The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Christopher H

  
  More like "The Hills Have Idiots". This movie is pretty much Wes Craven ripping off "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", except ineptly executed. The cannibalistic family in this movie are a bunch of idiotic push-overs. They wear the stupidest clothing (the mother… More
  More like "The Hills Have Idiots". This movie is pretty much Wes Craven ripping off "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", except ineptly executed. The cannibalistic family in this movie are a bunch of idiotic push-overs. They wear the stupidest clothing (the mother looked like a Native American while one was dressed as a caveman), and say the most laughable dialogue I've ever heard. At times it felt like the cannibal family was dying faster than the normal family, one of them was even killed by a dog. Not even the old man at the gas station seemed to have been afraid of them. The normal family in the film are bland and annoying, especially the sister in the shorty shorts. The script is very light on story and lacking in any compelling suspense or scares. The movie is not even bloody or gory, not that more blood makes a film better but so many critics hype this film up as being "brutal". It is not like the concept of this movie was too bad, but the combination of terrible direction and execution made this movie hard to watch for all the wrong reasons. Just like how the family's car breaks down and goes nowhere, this film goes nowhere. The filmmakers didn't even has the courtesy to give an actual ending, it just cuts off after a guy stabs one of the cannibals to death. How is this considered a minor horror classic? It wasn't even horrifying.

• Directors C

  
  [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon14.gif[/img] I prefer the remake because it did what this one did and then some. But whenever i'm in the mood for substance in a horror movie i'll watch this original version as food for thought. It's not… More
  [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon14.gif[/img] I prefer the remake because it did what this one did and then some. But whenever i'm in the mood for substance in a horror movie i'll watch this original version as food for thought. It's not Wes Craven's best piece of work but it deserves a bit more recognition than some of today's "horror" films. It's story is quite predictable and is clearly an obvious Texas Chainsaw Massacre rip off but it drew me into the environments of the desert and sympathised the protagonist family enough to keep me gripped and biting my nail's all the way through. There's a bit of gore but not a lot, but that's a good thing because it wasn't set up to scare anyone in that sort of way.

• Tim S

  
  Like a lot of Wes Craven's work, not all of it's perfect or is as impacting as some of it can tend to be with the right story. As a sort of exploitation sequel to The Last House on the Left and being a bit of a rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes is… More
  Like a lot of Wes Craven's work, not all of it's perfect or is as impacting as some of it can tend to be with the right story. As a sort of exploitation sequel to The Last House on the Left and being a bit of a rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes is more intriguing in its title then the actual film is. I'm sure many of my friends are going to cry blasphemy by me saying this, but I have to tell you... this film just isn't that good. I think why people put it on such a pedestal is because of the scene of the attack on the family in the camper. For its time, I'm sure that that scene really got to people - especially when they shoot the old lady. Having seen other exploitation films push it completely over the top and go even further than that, this just fails to shock me in any way... even when the mutants run off with the baby. There's nearly an hour of build-up to almost nothing. Sure people die in horrible ways, but it's over in seconds, and the attackers aren't all that interesting in the first place. Well, except for Michael Berryman who does a pretty good job in his role. I do admire the film for being so gritty and sweltering-looking, but as a story it sucks. And now, all these years later, as an exploitation movie it sucks. I'm sure John Waters would love it, but as for me, I like my Wes Craven just a little bit more polished and a little bit more well thought-out than this.

• Carlos M

  
  A cheap rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre that is hard to care about, since the villains are disgusting perverts you want to see dead while the main characters act really stupid most of the time. By the end there is no room left for any moral question intended, for a matter of… More
  A cheap rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre that is hard to care about, since the villains are disgusting perverts you want to see dead while the main characters act really stupid most of the time. By the end there is no room left for any moral question intended, for a matter of life and death justifies just about anything.

• AJ V

  
  This movie is exciting for the most part, not very scary, though. The overall story is predictable, but there are a couple of surprises. I didn't like it, but I didn't think it was bad either, it was just too much like other horror movies at the time so it doesn't… More
  This movie is exciting for the most part, not very scary, though. The overall story is predictable, but there are a couple of surprises. I didn't like it, but I didn't think it was bad either, it was just too much like other horror movies at the time so it doesn't stand out. It's was pretty good, but it could have been a lot better.

• Martin S

  
  I'm not sure what to say. I thought I'd give Wes Craven another chance after Last house on the left. But this wasn't really that good. Didn't cut the mustard

• Jeff "

  
  Wes Craven's 1977 film The Hill's Have Eyes is one of the most depraved and jaw dropping films in the horror genre. Wes Craven directs this awesome film with relish as the characters on screen are brutally stalked and murdered by a family of cannibals. With ever camera shot,… More
  Wes Craven's 1977 film The Hill's Have Eyes is one of the most depraved and jaw dropping films in the horror genre. Wes Craven directs this awesome film with relish as the characters on screen are brutally stalked and murdered by a family of cannibals. With ever camera shot, Craven makes you feel uneasy as the backdrop of the film is in the open and you end up feeling the same anguish as the characters on screen. The Hill's Have Eyes is a powerful Horror film and this is Wes Craven when he's just warming up. His Horror talents would culminate with 1984's Nightmare On Elm Street and 1989's Shocker. The Hill's Have Eyes is a film of raw, brutal intensity and is a wild ride from start to finish. The cast is pretty good as well, Dee Wallace and Michael Berryman are the best actors in this film and Wes Craven has cooked up an amazing film that you won't forget.

• Leigh R

  
  Wow... it's so 1970's-ish. HA HA HA!!! Okay, seriously though, it may have been scary or tense back in the day, but it just made me laugh at how horrible it was. My decision... EH!

• Conner R

  
  You have to appreciate it for the time and for its originality. It's got a real creepy tone that isn't easy to pull off when your movie's set in broad daylight. You've got some great characters when it comes to the freaks, great acting as well. The other normal… More
  You have to appreciate it for the time and for its originality. It's got a real creepy tone that isn't easy to pull off when your movie's set in broad daylight. You've got some great characters when it comes to the freaks, great acting as well. The other normal characters are so/so and their acting was even less impressive. The main aspect about the movie that draws such attention is the surreal nature of it. A lot like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre in that it makes you think twice about trusting people.

• Anthony L

  
  A low budget horror classic. The genius in this film is matched only by its awfulness. You either love it or hate it. Cult viewing and well worth a watch!

• Aaron N

  
  Brenda Carter: We're gonna be french fries! Human french fries! A family attempts to make a drive through the desert, only to have their car break down and then be attacked by violent, cannibalistic savages. Another early Wes Craven horror flick, not as good or as disturbing… More
  Brenda Carter: We're gonna be french fries! Human french fries! A family attempts to make a drive through the desert, only to have their car break down and then be attacked by violent, cannibalistic savages. Another early Wes Craven horror flick, not as good or as disturbing as Last House on the Left, but it gets its points for being dirty and gritty. Despite its content, it also works with its premise without being mean spirited like the 2005 remake. Problems involve how slow it is to get to being interesting. The characters actually do work fine, but the movie takes its time to get to where its going. Good ending though. Big Bob Carter: Do you always try to stop trespassers by hanging yourself?

• _kelly .

  
  I screened this for the second time today and its rating jumped a star. The first time I saw this was right after being stunned by "The Last House on the Left" and "Nightmare on Elm Street" so it was tough for me to be as stunned by this in comparison. Watching it… More
  I screened this for the second time today and its rating jumped a star. The first time I saw this was right after being stunned by "The Last House on the Left" and "Nightmare on Elm Street" so it was tough for me to be as stunned by this in comparison. Watching it now, it's a solid classic story and an extreme accomplishment of Craven's to make daylight in an open desert area as scary as a dark cramped place. I love the juxtaposition of the two families, and despite the production value (Craven didn't have) the shots are great and the editing is tight. This movie spun, not as big as Freddy but just as important, a world and story to be treasured (as much as you can treasure your cannibal serial killers). Great hard end.<br/>"So Fucked Up" highlight: Big Bob death distraction

• Chris G

  
  This Wes Craven film shows you why you don't go looking for your aunt's silver mine while on your way to California.

• Lady D

  
  Not a bad horror film for it's time, a little predicutable I guess and the bright red blood shows how far we've come in effects. All in all this film was better than I'd expecedted, yet still had it's fair share of boring moments

• James A

  
  The most terrifying thing about this movie was the "Mutant" that resembled Gary Delebate from the Howard Sten show. The victims were douche bags wearing cut off jean shorts and brandishing 70's mustaches. The remake was way more brutal and a vast improvement. They didnt… More
  The most terrifying thing about this movie was the "Mutant" that resembled Gary Delebate from the Howard Sten show. The victims were douche bags wearing cut off jean shorts and brandishing 70's mustaches. The remake was way more brutal and a vast improvement. They didnt even ask the question of What kind of place is that?

• Lafe F

  
  A bit too dark to see what's going on. Some of the mutants looked like aliens. I found this film sub-standard, but some of the grain felt as independant and gritty as "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". I much preferred the 2006 remake.

• Cassandra M

  
  Despite being close to thirty years old, Wes Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes" maintains a distinct raw intensity - far surpassing the level of terror seen in horror films today. The plot in a nutshell; a family on vacation ventures from the main road, ends up stranded in… More
  Despite being close to thirty years old, Wes Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes" maintains a distinct raw intensity - far surpassing the level of terror seen in horror films today. The plot in a nutshell; a family on vacation ventures from the main road, ends up stranded in the desert, and falls prey to a malevolent clan of inbred cannibals. Though the story idea may be far from original - it is the atmosphere, directorial style, and acting that raise the overall credibility of the film. The low budget and claustrophobic desert setting creates a sense of dread permeating throughout the entire film; while the grainy look of the print adds a sense of realism to the unfolding events. With a brisk running time of only 89 minutes the film doesn't waste a moment in setting the mood - then when all hell breaks loose it is unrelenting until the final scene. The actors portraying the Carter family bring sufficient emotional range to their characterizations, making it clearly evident that this a normal family being tested beyond the boundaries of civilized nature. It is also worth noting the performances by the actors who play Pluto and Mars (two of the baddies) - these characters are portrayed as both sadistic and devoid of any sympathy. Although the DVD print is grainy (as mentioned above), it is THE definitive version of the film and is thousands of times an improvement over the quality of the video release; quite amazing for a low budget film of this nature. Grim, violent, and symbolic; it is an amazing piece of 70's exploitation horror. "The Hills Have Eyes" is a classic in every sense of the word

• Dr Blood  

  
  Wes Craven does an admirable job of providing a gripping storyline with some brave moments of gore.

• xGary X

  
  More exploitative crap from Wes Craven. At one point one of the characters rips up a poster of Jaws, apparently Craven's way of saying "That was not horror. THIS is horror." But it isn't. There is no tension or suspense to speak of. Just a series of deeply… More
  More exploitative crap from Wes Craven. At one point one of the characters rips up a poster of Jaws, apparently Craven's way of saying "That was not horror. THIS is horror." But it isn't. There is no tension or suspense to speak of. Just a series of deeply unpleasant and tasteless sensationalism with no wit or intelligence behind it whatsoever.

• Michael G

  
  Entertaining but not amazing.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings