Tuesday, April 03, 2007
The Hills Have Eyes
Now first of all, don’t get me wrong. I’m glad horror movies are moving away from the “If this was a horror movie I’d be the first to be killed” kind of irritating, self-knowing bollocks. It was good for a while but has now run its course and it’s nice to see the movie industry acknowledge this. However, I’m getting increasingly pissed off with the number of pointless remakes. I know I gave a glowing review of the “Dawn” remake but this is the exception rather than the rule. “Hills” is a slightly different kettle of fish.
There have been a great many ‘broken down in the middle of nowhere to be attacked by cannibalistic mutants’ movies recently, most notably “Wrong Turn” which, for me, is the best in the sub-genre for a long time, presumably largely ignored because it wasn’t a remake. With this in mind, what is the point in remaking Wes Craven’s classic. They’ve not even had the courtesy to alter the plot in any way (at least “Chainsaw” tried), the family (including two dogs called ‘Beauty’ and ‘Beast’) break down and are attacked by cannibals, including one scene where a man bites off the head of the budgie. Even the nuclear sub-plot remains, the area used to be a test centre for the military.
There’s no doubt this movie is more shocking than the original 70’s movie, quite simply you can get away with more now. The first taste of the original I ever had was a creepy trailer that just zeroed in on the film poster with sound effects in the background, it made me think the film was too shocking to even see any of it in the teaser. In fact the movie is quite restrained, the complete opposite to the sledgehammer remake. We see pick-axes in the head, skewers through the neck, a face blown clean off with a shotgun. It goes on but none of those moments match the basic horror of the original where a man is force-fed oil and then burnt alive. You become de-sensitised to the violence, including a viscious sexual attack, that by the end of the film, there is a real feeling of anti-climax. There’s little or no tension and I’ve not even mentioned the plot holes that are bigger than the craters left by the nuclear detonations. How come it takes the father an entire day to get back to the garage, but within a few minutes of being attacked, the cannibals (are we to assume they can drive) not only get him back to his family, but tie him up and rig him up to explosives. How can one cannibal take a body from a car without two people, looking around them at all times, even hearing him (he even drags the body about a quarter of a mile and is feasting within seconds). If we’re to believe the newspaper headlines about mysterious disappearances and the police being baffled, how did they not stumble upon the test village populated by cannibals, or the massive car park graveyard in one of the craters? At least make it believable fellas!
In short, though I can’t say I hated this film, there are far better films out there made years ago for less money that deserve more attention. It’s all part of people’s obsession with re-makes (myself included, I always like to see how they plan to mess up another of my favourite horror films). I hate to bring this up but we’re expecting remakes of “The Evil Dead” and (I can barely bring myself to write this) “Suspiria” in the near future. Message to Hollywood, LEAVE US ALONE!!!
The Lucky ones get remade last!!!
"Beware the moon and stay on the path..."
