Subject: I have found a DVD that I think you would enjoy
|The Hills Have Eyes 2|
Actors: Daniella Alonso, Jacob Vargas, Michael Bailey Smith, Michael McMillian, Jessica Stroup
Director: Martin Weisz
Genres: Horror, Science Fiction & Fantasy, Mystery & Suspense
National Guard soldiers stop at a New Mexican outpost only to find the isolated camp mysteriously deserted. Little do they know that these are the very hills that the ill-fated Carter family once visited, and that a tribe ... more »
Similarly Requested DVDs
These Hills are flat...
Alan Draven | Montreal, Canada | 03/25/2007
(1 out of 5 stars)
"A group of National Guard rookies is sent to assist some scientists for an undisclosed project at a remote location in the desert. They soon find themselves stalked by a group of vicious mutants.
Let's make one thing clear, this isn't a good movie, folks. It has none of the gusto, cool cinematography, stylish directing, and well-written screenplay of last year's remake of the original. Where the remake by Alexandre Aja actually surpassed Wes Craven's original, this sequel is totally uninspired. Once again, an interesting premise (albeit overly used in the past; Aliens, Resident Evil, etc) completely wasted on a bad script. The actors weren't very good either, for the most part. Save for three characters, I didn't give a damn about the group of soldiers (they're actually National Guardsmen). The directing was average, no pizzazz, no flashy camera tricks. The movie was predictable and didn't bring anything new to the genre. The suspense element was reduced to nil. The mutants were all huge brutes and pretty much resembled one another as opposed to the different personalities of the ones in the first film.
The only thing this movie had going for it was a handful of clever and inventive kills. The gore was minimal and the violence level was average; nothing we hadn't seen before. Skip it in theatres and wait for the DVD if you're morbidly curious. Go rent (or buy) the first one instead. Horror sequels are almost always bad and the recent ones (Ring 2, Grudge 2, Saw 3, Texas Chainsaw: The Beginning) were all sub par. I'm hoping they won't go for a third Hills movie after this one because it's bound to flat line at the box-office."
I have no idea what everyone's complaining about
Raul Duke | Pittsburgh | 01/22/2008
(4 out of 5 stars)
"If you've seen the original(not the 70's one. different story), you should already know the basic concept. theres a huge plot of desert land that the governemt used as a nuclear weapons testing area. the people living in that area who refused to leave became horribly disfigured from all the radiation. over time the people lost their sanity and became more like animals, killing and eating any normal people that come near their hills.
the disappearances been going on for a while at this point, so theres some scientists investigating the area. when a small national guard squad comes through the area and discovers the corpses, they decide to take action into their own hands. bad idea.
i read some complaints about the whole concept. like, how could some deformed backwoods guys take out a whole squad of armed soldiers? i found the situation relatively believable as things progressed. these hills and mines are their home. these creatures know their environment, and they use it. their stealth and timing pays off, taking out one soldier at a time, never revieling themselves to too large of a group. besides, these soldiers arent even done with training. they were sloppy, and they lacked experience.
a lot of people complain about a lack of suspence, but this movie had more moments that made me jump than the original. there was one really clever kill. i dont want to give anything away, but that guy died very slowly.
the whole breeding concept is really twisted, and the rape scene deffinitely was kind of disturbing, but its not like they gorified the idea. these "people" are monsters. they kill with no remorse. they eat normal humans. this helped communicate their lack of humanity. although it could've been a shorter scene.
overall it felt more like a really twisted, brutal action movie than a horror movie. i really dont understand what everyone's problem is. if you liked the first one, you should like this one."
John Lindsey | Socorro, New Mexico USA. | 04/23/2008
(3 out of 5 stars)
"Two years after the horrifying incident with the Carter family, a militant group of soliders search out in the New Mexican desert for a lost research facility and scientists that been missing. They soon discover as they pass beyond a hill lies the lair of the flesh-eating crazed mutant hermits that inhabit the area.
Entertaining and violent sequel to the suprisingly good 2006 remake of Wes Craven's 1977 cult classic "The Hills Have Eyes". This movie just happens to be a slight improvement over the disappointing 1985 "Hills Have Eyes 2" but this time without the dumb dog flashback sequence like in that movie, this movie does have some gruesome moments like heads blown off, a brief rape sequence, cannibalism and such. It's more action horror then it's suspenseful precessor from Alexandra Aja, sure the acting would have been better including some dialog but this is an enjoyable sequel.
This DVD contains some fine extras like a Featurette from the FX Channel, When Mutants Attack Featurette, Deleted scenes, a trailer for the first installment, Birth of a Graphic Novel featurette which gives viewers an inside look at the Graphic novel prequel to 1 & 2, gag reel, alternate ending and the making of "Hills Have Eyes 2" featurette."
These Hills Aren't Steep Enough
Sebastian Sanjurjo | Miami FL | 12/16/2007
(2 out of 5 stars)
"This sequel to the 2006 horror remake the hills have eyes falls flat and sadly it never gets up. Everything that made the first film triumphant is completely absent here. The movie begins with a group of National Guard rookies arriving in the same desert of the first film. Only this time they know there is a threat. Like the first movie they get killed one by one. Sure enough there is more gore and guts..... So what exactly is wrong with this movie? Well for starters there are no scares, there are no surprises. The whole movie feels formulaic. Whereas the first one kept you on the edge of your seat; here everything is pretty much predictable. And the funny thing is that you can tell the actors worked hard... but still the movie feels pretty mediocre. Another bad thing about this one is the rape scene, unlike the first movie were the rape scene never got to the real thing, here it's pretty explicit and way to long, that almost made me turn the movie off. So you're advised that this one has much more violence, less scares, more gore, and a rape scene. I wouldn't recommend buying this one unless you're an avid fan of the first one, other than that just rent it.
MY PERSONAL RATING: 2 OUT OF 5