Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1

    Did anyone else dislike the new The Hills Have Eyes?

    I feel like I am alone in not liking it all that much.

    Sure it had the gore and there was a loaded gun pointed at a baby, but I still felt something was missing.

    Won't say too much else unless someone else gave this film a view this weekend and wants to discuss it further.
    Back and more bearded than ever before

  2. #2
    I saw it opening day on friday. I thought it was actually pretty good, considering it didn't have very much plot. Sadly I don't remember the original all that well, so I'm not even sure I ever saw it. The ending was annoying though, but expected.

    AGENTS OF ATLAS - Returns in Early 2009.

  3. #3
    Yes, there were quite a few people who laughed/yelled at the end of the film. Not sure if those laughing hated it or just laughed at the dumb way it ended. Really, I would have been more surprised if they didn't do the binoculars effect as I was expecting some shock at the end of the film.

    I liked the violence and secretly wished while watching the film that the pacifist/baby's father would have killed more of the mutants, especially the big head leader fellow and the mutant children.

    I'll probably end up owning the film in the future, but I wanted something more from this remake. Right now, I believe I am chalking up my dislike for character issues. Such as the brother and sister blowing up the trailer...I do believe I made a good impression of Mr. Rolleyes during that scene

    I wanted something more with the mutants, too. Just sort of faceless villains that I think could have been improved if there was some exploration into their characters.

    Right now I'm advising my friends to rent The Devil's Rejects instead. Much better gritty/violent film.
    Last edited by James Boba Fettfield; 03-11-2006 at 10:43 PM.
    Back and more bearded than ever before

  4. #4
    scruffziller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    The frozen tundra of Scandinavia
    I watched the original about a year ago. It was rather lame. It was nothing more than a modern western. A wagon train breaks down in the middle of the desert and they are being attacked by surly natives living in the mountains.......... {zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........} I could watch the same movie with my dad from his massive shrine to "The Duke".

    My dad is one of those baby boomers that if there was a 4th seat on the Godhead. It would go God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, and God the John Wayne.
    No matter how I die, even if there is a suicide note; it was murder. Cheers!

  5. #5
    Saw it yesterday and though I wasn't blown away it wasn't bad. I didn't leave dissatisfied. One thing for sure it was a hell of a lot better than the original, though it didn't seems a creepy. I do think it was lame how stupid the ex-cop dad was. He walked right into the trap.
    [FONT=Tahoma]I was born at night, but not last night.[/FONT]
    You Shouldn't believe everything that you read.
    (Like my posts)

  6. #6
    the original hills have eyes. is more grosse and violent then this remake could ever be. calling it a western is dumb. all the past 1970 movies that hollywood is remaking are still better than the ****ty remakes there doing could get away with more things. now were such a lame politically correct society. the new films want to grosse you out with blood and guts . But not mess with you. that's what the origianl did. it scared the crap out of when your taking that weekend trip through las vegas or arizona. this movie would pop up in your head. now we get to look forward to a stranger is watching, another remake of hitchhiker. halloween and friday the 13th. they won't live up to the originals. because hollywood and the studios are going to kill the industry with crap instead of getting someone to use there imagination for everyone will be hoping a monster comes through my computer and eats me. Oh crap i just thought of something hollywood could be making a remake of poltergeist with dakota fanning.

  7. #7
    I don't know. How long has it been since you saw the original? It really it's that gross. I mean sure the rape scene was more intense, but overall it wasn't gross. The idea was creeper then, probably because it was new.

    On another note I think the New Dawn of the Dead blows the 70's out of the water.
    [FONT=Tahoma]I was born at night, but not last night.[/FONT]
    You Shouldn't believe everything that you read.
    (Like my posts)

  8. #8
    It did pretty good at the box office also. Managed to snag 3rd place with $15.5 Million. Even though it opened on a lot less screens than the two top money makers. It's effectively paid for it's production costs. Which means we'll likely see a sequel in time.

    1 N Failure to Launch Par. $24,600,000 - 3,057 - $8,047 $24,600,000 $50 1
    2 N The Shaggy Dog BV $16,024,000 - 3,501 - $4,576 $16,024,000 - 1
    3 N The Hills Have Eyes FoxS $15,500,000 - 2,620 - $5,916 $15,500,000 $15 1

    AGENTS OF ATLAS - Returns in Early 2009.

  9. #9
    While the trailer attack scene was tense, brutal, and unrelenting, I found myself ultimately bored by the end of the movie. Maybe I've become too desensitized to extreme violence and situations. Maybe it was the minimal, paper-thin plot that failed to catch my attention. I can't say for sure, but I do know that the movie overall didn't do much for or to me.

    Now, with that said, there were a few truly f-ed up moments. Watching the mutant run his fingers on Brenda while grunting in an almost-orgasmic tone was pretty creepy...creepier than anything else in the attack on her. Also, the scene between Lizard (the mutant) and the older sister when she walked into the trailer was pretty out there too. Lastly, that scene with Doug locked inside the refrigerator was nasty too.
    "The boy you trained, gone he is...consumed by Darth Vader." - Yoda, Revenge of the Sith

    Yodasnews Review Archive:

  10. #10
    While not the best movie I will see this year, I certainly can't say that I disliked it. As far as remakes go, it is definitely better than the original. Of course, that's not saying much as the original is a POS in my opinion, a real cornball piece of work. I hadn't seen it since I was a kid so I bought the 2 disc collector's edition a few years back and I find it pretty lame. I don't see what's so great about it, I thought Craven did a better job with Last House.

    That new Pluto was awesome, he reminded me of a cross between Sloth from Goonies and Jason from F13th part 4.

    I wish I could say that I liked Robert Joy in this movie but I didn't. All I could think of was Charlie from Land of the Dead.

    Nice work by Aaron Stanford as Doug, though. That guy annoys the hell out of me in X-Men but he was pretty good here.

    Quote Originally Posted by maatu
    that's what the origianl did. it scared the crap out of you.
    It scared the crap out of me? Funny, I don't recall that, I just recall how lame and overhyped the "classic" original is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbowars
    On another note I think the New Dawn of the Dead blows the 70's out of the water.
    Now I know who's really been hitting the crackpipe.

    Quote Originally Posted by JJB
    Which means we'll likely see a sequel in time.
    I can only hope that if that is the case, they won't use THHE2 as a template for the sequel because that first sequel they did is THE WORST sequel I have ever seen in my life.

    That's one thing I was hesitant about, that Aja used so much from the first movie for his remake because as stated earlier I don't think the original is very good to begin with. But I give him credit for punching it up in some areas where it was needed.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO