts", and almost completely generic music (With the exception of the techno one that sounded like a warning klaxon at the start and the old one with lyrics used during the intro). The other thing I hated was the fact that the mutants simply didn't seem explored enough; I wanted to spit when I saw the pussy version of Papa Jupiter, a wonderfully mad mofo in the original who was reduced to some stupidass sprinter!

[Friday The 13th]

I liked the Remake.

[Wolf-J-Flywheel]

Yeah thats what I'm talking about the remake it was awsome

[Dedman13]

Both version had their merit, and I feel this is a big compliment from me considering my feelings on remakes.

The new one was a great job as far as remakes go. On the positive side of things, there was more gore of course, and I feel like the acting was more in place than the original.

The original though, had more of a powerful and visceral impact. It may be because of the desensitization towards violence that I have built up over the years, but the rape sequence seemed more brutal and harrowing in the original.

And besides, the original gave us Michael Berryman...

[Friday The 13th]

why do most people hate remakes? :reddisgust:

[Dedman13]

I will start a thread on this!

[Dr. Briggs]

I will start a thread on this!

Should be lotsa fun!

And I think the scenes in both versions were about equal... Still in my opinion the remake had an overall much greater primal impact by the end besides the mutants being more "generic" personality-wise... In the original stuff felt too "weird" and cheesy, take the "aww shucks!" CB radio moment for example, or the dog actually taking down Pluto alone...

I agree about Berryman though, but I thought he was in One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest first (Admittedly, he was MUCH less interesting there if I remember )

[Friday The 13th]

To be honest if it weren't for the Remake, I would have never known of such film! lol

[Dr. Briggs]

I learned of a lot of good horror from Bravo's "Hundred Scariest Movie Moments" myself... Honestly after the doc I was disappointed in this one, but I did know of it

[Friday The 13th]

I still have not seen the original, but I think there comes a time when Remakes are a must! IMO.
I mean you gotta love those classics! But think about 50-100 years from now!
When nobody has ever heard of those films! A Remake can bring the old into the spot-light aswell!

[Maxx88]

exactly, some of them I haven't heard of until I look them up on Imdb.com

[Friday The 13th]

I agree

[Wolf-J-Flywheel]

Well put Friday

[Friday The 13th]

Ty Wolf-J

[dmihatmttl]

I usually either don't like remakes at all, or at best enjoy them once (i.e., something to do on a lazy Sunday afternoon when the wife and I haven't been to the movies in a while), but then never have any desire to see them again.

This one is one of the few exceptions. I watched it again last night for the first time in a couple years, and I had forgotten how much I *loved* it. I think THE HILLS HAVE EYES is one intense ride, and -- dare I say it -- genuinely *scary*.

Probably my favorite of the batch of remakes that's popped up the last 5 or 6 years.



J.N.

[Friday The 13th]

I usually do like Remakes unless it has to do with Rob Zombie <.<

[NicoleMayCanaday]

Just watched the remake & #2, and I have to say I was really hesitant to watch #2.

I *loved* the remake when I saw it in 2006. Such an on edge movie, the actors were brillant, the use of CG & makeup fx freaking smart, and who doesn't love the use of the dog as a hero (besides briggs lol)?!

So when it came to #2, I thought shit...they ruined it. I really fucking hate sequels. If a movie has a 2 in the title...I instinctively add "SUCKS" to the end. Why ruin a good thing? You did it right the first time, don't reinvent the fucking wheel to make more bucks. But there are some sequels such as Aliens, that were brilliant. IMO, this was one of them. The violence & gore is amped for one, but done necessarily & not just for the hell of it.

I wasn't sure how they would spin off from the remake, continue where they left off with the kids of the surviving family?? That seemed easy & disastirous for a movie direction. The military guard sent in to survey the land and eradicate any remnants of the Yucca, NV flats sector 16 was very clever & a bad ass route for the Cravens to take. Anything based on part fact & then blown up to a what-if horror story is good grounds...IMO.

Craven & his son wrote THHE 2 in a month...pretty outstanding. :bowow:

[mytee]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O76m3kpgPTQ"]YouTube - The Hills Have Eyes.TRAILER.2006[/ame]
Well of course the sequel sucked -they almost always do-the 2006 remake was one of those rare examples of a remake that's as good or better than the original-remakes usally arent as good-I like that they fleshed it out so to speak-but I did like the original version of "Ruby" a little better-the remakes version of Bobby and Brenda were much better than those whiny little("Bobby dont leave me") crap in the original

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdYas_8EDZM"]YouTube - The Hills Have Eyes Trailer[/ame]
I like Michael Berryman(Pluto) it's too bad he wasnt in the remake

[Dr. Briggs]

Just watched the remake & #2, and I have to say I was really hesitant to watch #2.

I *loved* the remake when I saw it in 2006. Such an on edge movie, the actors were brillant, the use of CG & makeup fx freaking smart, and who doesn't love the use of the dog as a hero (besides briggs lol)?!

So when it came to #2, I thought shit...they ruined it. I really fucking hate sequels. If a movie has a 2 in the title...I instinctively add "SUCKS" to the end. Why ruin a good thing? You did it right the first time, don't reinvent the fucking wheel to make more bucks. But there are some sequels such as Aliens, that were brilliant. IMO, this was one of them. The violence & gore is amped for one, but done necessarily & not just for the hell of it.

I wasn't sure how they would spin off from the remake, continue where they left off with the kids of the surviving family?? That seemed easy & disastirous for a movie direction. The military guard sent in to survey the land and eradicate any remnants of the Yucca, NV flats sector 16 was very clever & a bad ass route for the Cravens to take. Anything based on part fact & then blown up to a what-if horror story is good grounds...IMO.

Craven & his son wrote THHE 2 in a month...pretty outstanding. :bowow:

When I said doc I actually meant "doc," as in documentary, I didn't mind the dog being the hero... though I do think the humans could have done more >.> . And I find a lot of sequels to be worthy followups! I haven't seen Hills 2 (remake) but I think there are plenty of sequels that do do well! ...it's the very, very unpopular opinion, but I actually liked the original Hills Have Eyes 2 x.X .