Horror remake gets lost in the 'hills'

Let me tell you why "The Hills Have Eyes" sucked.\nYou start off with an idea. In this case, that idea is "remakes are produced because those involved -- producers, directors, screenwriters, actors -- loved the original film." They want to pay homage to it and add their unique interpretation to a cool story. What they reproduce could be anything: a love story, comedy, drama, or yes, a horror film.\nAh, the horror film. Nothing seems to be more often "reinterpreted" than the horror film. Every year, some new jackass director fresh off of filming a Sprite commercial gets the rights to remake a classic. Happens all the time. \n"The Amityville Horror." "The Fog." "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre." Those are the ones off the top of my head.\nThere are two more things to acknowledge when watching a remake. One, we assume that whatever twist or understanding the new filmmakers bring to the table, they're going to improve upon the earlier movie's faults. Secondly -- and this one's important -- we assume that the movie deserves to be remade at all. Either it kicked ass the first time, or it had some good ideas.\nI bet only a handful of viewers have seen the original "The Hills Have Eyes." Wes Craven made it back in 1977 with what appears to be an operating budget of a couple of wooden nickels and a ham sandwich. Today, it's a cult classic. That generally translates into "kind of sucks, but is strangely endearing to a small population." \nThe '70s "Hills" was halfway interesting: a family of inbred cannibals living in the American Southwest terrorizes some lost suburbanites. Craven builds the tension, there's a lot of foreboding, and then things begin to lose their creepiness when you see the monsters. Just some guys wearing animal skins (though Michael Berryman is definitely an interesting looking guy). The movie drags out to a tedious ending. But, hey, they get points for trying.\nSo, you'd think that version two would attempt to correct those faults. You'd think so, wouldn't you?\nDirector Alexandre Aja thinks you can apply generous amounts of gore to anything and have a movie. This is what drove 2003s "High Tension." And it didn't work then, either. \nHe took the same premise of the original movie, threw in some other stuff about nuclear testing and filmed a lot of pick-axe murders. Shotgun blasts. Headshots.\nIt's a shame to see so many horror movies go this way -- violence for violence's sake. While I will admit that violence is necessary for "The Hills Have Eyes," that doesn't mean you get a free ticket for every fetish you could ever imagine. \nScratch that. A movie can do whatever it wants, but it won't necessarily make it any good. \nThat's why "The Hills Have Eyes" sucked.