Posted April 27, 200619 yr Hills' Eyes Wide Open Still Posted by Clint Morris on April 27, 2006 I said it before (in my review), and I’ll say it again : Wes, totally unnecessary. As good as it was, we really didn’t need a “Hills Have Eyes†sequel – like Disco, it’s a product of the 70s, and it should stay there – let alone a goddamn sequel. But money talks in this business, as my empty wallet and pussycat nature can corroborate. Talking to Fangoria, Wes Craven says he and his son Jonathan will write the sequel to Alexandre Aja's “The Hills Have Eyes†redo. Aja has – intelligently – passed on directing the project. "We want to continue the story of the miners," Craven said. "This time, a group of National Guard screw-ups come face to face with the mutants on their last day of training in the desert. We will take the audience underground [into the mines] as well. The studio, Fox Searchlight, wants the sequel out a year to the day after the last one, so we have to deliver our script in a matter of weeks." Craven, who says “Hills 2†will shoot this Summer, also has another film about to get and going. "I'm writing a film called 'Bug.' It's an original script, and it's not about killer insects. It's a thriller set in a high school. The bug of the title refers to a surveillance device." And no, sorry to say, Craven won’t be involved in TheWeinsteinCo’s “Scream 4†– which is expected to be before the cameras early next year - Seems the man just doesn’t like repeating himself… ahem.
April 27, 200619 yr I'm afraid I would have to disagree with that guy, considering the quality of the "Hills Have Eyes" remake, it was very much necessary.....
April 27, 200619 yr have you seen the original sequel? Well, getting past the fact that the phrase "Original Sequel" seems like a total oxymoron..... :lol: :lol: , yeah, I did, it was pretty bloody awful to be honest......
April 27, 200619 yr Author Well, getting past the fact that the phrase "Original Sequel" seems like a total oxymoron..... :lol: :lol: , yeah, I did, it was pretty bloody awful to be honest...... so not worth it even if it was £4.99?
April 27, 200619 yr so not worth it even if it was £4.99? Hmmmmmm, Pretty cheap, but bearing in mind that you can probably get the original film for that price now, I aint sure...... It's your call mate.... :)
April 27, 200619 yr Author Hmmmmmm, Pretty cheap, but bearing in mind that you can probably get the original film for that price now, I aint sure...... It's your call mate.... :) got the original, alright, quite liked the low budget nature of it.
Create an account or sign in to comment