Revisiting the Hills Pt 1 (The Hills Have Eyes, 2006)

In the early part of the aughts, studios started to remake Wes Craven’s films. To a certain extent, this was, I believe, an attempt to give Craven more financial benefit from his work. He was tangentially involved in these films as a producer, they were all written and directed by different people.

The Hills Have Eyes was probably a good place to start. It is a film known mainly to fans of Wes Craven and horror. However, a lot of people in the mainstream are likely to have simply heard the name.

Bringing in Alexandre Aja to write and direct. He had made a real impression with 2003’s High Tension, and honestly, was probably a strong choice. High Tension was part of the French Extreme trend in horror where stories could be messy and plot twists do not make sense. Here, the extreme violence of his work really is at home.

The core story is there. A family is on vacation in their RV. They go on a detour to shorten their drive time and the car appears to break down. They discover there are other people hiding in the hills and those people attack them and kidnap their baby. And then the family must fight back.

The original film is about a family from civilization versus the feral family. The film plays up the family divisions, with Big Bob’s tough Republican versus Doug’s “weak Democrat” played up big time. In fact a lot of the film is devoted to Doug becoming a violent badass. This is not an exaggeration. Doug goes from a guy barely able to think of using a gun to hand to hand violent killer. The film is pretty good at manipulating the viewer, because Doug is trying to save his baby.

The remake’s biggest alteration is that the feral family are ravaged by radiation. They are basically mutant monsters. Visually, this is really effective, though it loses something to make the Jupiter family outright inhuman monsters.

This is a decent remake and I think gorehounds will find it enjoyable.

October 24, 2020 0

The Original Haunted Palace Rebuilt (House on Haunted Hill, 1999)

1999’s remake of William Castle’s House on Haunted Hill began a series of remakes of mid to late 1950’s horror films. This one keeps the core idea. An eccentric rich man and his estranged wife throw a party, offering a million dollars to whomever lives through the night.

Stephen Price is an amusement park owner with a rather disturbed relationship with his devious wife Evelyn. She wants a party thrown in the restored Vannacutt Psychiatric Institute for the Criminally Insane. Years ago it was run by Dr. Vannacutt who performed ghoulish and cruel experiments. One night his patients revolted, violently killing the Dr and his staff. The Doctor’s last act was to set of a mechanism that locked down the entire facility and set it ablaze, killing all but five employees.

After dumping his wife’s party guest list for his own, Price does not notice the list changes yet again. When the guests arrive, both Stephen and Evelyn are shocked as they do not recognize them. Everyone is greeted by Pritchett, the nervous caretaker who tells everyone just how many people have died there. He wants his money and plans to leave. He refuses to stay in the asylum overnight. But he gets trapped with the confused guests: movie executive Sara, athlete Eddie, disgraced reporter Melissa and the Doctor Blackburn. Everyone has secrets and deceptions. When the planned horror get overtaken by the ghosts and demons of the fortress it becomes a battle for survival.

Geoffrey Rush does a great job as the Vincent Price inspired role of Price and his poisonous banter with with Famke Janssen’s Evelyn is every bit as biting as in the original film. This part is almost purely lifted from the original film, especially the dialog.

The changes from the original allow for surprises and while the heavy use of digital effects are somewhat dated, they do some creative things. The dark spirit that represents the house is made of human bodies intertwining to create a unique shape. Jeffrey Combs has no lines, but his diabolical doctor is effectively chilling.

The addition of the asylum backstory allows for a creepy vibe, as well as the updated addition of how the guests were selected. Chris Kattan is the primary comic relief, and I found his Pritchett to have a bit more vibrant of a personality than in the original.

The remake also manages to give the audience information a bit better than the original, relying on in story moments rather than talking heads. The film also opens with the asylum revolt, turning into an unsolved mysteries type of show (hosted by Peter Graves!) story about the devastation, which is very well done.

Overall, House On Haunted Hill is a pretty effective remake, both fun and exciting.

October 24, 2017 0

Fear of Santa Claus Part 6 (Silent Night, 2012)

In this 2012 remake of the original film, Santa has something he was missing in the first film. A freaking flame thrower.

The film opens right away with Santa killing an adulterous couple. He then shows up at the front door of a greedy little snot and kills her. Yeah, we see the killer off a kid in the first ten minutes or so. Jaime King is a deputy in a small town with about one hundred Santas, so you know it is going to be hard to find the one in the creepy mask killing people.

This film is largely about the kills. The original has it’s cult following for some of it’s kills (including using deer antlers-repeated in this film). But here they are far more elaborate, and bloody. Fargo’s wood chipper has nothing on this film. And a flame thrower. Santa has a flame thrower.

Unlike the original, this film opts for a mystery. We are not given the killer’s identity right from the start. We do not know his or her motive. And this is one of the more effective parts of this remake. A lack of discernible intent often makes for an effectively unnerving movie monster.

The cast here is pretty decent. Malcolm McDowell turns in a performance that admittedly is more about it being Malcolm McDowell. King is dependably sympathetic. Donal Logue is pretty entertaining as a lazy Santa who tells kids stuff like their parents might sell their gifts on Ebay and that you cannot trust parents.

One area where the film follows the original is a general undercurrent of sleaze. McDowell’s police chief even wonders just when the town got so sleazy. In place of mean nuns, there is a lascivious pastor. He seems like a creep from the get go when he tells King’s deputy that he will do anything to help her. There is a local porn industry, drug users, adulterers. Sometimes this works in the film…other times it feels like a cheap excuse for nudity

In certain respects, this is a far better film than the original or it’s sequels. But that is what they call damning with faint praise. The positives are about even with the negatives, and that is not enough to make a film worth the time to watch.

December 10, 2016 0

Confusing Christmastime (Black Christmas, 2006)

This movie is why people hate horror remakes.

Seriously, they tossed out the things that work and add in…uh, a backstory. One of the most unnecessary back stories ever. See, now the sorority house is Billy’s old house, and that is why Billy came back.

Except, now Billy is not alone. Apparently his daughter/sister (don’t ask) is in the house and has been for awhile. Cause somebody is killing the sorority girls while Billy is still locked in the asylum. See, the film does not reveal the sister/daughter until after the killings begin, so it is totally confusing.

The film is just a mess, and truthfully, the cast is not all that memorable in their roles. The characters are far more generic feeling. Bitchy Girl, Drunk Girl, Nice Girl, Weird Girl…the cast feels like it was culled from the WB. Probably cause it was.

There is an added “eyeball torture” aspect and a happier ending. Nothing added to the remake improves upon the original, and everything skipped is that much more noticeable.

December 11, 2015 0