The Hills Have Eyes (2006) Official Reaction Thread

Discussion in 'General' started by Peter Vincent, Mar 7, 2006.

  1. DrHerbertWest

    DrHerbertWest For Your Health

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Word.
     
  2. killit

    killit Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    ATX
    It wasn't very good in my opinion. Kind of a joke, maybe it would make a good blockbuster night.
     
  3. ZoSo

    ZoSo The Fucking King

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Corning, NY
    I enjoyed the flick quite a bit... I really dug the way it started... with the brutal pick-axe slaughter and then the dragging of the bodies... great start. Had some other uneasy scenes that were hard to watch also... the burning scene (especially when Doug pulled the body down and it slammed on the ground, and the smoke came out of it's mouth...ow), the rape scene (even though it wasn't too graphic, it was very believable, due to the young girl's acting. Very convincing fear)

    The shotgun suicide was great. Reminded me of Maniac. The nuclear test town, and the crater of abandoned vehicles were nice touches. The town gave me a little reminder of Tourist Trap, with all the mannequinns.

    The few things I didn't like have pretty much already been touched on... I didn't like some of the actions of the characters... Big Bob shooting into the darkness at the gas station (granted, he just saw a fucked up suicide, but he was a cop his whole life and knows how to handle situations...) Bobby determined to find who stole mom's body.... and when he finds Papa Jupe, he runs like a little bitch firing the gun every which way (like father like son?)... the mutants leaving Doug's bat right there... I also didn't like the obvious 'Lizard's not dead, DUH' part... I also thought the ending was a little too happy.. the music really killed it for me too... the ending had corny triumphant type music, and it seemed very out of place... like it would fit better in a gladiator type movie like Gladiator (duh) or Troy, etc... The binocular ending was kind of lame also. Just let it end.

    Overall though I really liked it... It did justice for a remake. Much better than my last theatre experience (The Fog UGH).

    I will definitely be picking up the DVD!
     
  4. RyanPC

    RyanPC Guest

    It seems to be popular as I've been hearing a lot of good things about this one in school. And when the girls tell me it is "too gory" that is also a good thing. Hopefully I can see this tonight. :)
     
  5. slinker

    slinker Un-Holy Force.

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    London
    I thought it was very good and i enjoyed it more than the original :)
    few things i would have done differently but then thats my vision.
     
  6. Paul0889

    Paul0889 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2002
    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    has anyone noticed that the movie has pretty much stopped being advertised? i haven't seen any tv spots since march 10th for it at all. it's as if fox searchlight doesn't have any hope for the movie anymore or either didn't spend enough on advertising or something. look at the when a stranger calls remake. i saw probably hundreds of tv spots for that even a week after it was released.
     
  7. BloodMan

    BloodMan Kill Time B4 It Kills You

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,442
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    I don't know why they'd not think there is hope for it... it has to date made 28 million dollars... almost double its budget. I'd be happy. :)
     
  8. DrHerbertWest

    DrHerbertWest For Your Health

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,004
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Now that I think about it, I saw a LOT of promotion right before opening weekend and then it did kind of drop off. However, it might be because of how well it's doing. I don't know what spot it's in with the rankings, but I'd assume it's doing fairly well, like Bloodman said.
     
  9. RyanPC

    RyanPC Guest

    Just got back from seeing this. Here are my thoughts, but this post contains spoilers. If you haven't seen the film yet, needless to say, you shouldn't read on:

    Aside from a few scenes near the end, it was almost exactly the same as the original. Same structure, same characters. They even went so far as to make the actors resemble the ones in the original film, not just how they look physically, but how they act as well, which is a touch that I truly enjoyed. But that could also be because the script is pretty much ripped from the '77 version. However, the last twenty minutes or so were too MTV-style for my taste. High Tension didn't have any of these moments, what happened? Is Aja copping out by including these quick-cut shots to try and "scare" the audience? Those didn't work for me. Another thing that didn't work were the deformed psychos. Yes, they were creepy but for the most part they looked ridiculous and kind of took me out of the film for a bit. I swear one of them resembled Jason Voorhees without his hockey mask.

    The Hills Have Eyes was blessed with great cinematography and great locations. High Tension wasn't a fluke; Aja really knows what he wants to do with the camera and how he wants his film to look, and he has a very distinct style. The music is also noteworthy, as it is one of the best scores for a horror movie in quite a while.

    The best thing in this film-- which is, in fact, also the best thing about the original film-- is the main rape/attack sequence inside the trailer. It is much gorier and brutal this time around, and I think it hit me harder than the same scene in the '77 version did. When the young mother had her brains blown out and blood splattered against the trailer walls, my jaw about hit the floor. Earlier on in the film, I noticed a group of girls sitting in the theater with me, giggling in the rather squirrelly way that young girls do. They laughed at any old thing in the film that tickled their fancy, but when this scene came up, they promptly shut up for the remainder of the movie. It's a very sad, emotional, and nervewracking sequence that seems to work no matter what decade the film is made in.

    The changes that were made to the script made sense, and were better executed than in the original. However, I still find myself preferring Craven's version over this one. The actors in his version were better, the grittiness of the desert was on much better display, and the very end of the movie was better. Lost in this version is the whole "sinking to their level" philosophy; in the original, Doug observes what he has done and realizes that he is no better than they are, but in the new version Doug simply kills the final cannibal and moves on to meet with the remaining members of his family. To me, it cheapens the film.

    Another aspect that cheapens the film are the scenes added in solely to instill an "oogey" feeling into the audience, like the scene with Doug trapped in the freezer with the dead bodies-- scenes meant to cater to our own personal fears, but don't quite work. Sure, it's gross, but nothing more than that.

    Overall, it was a well-executed horror film that retains most of what made the original so successful, but also loses some very important aspects that could have aided in making the film more powerful. I wouldn't call it disappointing, because for 3/4 of the movie I could have sworn I was watching the original-- it's that close. The ending is what it always was, yet the film veers off in a somewhat different direction to make it there. But when faced with a decision in the future on whether or not to watch the original or the remake, I would most definitely go with the original.
     
  10. Grim

    Grim Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    Messages:
    7,726
    Likes Received:
    155
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Personally I thought the acting in the remake was leaps and bounds ahead of the original. I usually don't hold bad acting against a lower budgeted film, which I won't for the original Hills, but most of the actor's talents in the original were kind of lacking, especially the mothers of both families. The remake had such greats as Ted Levine (who I think should've won something for Silence of the Lambs) and Kathleen Quinlan, and new rising talents like Aaron Stanford, and then some good B/character actors like Billy Drago (however underused he was) and Robert Joy. Just my opinion though, to each their own.
     
  11. betterdan

    betterdan Guest

    Great review Ryan and I agree as usual with you.
     
  12. studio1

    studio1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    uk
    I agree, great review Ryan.
     
  13. This remake fucking ruled! Excellent all around!! I saw it Tuesday and.....WoW!
     
  14. RyanPC

    RyanPC Guest

    I did like the acting in this one, but I didn't find myself to be as involved with the characters. Sure, there was a bit more character development in the remake but the characters just weren't likeable enough, with the exception of maybe the mother and the girl with the baby. In the original, I liked all of the characters. Case in point: the character of Doug. In the original, he was a likeable guy and you wanted to see him make it out alive. In the remake, I could have given two shits about that character, especially after the seemingly endless, over-the-top beatings the cannibals deliver to him. All I could think was, "Just fucking kill him already!" The kid who played Bobby was okay, even though I detest the whole "emo" image he was trying to convey. The Brenda character wasn't developed enough and I nearly forgot about her. The usually-great Ted Levine didn't have much of a part, plus he wasn't really recognizable at all. Yet as much as I didn't identify with the characters, I did get caught up in their plight and became concerned for them.

    Unfortunately, the sense of "family" with the cannibals was lost, which diminished the whole question of "Are we really better than they are?" In the remake, the cannibals were pretty much mindless, deformed creatures. In the original, they actually used a bizarre form of teamwork to get their dirty deeds accomplished, which made them seem more realistic in my eyes.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 23, 2006
  15. zep

    zep Guest

    scary movie 2

    :fucked: scary movie 2 brilliant here take my strong hand. i dont know what this is but i lick it anyway
     
  16. Alien Redrum

    Alien Redrum New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Derry
    Maybe spoilers, maybe not...




    Excellent observation. It seems that the scene was missing something that would have made it completely unsettling instead of just nasty. I'm wondering if he had shortened that scene just a bit, it would have worked.

    That was pretty much my biggest problem with the remake. I enjoyed it a helluva lot, moreso than the original, but I wish the cannibals weren't just zombieesque and more human.
     
  17. onebyone

    onebyone Guest

    I was surfing DVDEmpire and saw listings for the theatrical release and unrated release for this movie. If they are right, this is coming out on 6/20/2006. They have the unrated release as shorter than the theatrical cut, but I really hope that is an error on their part.

    Edited to add: Amazon has the same runtime as they do. It was like 107-108 minutes in the theater. Surely that 101 minutes for the Unrated Cut is in error. :nervous:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 8, 2006
  18. fceurich39

    fceurich39 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,232
    Likes Received:
    697
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Ira's Toys store
    it should be an error and their is hardly any features how come the long making of the movie isnt on the dvd surely fox wont fuck up my and probably alot of other most anticipated dvd releases of 2006
     
  19. fceurich39

    fceurich39 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,232
    Likes Received:
    697
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Ira's Toys store
    also that may not even be the official cover art for the dvd either
     
  20. walkingdude

    walkingdude Megatron

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,463
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Nova Scotia Canada
    Me too.I'll lick it anyway.
     

Share This Page