The Hills Have Eyes (1977)'s comments

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

akuma587

Remake is actually way better, IMO.

13 years 9 months ago

There are two keys to understanding what Wes Craven wanted to express in The Hills Have Eyes. Within the movie itself, a scene where an eerie sound is shown to be the simple result of wind going through a water speaks to the mundanity of the "monsters" in this story. Behind the scenes, Craven based the film's script on the legend of cannibal Sawney Bean, which he viewed as illustrating how supposedly civilized people could become savage. So when a family gets lost in the desert and attacked by mutant hicks from the hills, they themselves eventually turn savage to defend themselves. This is why the the bad guys are killed in horror movie fashion, with sadistic traps and bloody knife blows, while the initial attack is more likely to feature guns and people coordinating on C.B. radios. So I get it, it's about turning the victims into the monsters, but it still left me a little cold. While there's some nice visceral film making when we are essentially in the caravan family's heads, any scene where we are instead in the hill people's only make them seem silly and over the top, defusing any tension the film actually has. It doesn't quite work as a horror film for me.

3 years 5 months ago

baraka92

If The Last House on the Left was a bad and stupid Virgin Spring, this is a bad and stupid Straw Dogs.

2 years 6 months ago

Oneironaut

Not one to normally say this - especially when it comes to horror movies - but I enjoyed the remake more.

I saw the remake before this, and if I could change things, I'd prefer to watch this version first.

All in all, decent enough even if a tad goofy. Not particularly fond of Craven's work, but I do appreciate his contribution to the genre.

12 years 2 months ago