The hills have eyes(1977) Blind buy?
03-09-06, 07:19 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: B-More
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hills have eyes(1977) Blind buy?
I noticed best buy has a 2 disc version of the original "The hills have eyes" Can anyone let me know if this is a good blind buy or not?
03-15-06, 01:04 PM
#6
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 2,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to disagree with the rent first posters. After LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, I think it's Craven's best film, and it stands up to repeated viewings. Just my lone voice shouting out from the wilderness.
03-15-06, 01:13 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depending on your tastes in film, I'd rent it first. It's definitely not a film for everyone. It's landmark horror cinema, but it was shot in the 70's on a very low budget, and it certainly shows. I own the 2 disc set, which is a very well put together disc. I've watched it twice since I own it, and enjoyed it a whole lot greater the second time I viewed it. For most people though, I can see why once would be enough. That's my two cents.
03-15-06, 01:43 PM
#8
70s exploitation horror is an acquired taste. If you like things like: Last House on the Left, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I Spit on your Grave, Driller Killer, Toolbox Murders ... well, if you like those I can't imagine you haven't seen Hills. If you're more a fan of the TCM remake and Craven's Scream ... you might want to rent first. I like Hills, and own that DVD set. But it's not for everyone (even if you're a horror fan already).
03-15-06, 09:33 PM
#9
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
I'm a huge horror fan and have always felt Hills was a pretty mediocre film. And seeing it again years later on dvd to give it another chance have not changed my opinion
I would definitely rent it first.
And since Last House was mentioned. I thought that was superior than Hills in terms of directing,pacing and entertainment value alone. It is highly entertaining and disturbing,twisted fun I think and is never dull. Meanwhile "Hills' felt like Cravens heart wasn't into the material as much as he claims. It just never showed onscreen for myself,and the pacing is quite lacking.
I would definitely rent it first.
And since Last House was mentioned. I thought that was superior than Hills in terms of directing,pacing and entertainment value alone. It is highly entertaining and disturbing,twisted fun I think and is never dull. Meanwhile "Hills' felt like Cravens heart wasn't into the material as much as he claims. It just never showed onscreen for myself,and the pacing is quite lacking.
