Fox Atomic | Release Date: March 23, 2007
5.0
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 126 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
42
Mixed:
35
Negative:
49
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
0
oliver1hMar 4, 2013
Utter fail on every level! It is not even as cheesy as some 60's or 70's movies, people watch for laughs. This movie is just simply bad. The acting, the story, the effect, everything is the lowest quality. Avoid this like the plague.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
TheQuietGamerOct 12, 2021
While I've never seen it myself, I'm aware that the sequel to the original The Hills Have Eyes, aptly titled "Part 2," has something of a disastrous reputation, with even Wes Craven himself reportedly disowning it. The prolific horror iconWhile I've never seen it myself, I'm aware that the sequel to the original The Hills Have Eyes, aptly titled "Part 2," has something of a disastrous reputation, with even Wes Craven himself reportedly disowning it. The prolific horror icon had a chance to right that wrong here in this follow-up to the 2006 remake though as he stepped into the writer's chair with his son Jonathan. Unfortunately, what we got only provides further evidence that despite a strong telling and even stronger retelling of that first story this property was never destined to become a long-running franchise.

Those hoping this would one-up the sick thrills of its predecessor may take some comfort in knowing that things get even nastier as we follow around a group of obnoxious soldier stereotypes that make the cast of of 2020's Monster Hunter seem charismatic by comparison. All of whom are unlikable, horrendously acted, spout the worst expletive-filled dialog ever put to paper, and make only the dumbest possible decisions in any given scenario. The action peaks VERY early on however in the opening birthing sequence that is so graphic and brutal it puts even the one in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning to shame. Most of what comes after is a lot of generic amputations and impalements that are brought to life by lackluster gore effects.

None of it is scary or disturbing. It's just gross, favoring icky porta potty kills and particularly savage rape sequences over anything legitimately clever or unsettling. It's all shock value that's as cheap and ugly as the often straight-to-DVD quality visuals are. It doesn't even get the look right as it ditches the arid desert scenery in the second-half for the mutants' homemade, ramshackle living quarters hidden underground that call to mind Platinum Dunes' 2003 reboot of the Leatherface family chronicles over The Hills Have Eyes. Mutants who, by the way, come off more like rejected X-Men villains than malformed backwater psychopaths this time around.

Clearly designed with the intent to kick off a series capable of churning out a seemingly endless array of future installments à la Hellraiser or Children of the Corn, this frightless disaster is as passionless as it is tasteless even with the Cravens' involvement. If this is the direction they were honestly planning on going then horror fans are better off without it. Especially since the prequel comic I read made it clear that sexual assault was going to be a staple. I'm sure it would have had a following among the likes of those who made it possible for The Human Centipede to become a trilogy, but you wouldn't find me in their ranks as I consider this to be truly one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

3.8/10
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
2
AutiTakahashiAug 12, 2012
In the opening subtitles, the audience is reminded of the bloody carnage that concluded the remake of the first "The Hills Have Eyes". It is safe to assume that any evidence regarding the mutant slaughtering that was bestowed upon that poorIn the opening subtitles, the audience is reminded of the bloody carnage that concluded the remake of the first "The Hills Have Eyes". It is safe to assume that any evidence regarding the mutant slaughtering that was bestowed upon that poor family was dissolved by the heat of the sun. This is so because, in this sequel, a military group has decided to base somewhere near the same place without much precaution. The subtitles claim that they are "monitoring for undisclosed reasons."

I wander as to what the hell they were monitoring in an abandoned desert; the words "undisclosed reasons" are not reassuring enough, especially in a horror movie, but let's move on. To no surprise, these people end up disfigured and discombobulated, while one ends up deep in the toilet with a few cuts so he can die of mass infection. Oh no, these mutants, they have developed their own sense of humor.

Read more here: http://localmoviereview.com/hills-have-eyes-2-review/
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
ChristopherW.May 8, 2007
This film had a fantastic teaser trailer, and after seeing it, one might expect something more than one actually gets. I saw it in an empty theater, likely one of many empty theaters. I LOVED the first remake and thought it was one of the This film had a fantastic teaser trailer, and after seeing it, one might expect something more than one actually gets. I saw it in an empty theater, likely one of many empty theaters. I LOVED the first remake and thought it was one of the best horror films in recent years, but this one disappointingly played much like the countless direct to video 'fright flicks' that collect dust on rental shelves. I wasn't terribly bored, but I do recall talking on my cell phone during the third act. Oops! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
RyencokeMar 24, 2007
Why all such the good reviews? This movie was a mockery to the series. The remake was possible one of the best horror re-makes to date. This movie was really just stupid, all they did was attempt to out-due the first one in gore & rape. Yes Why all such the good reviews? This movie was a mockery to the series. The remake was possible one of the best horror re-makes to date. This movie was really just stupid, all they did was attempt to out-due the first one in gore & rape. Yes they did it, but it was pointless. I'm a person who loves gore and have no problem with rape. But when a movie has it's plot based on how violent they can make it, it's really very stupid. This movie was a stinker. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
BrinaK.Mar 19, 2007
An offensive shame to popular culture. I have never seen anything so vulgar and disturbing in my life. It will haunt millions and may have imprinted itself on my life. The prolonged sequences of strong gruesome horror violence and the An offensive shame to popular culture. I have never seen anything so vulgar and disturbing in my life. It will haunt millions and may have imprinted itself on my life. The prolonged sequences of strong gruesome horror violence and the explicit rape seen should have earned this junk a NC17. The biggest movie mistake of my life. I would only recommend this movie to psychopaths, but I'm not that sick. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
MattF.Mar 24, 2007
This movie was by far one of the worst remakes I have ever seen. I dont see where all this controversy comes from there is little gore and the rape scene shows very little. Half of the deaths come from being shot or falling off a cliff, This movie was by far one of the worst remakes I have ever seen. I dont see where all this controversy comes from there is little gore and the rape scene shows very little. Half of the deaths come from being shot or falling off a cliff, which is very uncreative especially considering the brilliance used in the first one with character development. Stay away from this, it is a money ploy and will make you want to leave. The most boring horror I have seen in a while. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
HootchieMommaMar 25, 2007
Big Fan of the first movie.... HOWEVER, this was, honest to god, the worst movie I have seen in the past few years, possibly ever. Horrible acting. Such a disappointment!! Everything that happens in the movie, you sit there and ask Big Fan of the first movie.... HOWEVER, this was, honest to god, the worst movie I have seen in the past few years, possibly ever. Horrible acting. Such a disappointment!! Everything that happens in the movie, you sit there and ask yourself.. "why?" I wanted to love this movie like I did the original, but it just ended up pissin me off. Nothing like last years movie.. SUCKS!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
PJR.Mar 27, 2007
I love a good horror movie, but, lord this flick pissed me off. Horribly acted (and I mean, really bad, especially the big guy with the Cindy Brady lisp), and an implausible, stupid story. The characters behave in ways that make you want I love a good horror movie, but, lord this flick pissed me off. Horribly acted (and I mean, really bad, especially the big guy with the Cindy Brady lisp), and an implausible, stupid story. The characters behave in ways that make you want them to die quickly and violently. At a merciful 89 minutes, this movie was still way too long. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
PatrickC.May 8, 2007
New horror movies normally are bad. Remakes of old horror movies are normally bad. But when you make a remake of Hills Have Eyes two, you know the movie is going to be bad. Sure enough, Hills brings the awfullness we all knew was coming. The New horror movies normally are bad. Remakes of old horror movies are normally bad. But when you make a remake of Hills Have Eyes two, you know the movie is going to be bad. Sure enough, Hills brings the awfullness we all knew was coming. The movie isn't scary, isn't entertaining and quite frankly it's boring. Wes Craven should stop selling the rights to his old horror films and start making new ones. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RockVJun 4, 2007
I think it is a horrible movie. The rape scene is horrible principally, the violence is exaggerated. Not that it is bad to have violence in those movies, but the violence against womens in that way, especially after hearing what happened in I think it is a horrible movie. The rape scene is horrible principally, the violence is exaggerated. Not that it is bad to have violence in those movies, but the violence against womens in that way, especially after hearing what happened in the second movie, i was disgusted. I saw lots of horror movies, even those with rapes in them never made me angry like that. I understand people liked it, and that they gave a 10, but I don't understand what went into the creators heads when they wrote it. Mediocre movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
TylerDJul 23, 2007
The Hills Have Eyes 2 flat out fails at everything it attempts to do. It's filled with terrible acting and a lack of sympathy mixed in with stupid characters and an even dumber story (if it's considered that.) The inclusion of The Hills Have Eyes 2 flat out fails at everything it attempts to do. It's filled with terrible acting and a lack of sympathy mixed in with stupid characters and an even dumber story (if it's considered that.) The inclusion of soldiers being the main cast also takes away from the scariness. Overall, it fails miserably to live up to The Hills Have Eyes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ElliottM.Mar 23, 2007
My question is: Who is paying all of these reviewers to give this such high scores?!? It's all noise, gross-outs, and cheap scares. We've seen it all before (more or less). Nothing about it lingers afterwards.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
BillyB.Mar 25, 2007
If you saw the first movie in this disgraceful series of terrible movies, you would know not to see this one, but strangely enough I went and saw it anyways and I have to say Mr. Craven, I'm very disappointed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ERG1008Sep 3, 2010
Sequel to the half-decent remake of The Hills Have Eyes.
The best way to describe this film is if you imagine the cast of Hollyoaks joining the Military then acting like the Chuckle Brothers.
Put simply, it's bloody awful.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
asylumspadezNov 26, 2011
Terrible acting, Terrible script that does nothing but give you a reason why they are there just so the villians can get them. The entire film was stupid and nothing compared to the previous one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
inaneswineNov 14, 2017
One character notes that the mutants are "smart". In fact, the antagonists are dumb and the protagonists are brain-numbingly stupid. So God knows what we're supposed to be. Fortunately it doesn't take long for these appallingly writtenOne character notes that the mutants are "smart". In fact, the antagonists are dumb and the protagonists are brain-numbingly stupid. So God knows what we're supposed to be. Fortunately it doesn't take long for these appallingly written characters to start dying in this pathetic, boring sequel. If you thought the original was overly clichéd, you ain't seen nothing yet. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
TheDude-Jun 12, 2015
>........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews