Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

whats your views on this movie?
i didnt think it was disturbing has people made it out to be,..still a good flick though

About as overrated as "LHOTL", if you ask me. It was just goofy.

yeah it is overated but i still found it enjoyable
im gonna check out 'last house on the left' to see if its any good
shall i even bother?

Most everyone else thinks it's golden, most because it's Craven's first movie. It's totally amateurish, and like "The Exorcist" gets attention for the shock value, while the story is sacrificed.

I saw just so I could have an opinion on it, I didn't plan on enjoying it to begin with.

im one of those people who really enjoyed the exorcist
last house on the left does look crap but i will check it out anyway.....it cannot be as shocking as the french flick ''irreversible'' the worst rape scene ive eva saw in my life and plus the head bashin scene made me feel sick
have u saw it cine?

It's stupid, but it's fun to watch from time to time.

have u saw the new movie called detour?
its a 95 percent carbon copy of the hills have eyes..the only difference is that it is much funnier

A truly disturbing movie is the film Haute Tension

Wes Craven recycled a large part of The Last House On the Left and put it in A Nightmare On Elm Street.

i love a nightmare on elm street
classic

So I've heard elsewhere too...it's nice to see Gianetto De Rossi back to what he does best!!!

I never knew The Hills Have Eyes wes supposed to be disturbing and shocking.........

good flick.........but I admit probably won't be enjoyed by the movie watching masses. Same goes for LHotL...........you won't be getting your big budget, special effect blockbuster ala Terminator 2.

Then again........one of the most beautiful and artistic films of all time goes unappreciated today......2001 : A Space Odyssey. People have become to jaded by films in the last 20 years or so..........instead of going to a movie to get inside a director's head and see his vision.......they just go to eat popcorn.

and yes.......people on this very board have talked down about 2001......which is why I don't take too many people's opinions on here seriously. There is a difference in my mind between cinema and your basic flick. Cinema implies art and vision........whereas flicks like T2 imply selling popcorn and making money.

"The Hills Have Eyes" is as pedestrian as "Last House On the Left" was amateur cinema. They were first attempts, and it shows. Both being dated, which may or may not be Craven's fault, are their biggest flaws, and I don't know if they were intended to ever be taken seriously. The plausibility of them, compared to other horror at the time would say they were supposed to be. "Hills" was just too silly a premise, having just seen it now, and "Last House" was really college/film school material. Shocking at times, sure, but the approach/exectution was so campy, I couldn't take it seriously either.

As for "2001", that's a whole different beast. Personally, I thought it was pretentious, like other Kubrick flicks, not to mention slow of pace, and WAY too "dark", both in content and actual set design. Nothing popped out, it was vanilla, IMO. I didn't just "not like it", that's for sure.

All that said, you can't/shouldn't dismiss peoples opinions if they have legitimate reasons for disliking movies. I know this place is chockful of casuals, but there is a solid contingent of those who are diverse, and can appreciate both the fantastic and the fluff that have been produced over the years. It's just knowing your subject matter, and being able to distinguish real genius from real garbage, and giving credit where credit is due.

2001 space odyssey is stunning to watch but it is really slow paced and kubrick just seemed to show off with his beautifulyl designed sets....the film hooked me in at the start then just started to bore me....its just the cinematograph that is stunning

as for haute tension..it is a great film but the ending annoyed me slightly

C-dic.......like the stories or not.......both LHotL and The Hills have Eyes offer the viewer exactly what the director wanted to express.......

sure...you may have wanted more from the movie that you didn't recieve........but that's not the way cinema works. You take what the director want's to give you......it's his mind, his vision.......if you are dis-satisfied with that.......fine. Don't like the movie. This doesn't make the movie bad in any way, shape or form........just means that what you wanted in the movie is not the same as what the director wanted to put out there.

A person may look at the Mona Lisa and proclaim that it's a poor painting as the subject material is rather bland and there are even a few imperfections. Others may look at the Mona Lisa and proclaim it to be great as it puts across the mood and feeling the artist wanted it to.......same goes for movie making.

There are many movies I consider bad........only by my opinion as I do not enjoy them. There are very few movies that I would consider to be "technically" bad.........and those movies are the result of studio interference or demographic marketing which result in the director's vision being changed to suit others........basically watering it down.

Interesting, mind giving some details? I've never noticed anything in common between the two (aside from the obvioius naming of the main villains, and the fact that it has to do with people being killed).

Evil dead you are so right, just about every person I know thats around my age, somehoe hates movies older the 15years, some of them come with the stupitest reasons, erm the sound is not good, to little bass in it, so the movie sucks, or the picture quality has stupit bad colors, i dont even want to watch it, these are the kind of people that dont know a good film when theyt see one, instead they go see AvP, The Hulk, Spiderman, T3, and stupit a$$ teenage movies, and call them masterpices, I dont know why most young people can't look for acting, story, dialog, masterful directing, movie message, and what eles when they go see a movie, looks to me like they are just looking for stupit Vin Diesel style action, well that how I see it

i havent enjoyed many new films for a while
i tend to watch old horror movies,
.the last three recent horror movies that i have thoroughly enjoyed are dog soldiers, 28 days later and haute tension and they have come from outside america

i think (refering to Evil Deads comment before) that lots of people dont appreciate 2001: A Space Oddesy because of the slow pace some of it moves at. still, it is one of the best looking movies of all time

I liked Dog Soldiers and 28 Days Later alot. Never seen Haute Tension before.

Nancy sets the same traps for Freddy in A Nightmare On Elm Street that the Collingwoods set for Krug, Junior, Sade, and Weasel in The Last House On the Left. The entire sequence is nearly identical between the two movies and if I am not mistaken, both Nancy and the Collingwoods devise the traps from the same book.

Ah, that's right! Forgot about that sequence. I remember noticing that when I first watched them both in the same day, forgot since then.

well i'll be, you do forget shit about horror movies....

has anyone saw the sequel to the hills have eyes?
well dont bother cos it is crap!

I agree but I thought the dog's flashback moments to the original's highlights were pretty nifty!

there are a few decent scenes within the sequel

From the dog's perspective...

yeah lol

What? Wait a minute.....no..............no I don't think so. Please give an exampe of why you would think that.

He already did, although i wouldn't call it a "large part". It was pretty trivial.

It is probably one of the larger sequences in the entire film.

traps are also set in the hills have eyes near the end of the film for the cannibals

The scene may have been a bit lengthier then others, but it's importance is pretty minimal in both flicks. Seems that it was more or less a time waster then anything else, seeing as the traps never really did much in either film. I still don't see these as being a large part of either movie...

Unless you are talking about actual length, in which case - sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes, I was talking about length.

Okie doke.

Saw The Hills Have Eyes last night. I didn't expect anything over the top, just along the lines of LHOTL. Got what I wanted, and I didn't have to sit through some debacle featuring the no-talent actresses that Hollywood is feeding us today.

I thought the hills have eyes was good it was one of craven better films better than the stuff he makes today.

this is being remade by the guy that made Haute Tension, chosen personally by wes craven

Just saw it today, I liked it alot.






hehehe The last post on this thread was 4/20

Well, I for one am a fan of 2001 and the first time I saw it, it was in one of the theaters called Translux Cinerama, which apparently do not exist anymore. From what I have found, there were several of them in the US and this one was in St. Louis, MO. Here are 2 photos of the inside showing the screens covered with curtains before a show. There were 3 screens and if you were lucky enough to get down near the front, you felt surrounded by them, similar to an Omnimax, only better, IMHO. There were also 3 separate film reels going at the same time, one for each screen.

http://hometown.aol.com/fastasyou7/images/trctmartin.jpg

http://hometown.aol.com/fastasyou7/images/trctneworleans.jpg

I managed to be down that far and the effect was totally awesome. One really felt that they were out there in space, too. When *forget the guy's name, sorry* was doing is jogging on that wheel, I thought I was going to throw up and had dizzy spells at the same time. It was very similar to a ride on a ferris wheel and everything was very three dimensional. I still love the film and the ones that followed as sequels but seeing the first one in that cinema was mind blowing!

Originally posted by Evil Dead


Then again........one of the most beautiful and artistic films of all time goes unappreciated today......2001 : A Space Odyssey. People have become to jaded by films in the last 20 years or so..........instead of going to a movie to get inside a director's head and see his vision.......they just go to eat popcorn.

and yes.......people on this very board have talked down about 2001......which is why I don't take too many people's opinions on here seriously. There is a difference in my mind between cinema and your basic flick. Cinema implies art and vision........whereas flicks like T2 imply selling popcorn and making money.

wrong thread?

No Deano, I was just answering Evil Dead's post regarding 2001 Space Oddesy, although it certainly could have been cross posted. Sorry....

Originally posted by Deano
wrong thread?

no probs

2001 is a great film, i made a thread on it