The second film directed by Wes Craven is a lot less impressive as his debut, the notorious Last House on the Left. But Craven can't really be blamed for that because he obviously was a lot more careful when he wrote the script for The Hills have Eyes. Last House on the Left almost destroyed his career before it even begun and the shocking character of that movie made him pretty hated among critics and producers. Craven obviously kept that in mind while working on the Hills have Eyes and so, the villains are a lot less "human" and it doesn't at all contain perverse -or even erotic - sequences.
Especially the character-building in The Hills have Eyes is a bit of a letdown, according to me. The villains are supposed to be a bunch of savage and cruel madmen, but they look pretty organised to me and they're overall rather 'normal'. The protagonists of the film - the entire Carter family - fail to impress. As a viewer, you never feel connected with them and you don't really care whether they'll make it or not. Michael Berryman really became the icon of the film and that is well-deserved. Due to his naturally inherited disease, he looks spooky and primitive. Casting him for the role of Pluto really was a brilliant idea. Other positive aspects of the film include the terrific use of settings and locations, the solid directing by Craven and the raw character of the film. Craven uses the hot and hopeless desert as a powerful tool of suspense and atmosphere and I guess that's the most perfect element in the entire movie. Even though I think The Hills have Eyes doesn't belong to the absolute top of horror, it's Craven's second best film without a doubt. I'm not a fan of his modern work and I truly loath Scream.
The Hills have Eyes recently received a special double-disc DVD edition which is a real treat for the fans. It contains fascinating commentary tracks by Craven himself and producer Locke. Besides that, the extra disc contains a documentary about the greatest directors in the genre in which they express their love and motivations towards horror. It's called the American Nightmare and I certainly recommend giving that a look as well.
Especially the character-building in The Hills have Eyes is a bit of a letdown, according to me. The villains are supposed to be a bunch of savage and cruel madmen, but they look pretty organised to me and they're overall rather 'normal'. The protagonists of the film - the entire Carter family - fail to impress. As a viewer, you never feel connected with them and you don't really care whether they'll make it or not. Michael Berryman really became the icon of the film and that is well-deserved. Due to his naturally inherited disease, he looks spooky and primitive. Casting him for the role of Pluto really was a brilliant idea. Other positive aspects of the film include the terrific use of settings and locations, the solid directing by Craven and the raw character of the film. Craven uses the hot and hopeless desert as a powerful tool of suspense and atmosphere and I guess that's the most perfect element in the entire movie. Even though I think The Hills have Eyes doesn't belong to the absolute top of horror, it's Craven's second best film without a doubt. I'm not a fan of his modern work and I truly loath Scream.
The Hills have Eyes recently received a special double-disc DVD edition which is a real treat for the fans. It contains fascinating commentary tracks by Craven himself and producer Locke. Besides that, the extra disc contains a documentary about the greatest directors in the genre in which they express their love and motivations towards horror. It's called the American Nightmare and I certainly recommend giving that a look as well.