The Hills Have Eyes Movies

[emperor26]

Anyone has seen the original, or the remake of Wes Craven's horro movie?

To be honest, I never saw the original at all, since I wasn't born when the movie was relased. In fact, I only know the remake based on it.

Speaking of which, I saw the remake on DVD, and I enjoyed the movie all the way to the end, which still puzzles me about whether the remaining Carter family members actually survived or not.

Hopefully, the upcoming sequel would be better like the first one.

[CG]

I'm not entierly sure if discussion on this kind of horror movie should be permitted on this forum or not. Unfortunately, I don't have the power to temporarily close threads; so we'll just see how things pan out here. But we shall be watching.

[derangedperson]

I've never seen the original, but the remake blew me away. The ten-minute attack scene in the middle is EASILY one of the hardest parts of any movie that I've ever had to watch. The guy that directed it (Alexandre Aja) also made Haute Tension. SEE IT.

[scary_dream]

Meh, it was ok... It seemed like it still followed the "gore and skin shots" values of the early times, though. Don't get me wrong, a good horror movie NEEDS gore most of the time, and gore/skin shots are what made the early horror films great, but audiences today have a hard time being sustained by gore and flesh alone with just a skeleton plot (unless they're a younger audience). I'm not talking down to anyone, though, it's just younger audiences just tend to be more enthralled in testing their limits of what they can and can't stand to watch because they're coming of age. However, I think since they truly planned on making this movie for a broad audience, I think there was actually too many "money shots" so-to-speak, like they were thinking "Hey, this 5-minute shot has NO gore in it! Let's squeeze some in, even though it doesn't contribute to the story at all."

Horror, to me, just doesn't come from gore alone.

Plus, I'm always a fan of an original movie more than I am of a remake... heh, but that's just me.

[Mr. Marshmallow]

Originally Posted by scary_dream

Horror, to me, just doesn't come from gore alone.

That depends on the horror movie itself actually. Movies of every genre are designed to do something different, and not all horror movies are designed to be scary. There are more "gore horror" movies coming out these days actually.

People love gore or at least some generation of fans do. Some people enjoy being grossed out and with films the likes of "Hills have Eyes" "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and practically anything made by Quentin tarantino and Robert Rodriguez.

It's no shock people get drawn to gore and guts. I personally though prefer to have movies that ACTUALLY scare me, which being someone who's seen so many horror movies, it's harder and harder to find.

Only horror films that scare me these days are the Japanese remake ones like "Ring" and "Grudge", those have given me genuine chills and seriously make me more nervous when looking at something simple as a TV set or the dark.

[scary_dream]

Yeah, you're right, I suppose a lot of the gore in horror movies today is for shock value more than anything, which is why there are a lot of torture/gore movies that have come out/are coming out recently.

I'm with you... psychological eerie stuff scares me more than "AHH SEVERED ARM!"

The original Japanese version (not the American remake) of The Grudge freaked me out quite a bit... it was creepy because everything happened in bright light when you weren't expecting it at all, and when the TV set froze on the news reporter's face to make it look distorted... *shudder*

The American one was good, too, but the Japanese one was just more surprising because seriously almost everything happened under daylight or halogen lights, not flickery dark rooms like in the American one.