Topic: The Hills Have Eyes '06

So after watching the 'Evil Dead' and 'Maniac' remakes recently (both of which I enjoyed), I thought I should finally watch 'the hills have eyes' remake, as everyone always seems to rave about it...

It was god awful. Does anyone agree?

The nuclear mutant freaks looked like they were taken straight out of the Goonies.. and every time something ‘scary’ moves past the camera they put a music sound effect on it.. it's the type of effect that only works on the assumption that its audience is stupid. Overall, It just didn't seem to have much respect for the original...

After watching it I remember why I'm usually so against remakes. I just think the 2000's were a bad decade for horror remakes in general. I think it's because it was a studio trend that was more concerned about making a profit than paying homage to the original.. I wonder if that shitty phase is over with now?

I'm curious to know what other actual horror fans think of it?

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Thank god someone else thinks the same as me!! I prefer the original. The 2nd one felt unnecessarily gory and ott. I'm not a fan of Aja though. He is over the top and rarely do I find his stuff redeemable. I do like Switchblade though. First watch I was disappointed but watched it again and enjoyed it more.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I preferred the remake over the original. 

I watched the original at a theater and was pretty damn scared throughout it's entirety.  Given I was about 15 at the time.

The remake was better IMO because it was:  hard hitting, violent, gory. And that's the kind of horror film(s) I prefer. I will say that #2 was crap!

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I liked them both, but preferred the original. It's been a while since I've seen either of them (especially the remake last time was in theatres) so it's tough for me to compare them. I'd have to watch them back to back to have a more fleshed out opinion. Even liked the sequel to the '06 remake.

Generally speaking I like remakes of old horror movies, but almost never do I prefer them to the original.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I thought the original was good, but not great.  I really enjoyed and prefer the remake, though.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Alexandre Aja. Enough said.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

UltraViolence wrote:

Thank god someone else thinks the same as me!! I prefer the original. The 2nd one felt unnecessarily gory and ott. I'm not a fan of Aja though. He is over the top and rarely do I find his stuff redeemable. I do like Switchblade though. First watch I was disappointed but watched it again and enjoyed it more.

I would direct them kind of criticisms at the Eli Roth brand of filmmaking myself. Though THHE's was gory and hard hitting it also had some great performances by some of its actors - especially Aaron Stanford as Doug Bukowski so I could actually relate and feel for the characters - unlike in a Eli Roth film. Don't forget that the effects were done by veteran effects artist Greg Nicotero - personally I thought they were therefore above acceptable, pretty good in fact. Great cinematography by Maxime Alexandre also really helps to build up the atmosphere.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

remake was so much better, i grew up with original movies and i thought they sucked back then and i thought with the new twist better gore and inbred creatures was so much better.craven cgave the idea and it was improved in my opinion, i dont say that much in remakes but this was one of them, like the thing carpenters was much better.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Well I wouldn't say the original Hill Have Eyes 'sucked', just greatly improved by the remake. Though there are a lot of remakes which either add nothing to improve on the original like the evil dead remake in my opinion.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Vasquez wrote:

Well I wouldn't say the original Hill Have Eyes 'sucked', just greatly improved by the remake. Though there are a lot of remakes which either add nothing to improve on the original like the evil dead remake in my opinion.

ok it did not suck, i was being i bit strong lol, but it wernt good in my opinion, and it was improved now and i prefer what they have made out of it now. wink

i thought friday 13th was boring, but the remake was so much better, but i never did think the original was much cop.What they did with it now was so much better and looking forward to next one.but i was never a fan : :

Last edited by plan_9 (2013-05-25 15:36:00)

11

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I never usually prioritize the story, cause for me the events in the story were basically identical to the original anyway (they rape the girl, eat the bird, steal the baby etc etc. only this time they do it with fake rubber masks oh my!).

I want to see how they reference and expand on stylistic nuances... I kind of think the hills have eyes '06 just took the plot structure and altered everything inside it to make it look like a typical Hollywood kind of horror film (and throw in a twist and you got a new movie!). It didn't seem to have any aesthetic memory of the original, instead I think it was trying to forget and replace the original all together. hence why I think it didn't really respect it.

but yeah, each to their own wink

also the original Hills Have Eyes is a classic dammit!

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Vasquez wrote:
UltraViolence wrote:

Thank god someone else thinks the same as me!! I prefer the original. The 2nd one felt unnecessarily gory and ott. I'm not a fan of Aja though. He is over the top and rarely do I find his stuff redeemable. I do like Switchblade though. First watch I was disappointed but watched it again and enjoyed it more.

I would direct them kind of criticisms at the Eli Roth brand of filmmaking myself. Though THHE's was gory and hard hitting it also had some great performances by some of its actors - especially Aaron Stanford as Doug Bukowski so I could actually relate and feel for the characters - unlike in a Eli Roth film. Don't forget that the effects were done by veteran effects artist Greg Nicotero - personally I thought they were therefore above acceptable, pretty good in fact. Great cinematography by Maxime Alexandre also really helps to build up the atmosphere.

Completely confused.com about this comment and it's relation to mine big_smile

I didn't find it hard hitting at all though. Just gore and torture. I think it was the sexual violence that annoyed me.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

i like both versions but the 2006 one is better and among the few remakes that better the original. both the original " Hills have Eyes 2" and the remake are baaaaadddd.

Last edited by wolfman1959 (2013-05-26 13:43:09)

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I love both but I liked the remake better. Pretty much the same movie, but the remake is more violent and a lot darker.

15

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

hmmmm very interesting... I was gonna watch the Last House on the Left remake and the I Spit on your grave remake too.. I've never seen them.. but now i'm kinda put off... are either of these any good?

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Personally I think the original LHOTL and ISOYG are far superior to their remakes, but I believe I'm in the minority.

17

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

so much remake love around here! If anyone says that they think the texas chainsaw massacre remake is better than the original I think my head might explode...

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Udo wrote:

hmmmm very interesting... I was gonna watch the Last House on the Left remake and the I Spit on your grave remake too.. I've never seen them.. but now i'm kinda put off... are either of these any good?

IMO The Last House on the Left remake is better than the original, but honestly I've never been a fan of the original. I respect it, but that's about it. I thought the remake was better in almost every way. On the other hand, I thought the original I Spit on Your Grave was better than the remake. The remake didn't really go all the way like the original did and just came off as weak IMO. Still thought it was a decent horror flick though.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

I thought The Hills Have Eyes remake was great, but only because the original film wasn't that good. Of course, the plot and story are great but it wasn't executed as good as it could have been.

I thought the second one wasn't as good as the first obviously, but still wasn't bad.

On that point, I wouldn't mind a third film.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Suspiria_89 wrote:
Udo wrote:

hmmmm very interesting... I was gonna watch the Last House on the Left remake and the I Spit on your grave remake too.. I've never seen them.. but now i'm kinda put off... are either of these any good?

IMO The Last House on the Left remake is better than the original, but honestly I've never been a fan of the original. I respect it, but that's about it. I thought the remake was better in almost every way. On the other hand, I thought the original I Spit on Your Grave was better than the remake. The remake didn't really go all the way like the original did and just came off as weak IMO. Still thought it was a decent horror flick though.

i'd agree with the comments on last house on the left, i did not like the original at all and the comedy moments with the cops were just stupid. the remake is much better. I also didn't like the original " I Spit On your Grave" thought it cheap, nasty and boring but i like Camille Keaton who is a facebook friend of mine, nice lady. i preferred the remake of that too. who said i'm completely against remakes? i'm not, something that has always happened in film and in our genre but there's just too many unnecessacery ones these days.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Udo wrote:

so much remake love around here! If anyone says that they think the texas chainsaw massacre remake is better than the original I think my head might explode...

I dont think there is remake love here, just a recognition that though yes, the genre has become over saturated with a lot of unnecessary and bad remakes in recent times there are actually also quite a few good ones.

I think The Hills Have Eyes and I Spit On Your Grave are good examples of where a remake can improve on a original film where this approach has potential. If you gonna remake a film why not take one that has some good creative ideas and elements but wasn't executed as well as it could have been as a whole - The original Child's Play for example, though a decent film could be improved quite a bit with a remake.

Films like Texas Chainsaw 74 are pure and deserving classics of the genre, so yes I don't see the point in remaking them. The remake I HATE most is Day of The Dead. SO BAD!. The TCM original is my N1 horror film of all time and Day number 2 so I think that explains my reasoning.

Last edited by Vasquez (2013-05-29 17:03:33)

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Udo wrote:

hmmmm very interesting... I was gonna watch the Last House on the Left remake and the I Spit on your grave remake too.. I've never seen them.. but now i'm kinda put off... are either of these any good?

Again i liked both version of Last House on the Left, but the original is much better, and much more disturbing. The new one is still a kick in the groin, but it's done with sandals, the original is more like a steel toed boot to the nuts.

Haven't seen I Spit on Your Grave remake, the original was ok but nothing to great. I have the remake and I'll watch it someday when I have the time again.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

Udo wrote:

If anyone says that they think the texas chainsaw massacre remake is better than the original I think my head might explode...

At one point I would have said that I think the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake is better than the original.  When it came out (the remake) I loved it and thought it was a great movie.  Yes, I know it is hated for the most part around here.

Re-watched it a while ago, and didn't understand what I saw in it.  Still a solid flick, but not what I remembered.  So, I'd say IMHO the original is better.  No need for your head to explode.

I liked Hills 06 more than the original.

Personally, I want them to stop making remakes, especially of the classics.  However, they aren't going to.  So, I will end up seeing some (avoiding many) and will acknowledge if I like it.

24

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

They should only remake a movie if they do a good job... ha. and in that sense I think anything could be remade. though, the better the original the harder it is...

Herzog's Nosferatu.. sooooo good.

Re: The Hills Have Eyes '06

^Yeah that is one of the finest remakes around. It manages to retain the class of the original, and yet add something of it's own. The end is a little OTT.