Le colline hanno gli occhi II

The Hills Have Eyes Part 2 (1985) was a unwarranted sequel. But after all this was the eighties and sequels were in vogue. The first film had a fine closure and I still don't understand what was Wes Craven thinking when he released it? It was far too tamed to be an R-Rated film and it wasn't a true sequel (in my opinion). Too far fetched and inane. I wasn't pleased with the end results. I'll just pretend it never took place.

Not a bad movie but certainly not a good one either. A mediocre effort of Wes Craven. You could tell his heart wasn't in this project. But I would take one of these films any day compared ti the rubbish he's cranking out these day.

An okay time waster. Not a total disaster that some people might make you believe it is!

Just watched this movie a couple of hours ago! Sure, I loved The Hills Have Eyes, and I had heard how horrible this one was, but I bought it anyway for $3. And it's not THAT bad! Really! If you don't keep saying "Gee, this movie is crap compared to the original", I mean, it's not a great movie, but it's not unwatchable. Some things are pretty annoying and/or stupid... like...

*When the girl finally admits to being the ex-cannibal sister Ruby, and that it was Bobby's family that was in the incident, THEY DON'T CARE! GEE, I was hoping they would at least react! P***ED ME OFF! That ruined some of the movie for me... The characters just don'tttt care.

*The characters, most of them, P*** ME OFF also. All they do is walk around saying "Yeahhh right, there's nothing to worry about, hahaha". The 'there's nothing to worry about' attitude Gets old.

*Hardly anyone finds out when someone has been killed. That's part of the fun of horror movies, for the people to find out someones dead, go tell the others, and freak out!

*The ending was ridiculus. So, the guy came up with that ingenius plot? Wow... he must be next in line for the Pulitzer! Brilliant.

But, it is just a movie.... Keep telling yourself that....

That's about it, now, with all that said, there dosent seem to be any good things about it... Annoying... Sometimes stupid, but never really boring... Not the worst choice for a boring day. Plus, there's not as many flashbacks as some people would lead you to believe...

5/10

This movie I thought was more entertaining than the original. It just has more places to go than the first one. The characters are better and funny also. This is one of Wes Craven's most underrated movies. I give The Hills Have Eyes Part II *** out of ****

Since Wes Craven himself wrote and directed this one, I was really expecting more than just another slasher movie. Still, it's pretty good, though. And yes, I'm sure dogs can have flashbacks too (they do have minds after all, don't they?)

Wes Craven admitted in an interview that he needed to make some cash fast, would have happily 'directed Godzilla in Paris'. So he made a sequel to one of his well-made and enjoyable films.

However, 'Hills Have Eyes 2' is a letdown. It seems to rely heavily on flashbacks to the previous (superior) film and is really nothing more than a 'Friday the 13th' clone. It even has the same composer as the Jason films (Harry Manfredini) so much of the music in 'Hills 2' could make you think you're watching a 'Friday the 13th' sequel. This whole film is just a waste of time. The characters are so obnoxious you don't give a hoot what happens to them, the 'Papa Jupe's brother' business is glaringly contrived and unlikely and to cut a long story short I have trouble believing that this mess was by the same director who brought us the best of the 'Nightmare on Elm Street' films and 'Shocker'.