this was a major disappointment compared to Aja's film. It had a few decent scenes but it mostly dragged on and on.

C-

Yep.

"GIVE ME A BABY!!!"

I want a spoiler for something. Do they mention what happened to the characters from the last one in this one? My fear as soon as the first ended was that if they made a sequel they'd end up mentioning the characters from the first one and that they didn't make it, and I didn't want that since I actually gave a damn about them and wanted them to live. Otherwise I figured they'd have characters in this one stumble on their remains or something. It seemed unlikely they wouldn't mention them or would say that they made it. I'm hoping I'm wrong, but either way I want to know if they say anything about it in this sequel.

HHE2

I'm sorry to say I actually paid for this but I was in the mood for something gory that evening and I like McMillan, the actor. Anyway, the film isn't near as polished and deep as HHE but it does have some good fright moments but nothing overwhelming like in the first which I thought was on the verge of over the topness. This one actually seemed toned down actually and a bit tame. The story is throwaway. Some national guard troops get stuck in the same testing zone looking for scientists but run into the last remnants of the deformed freaks and have to deal with them. Good trumps evil of course and the final fight is really a good one. One moment I really liked was when McMillan gets crazed and smashes one of the freak's head to a pulp. That I liked. Again, the movie is pretty much str8 to vid level but it was good for one viewing if you like this stuff.

Grade - D

It's been like a week since I saw it and they were mentioned in the opening, but I think they said they lived and because of the stories they told people about the mutants, the place become like a.. search and rescue or something for the army? I don't entirely remember but it was something like that.

Napoleon really was sssooo cute.

A text bit at the beginning says they told the military, so they lived.

C+/B-


It is servicable. Not more, not less. I never felt bored, but I was also never really invested. I didn't feel for any of the characters at all, really. The movie never really tries to estabilish them either to to let the audience have any chance at sympathy with them. The gore is there and so is the action. The acting ranges from mediocre to bad. It's quite a step-down from a very solid "original".

That sums up most of my thoughts as well.

The script for this must have simply read

Walk Round
Swear a bit
Go into cave system
get sort of lost
Go to next cave system
swear some more and possible shoot at things
Go to next cave system
Get out and leave.

Forgivable if the characters and dialogue was sharp, pity they weren't

F

I actually thought the first half was pretty ok but when they got into the caves it all went downhill for me. Still not even worth saying it in the same sentence with the first one. C

THE HILLS HAVE EYES 2 - 5/10 (C-)

A very disappointing and lame follow-up to a very good remake. It's a shame the talented Alexandre Aja didn't have anything to do with this sequel since he did such a good job with the remake and a great job with his film High Tension. This seems as if it was written by a drunk frat boy. The dialogue is truly awful. There is no tension or character's to give a crap about. The only purpose this sequel serves is making the original remake look even better.

The saddest fact about this movie: Wes Craven wrote the awful dialog.

Seriously? I just can't believe it. I think he let someone else write it and he just said he did .

Wes Craven should stick to directing...

The Hills Have Eyes - well made, grimy, unsettling, shocking and intelligent. A genuinely pleasant surprise and one of the best horror films in years.

The Hills Have Eyes II - crappy, predictable, generic slasher flick that lost everything that made the first so great.

Applies to both the originals and the remakes.

For a second I thought your praise was for the sequel, and I was thinking you were off your rocker .

When I saw the 2006 version, I didn't expect to like it because most horror films these days aren't good. That film surprised me because it made me care for the entire family - the trailer scene is the best scene in any horror film in quite sometime just because of how fucked up it is. It isn't entertaining, just good filmmaking.

With Eyes II, Craven has pretty much thrown all of that out the window with the exception of the soldier who has a son back home. She's the only one I cared if she made it out or not. And to a lesser extent, Napoelon and the other girl (See what I mean?). Everyone else, not so much. The quicker they got off screen, the better, especially Spitter. Throw in a couple of stereotypes and a lisp and I pretty much wanted him dead within the first five minutes. He sadly lasts at least 40 more.

So is the film good? Does it matter? It's cheesy, the dialogue is awful, the cheap budget gets in the way sometimes (In a couple of scenes, you can clearly tell that the group isn't outside on the rocks, but in front of a blue/green screen) and the characters are standard military stereotypes. Then again, I don't care seeing as I came for the gore. The gore I thought could've been a little more bloodier - and I watched the Unrated version. There are good shots here and there of bodies split open, and a couple of good kills, both involving cliffs (The best invloves losing an arm), but it could've been slightly better.

And yet somehow, the film delivers a couple of good jumps, some good gore scenes, and that's really all I asked for. It's maybe a small disappoinment since it has Wes Craven's name on it, but then again, he did executive produce Feast.

B-

I expect a 3rd one, but direct-to-DVD like Wrong Turn 2: Dead End, which I guess is actually really entertaining.