Badmovies.org Forum

I saw this today and it is an exceptionally worthy remake.  In many ways, it remains faithful to Wes Craven's classic original, but it is much more brutal and relentless.  Highly recommended.

Hmmm, I dunno....

I'll wait and see what other's think.

I wanted to see this really bad today buy my gf hates horror flicks. We saw 16 blocks instead. One thing funny though..I was waiting in line to get the tix and a kid about 12 or so told some girls he was with "We probably don't want to see it anyways, who is going to believe that Hills have eyes?" I about reached over and slapped him!! HAHA!!  Ahh to be young again....I will be going to Slither alone for sure!!!!!

THE BOSTON GLOBE gave it a good review . . . said it "completely obliterates" the original.  They may be right.  VARIETY also gave it a good review.

Trust me . . . this isn't your typical rushed, crappy remake.  Wes Craven was invloved and the guys who made HIGH TENSION (another excellent horror movie) were responsible for it.  The camerawork and editing are excellent and the suspense and violence are riveting.  And there is much more gore than you would expect.  

Maybe best of all is the make-up on the mutants . . . it's obvious that the make-up artists studied real people with genetic defects before they made this movie.  Don't wait . . . go see it.  

I, on principle, am against any remake of a great Wes Craven movie.

Like i said before, I am very leery.  If I can see it cheap, I'll go/rent/borrow, but thats all.  Its not my favorite genre, and I really like the original.
-Ed

Remakes are not a genre I like very much either.

Specially 2000s ones.

Sweet Jesus....I just came back from seeing it.  Take Burgo's advice and see it ASAP.  

I'm fond of the original, but this just completely blew it away.  It doesn't play by any rules set by other horror films and seems out of control during it's entire running time.  What amazed me the most was how much Aja got away with when it comes to violence.  This film is gory as hell, and has a lot of scenes I would never expect to see in an R rated film today.

My wife and I were the only people in the theater when the movie started.  About 5 minutes into it, a group of 11-12 year olds walked in (or snuck in).  At first, they were laughing whenever someone said a curse word.  Then, during the attack on the trailer, I heard every one of them get up and leave.  I have no doubt that they are now scarred for life.

Go see this film.  Excellent excellent excellent piece of work.

Hmm, I getting kind of interested now, since the guy who did this was the guy who did the Dawn of the Dead remake.

Let me interject some additional info here.

For those of you who have read my other threads over the years, I am NOT a big fan of remakes and I am DEFINITELY NOT a fan of current movies, in general.  I think that the industry as a whole took a turn for the worse after the late 1970s.  I am very much opposed to the industry's current reliance on CG effects and MTV-type camera work.

That being said, I am VERY surprised that this movie is so good.  Of course, there are people out there who worship the original and will be totally against this remake no matter how good it is.  Believe me, I love the original.  I've seen it about 10 times.  I own the DVD.  But sometimes you just need to admit that a remake can be as good as (or better than) the original.  Such is the case with this movie.  Don't condemn it before you see it.  It is one of the best movies of its kind to be released in a long, long time.  It is a high-energy, non-stop thriller.  And Skaboi is right.  This movie looks much more like NC-17 territory than R.  Even if yoiu hate the movie, you'll be impressed with the gore.  

Burgo,

The only problem that I had with it was the first five minutes or so.  The writing about the nuclear tests was fine, but then the first scene felt out of place compared to the rest of the film. The desert in the first scene even looks nothing like the rest of the film.

I had a bad feeling though with the first shot of that scene with a CGI fish running through a small river.  I was starting to wonder if Aja had given into our American sensibilities and used CGI throughout the film, but as you mentioned, that's not even remotely the case.  Everything here is latex and absolutely stunning to look at.  Not to spoil anything for the others, but there is one of the family members who is in a wheelchair, and once you see him, you will be amazed at how well the latex was done in this film.

It's hardcore to it's bone from beginning to end.  I'm going to start calling Aja's films, "Ulcer Films".  Both this and Haute Tension are so stressful on the viewer that it feels like you'll have an ulcer by the end of it.  That is great filmmaking.

I know you dislike remakes as well Burgo. But that doesn't mean we'll nessacrerly agree on both liking a remake.

But I do believe in if "Burgo (or any other person that dislikes remakes unless it's a surprisingly good remake) likes it then it must be a good remake."

I think I will try to catch it but when it hits the dollar fifty theater.

Well, I just looked it up and it looks like HHE got raped by the new Sara Jessica Parker comedy and the new Tim Allen Disney remake.  This is pretty damned sad.  Parker's film made 24 million while Hills only made 15 mil.  WTF!?!?!?

I was hoping that the film would have a good box office and have other films start following it's balls to the wall violence and gore quota.  Word of mouth could possibly save this film, but a the moment it looks like it will only break even.  That, my friends, is a shame.

Well, give it time; word will probably spread.  Flicks like that SJP masterpiece open strong (is 24 mil even a strong opening anymore?) for a week or two due to marketing and hype, but they tend to have no staying power.

I know you know this already, Skaboi; I'm just re-emphasizing it.

Ulthar,

Yeah, I hope the film does have some staying power.  If not, it'll probably do the same thing as most horror films, which is make money on DVD.  It never fails to amaze me how a horror film will bomb at the theater and then make buckets of cash on video.  I guess that most people just don't care to see horror films in theaters anymore.

Skaboi:

Again, I agree.  The movie does have a few problems (but EVERY movie does - - even my favorite movie THE GODFATHER had shameless continuity errors).  HILLS sure isn't perfect.  In fact, without giving anything away, there is a certain scene near the end of the movie that made me groan because it is SUCH a horror movie cliche.  But I still give the movie a solid recommendation.  THE BOSTON GLOBE rated it 3 stars out of 4.  I'd say that's about right.

If you're in the mood for a good bloodbath, this movie certainly delivers!

Burgo,

I know the exact scene you are thinking of.  I just knew the character was going to do what he did, and exactly what would happen afterwards.  Wow....that was vague.

Skaboi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ulthar,
>
>  it'll probably ... make money on DVD.
> It never fails to amaze me how a horror film will
> bomb at the theater and then make buckets of cash
> on video.  I guess that most people just don't
> care to see horror films in theaters anymore.
>

I was thinking about DVD sales just before I read your post, which made me wonder: are the major studios looking at DVD sales as a means to recoup investment, or is the focus TOTALLY on Box Office?

Weren't there a few articles in 2005 about WHY folks are not going to theatre anymore?  The teeny-bopper factor helps keep us away from the theatres, and that is generally magnified at horror flicks.  Pretty much the only time we go see one on the big screen is at the drive-in.

I can remember the days when the audience was an integral part of the (positive) aspects of going to the movies.  But nowadays, with talking, cell phones and general anti-social behavior, plus the crowd and traffic, I just don't care that much.  And in my younger days, I would routinely go see 4-5 movies per week (or more) and sometimes more than one per day.

ulthar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can remember the days when the audience was an
> integral part of the (positive) aspects of going
> to the movies.  But nowadays, with talking, cell
> phones and general anti-social behavior, plus the
> crowd and traffic, I just don't care that much.
> And in my younger days, I would routinely go see
> 4-5 movies per week (or more) and sometimes more
> than one per day.


First off, that's alot of movies a week.  Sweet.

Secondly, poor box office is a trend at the moment everywhere, and add to that the fact that you can practically buy a home theatre system for a few thousand, there's more and more people looking to view at home.  I mean, I wouldn't say that nowadays there would be much more talking, in general or on mobile phones than there would have been years ago, and I'm pretty sure there's the same amount of anti-social behaviour at any cinema so I don't think that's the case.

I'm also assuming the viewing experience at the cinemas is pretty different here than in the states.  

Plus I guess alot of people are getting sick of how the hollywood system is pumping out a lot of crap recently.  It's kind of hard to get people excited about going to the movies when you know that they just want to make money, and don't actually seem to care about making something good for once.  A relatively cynical audience doesn't seem to help sales I guess.


Anyways, I'm excited now for The Hills Have Eyes, but sadly I'm pretty certain it won't be released here for a long while now.  Very excited.  

For some reason there isn't as many 'blockbuster' good movies I want to see this year, so it's always good to have a film like this to look foward to.

The original is a masterpiece of horror that SHOULDN'T be remade.

I'd rather eat my own liver than watch this film, or ANY remake of a horror classic for that matter.

Dean - its meant to open in Melbourne March 23. I've seen the trailer a whole bunch of times & I'm really looking forward to it.

And am I the only one that thinks Craven is incredibly over rated?!? He's had more misses than hits over the years, but people seem to hold him in high regard.

Wes Craven is a master of horror, and he is ten thousand times more talented than Alexandre Aja.

And remakes suck.

Mitch:

I also believe that Craven is overrated.  He made 2 "breakthrough" films (THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and THE HILLS HAVE EYES), and a few other decent movies (such as the original NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET), but he has also churned out a lot of crap or near-crap (such as DEADLY FRIEND, SHOCKER, THE HILLS HAVE EYES PART 2, etc.)

He has definitely made some very influential and trend-setting movies, but I think his "just okay" movies and his "not good at all" movies outnumber his "classics."  (Similar to Tobe Hooper, whose entire career is defined by THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, and the fact that Spielberg "tossed him a bone" with POLTERGEIST.  Most of his other movies are forgettable).

But HILLS and LAST HOUSE are still two of my all-time favorites.

Burgo: I agree with you about comparing Tobe Hooper to Craven. Two directors who broke into the movie business in the early 70’s, both with controversial independent films, who then managed to build patchy careers with uninspiring projects (with one or two exceptions, such as the original ELM STREET).

It was only last year that I finally had the opportunity to watch LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT - it was banned for many years here in Australia. Whilst it's very rough, you can't deny the rawness & power on screen & it’s reputation is well deserved.

I’d also add …

Craven’s SHATTERDAY episode from the 80’s TWILIGHT ZONE as one of his “better than average” projects.

And Hooper’s SALEMS LOT – I haven’t seen it since it aired in the early 80’s, but as a kid this scared the crap out of me! I probably should watch it again sometime. This film & TEXAS CHAINSAW were Hooper’s best films in my book.

As for POLTERGEIST – well it looks exactly like a Spielberg film, it sounds exactly like a Spielberg film & it feels like a Spielberg film. But I guess we’ll never really know, despite the conflicting set reports & interviews from key crew members when asked “who really directed Poltergeist?”

<>

Yeah. A whole lot of people said 'Oh yeah, Tobe directed it!' and then other people said 'Steve had a ton of input' or worse 'Steve just told Tobe what to do'.

"the guys who made HIGH TENSION were responsible for it"

Whoa, glad you said that.  Now I know not to waste my money for a ticket.

Hey Burgo, I think Deadly Friend is a neat little movie. I wouldn't rate  is as "near crap'".

Man...Deadly Friend scared the crap out of me when I was younger.  I remember catching the film on a local station around 88 or so.  At the time, I was pretty young and I remember it started off with the guy and a robot.  At that point my 5 year old mind was captured.

Then...the guy puts the chip in the chick's brain and I remember being scared from there on out.  I remember being too scared to watch anything after the point where she kills her father.  It's funny how much horror films scared me back in the day, and how much I love them now.

Cheers Mitch, I've seen the posters pop up, but haven't seen a trailer for it yet [either on TV or at the movies, but that's probably because I'm not watching alot of TV at the moment, and I've missed the previews at the last few films I watched.]

Good to know it's not a long wait.

"Whoa, glad you said that. Now I know not to waste my money for a ticket."

Except that HIGH TENSION is one of the 3 or 4 horror movies made in this decade that is worth seeing.  Maybe you should save your money for something really good, like the next FRIDAY THE 13TH or NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET movie.

OK, I wasn't gonna go see this but now after reading all this I can't wait...but then again I felt the same about Hostel and then got sucked in by the hype enough to spend my money.  I can't imagine being THAT disappointed, but I don't want to get too excited for it and come out feeling jipped if you know what I mean.

General hype is different from a recommendation from both Burgomaster and Skaboi.

Loyal1:

Trust me, this movie is MUCH better than HOSTEL.

Ulthar:

Of course, now that I stuck my neck out and recommended it, I will need to prepare myself for the wrath of those who see it and think it stinks!  At least some professional film critics have been giving it good reviews, which almost never happens for horror movies (and especially remakes).  So I'm not alone!

See, everyone always bashes Hostel, but the main thing that I enjoyed about Hills was the main thing I enjoyed about Hostel.  Both films just feel so "unhinged".  You don't trust the directors to 'keep it safe'.  Both films feel like they're jumped the tracks and are out of control.



Spoilers Ahead!!!!

Take Hills for example.  It starts off fairly brutal, but nothing you haven't seen before.  Everything seems fairly tame until the gas station attendant blows his brains out.  That one scene, including the shot of the now decapitated guy is where the film starts to go out of control.  At that point, you know that Aja isn't scared to show you anything and that it's going to go beyond a normal R rated film.

Hostel had something similar.  Everything is tame, including the first torture that we see, where one of the main characters has a drill go through his leg.  Roth doesn't show the actual act of torture, so he sort of sets up the viewer to expect a light amount of violence.  Then, everything goes out of control later on when you see the same guy being sliced up ala an autopsy.  You know then that Roth isn't screwing around.  From there, things just get more and more violent and gory, and you don't know exactly what dark places Roth is going to take you.


End Spoilers!!!!



It is unfair to compare Aja and Roth though.  Roth is a good horror director, but nothing compared to Aja.  Aja just has a way of drenching each scene in tension and getting the most effect out of every character/situation.  The man is a pure artist when it comes to horror.  

Aja is a good director, but the resolution to 'Haute Tension' was a cop out. Up until then it was absolutely great.

As long as QT isn't directing the next Friday the 13th movie, you bet I'm going to see it.